Ultimately it is absurd to have a Government funded national overseas television service operated by anyone other than the Government funded broadcaster. However, since the commercial networks first had the Australia Television service tendered out under the Howard Government (won by Seven) that has been the accepted position.
Perhaps having it in commercial hands can provide greater cover for the service upsetting foreign powers; but the powers likely to be offended won't really comprehend the nicety.
The Australian today reports that the second assessment of tenders is going to recommend Sky.
But with its high News Ltd relationship making the decision either way can be spun by the Opposition. If the tender is awarded to the ABC then the action is to "punish" News for its coverage; if it is awarded to the ABC it will be a "bribe" for News to change its coverage.
Ultimately that is always the problem with any process where a media player is the potential beneficiary of a Government contract.
That is an additional reason to have the service run by the ABC. But the decision should be made not to award the contract to the ABC, but to abandon the tender process totally and to amend the ABC charter so that the provision of Australia Television is part of its ongoing function. That change should be accompanied by legislation that entitles Australia Television to a mechanism to "compulsorily acquire" sporting and other culturally (yes sport is cultural) significant coverage content if that content is not otherwise being internationally distributed.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts
Monday, October 17, 2011
Tuesday, October 04, 2011
What do they teach in science these days
It is really hard to keep the car on the road when listening while driving and hearing news stories like the one I heard this morning on the 8:30am Triple J news.
An item on a new telescope in Chile cited as the world's most powerful radio telescope concluded that the objects the telescope is looking at "are so far away that the light and radiation is only just reaching the Earth."
I took that to mean "just now" and it might actually have been what it said. Is there any other kind of light and radiation a telescope could see? Like light and radiation that reached the Earth last week, month or year? Surely not radiation that won't reach the Earth till tomorrow.
If the "just" is meant to reflect the arduous journey of the photons through the vastness of space - well, we know that the only thing that will stop the photon is other matter and that space is pretty empty. Most photons just keep on keeping on.
The other possible interpretation is that the distance relates to the dispersion of the light (as the square of distance) and hence the further away the object the lower the statistical likelihood of photon hitting the Earth - or more specifically just a much much lower signal intensity.
But the description "just reaching the Earth" isn't the same thing at all.
I'm sure all the people in the Triple J newsroom are probably journalism or Arts graduates, but surely they should have a better grasp of basic science than that.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
An item on a new telescope in Chile cited as the world's most powerful radio telescope concluded that the objects the telescope is looking at "are so far away that the light and radiation is only just reaching the Earth."
I took that to mean "just now" and it might actually have been what it said. Is there any other kind of light and radiation a telescope could see? Like light and radiation that reached the Earth last week, month or year? Surely not radiation that won't reach the Earth till tomorrow.
If the "just" is meant to reflect the arduous journey of the photons through the vastness of space - well, we know that the only thing that will stop the photon is other matter and that space is pretty empty. Most photons just keep on keeping on.
The other possible interpretation is that the distance relates to the dispersion of the light (as the square of distance) and hence the further away the object the lower the statistical likelihood of photon hitting the Earth - or more specifically just a much much lower signal intensity.
But the description "just reaching the Earth" isn't the same thing at all.
I'm sure all the people in the Triple J newsroom are probably journalism or Arts graduates, but surely they should have a better grasp of basic science than that.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Life imitates art
The ACCC has prosecuted a group of firms for selling ads in magazines that were never to be produced.
That business model was part of Wayne Hope's ABC TV comedy Very Small Business.
I wonder which came first - the satire or the actual business?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
That business model was part of Wayne Hope's ABC TV comedy Very Small Business.
I wonder which came first - the satire or the actual business?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Thursday, July 14, 2011
More lessons from News Corp/International/Limited
Just so we are all clear - News Corp is the parent company, originally of Adelaide now of Delaware. News International is the UK operation. News Limited is the Australian operation.
The company name comes from the Adelaide News. Rupert's father was a journalist, editor then manager. He died with shares in some companies, not control of any. The executors sold the share of Herald and weekly Times allowing Rupert, his mother and siblings to retain the Adelaide News and a Queensland title (can't recall if it was the Courier-Mail).
Rupert sold the Adelaide News when he later acquired the HWT group - competition concerns wouldn't allow him to acquire the HWT title the Advertiser otherwise.
The purpose of this tale is to remind you of the structure of News Corp, and that Murdoch will happily adjust that structure to suit his needs.
An underlying question is what his commitment is to printed media, in particular newspapers. The recent acquisition of The Wall Street Journal clearly indicates Murdoch hasn't given up on print. Despite the public perception that Governments these days are made by television or even social media, Murdoch knows that enduring contributions stem from the daily drip of print that gets recycled in the electronic media.
That changes only when the contagion effect of rapid news transmission takes hold - the mob effect that I earlier referred to in the closure of News of the World.
That closure hasn't yet contained the damage, having to now walk away from the BSkyB bid.
The biggest issue with News Corp remains the ability of the 80 year old Murdoch to maintain control, and to create a family succession. The group faces periodic shareholder actions and the latest turmoil adds to those.
Some have speculated that Murdoch will go a step further and abandon the entire UK business. The challenge is that the shareholding base probably sees a change of executives not a change of structure as the solution.
This creates the possibility of the unthinkable - is the only way to save News Corp and the possibility of a family succession for Rupert to go now. If he accepts the blame for the culture and every other error there is no one left to pursue.
James and Elisabeth are both tarnished by the News International story (and the purchase of Shine). Lachlan is currently a relative clean skin - having effectively rejected the culture of his father.
Finally there is ample evidence that what goes on in News is cultural - by which one means unstated by widely accepted norms of behaviour. News Limited has been playing the game pretty solidly over its support of the Sky News bid for Australia Network - even though the ownership is through News International.
Today the Oz has run a story as a kind of "counter corruption" story suggesting inappropriate behaviour by ABC execs in support of the ABC bid. Ultimately the prohibition on lobbying during tendering is an obligation on those being lobbied not the lobbyists. I would be dearly interested in knowing if anyone from News or Seven or lobbyists acting on their behalf has said anything to any Minister about the tender. The difficulty is getting anyone to admit to it - on either side.
Note: A couple of reading recommendations. The Shawcross biography of Murdoch
is far better than Wolff's The Man Who Owns the News
, but the latter is more up to date. The story of subscription television in the UK, and the eventual merger of Sky and BSB to make BSkyB is well told in Dished! The Rise and Fall of British Satellite Broadcasting.
)
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The company name comes from the Adelaide News. Rupert's father was a journalist, editor then manager. He died with shares in some companies, not control of any. The executors sold the share of Herald and weekly Times allowing Rupert, his mother and siblings to retain the Adelaide News and a Queensland title (can't recall if it was the Courier-Mail).
Rupert sold the Adelaide News when he later acquired the HWT group - competition concerns wouldn't allow him to acquire the HWT title the Advertiser otherwise.
The purpose of this tale is to remind you of the structure of News Corp, and that Murdoch will happily adjust that structure to suit his needs.
An underlying question is what his commitment is to printed media, in particular newspapers. The recent acquisition of The Wall Street Journal clearly indicates Murdoch hasn't given up on print. Despite the public perception that Governments these days are made by television or even social media, Murdoch knows that enduring contributions stem from the daily drip of print that gets recycled in the electronic media.
That changes only when the contagion effect of rapid news transmission takes hold - the mob effect that I earlier referred to in the closure of News of the World.
That closure hasn't yet contained the damage, having to now walk away from the BSkyB bid.
The biggest issue with News Corp remains the ability of the 80 year old Murdoch to maintain control, and to create a family succession. The group faces periodic shareholder actions and the latest turmoil adds to those.
Some have speculated that Murdoch will go a step further and abandon the entire UK business. The challenge is that the shareholding base probably sees a change of executives not a change of structure as the solution.
This creates the possibility of the unthinkable - is the only way to save News Corp and the possibility of a family succession for Rupert to go now. If he accepts the blame for the culture and every other error there is no one left to pursue.
James and Elisabeth are both tarnished by the News International story (and the purchase of Shine). Lachlan is currently a relative clean skin - having effectively rejected the culture of his father.
Finally there is ample evidence that what goes on in News is cultural - by which one means unstated by widely accepted norms of behaviour. News Limited has been playing the game pretty solidly over its support of the Sky News bid for Australia Network - even though the ownership is through News International.
Today the Oz has run a story as a kind of "counter corruption" story suggesting inappropriate behaviour by ABC execs in support of the ABC bid. Ultimately the prohibition on lobbying during tendering is an obligation on those being lobbied not the lobbyists. I would be dearly interested in knowing if anyone from News or Seven or lobbyists acting on their behalf has said anything to any Minister about the tender. The difficulty is getting anyone to admit to it - on either side.
Note: A couple of reading recommendations. The Shawcross biography of Murdoch
is far better than Wolff's The Man Who Owns the News, but the latter is more up to date. The story of subscription television in the UK, and the eventual merger of Sky and BSB to make BSkyB is well told in Dished! The Rise and Fall of British Satellite Broadcasting.)Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Cattle
The images on 4 Corners last night were very confronting, but it is hard not to feel for the cattle industry.
Live cattle are exported to Indonesia both because the Indonesians insist on Halal butchery, and because the Indonesians cannot accept frozen or refrigerated meat as they have no refrigeration.
The show showed conditions in reverse order. What used to be the only way to slaughter cattle in Indonesia was what was shown last. Cattle being tied and beaten till they would lie in such a way as to be able to have their throats cut. What looks like the very cruel Australian Meat and Livestock box is in fact humane compared to this, if done properly.
What is more interesting is that the whole idea of Halal butchery, the death by one clean stroke, is that the animal is not meant to be tortured before death. But I guess the technique was designed with goats and sheep, not Australian beef cattle.
How do you justify a stunner for an abbatoir that kills four beasts a day?
In all the discussions of frzen or refrigerated meat the option of "cryo-packed" meat seems to be ignored. While we keep this refrigerated it actually doesn't need to be - meat in a sealed bag devoid of oxygen does not go "off".
The Muslims of Indonesia will trust Australian Halal slaughter. Can we just find a way to package it?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Live cattle are exported to Indonesia both because the Indonesians insist on Halal butchery, and because the Indonesians cannot accept frozen or refrigerated meat as they have no refrigeration.
The show showed conditions in reverse order. What used to be the only way to slaughter cattle in Indonesia was what was shown last. Cattle being tied and beaten till they would lie in such a way as to be able to have their throats cut. What looks like the very cruel Australian Meat and Livestock box is in fact humane compared to this, if done properly.
What is more interesting is that the whole idea of Halal butchery, the death by one clean stroke, is that the animal is not meant to be tortured before death. But I guess the technique was designed with goats and sheep, not Australian beef cattle.
How do you justify a stunner for an abbatoir that kills four beasts a day?
In all the discussions of frzen or refrigerated meat the option of "cryo-packed" meat seems to be ignored. While we keep this refrigerated it actually doesn't need to be - meat in a sealed bag devoid of oxygen does not go "off".
The Muslims of Indonesia will trust Australian Halal slaughter. Can we just find a way to package it?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Friday, February 26, 2010
Communications Policy
The National Broadband Network is just one facet of communications policy, but at times you'd be forgiven for thinking it is the only one.
The Australian reported last week that the NBN itself was in a mire, and that Telstra was eyeing off the prospect of again playing hard ball. That is, thinking the story is only about them deciding not to finalise negotiations to force more concessions from the Government.
In the same rag today Mark Day wonders whether our ABC needs to have its role redefined. There has been some angst both about the ABC move to a 24/7 news channel and the ABC funding of the so-called "regional hubs".
The ABC is a strange model, given that we've almost always had both whereas he US started only commercial and the UK started only public. The trick in our model is maintaining the balance. I guess the biggest shame was that the FTAs couldn't get their act in to gear on how to move the jointly owned SKY news into an FTA multi-channel.
The regional hubs are far more akin to community media that public broadcast, and are more about "digital capability building" than new "broadcast" services. It is really hard to argue against more direct community engagement, especially as almost all "local" papers are now just pat of one of three conglomerates. The hub model creates the idea that the hubs can "rip and read" ABC content but still be local.
The real question is whether anyone outside the media itself cares enough about media policy to force either party to put effort into developing one before the election?
The Australian reported last week that the NBN itself was in a mire, and that Telstra was eyeing off the prospect of again playing hard ball. That is, thinking the story is only about them deciding not to finalise negotiations to force more concessions from the Government.
In the same rag today Mark Day wonders whether our ABC needs to have its role redefined. There has been some angst both about the ABC move to a 24/7 news channel and the ABC funding of the so-called "regional hubs".
The ABC is a strange model, given that we've almost always had both whereas he US started only commercial and the UK started only public. The trick in our model is maintaining the balance. I guess the biggest shame was that the FTAs couldn't get their act in to gear on how to move the jointly owned SKY news into an FTA multi-channel.
The regional hubs are far more akin to community media that public broadcast, and are more about "digital capability building" than new "broadcast" services. It is really hard to argue against more direct community engagement, especially as almost all "local" papers are now just pat of one of three conglomerates. The hub model creates the idea that the hubs can "rip and read" ABC content but still be local.
The real question is whether anyone outside the media itself cares enough about media policy to force either party to put effort into developing one before the election?
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
The Folk Song Army
Gerard Henderson in today's SMH has made me think of Tom Lehrer's comic piece The Folk Song Army in which there is a refrain;
Remember the war against Franco?
That's the kind where each of us belongs,
Though he may have won all the battles,
We had all the good songs.
Henderson's thesis is that the outrage over recent ABC Board appointments was misplaced because rather than changing the ABC all it does is has the effect of taking a critic out of the debate.
I happen to agree with him on the outrage being misplaced, but not for the same reasons. More people need to recognise that the Boards or Commissions appointed by Governments first and foremost have to address their establishing legislation, and much of their actions and activity are reflective of it. As a consequence, merely changing the Board doesn't change the "governance" of the ABC.
In addition there is a simple piece of behavioural theory to understand. People repeatedly do things that get "reinforced". An ABC Board member battling the management gets no reinforcement from anyone as it is a private battle, a Board member supporting management gets reinforced and thanked in every contact with the organisation.
However, there is another part of the Henderson thesis, "The fact is that there are few articulate conservatives in Australia and certainly fewer, per capita, than in the United States or Britain. The phenomenon goes back to the Robert Menzies era, when the Coalition won elections while the left dominated the cultural debate."
On this I cannot agree. In fact there seem to be far more printed pages by the "conservatives" - at least the economic "neo-cons" - than by any left/progressive or other like cause. Policy and Quadrant, the column inches devoted to the IPA and CIS staff, the voluminous issues from the BCA and Mr Henderson himself.
More importantly this ongoing perception that "the left" has control of the "cultural institutions" or "the opinionators" or "the elites" is strange - because if these people were as influential as they are claimed to be this should be a country which is a rabid hotbed of collectivism and social experiment. Instead we remain a highly conservative society that has four times elected the most conservative leader in the history of Australia. If that is the consequence of a "left intelligensia" then surely the conservatives want more of it.
What is the benefit to the left if it has the good songs (the articulate left?) if it is losing the battles?
Remember the war against Franco?
That's the kind where each of us belongs,
Though he may have won all the battles,
We had all the good songs.
Henderson's thesis is that the outrage over recent ABC Board appointments was misplaced because rather than changing the ABC all it does is has the effect of taking a critic out of the debate.
I happen to agree with him on the outrage being misplaced, but not for the same reasons. More people need to recognise that the Boards or Commissions appointed by Governments first and foremost have to address their establishing legislation, and much of their actions and activity are reflective of it. As a consequence, merely changing the Board doesn't change the "governance" of the ABC.
In addition there is a simple piece of behavioural theory to understand. People repeatedly do things that get "reinforced". An ABC Board member battling the management gets no reinforcement from anyone as it is a private battle, a Board member supporting management gets reinforced and thanked in every contact with the organisation.
However, there is another part of the Henderson thesis, "The fact is that there are few articulate conservatives in Australia and certainly fewer, per capita, than in the United States or Britain. The phenomenon goes back to the Robert Menzies era, when the Coalition won elections while the left dominated the cultural debate."
On this I cannot agree. In fact there seem to be far more printed pages by the "conservatives" - at least the economic "neo-cons" - than by any left/progressive or other like cause. Policy and Quadrant, the column inches devoted to the IPA and CIS staff, the voluminous issues from the BCA and Mr Henderson himself.
More importantly this ongoing perception that "the left" has control of the "cultural institutions" or "the opinionators" or "the elites" is strange - because if these people were as influential as they are claimed to be this should be a country which is a rabid hotbed of collectivism and social experiment. Instead we remain a highly conservative society that has four times elected the most conservative leader in the history of Australia. If that is the consequence of a "left intelligensia" then surely the conservatives want more of it.
What is the benefit to the left if it has the good songs (the articulate left?) if it is losing the battles?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)