tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/media-policy-4800/articlesMedia policy – The Conversation2018-12-11T04:15:36Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1077912018-12-11T04:15:36Z2018-12-11T04:15:36ZACCC wants to curb digital platform power – but enforcement is tricky<p>We need new laws to monitor and curb the power wielded by Google, Facebook and other powerful digital platforms, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/inquiries/digital-platforms-inquiry/preliminary-report">Preliminary Report on the Digital Platforms Inquiry</a> found major changes to privacy and consumer protection laws are needed, along with alterations to merger law, and a regulator to investigate the operation of the companies’ algorithms. </p>
<p>Getting the enforcement right will be key to the success of these proposed changes. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/digital-platforms-why-the-acccs-proposals-for-google-and-facebook-matter-big-time-108501">Digital platforms. Why the ACCC's proposals for Google and Facebook matter big time</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Scrutinising accumulation of market power</h2>
<p>The report says Google and Facebook each possess substantial power in markets such as online search and social media services in Australia. </p>
<p>It’s not against the law to possess substantial market power alone. But these companies would breach our <a href="https://clmr.unsw.edu.au/australia-misuse-of-market-power-law">November 2017 misuse of market power law</a> if they engaged in any conduct with the effect, likely effect or purpose of substantially lessening competition – essentially, blocking rivalry in a market. </p>
<p>Moving forwards, the ACCC has indicated it will scrutinise the accumulation of market power by these platforms more proactively. Noting that “strategic acquisitions by both Google and Facebook have contributed to the market power they currently hold”, the ACCC says it intends to ask large digital platforms to provide advance notice of any planned acquisitions.</p>
<p>While such pre-notification of certain mergers is required in jurisdictions such as the US, it is not currently a requirement in other sectors under the Australian law. </p>
<p>At the moment the ACCC is just asking the platforms to do this voluntarily – but has indicated it may seek to make this a formal requirement if the platforms don’t cooperate with the request. It’s not currently clear how this would be enforced. </p>
<p>The ACCC has also recommended the standard for assessing mergers should be amended to expressly clarify the relevance of data acquired in the transaction as well as the removal of potential competitors. </p>
<p>The law doesn’t explicitly refer to potential competitors in addition to existing competitors at present, and some argue platforms are <a href="https://promarket.org/new-economy-enables-winners-capture-much-welfare/">buying up nascent competitors</a> before the competitive threat becomes apparent. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-public-interest-journalism-78996">Explainer: what is public interest journalism?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A regulator to monitor algorithms</h2>
<p>According to the ACCC, there is a “lack of transparency” in Google’s and Facebook’s arrangements concerning online advertising and content, which are largely governed by algorithms developed and owned by the companies. These algorithms – essentially a complex set of instructions in the software – determine what ads, search results and news we see, and in what order. </p>
<p>The problem is nobody outside these companies knows <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-10/ai-democracy-google-facebook/8782970">how they work</a> or whether they’re producing results that are fair to online advertisers, content producers and consumers.</p>
<p>The report recommends a regulatory authority be given power to monitor, investigate and publish reports on the operation of these algorithms, among other things, to determine whether they are producing unfair or discriminatory results. This would only apply to companies that generate more than A$100 million per annum from digital advertising in Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/attention-economy-facebook-delivers-traffic-but-no-money-for-news-media-105725">Attention economy: Facebook delivers traffic but no money for news media</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>These algorithms have come under scrutiny elsewhere. The European Commission has previously <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=1_39740">fined Google €2.42 billion</a> for giving unfair preference to its own shopping comparison services in its search results, relative to rival comparison services, thereby contravening the EU law against abuse of dominance. This decision has been <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2811789">criticised</a> though, for failing to provide Google with a clear way of complying with the law. </p>
<p>The important questions following the ACCC’s recommendation are:</p>
<ul>
<li>what will the regulator do with the results of its investigations? </li>
<li>if it determines that the algorithm is producing discriminatory results, will it tell the platform what kind of results it should achieve instead, or will it require direct changes to the algorithm? </li>
</ul>
<p>The ACCC has not recommended the regulator have the power to make such orders. It seems the most the regulator would do is introduce some “sunshine” to the impacts of these algorithms which are currently hidden from view, and potentially refer the matter to the ACCC for investigation if this was perceived to amount to a misuse of market power.</p>
<p>If a digital platform discriminates against competitive businesses that rely on its platform – say, app developers or comparison services – so that rivalry is stymied, this could be an important test case under our misuse of market power law. This law was amended in 2017 to address <a href="https://clmr.unsw.edu.au/australia-misuse-of-market-power-law">longstanding weaknesses</a> but has not yet been tested in the courts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-should-levy-facebook-and-google-to-fund-journalism-heres-how-77946">We should levy Facebook and Google to fund journalism – here's how</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Privacy and fairness for consumers</h2>
<p>The report recommends substantial changes to the Privacy Act and Australian Consumer Law to reduce the power imbalance between the platforms and consumers. </p>
<p>We know from research that <a href="http://cprc.org.au/2018/05/13/research-australian-consumers-soft-targets-big-data-economy/">most Australians don’t read online privacy policies</a>; many say they don’t understand the privacy terms offered to them, or they <a href="https://theconversation.com/94-of-australians-do-not-read-all-privacy-policies-that-apply-to-them-and-thats-rational-behaviour-96353">feel they have no choice but to accept</a> them. Two thirds say they want more say in how their personal information is used.</p>
<p>The solutions proposed by the ACCC include:</p>
<ul>
<li>strengthening the consent required under our privacy law, requiring it to be express (it may currently be implied), opt-in, adequately informed, voluntary and specific</li>
<li>allowing consumers to require their personal data to be erased in certain circumstances</li>
<li>increasing penalties for breaches of the Privacy Act</li>
<li>introducing a statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy in Australia.</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/94-of-australians-do-not-read-all-privacy-policies-that-apply-to-them-and-thats-rational-behaviour-96353">94% of Australians do not read all privacy policies that apply to them – and that’s rational behaviour</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This last recommendation was previously made by the Australian Law Reform Commission in <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/serious-invasions-privacy-digital-era-alrc-report-123">2014</a> and <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/pdfs/108_vol1.pdf">2008</a>, and would finally allow individuals in Australia to sue for harm suffered as a result of such an invasion. </p>
<p>If consent is to be voluntary and specific, companies should not be allowed to “bundle” consents for a number of uses and collections (both necessary and unnecessary) and require consumers to consent to all or none. These are important steps in addressing the <a href="https://theconversation.com/soft-terms-like-open-and-sharing-dont-tell-the-true-story-of-your-data-95521">unfairness of current data privacy practices</a>. </p>
<p>Together these changes would bring Australia a little closer to the stronger data protection offered in the EU under the <a href="https://eugdpr.org">General Data Protection Regulation</a>. </p>
<p>But the effectiveness of these changes would depend to a large extent on whether the government would also agree to improve funding and support for the federal privacy regulator, which has been criticised as <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/07/16/australias-privacy-watchdog-is-woefully-and-criminally-underfunded/">passive and underfunded</a>.</p>
<p>Another recommended change to consumer protection law would make it illegal to include <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections/unfair-contract-terms">unfair terms in consumer contracts</a> and impose fines for such a contravention. Currently, for a first-time unfair contract terms “offender”, a court could only “draw a line” through the unfair term such that the company could not force the consumer to comply with it. </p>
<p>Making such terms illegal would increase incentives for companies drafting standard form contracts to make sure they do not include detrimental terms which create a significant imbalance between them and their customers, which are not reasonably necessary to protect their legitimate interests.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/soft-terms-like-open-and-sharing-dont-tell-the-true-story-of-your-data-95521">Soft terms like 'open' and 'sharing' don't tell the true story of your data</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The ACCC might also take action on these standard terms under our misleading and deceptive conduct laws. The Italian competition watchdog last week <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/dec/07/italian-regulator-fines-facebook-89m-for-misleading-users">fined Facebook €10 million</a> for conduct including misleading users about the extent of its data collection and practices. </p>
<p>The ACCC appears to be considering the possibility of even broader laws against <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/federal-trade-commission-bureau-consumer-protection-preliminary-ftc-staff-report-protecting-consumer/101201privacyreport.pdf">“unfair” practices</a>, which regulators like the US Federal Trade Commission have used against bad data practices. </p>
<h2>Final report in June 2019</h2>
<p>As well as 11 recommendations, the report mentions nine areas for “further analysis and assessment” which in itself reflects the complexity of the issues facing the ACCC. </p>
<p>The ACCC is seeking responses and feedback from stakeholders on the preliminary report, before creating a final report in June 2019.</p>
<p>Watch this space – or google it. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-not-to-agree-to-clean-public-toilets-when-you-accept-any-online-terms-and-conditions-81169">How not to agree to clean public toilets when you accept any online terms and conditions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107791/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katharine Kemp receives funding from The Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation. She is a Member of the Advisory Board of the Future of Finance Initiative in India, the Centre for Law, Markets & Regulation and the Australian Privacy Foundation.
</span></em></p>The ACCC would like closer scrutiny of digital platforms such as Facebook and Google – in particular with regards to user privacy, market power and operational algorithms.Katharine Kemp, Lecturer, Faculty of Law, UNSW, and Co-Leader, 'Data as a Source of Market Power' Research Stream of The Allens Hub for Technology, Law and Innovation, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/943652018-04-04T10:45:24Z2018-04-04T10:45:24ZWhy are Sinclair’s scripted news segments such a big deal?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213022/original/file-20180403-189810-1r6o93m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sinclair Broadcast Group is under fire, following the spread of a video showing anchors at its stations reading a script criticizing 'fake' news stories.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Sinclair-Broadcast-Group/efe8917e69304ec695b0b67d4a3c4555/10/0">Steve Ruark/AP Photo</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>On March 31, <a href="https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/how-americas-largest-local-tv-owner-turned-its-news-anc-1824233490">Deadspin</a> produced a video showing a chorus of local news anchors delivering the exact same scripted speech to viewers.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/KOMO-fake-news-Sinclair-promos-12792032.php">The message</a> – denouncing media bias and fake news, calling it a problem that is “neither politically ‘left nor right’” – might seem innocuous enough. </p>
<p>But I study the media industry, and it really does represent a radical departure from how local television news has traditionally operated.</p>
<p>These news anchors all work for the same parent company, Sinclair Broadcast Group, which owns <a href="http://sbgi.net/#About">193 local broadcast stations</a> across the country. </p>
<p>You might think that your local television stations – with names like WXYZ-TV, KXAN or KMOV – are owned by national networks like ABC or Fox. But that’s often not the case; they are merely affiliated with the national network. Most are owned by companies called “station groups” that have purchased a portfolio of stations in different cities with different network affiliations.</p>
<p>Tribune Media, Nexstar and Tegna are examples of <a href="http://www.tvnewscheck.com/tag/2017-top-30-station-groups">station groups</a>. Sinclair is the biggest.</p>
<p>It was once the case that most stations were local, independently owned businesses. But during the 1970s, these individual stations started to be absorbed by station groups, which were able to take advantage of new technologies to achieve economies of scale. Instead of performing all operations at the local level at every station, they found they could save money by centralizing many tasks, from buying and selling advertising, to designing the computer graphics that air during news segments.</p>
<p>Today, owning many stations and centralizing these back-end tasks are common in the broadcast business. What isn’t common is what the Deadspin video shows. As far as I know, no other station group has written news scripts and required local stations to deliver them.</p>
<p>In fact, it’s a practice that directly goes against <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Communications-Policy-Principles-Communication/dp/1572733438">U.S. broadcast policy</a>, which asserts that local stations should serve their geographic communities and be allowed to refuse content offered by national networks. Sinclair, however, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/business/media/sinclair-news-anchors-script.html">has dubbed</a> these scripts “must runs.” The company also produces complete news stories and commentaries that it <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/business/media/sinclair-broadcast-komo-conservative-media.html">requires local stations to air</a>. </p>
<p>The script in the Deadspin video has fueled a partisan backlash, and many <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtNyOzGogc">have pointed out</a> that Sinclair’s “must-run” content often advances a conservative point of view. </p>
<p>However, the most important part of the story isn’t the question of partisan bias. It’s that a national station group is forcing content on local stations. To many, what Sinclair is doing is precisely what U.S. broadcast policy is supposed to protect against: a single company advancing an agenda to a majority of the country using the public good of broadcast spectrum. </p>
<p>With Sinclair’s pending purchase of Tribune Media’s <a href="http://www.tribunemedia.com/our-brands/tribune-broadcasting/">42 stations</a>, the company’s reach is only poised to grow.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94365/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amanda Lotz does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s worth looking at how local news stations have traditionally operated.Amanda Lotz, Fellow, Peabody Media Center; Professor of Media Studies, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/468242015-08-28T14:03:29Z2015-08-28T14:03:29ZScottish TV channel a non-starter if BBC expected to stump up<p>Whenever Scottish broadcasting is discussed, several issues often collide, and they’ve been colliding again in the responses to Nicola Sturgeon’s <a href="http://www.allmediascotland.com/broadcasting/107294/in-my-opinion-nicola-sturgeon-alternative-mactaggart-lecture/">Alternative MacTaggart lecture</a> to the Edinburgh International Television Festival. </p>
<p>The first minister’s call for a dedicated Scottish television channel is not new; it was first floated by the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08_09_08_broacasting.pdf">Scottish Broadcasting Commission</a> in 2008 and received a broad welcome at the Scottish parliament. Inevitably some commentators always interpret this proposal as an SNP wheeze, but a wide constituency inside and outside the Scottish parliament has acknowledged that a new digital channel would fill a large gap in Scottish broadcasting provision. </p>
<p>There is no TV channel in Scotland which has autonomy over editing and commissioning (with the exception of Gaelic channel BBC Alba). Scotland has opt-out TV only, ducking out of network schedules on occasion, generally not at moments of peak viewing. This makes Scotland an exception in Europe, where regions with a strong identity of their own usually have at least one indigenous TV channel. </p>
<p>Therefore it’s not especially controversial to suggest that the lack of such a channel should be addressed, particularly at a time of political assertiveness in Scottish society. It’s not just the democratic needs of Scottish civil society at stake either: this absence makes it all the more difficult for an independent production sector to flourish, with negative effects on investment and infrastructure in the economy.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0wPi7SWcb5U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Sturgeon, who also called for a second English-language radio station, has nevertheless <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/df4b7800-4cbf-11e5-a089-1a3e2cd1819b.html#axzz3k6jnNa2t">been accused</a> of wanting to control broadcasting – or of waging a vendetta against the BBC. Yet the idea that the BBC should be in some way accountable to Holyrood as well as to Westminster is, after all, only consistent with the democratic functioning of the Scottish nation. The BBC’s Scottish provision could be scrutinised by a Holyrood committee, for instance. To equate this with SNP diktat, in a parliament with the protection of proportional representation, is facile. </p>
<p>It’s a real pity if a serious debate about the media needs of Scottish civil society gets dragged (further) into the tribal dimensions of party politics, let alone the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/alex-salmond-brands-nick-robinson-a-disgrace-1-3866814">unhelpful spat</a> between Alex Salmond and Nick Robinson over coverage of the referendum. At a time when the Scottish press, Sunday Herald excepted, <a href="http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-herald-only-weekly-title-audited-abc-grow-print-sale-first-half-2015">continues to face</a> bad news on the circulation front, and London-produced newspapers maintain their large presence in the Scottish market, achieving better Scottish TV provision is yet more important. </p>
<h2>Money too tight to mention</h2>
<p>The next problem, though, has to do with resource, with no obvious case for suggesting that any of the funding for Sturgeon’s proposals could come from commercial opt-out channel STV. This comes amid growing difficulty for the BBC, currently from the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33556009">Green Paper</a> on its future at UK level. It’s one thing to argue the need for a new Scottish channel, something else to ask the BBC maybe to help pay for it, and a quite different matter again to ask it to run it. </p>
<p>That’s three different things. And if you were looking at the least feasible option, it’s the third one. By the time such a channel might emerge, we can’t be sure even how the BBC will be funded UK-wide. MSPs don’t seem disposed to discussing funding from other sources. (And do we want the BBC to run it? Will that prove a distinctive Scottish alternative?) So Sturgeon’s suggestion could be the equivalent of leaving discussion about a new Scottish channel in its natural habitat thus far – the long grass. </p>
<p>A pity, too, that three other themes in the first minister’s lecture have received less attention, including her remarks on the sexist treatment of female politicians and sportswomen on TV. A perspective from someone with Nicola Sturgeon’s experience is an antidote to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/09/megyn-kelly-donald-trump-winner-republican-debate">recent meditations</a> on women and TV from a US presidential candidate by the name of Trump. </p>
<p>Her thoughts on the importance of maintaining the strengths of traditional news media are also welcome. As she recognises, social media can transform the fact-checking process by making it possible for untrue statements to be instantly rebutted, though this cuts both ways: facts can be obscured as easily as they can be clarified. But to affirm the need for properly resourced journalism in traditional broadcasting and print is very important, not least in the present fragile situation for the Scottish media. </p>
<p>Closely related is the subject of political impartiality in the media. Nicola Sturgeon’s rejection of the idea of “institutional bias” in the BBC against the Yes camp during the referendum is helpful, in the sense that if there exist deficiencies in media representation, it’s better to complain about actual rather than imagined problems. </p>
<p>But despite interesting questions to ponder in these other themes from the Alternative MacTaggart, it’s the proposals about the BBC which will occupy centre stage. With the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-parliament-election-poll-snp-support-surges-1-3796655">2016 Scottish parliamentary elections</a> on the horizon, and the UK debate over the Green Paper well under way, they’re likely to stay there for a while.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/46824/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Neil Blain does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Scottish first minister’s speech may have been strong on vision, but there were no signs of innovative thinking on how new Scottish services would be funded at a time of BBC cutbacks.Neil Blain, Professor Emeritus of Communications, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/248512014-04-01T19:47:42Z2014-04-01T19:47:42ZBad news: negative Indigenous health coverage reinforces stigma<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45002/original/syj54mcd-1395985432.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The media should focus more on positive models of change and commitment in Aboriginal communities.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/rustystewart/4475515475/">Rusty Stewart</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Think of Aboriginal health and you’ll probably recall messages of large gaps in life expectancy, increasing rates of chronic diseases such as diabetes, kidney disease and asthma. Or that the last ten years has been a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/wasted-decade-as-indigenous-health-fails-to-show-improvement-20131127-2yae1.html">“wasted decade”</a> for Aboriginal people. </p>
<p>It won’t be too much of a surprise, then, to learn that 74% of media articles about Aboriginal health are negative. That’s the finding of a <a href="http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/iipj/vol5/iss1/5">media study</a> by my colleagues and I at the Public Health Advocacy Institute Western Australia (PHAIWA).</p>
<p>No one would argue it is difficult to generate negative stories about Aboriginal communities when the data shows:</p>
<ul>
<li>the estimated gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people’s <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=10737418934&tab=2">life expectancy</a> in Australia is greater than in New Zealand, Canada and the United States</li>
<li>Aboriginal people are <a href="http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=60129543825">four to five times</a> more likely to die between the ages of 25 and 54 years than non-Indigenous Australians</li>
<li>Aboriginal employment rates fell from 48% in 2006 to 46.2% in 2011 </li>
<li>More than 26% of Australia’s <a href="http://www.andrewleigh.com/blog/?p=1918#more-1918">adult prisoners</a> are Aboriginal, even though they represent just 2.5% of the country’s total population</li>
</ul>
<p>The news is bad. But does the media do all it can – or make enough of an effort – to look for positive stories? </p>
<p>My colleagues and I analysed all articles relating to Aboriginal health from print media in The West Australian, The Australian and The Sunday Times (WA) and from the ABC Online news service during 2012, a total of 335 articles.</p>
<p>We found that overwhelmingly, the articles were negative in their portrayal of Aboriginal health, with 15% of the coverage positive and 11% neutral. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=664&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=664&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44999/original/cysrnzgs-1395984193.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=664&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Stereotypes can be internalised, creating a sense of shame among Indigenous people.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikecogh/5594709903/">Michael Coghlan</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The most common negative topics were alcohol, child abuse, petrol sniffing, violence, suicide, deaths in custody and crime. </p>
<p>The most common positive topics included education, role modelling for health, sport and employment.</p>
<p>The media plays a significant role in framing the way we think about issues. When Aboriginal people are persistently portrayed as drunks, welfare dependents and violent perpetrators, it can fuel racist attitudes among the wider population and this type of racism has a major impact on the health of Aboriginal Australians. </p>
<p>In some cases, these stereotypes can be internalised, <a href="http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4614-1403-2_12">creating</a> a sense of shame and presenting barriers to participating in mainstream society. This perpetuates the cycle of disadvantage.</p>
<p>Yet it would not be appropriate to blame the media in isolation for negative portrayals of Aboriginal health. </p>
<p>Drawing attention to problems experienced in Aboriginal communities is a legitimate and well-tried approach for those who seek to generate action. Media coverage of disadvantage and negative outcomes is often presented by journalists as a response to comments by advocates for action, and as a means of expressing and generating concern and outrage, and seeking change. </p>
<p>There is also a legitimate role for media in reporting evidence-based information relating to disadvantage. </p>
<p>Although these issues are important to highlight, particularly from an advocacy perspective, they tell only half the story and rarely provide positive aspects or hopes for the future.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45001/original/hv9j7cw9-1395985262.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Negative portrayals of Indigenous people can fuel racist attitudes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/sidkid/2261838517/">sidkid/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So, how can we positively influence the way in which Aboriginal health is portrayed in the media?</p>
<p>One strategy to overcome the sense of hopelessness created through negative media, is to focus on positive models of change and commitment in Aboriginal communities. There is great value in capturing positive changes, in collecting and amplifying the voices of Aboriginal people and organisations who are role models, and who run successful ventures in their communities. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.phaiwa.org.au/other-projects-mainmenu-146/indigenous-storybook">The West Australian Indigenous Storybook</a>, produced by PHAIWA, does just this. The <a href="http://www.phaiwa.org.au/other-projects-mainmenu-146/indigenous-storybook">storybooks</a> portray only positive stories and are written largely by Aboriginal public health or community development practitioners.</p>
<p>The books look more deeply into issues and illustrate responsible and less sensationalist reporting on a diverse range of topics and issues that affect health including personal journeys, Aboriginal art, language, education, sport, environmental stewardship and preventive health projects. These achievements are worth talking about.</p>
<p>Upskilling Aboriginal advocates through media training is also required, particularly when, by nature, many are shy. Aboriginal corporations should consider this within their annual budgets and professional development plans. </p>
<p>In Western Australia, this training is provided free of charge by PHAIWA but in other states, budgets may need to be allocated. This training is important to balance the power relationship between journalists and Aboriginal people.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/45003/original/4rpxmp55-1395986073.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Positive media representations of Indigenous Australians can provide hope for the future.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/barkochre/1101233771/">yaruman5/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Encouraging journalists to talk with Aboriginal people about their life, culture and concerns may result in news stories that are more accurate and portray a less distorted and stereotypical view of Aboriginal communities. </p>
<p>One effective training method is the integration of a visit to an Aboriginal community during cadetships or university training, where students talk directly with them about their hopes, fears and problems. </p>
<p>This has <a href="http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1321&context=apme">been trialed</a> in a partnership between the Combined Universities Centre for Rural Health (CUCRH) and Edith Cowan University, where eight final-year journalism students spent a month with Aboriginal communities in two Western Australian towns.</p>
<p>We also need to develop ethical media policies and procedures that promote fair reporting of issues relating to Aboriginal communities, such as the clash of media and Aboriginal cultures, timelines, values and trust. </p>
<p>An organisation such as the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance which already has a <a href="http://www.alliance.org.au/code-of-ethics.html">code of ethics</a> could lead the charge and provide regular training on how journalists can better promote cultural diversity in reporting.</p>
<p>A precedent has been established with the reporting of suicide. <a href="http://www.mindframe-media.info/">Mindframe</a> aims to inform appropriate reporting of suicide and mental illness, to minimise harm and copycat behaviour, and reduce the stigma and discrimination experienced by people with mental illness is working. So, we know it can be done; now we just have to make it happen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24851/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Melissa Stoneham receives funding from Healthway.</span></em></p>Think of Aboriginal health and you’ll probably recall messages of large gaps in life expectancy, increasing rates of chronic diseases such as diabetes, kidney disease and asthma. Or that the last ten years…Melissa Stoneham, Deputy Director, Public Health Advocacy Institute WA, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/189502013-10-15T19:38:05Z2013-10-15T19:38:05ZPolicy outlook: Coalition likely to take a measured approach on media regulation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32920/original/4tqbccnm-1381643790.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">How will new communications minister Malcolm Turnbull and the Coalition approach the vexed issue of media reform?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The media has wasted little time reminding the Coalition government that its rigorous scrutiny of the former Labor government was par for the course. Journalists are snapping at the Coalition’s heels on <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/building-on-semantics-labor-debt-versus-coalition-funding-20131003-2uxcd.html">government debt</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-30/mungo-tony-abbott-indonesia/4988030">asylum seeker arrivals</a>, and <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/trip-ups-in-the-claim-game/story-e6frfkp9-1226735029342">expenses claims</a>.</p>
<p>Already it’s being said that although voters always end up disillusioned with governments, in the present case it - according to one commentator - <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/10/09/disillusionment-sets-in-early-for-a-government-that-promised-better/">“appears to be coming quicker than usual”</a>. While trenchant coverage by some media outlets fanned the agitation for the (ultimately unsuccessful) <a href="https://theconversation.com/low-key-conroy-proposals-are-media-reform-lite-12778">stricter media regulation</a> proposed by the former Labor government in March this year, it has so far not assumed the <a href="http://theconversation.edu.au/bob-browns-misjudged-attack-on-the-murdoch-hate-media-1442">“hate media”</a> proportions that led to Labor’s <a href="http://theconversation.com/uk-and-australian-media-reforms-are-very-different-beasts-12900">Finkelstein exercise</a>.</p>
<p>The Coalition largely benefited from the strident anti-Labor posture some media outlets took during the recent election campaign. Does this absolve the Coalition government of media regulation designs? While in opposition, Malcolm Turnbull forcefully and eloquently led the Coalition’s charge against the media reform package of his predecessor, Stephen Conroy. Turnbull <a href="http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/broadcasting-legislation-amendment-news-media-diversity-bill-2013#.UlfjZ2T4io0">described it</a> as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…the most absurd farce this wretched government has dragged this parliament into.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now, as federal communications minister, Turnbull has affirmed the government’s overall policy of cutting regulation and red tape. He has <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3863199.htm">pledged to review</a> the policy objectives of regulations.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is that objective relevant any longer? If it is not, the regulation should go. If it is still relevant, can we achieve the objective more cost effectively?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On cross-media arrangements, Turnbull said that while the government had no plans to change the cross-media laws and while he was not ruling out any reviews, we “shouldn’t be anticipating any dramatic changes”.</p>
<p>What then might constitute dramatic change? The kind manifested in Conroy’s failed media reform package, widely seen as a full frontal assault on freedom of speech, would rate as dramatic.</p>
<p>The Coalition is not short on free speech proponents. Turnbull aside, prime minister Tony Abbott <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/tony-abbott-to-champion-freedom-of-speech/story-e6frfkp9-1226710959763#mm-premium">advocated</a> protection for “things that are unsayable in polite company” shortly before the election. Also in opposition, the Coalition’s attorney-general George Brandis stoutly defended freedom of speech, <a href="http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2012/10/in-defence-of-freedom-of-speech">warning against</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>….a comprehensive challenge – arising from a modern-day puritanism, driven by an ideologue’s intolerance of alternative or dissenting views.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While reflecting the sentiments of Abbott and some of his new ministers as captured above, the Coalition’s <a href="http://lpa.webcontent.s3.amazonaws.com/realsolutions/LPA%20Policy%20Booklet%20210x210_pages.pdf">“Real Solutions” manifesto</a> leaves the door open to supporting “an open and accountable media”, and to working with the media:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…to ensure they actively strengthen their standards so they meet community expectations of the levels of journalism Australians expect and deserve.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Any indelicate handling of such moves, however, runs the obvious risk. Even so, questions have surfaced. There have been calls, for example, to purge the ABC of its alleged anti-Abbott bias, and for a <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/outdated-aunty-needs-new-act/story-e6frfkp9-1226734338818#mm-premium">major review</a> of the ABC’s operations and the ABC Act.</p>
<p>Turnbull has been at pains before and after the election to downplay cuts to the public broadcaster, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3690871.htm">noting</a> in February 2013 that “we don’t have any plans to cut the funding to the ABC”. Since taking office he has acknowledged the ABC as a “vital part” in Australia’s democracy.</p>
<p>The ABC was <a href="http://about.abc.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ABC-AR-2012-combined-web-revised-17-Oct.pdf">allocated A$1 billion</a> in the 2011 federal budget. Belt-tightening, even for the ABC, is not inconceivable given that the austerity theme <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/budget-takes-33bn-revenue-hit/story-e6frfkp9-1226690156605">entered the discourse</a> even before the election. Will the ABC be quarantined from cuts, and if not, at what point will austerity-driven cuts morph into the kind that resembles the Howard era’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-22/dempster-the-future-of-public-broadcasting/4902904">“campaign of vilification of public broadcasters”</a>? It has been suggested that even a $50 million cut would be “a hammer blow” to the ABC.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32922/original/kzn23r5k-1381645254.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Former News Corp CEO Kim Williams led the charge against the former Labor government’s disastrous media reform package in March this year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Other media regulation areas are fertile for attention. These include regulatory reform sought by commercial broadcasters aimed at <a href="http://www.afr.com/p/national/cut_tv_fees_urges_seven_boss_za4ZjoJbwdv0BAdaO15EmL">lowering or removing broadcast licence fees</a>, which they argue is among the highest in the world and which they say constitute a relic of the pre-internet age. Turnbull recently said that he was “very focused on reducing the cost of doing business in my area”. On that basis, there could be movement in this regard.</p>
<p>Media commentator Mark Day <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/tony-abbott-will-deliver-reform-where-its-needed/story-e6frfkp9-1226714738179#mm-premi">argued</a> that while:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…upsetting the media status quo will be low on Abbott’s priorities, there are a number of matters that must be attended to. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is unfinished business arising from the recent media reviews. It is likely that the print sector’s ongoing review of best practice will continue without too much Coalition prompting. Deadlocked moves <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/10/press-regulation-brian-leveson-commons-mps">in the UK</a> show how arduous and time-consuming this process can be. </p>
<p>The Convergence Review <a href="http://www.archive.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/147733/Convergence_Review_Final_Report.pdf">argued</a> the case for a “new approach” to media regulation because many elements of the current regulatory regime are “outdated or unnecessary and other rules are becoming ineffective with the rapid changes in the communications landscape”. This process is likely to continue.</p>
<p>The Coalition promised attention to the Racial Discrimination Act to focus on “offences of incitement and causing fear but not a prohibition on causing offence”. <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/tort-is-not-the-only-privacy-option/story-e6frfkp9-1226737685505">Reform of privacy law</a> to resolve privacy concerns has been looming for some time, and a new <a href="http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/invasions-privacy-ip43">issues paper</a> was recently released. </p>
<p>So, there is no shortage of grist for the media reform mill. And where the reform initiative encroaches on freedom of speech, resistance is likely to follow. Chances are that this time around, however, reform will be pursued in measured doses without resorting to ultimatums, as <a href="https://newmatilda.com/2013/03/13/conroys-all-or-nothing-media-reforms">Stephen Conroy did</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/18950/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joseph Fernandez does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The media has wasted little time reminding the Coalition government that its rigorous scrutiny of the former Labor government was par for the course. Journalists are snapping at the Coalition’s heels on…Joseph Fernandez, Head of Department, Journalism, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/127782013-03-12T19:43:03Z2013-03-12T19:43:03ZLow-key Conroy proposals are media reform lite<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21165/original/xwfq8rpq-1363067926.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Senator Stephen Conroy did not have a mandate for significant change.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Yesterday, communications minister Senator Stephen Conroy finally presented the government <a href="http://www.afr.com/rw/2009-2014/AFR/2013/03/12/Photos/73ae3770-8ac2-11e2-b3be-e962dfe94952_Reforms%20to%20secure%20media%20quality,%20diversity,%20and%20certainty%20for%20the%20future.pdf">response</a> to the <a href="http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/convergence_review">Convergence Review</a> and <a href="http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/independent_media_inquiry">Finkelstein review</a>. </p>
<p>It is hard to know how many drafts of this long-awaited response have been generated in the minister’s office, but what has finally been put forward is decidedly low-key. It is focused on current concerns and existing media players more than a convergent media future.</p>
<h2>Core reforms</h2>
<p>Given the fanfare with which the initial media enquiries were announced, and the mix of hope and trepidation that surrounded what they may recommend – a fair part of which was generated by the media itself – a modest set of recommendations has emerged. </p>
<p>Among the core reforms proposed are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>A press standards model that maintains self-regulation, but beefs up the role of the Press Council and clarifies its standing in relation to online as well as print media;</p></li>
<li><p>The introduction of a Public Interest Test for future media takeovers and mergers, including the creation of a Public Interest Media Advocate (PIMA) to evaluate their implications for media diversity;</p></li>
<li><p>Updating the ABC and SBS charters to explicitly incorporate their online activities as core to their public service mission;</p></li>
<li><p>Continuing allocation of the sixth free-to-air channel to community television, or, put differently, a continuing prohibition on a fourth free-to-air commercial TV service;</p></li>
<li><p>Making permanent the 50% licence fees rebate for commercial television broadcasters, subject to their meeting new Australian content obligations, particularly on their digital multichannels.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>Old world thinking</h2>
<p>This package of measures is hardly the “<a href="http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/147780/Convergence_Review_Final_Report_Executive_summary.pdf">new policy and regulatory framework</a>” the Convergence Review believed was the necessary response to technological and audience changes rendering the existing legislative framework redundant.</p>
<p>Yes, the new policy recommends changes to media ownership, news standards, public broadcasting and Australian and local content that are largely with the convergence review recommendations, but these still largely sit within the established media “silos” of print, broadcasting and online media. </p>
<p>More radical proposals, such as setting content standards for Google, or eliminating broadcasting licences altogether, are clearly off the agenda.</p>
<h2>Legislating the public interest</h2>
<p>The proposal for a public interest test for media mergers and acquisitions, and the creation of a Public Interest Media Advocate (PIMA), are the recommendations most consistent with the spirit of the convergence review. </p>
<p>The review proposed that a revised media policy framework needed to be “technology-neutral”, avoiding structural biases for or against any particular media platform or service type, while recognising that public interest questions about media ownership concentration or the loss of local content still matter.</p>
<p>The PIMA proposal walks the line between establishing more flexible, less prescriptive approaches to regulating media ownership, without fully abandoning controls in the interests of securing media diversity. It draws upon the concept of <a href="http://www.gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Weeks_SoftLaw_%20Australia.pdf">soft law</a>, whereby legislation establishes a general principle – in this case media diversity – and grants decision makers a degree of autonomy in determining the scope of its application in particular cases. </p>
<p>Soft law is seen by many as a necessary response to rapid technological change, where events are moving too quickly for parliaments to be able to regularly update legislation.</p>
<h2>The politics of change</h2>
<p>Senator Conroy indicated his personal preference for eliminating what he sees as legacy rules, such as the maximum 75% audience reach rule for commercial broadcasters. This rule clearly assumes that services such as broadcast news are only accessed through broadcast media, whereas they are clearly now available to 100% of Australian homes with a reasonably fast internet connection. </p>
<p>It is worth remembering that almost no Australian homes had an internet connection when these initial restrictions were passed, let alone access to YouTube and on-demand media services.</p>
<p>But the politics of legislating for changes to media laws in a political context where the government lacks a majority in either house, and where an election is six months away can also be seen in the Conroy’s response to the reviews.</p>
<h2>A modest proposal</h2>
<p>Rather than presenting a single set of legislative changes to parliament, Conroy has instead opted to unbundle the proposals. This means the licence fee rebate and the changes to the ABC and SBS charters do not hinge on how parliament responds to the PIMA proposal. The former could be passed even if the latter is rejected.</p>
<p>What has finally emerged is a compromise set of changes; a very cautious, and in many ways piecemeal, response to the proposals of the Convergence and Finkelstein reviews. It has probably not modernised media laws sufficiently to “tackle the challenges of the future”, although it does make some overdue changes to existing law. </p>
<p>Given the lack of community consensus as to what media laws should prioritise, it would have been hard to have advanced further without a clearer mandate for change than the federal government currently possesses.</p>
<p>It would appear that a larger overhaul of media policy and regulation to meet the challenges of convergence will need to wait for another occasion. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12778/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Terry Flew does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Yesterday, communications minister Senator Stephen Conroy finally presented the government response to the Convergence Review and Finkelstein review. It is hard to know how many drafts of this long-awaited…Terry Flew, Professor of Media and Communications, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/122032013-02-13T08:50:13Z2013-02-13T08:50:13ZThe paucity of information overload<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/20234/original/7x5p9fyk-1360739955.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Stephen Conroy is still to bring media policy to cabinet.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It might not be a front line issue, but media policy is a significant election year debate.</p>
<p>Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/conroy-pushing-for-rapid-response-on-press-controls/story-e6frg996-1226523109340">still committed</a> to bringing a submission to cabinet in coming weeks or months, despite a long delay caused by differences within the government between those who would like a robust approach following the <a href="http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/independent_media_inquiry">Finkelstein Inquiry</a> and others, including the Prime Minister, who do not want to upset the media companies.</p>
<p>The debate has also been heightened by the <a href="http://mumbrella.com.au/guardian-reported-to-have-hired-fairfax-canberra-duo-138769">cost cutting</a> and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/news-to-combine-divisions-in-costcutting-sweep-20120620-20nfe.html">staff shedding</a> by the major media organisations, Fairfax and News Limited, and by the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/15/guardian-launch-digital-australia-edition">imminent entry</a> of The Guardian into the Australian market.</p>
<p>This week Professor Robert Picard, from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/about/news/item/article/can-society-ensure-quality-news-pro.html">gave a grim assessment</a> of the difficulty for the public of obtaining quality information in the age of information overload.</p>
<p>“We are receiving more information than ever before, but it is a narrow form of information. We get endless flow of events news, disaggregated facts, and massive amounts of sports and entertainment news. These are increasingly shortened and disconnected from other information to limit complexity and allow quicker consumption. This information is replicated and echoed through multiple digital sources—magnifying its availability,” he told the National Press Club in Canberra.</p>
<p>“This expanding information hides the diminishing focus on complex social issues and challenges, the reduction in oversight and pursuit of accountability of social institutions, and an impoverishment of in-depth reporting and analysis.”</p>
<p>“These are occurring because changes in technology and economics are dismantling the traditional financial configurations that made Western media independent and provided the resources needed to carry out regular coverage of social institutions and undertake expensive and time consuming investigations,” Professor Picard said.</p>
<p>Digitalisation had destabilised the business models, he said, with digital developments concurrently stripping wealth from the news industry, forcing newspapers and other news operations to become smaller, reducing news bureaus and staff.</p>
<p>“The digital world is thus producing a paradox in which news and information sources and distribution platforms are increasing, but the capacity of news organisations to provide quality news is diminishing,” he said.</p>
<p>The media had become more dependent on the market and this had rendered them all highly vulnerable to commercialism, vying for larger, more attractive market segments.</p>
<p>“As a result media accentuate competition, manufacture conflict, and create false excitement in a desperate bid to attract audiences. Dialogue has become shouting matches, observation of the human condition has become voyeurism, and even cooking has become competition. Media celebrate mediocrity and folly; give great attention to unaccomplished and mindless individuals; and venerate the common and the mundane,” he said.</p>
<p>“The market pressures are reducing journalistic quality, producing practices that diminish the social value of news content, and diverting the attention of journalists from social activities to those primarily related to the business interests of the enterprises.”</p>
<p>These trends had led to debate about whether public action should be taken and if so what sort of action, including increased regulation, support and incentives to improve content.</p>
<p>Picard canvassed a range of actions that had been taken overseas and the pros and cons of various types of intervention, he also noted that it was not just a case of whether governments should or should not do but said that society should also encourage non-government support for quality news.</p>
<p>“The challenges facing quality news provision are complex and there will be no single easy solution, but it is vital that society address the growing gulf between our aspirations for information society and the information that it is actually providing,” he said.</p>
<p>“As we look forward, the most important issue is not whether traditional news providers survive, but how news will be gathered and distributed in the coming century. The issue involves questions about what institutional and organizational arrangements will emerge to support newsgathering, curating, and analysis. Distribution of news is no longer the challenge, but the business arrangements surrounding it clearly are in question.”</p>
<p>He said it had become increasingly clear that “markets are highly useful for providing some types of information and content, but that they are not able to fully meet the information needs of democratic society.”</p>
<p>Picard did not delve particularly into Australian examples. But here, the situation is complicated by the fact that tax payers already fund a major media player, the ABC, making the advocacy of money to support other news gathering operations more difficult. The ABC itself periodically becomes a political issue, with both sides at times complaining about its coverage. If there is a coalition government elected this year, the national broadcaster could find itself under funding pressure.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the Gillard government is likely to tread softly on the issue of standards for the newspaper industry. The real test of its media policy will be whether it maintains Labor’s support for a public interest test on the sale of media assets to be introduced, to prevent even further concentration of an already highly concentrated industry.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12203/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It might not be a front line issue, but media policy is a significant election year debate. Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is still committed to bringing a submission to cabinet in coming weeks…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.