Media reform: in shallows and miseries

This paper recounts the story of the 2013 media reforms - their introduction, the hurried investigations which attempted to explore their intentions and possible outcomes, and their eventual demise. Introduction As a result of an investigation into the British media following allegations of corruption, the Australian Government announced in September 2011 that it would instigate an independent review into certain aspects of media regulation. In addition to this inquiry, the Finkelstein Review, the Government set up a committee (the Convergence Review Committee) to consider the effect convergence was having on the Australian media landscape. The findings of the Finkelstein Review and the Convergence Review Committee were presented to the Gillard Government in the first half of 2012. The inquiries essentially recommended that the Government adopt a new approach to media regulation. As the Convergence Review Committee summarised the situation: media content and communications technologies have outstripped existing media policy frameworks, and as a result, ‘many elements of the current regulatory regime are outdated or unnecessary and other rules are becoming ineffective’. During the time the Government took to contemplate the recommendations of the Finkelstein Review and the Convergence Review Committee, media stakeholders warned against accepting what they saw as radical attempts to overhaul the media environment. While these stakeholders were more accepting of the Convergence Review’s conclusions, in general they argued that if the Government unquestionably agreed to the recommendations of either review, the result would be that the freedom of the press would be restricted. This, in turn, would give governments the power to manipulate and control the flow of information to the public—and consequently, undermine democracy. Other groups, however, were pleased with Finkelstein’s and the Convergence Review Committee’s findings and recommendations. They saw no contradiction between certain types of regulation and freedom of the press. Indeed, they saw a positive and ongoing role for government in maintaining and supporting ‘a free, diverse and responsible exchange of information, opinion and ideas to ensure the maintenance of a democratic polity’. Depending on the Government’s response, there was potential therefore for any attempt to reform the media based on recommendations from Finkelstein or the Convergence Review Committee to be controversial and divisive. And so it was. The introduction into the Parliament on 13 March 2013 of a package of Government media reform Bills was both controversial in its manner and its expectations, and divisive in its content. For two weeks it continued to be divisive, as stakeholders debated the failings and merits of the package. For two weeks it continued to be controversial, as claims and counterclaims about how it would undermine freedom of speech or enhance diversity of views and democratic discourse were argued. This paper recounts the story of the 2013 media reforms—their introduction, the hurried investigations which attempted to explore their intentions and possible outcomes, and their eventual demise—to reveal a policy, which for many, complicated reasons, did not take the tide towards good fortune, but mired in the misery and shallow waters of failed policy

The ABC: an overview

This paper presents an overview of Australia\u27s principal public broadcaster, the ABC, with reference to its origins, current composition and functions and its vision for a viable future within a changing media environment. The paper also makes reference to some of the controversies which have been integral to long-running discussion about the ABC - allegations of bias, political appointments to the broadcaster and the perennial question of funding adequacy. Executive summary This paper presents a brief overall picture of Australia’s principal public service broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).It describes the origins and development of the ABC and looks at its current structure, general operational policies and functions. The paper also discusses a number of important issues which are often raised in discussions of public broadcasting in general, and in particular, in relation to the ABC. One of the most significant of these is the issue of how the ABC is funded. The paper provides a brief background to the current funding situation, noting the debate surrounding the adequacy of funding and what may be future funding outcomes. Discussion of this issue is supplemented by detailed funding tables presented in Appendix C. These tables show funding trends and provide information actual dollars and dollar adjusted to 2012–13 prices. The ABC has regularly been the subject of criticism from a number of quarters; there have been frequent allegations of bias in reporting, inappropriate programming, political appointments to the ABC Board and mismanagement of funds. Recently the ABC has been accused also of neglecting its Charter obligations by withdrawing local services and outsourcing production. The debates surrounding these and other similar issues are also considered in the paper. Arguments supporting and criticising the broadcaster are noted throughout. While no attempt is made to draw definitive conclusions about the future of the ABC, it is noted that the broadcaster continues to be admired and supported by a significant number of Australians who see it as a constant source of quality information and entertainment

Commonwealth Games: friendly rivalry

This paper looks back at how the Commonwealth Games came to be, Australia’s experience of staging the event and contemplates how the Gold Coast will deal with that legacy and surmount perceived and unexpected complications that will inevitably surface before the 2018 Games’ Opening Ceremony.Executive summary Elite athletes from the Commonwealth meet every four years to compete in the multi-sport event known as the Commonwealth Games.While the Commonwealth Games boasts many similarities to the Olympics, it differs in the more relaxed and ‘friendly’ spirit of competition, which is a highlight of most events. The spirit of friendship has not always prevailed, however, and there have been serious rifts between Commonwealth nations that have manifested themselves in boycotts of the Games. While these have threatened at times to dissolve, or seriously weaken the Commonwealth, solutions have always been found and the Commonwealth and its Games have endured. Australia was one of a group of nations that first participated in competition between Britain and its colonies in 1911; it has participated in the Games in all its forms since that time. It is acknowledged as the most successful of the Commonwealth nations in this sporting competition—winning over 200 more medals than its nearest rival. Australian cities have hosted the Games four times. While there have been some hiccoughs in the staging of each event—some social, and some economic—Sydney, Perth and Brisbane have all received accolades and Melbourne was praised as ‘the best’ following the 2006 Games. In 2018 Australia will host another Commonwealth Games—on Queensland’s Gold Coast. This paper looks back at how the Games came to be, Australia’s experience of staging the event and contemplates how the Gold Coast will deal with that legacy and surmount perceived and unexpected complications that will inevitably surface before the 2018 Games’ Opening Ceremony

Media of the people: broadcasting community media in Australia

Provides an overview of Australia\u27s community media sector, looking at its origins and composition and the problems it faces in light of the tasks it performs and the lack of resources available to it to deliver a media which is ‘of the people’ in terms of aims, objectives and production. Introduction The term community media refers to radio, television and print services. Any or all of those forms of community media tend to emerge when communities are denied a voice for their views. In many countries they have provided a rallying point for protest and demands for rights. In post-apartheid South Africa, for example, community radio stations have emerged in an attempt to promote democracy as well as freedom of expression and diversity of broadcast content and ownership previously been denied in that country. It would be drawing a long bow to equate the situation which led to the establishment of community radio in South Africa with that of Australia. Nevertheless it is possible to consider that the Australian community broadcasting sector, which emerged in the 1970s, represented the demands of groups who felt that they were denied the opportunity to express their opinions or listen to alternative sources of entertainment. These groups ranged from those who felt marginalised to those who were beginning to feel that traditional media sources were not acting in the interests of the people. They even included groups who just wanted to hear music that was different from that broadcast on commercial stations. In seeking to deliver such alternatives, broadcast community media has done much to enhance Australian cultural diversity. It does much also to furnish ordinary Australians with an opportunity to contribute to debate on social and political issues. Indeed, researcher Michael Meadows and his colleagues argue that community broadcasting in Australia empowers audiences ‘to re-engage in the processes of democracy at the grass roots’ level creating social coherence through diversity’. Community broadcasting can be seen therefore as an alternative medium to public service and commercial media. As such, it occupies ‘an important space in citizen participation’ and is an important, though neglected, media sector. This paper provides an overview of the sector, looking at its origins and composition and the problems it faces in light of the tasks it performs and the lack of resources available to it to deliver a media which is ‘of the people’ in terms of aims, objectives and production

Australian Governments and dilemmas in filtering the Internet: juggling freedoms against potential for harm

This paper examines proposed internet filtering policies in Australia from the 1990s to 2014 and discusses some of their ideological underpinnings. Executive summary The Internet is a revolutionary source of information and its dissemination; and a medium for collaboration and interaction between individuals without regard for geographic location. Since its inception, however, concerns have been raised about the potential for unsavoury characters to use the Internet as a vehicle for distributing pornography and material of a violent nature to young or otherwise vulnerable individuals. Governments across the world have attempted to deal with such activities by various means and to varying degrees. These have included imposing mandatory filtering at an Internet Service Provider (ISP) level and optional filtering at the computer level. In Australia there has been considerable debate about what degree of filtering (if any) should be mandated. The Howard Government favoured an approach which emphasised self-regulation by ISPs combined with a legislative component and education and freedom for families to choose between either computer or ISP filtering based on a list of unacceptable content. The Rudd and Gillard Governments preferred the option of a mandatory ISP level filter, although this too was to be based on a ‘blacklist’ of prohibited content. Both options have been criticised as being expensive and inefficient. In addition, it has been argued that the Rudd/Gillard option would have had a detrimental impact on Internet speeds and that it would set a precedent for future governments to widen filtering to other forms of expression. The Howard Government’s programs were largely discarded by Labor after it was elected in 2007. However, Labor’s own filtering option was abandoned prior to its defeat in the 2013 election. In conjunction with their filtering options , both Coalition and Labor Governments have supported education and information campaigns to assist people, particularly children, to deal with online predators and both have introduced successful programs. The current Coalition Government’s policy on Internet filtering appears to favour light-handed legislation combined with education and information programs. This paper examines the iterations of internet filtering policies from the 1990s to 2014 and discusses some of their ideological underpinnings

Media reviews: all sound and fury?

This report provides background on recent media reviews in Australia, and assesses what they may mean for the future. Since the seventeenth century the media have been seen as the watchdogs of democracy— guardians of the public interest, protecting the people against arbitrary rule by governments. In recent times however, there has been considerable speculation that the media has relinquished its role as defender of democracy; that it is in fact just another industry controlled by and serving commercial interest, rather protecting the public interest. For many media commentators the News of the World (a former London newspaper owned by News International) phone hacking scandal in Britain validated such speculation. The scandal illustrated the extent to which at least certain sections of the media had failed in their remit by wilfully abusing power and invading personal privacy. Furthermore, the scandal demonstrated the potential negative influence on good governance that can result when powerful media interests become corrupt. Following the setting up of an investigation into News of the World practices, there were calls for a similar investigation to take place into the Australian media. These calls were premised on assumptions that some of the Australian press was engaging in comparable practices. The Australian Government announced on 14 September 2011 that an inquiry would be conducted into certain aspects of the media and media regulation. The inquiry was undertaken by Ray Finkelstein QC, with the assistance of Professor Matthew Ricketson from the University of Canberra’s School of Journalism and Communications. In addition, discussion about what effect media convergence was having, and would continue to have on the media landscape, prompted the Government also to convene an investigation into this phenomenon (see box below for definition of media convergence). In this context, and in light of government commitments made in the NBN: Regulatory Reform for 21st Century Broadband discussion paper and Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions Report, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Stephen Conroy, announced draft terms of reference for a convergence review in December 2010. In March 2011, final terms of reference were provided to the Convergence Review Committee, which consisted of Glen Boreham, Malcolm Long and Louise McElvogue. The findings of both reviews were presented to the Government in the first half of 2012

Sports funding: federal balancing act

This paper considers the policy environment which has surrounded federal government sports funding decisions since federation, concentrating on the period from the 1970s from which time the federal government has become increasingly involved in funding sport at the elite and participation or grassroots levels. Introduction The Australian Government has only relatively recently become involved in framing, delivering and funding sports policy. Prior to the 1970s government involvement in sport for the most part was at the local level. Indeed, local government still spends more than state and territory governments and the Australian Government on sport and recreational activities. However, since the Whitlam era, various federal governments have been persuaded, albeit to varying degrees, that there are a myriad of benefits to be gained from funding sports participation at grassroots levels and excellence in performance at elite levels. These benefits range from improvements in the health of the population and greater social cohesion to economic benefits. The World Health Organization (WHO) points out: Physical activity and healthy sports are essential for our health and well-being. Appropriate physical activity and sports for all constitute one of the major components of a healthy lifestyle, along with healthy diet, tobacco free life and avoidance of other substances harmful to health. Available experience and scientific evidence show that the regular practice of appropriate physical activity and sports provides people, male and female, of all ages and conditions, including persons with disability, with wide range of physical, social and mental health benefits. It interacts positively with strategies to improve diet, discourage the use of tobacco, alcohol and drugs, helps reduce violence, enhances functional capacity and promotes social interaction and integration. Physical activity is for an individual; a strong means for prevention of diseases and for nations a cost-effective method to improve public health across the population. Numerous studies agree that physical activity is important in maintaining good health. Regular physical activity reduces cardiovascular risk in its own right and also improves levels of cardiovascular risk factors, such as excess weight, high blood pressure, low levels of HDL and Type 2 diabetes. Research concludes that physical activity helps protect against some forms of cancer and strengthens the musculoskeletal system, helping to reduce the likelihood of osteoporosis and the risk of falls and fractures. Taking part in physical activity improves mental wellbeing by reducing stress, anxiety and depression. Further, it has been argued that sport contributes to social capital: the ‘features of social life—networks, norms, and trust—that enable participants to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives’. Studies have shown that sport makes a significant contribution to national and local economies. Hence, sport and physical activity contribute to the Australian economy as participants purchase clothing and footwear and sports equipment as well as pay subscriptions and fees to clubs and organisations and admissions to sporting venues. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), $8 293.8 million (1.5 per cent) of the total expenditure by Australian households in 2009–10 was spent on selected sporting and physical recreation goods and services. Workplace activity programs have been found to reduce short term sick leave and health care costs as well as increase productivity. Australian corporate fitness programs have been associated with a reduction in absenteeism of between 23 and 50 per cent. One study estimated that on the basis of a 20 per cent reduction in absenteeism this would result in a saving of 1.5 days per worker per year, and this in turn would approximate to a net benefit of$848 million to the Australian economy. In short, sport and physical activity not only make people healthier and more productive; they contribute to the nation’s economic and social capital. This paper briefly considers the policy environment which has surrounded federal government sports funding decisions since federation. It concentrates on the period from the 1970s from which time the federal government has become increasingly involved in funding sport at the elite and participation or grassroots levels. Funding sport has brought with it a number of dilemmas for federal governments. These include questions about what to fund; should federal governments fund community sporting facilities for example, or is it more cost efficient to support more local government involvement in this area. One area where it appears a consensus has developed over time relates to the division of funding between elite and participation sport. It can be argued this consensus can be traced to an underlying belief that funding which results in elite athlete success in international arenas will in turn motivate grassroots participation. The consensus has meant that despite some rhetoric to the contrary, and some attempts to alter government thinking, federal funding for elite sport has always exceeded that provided for community participation

Marketing obesity? Junk food, advertising and kids

This paper examines the debate over the importance of foods high in fat, sugar and salt in childhood obesity. It also looks at policy approaches to junk food in a number of countries and consequent actions taken to control or prohibit the influence of advertising. In particular, the paper notes recent Australian government approaches to dealing with this issue. The paper concludes that, to date, the Australian response to this issue has emphasised the value of a self regulatory regime. However, this approach may be modified in the future, as a result of a number of factors. These include growing public demand for intervention and a shift in health policy more towards preventive health than has been emphasised in the past

Medical practitioners: education and training in Australia

Medical practitioners -- general practitioners and other medical specialists, hospital non-specialists and specialists-in-training -- are a fundamental and vital component of the health workforce. Medical practitioners diagnose physical and mental illnesses, disorders and injuries, provide medical care to patients and prescribe and perform medical and surgical treatments to promote and restore good health. In 2006, there were an estimated 71, 740 medical practitioners registered in Australia, and most of these were working in medicine throughout the country. The overall supply of employed medical practitioners in Australia increased in the period from 2002 to 2006. During the same time, however, the supply of general practitioners decreased. The overall number of medical practitioners in Australia in 2006 was less than the number of practising doctors in most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, but more than the numbers of doctors practising in comparable countries such as Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. Prior to the mid 1990s, it was believed that there were adequate numbers of medical practitioners to service the needs of the Australian population. As a consequence, the Australian Government placed a cap on the number of university places provided for medical students. In the view of some commentators however, this restriction on places contributed to what was a shortage of general practitioners. In addition, the cap led to shortages at the junior hospital doctor level, in part because there were not enough second-year interns to fill these positions in the public hospital system.&nbsp