Media for the people?
The social remit of a public broadcaster
by Jerath Head
When television first went to air in Australia 1956, it was with networks Seven and Nine, and public broadcaster the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). From its inception, the ABC’s function was a social one — to ensure media content was as broadly representative of national interest as possible, as a check against the predominantly commercial interests of the other networks. As Professor Julianne Schultz notes:
When the ABC was established, first in radio and then in television, it was essentially to address a problem of scarcity — there was a scarcity of spectrum…a scarcity of content, and a scarcity of audience. It was very much addressing how to ensure a baseline in that environment, where there were real limits.
This remains true today — if not in terms of sheer volume of content and potential audience numbers, then certainly in terms of spectrum. Australia has one of the most concentrated media industries in the world, controlled by a handful of corporations pushing ever more centralised and syndicated content.
Further consolidation is on the cards for 2016, with the recent announcement that the Turnbull government’s proposed reforms to media deregulation laws — tabled in May but overshadowed by the election — are to be fast tracked for the next sitting of parliament.
Although the reforms will likely face some resistance from Labor, Professor Schultz says they represent the unravelling of the social contract that even commercial media networks have deferred to, in some capacity, since the post-WWII era of reform. As government-funded entities, the ABC, SBS and NITV are now the only media organisations with a responsibility to uphold this contract and promote a broad spectrum of media content.
The business of public broadcasting
It is widely agreed that reform to the regulatory framework in Australia is necessary to account for digital disruption. However, there is no clear indicator as to how the Senate committee’s recommendations for amending the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 are meant to provide a balance for new media.
Mainstream commercial players in Australia have been decidedly ineffective at adapting to the digital environment, and these recommendations are likely to merely increase their stranglehold over traditional media.
While a proposal has been made for a ‘points system’ to guarantee local content production, there are concerns that ownership changes will in fact result in less local content, rather than more.
The ABC has been one of a few media operators to successfully exploit the potential of digital media. Combined with its core remit of producing and promoting diverse content, this adaptability has seen its popularity rise to the point where it is considered an integral part of Australian cultural life.
And yet, as Professor Schultz notes, these days the ABC is run more like a business than a social institution. An example of this is in the heavily criticised 2011 absorption of TV program Stateline into broader news coverage. The state-specific editions of regional and rural content — strong examples of the ABC’s core social function — were axed as a budget measure following government cuts.
Political hostility towards this move exemplified the need for a re-evaluation of the ABC’s function moving forward. If it still to represent the public interest, does the Australian government want to hamstring this commitment with restrictions or cuts to funding, forcing the ABC to compete for revenue with commercial media corporations?
In May, Treasurer Scott Morrison announced $3.1 billion in funding for the ABC over three years with a reduced investment of $41.4 million for news gathering.
The ‘public interest’ remit
Defining ‘public interest’ can be difficult. But, if the ‘unexpected’ swing towards minor and independent parties in the 2016 federal election is any indication, representation is a factor. Place still matters.
Accounting for such a cultural deficit is one of the functions that Professor Schultz identifies as the remit of a strong public broadcaster. Also important is the potential to account for democratic deficits in the media: a baseline of mediated and disinterested content. The ABC is often accused of a left-leaning bias, although two independent reviews have so far reported no indication of this.
Interestingly, Professor Schultz identifies industry development as another deficit that a strong (adequately funded) public broadcaster has the potential to address — countering the very contraction of services and employment that increased deregulation fosters, by requiring a broader infrastructure for content production.
Furthermore, the ABC is uniquely positioned to meet international outreach objectives, as an Australian presence covering significant global issues that hold no commercial imperative for other networks.
New media, new models
This discussion is unlikely to take place in the precarious government that has emerged from the recent election. Instead, the ABC will need to exercise its historical versatility to continue adapting to both industry-driven cost pressures and the challenge posed by new media broadcasters such as Netflix and Stan — which are essentially vehicles for distributing U.S. content.
But the direction this leads in could be less than ideal. Managing director Michelle Guthrie recently suggested that the ABC partner with Netflix in order to increase revenue. It’s some of the first serious thinking being presented on incorporating new providers, though unfortunately still prioritises the ABC as a business.
Why not address both the bottom line and the social imperative by pushing for legislation that requires providers like Netflix, as with the other media broadcasters, to feature a certain quota of ABC and locally produced content as has been suggested by the European Commission?
If funding is to be cut or restricted, Guthrie’s business modelling may be essential — which begs the question of how much private dealing is acceptable before the social function of the public broadcaster is compromised?
With the competitiveness of commercial corporations set to increase, other avenues for scarce revenue will need to be considered; for example, making concessions for the ABC to accept forms of advertising. For many, this would go against the very nature of the ABC (particularly when compared to its model, the BBC); but such considerations will be increasingly thrust upon it unless a renewed consensus on its role as the public’s broadcaster can be reached.
Jerath Head in conversation with Professor Julianne Schultz
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
JERATH HEAD
Jerath Head is part of the editorial team at Griffith Review. Jerath is a Master’s student at the University of Queensland, and has worked as a freelance writer and editor in Australia and Ireland.
