Should the ABC kill Lateline? Why is there no longer a place on ABC TV for a movie reviewing program? Does the ABC have an added responsibility to produce more quality journalism at a time when commercial media is retrenching thousands of journalists? Should there be more (or less) local current affairs on the ABC? Why does the ABC cover minority sports watched by miniscule audiences?
At the heart of these and dozens more questions about the ABC’s raison d’etre is one overriding question: why does the ABC exist in 2014?
Without a detailed consensus answer to that question, the emotional debates about ABC funding are futile. Unless there’s clear agreement about the ABC’s primary objectives and priorities, every discussion about ABC funding ends up being framed by someone’s ad hoc personal (or political) views.
Is this really the way to make crucial decisions about one of Australia’s most important cultural institutions, which is publicly funded to the tune of $1.2 billion a year?
Right now it’s a crude, subjective and unmoored debate — a debate not helped by the fact that, arguably, the reasons for establishing the ABC 82 years ago are now redundant because the media and societal environment is so radically different.
According to its charter, the ABC’s primary functions are “to provide within Australia innovative and comprehensive broadcasting services of a high standard as part of the Australian broadcasting system consisting of national, commercial and community sectors” … to broadcast programs that “contribute to a sense of national identity and inform and entertain, and reflect the cultural diversity of, the Australian community” … including “programs of an educational nature” … to broadcast “news, current affairs, entertainment and cultural enrichment” to countries outside Australia that will “encourage awareness of Australia and an international understanding of Australian attitudes on world affairs” and “enable Australian citizens living or travelling outside Australia to obtain information about Australian affairs and Australian attitudes on world affairs” … to “provide digital media services” … and to “encourage and promote the musical, dramatic and other performing arts in Australia”.
The charter also stipulates that the ABC “shall take account of … the services provided by the commercial and community sectors of the Australian broadcasting system … provide a balance between programs of wide appeal and specialised programs … and … the multicultural character of the Australian community”.
That’s it — a fuzzy motherhood manifesto that, perhaps deliberately, fails to provide any detail about key directions (“provide digital media services”) or any guidance about priorities or relativities. If you think there is clarity to the ABC’s purpose and priorities, try answering these questions:
- Does the ABC exist primarily to fill the gaps left vacant by commercial media — and if so, which specific gaps?
- Should ABC radio and TV compete for ratings against commercial rivals, or are ratings an irrelevant metric for ABC program makers?
- If ratings aren’t the relevant measure of success, what is?
- Should the ABC have carte blanche to create whatever digital content it likes, even if similar or identical content is already being produced by commercial or other content creators?
- Should the ABC use its formidable public resources to disrupt or compete with opportunities available to commercial media?
- Should the ABC actively encourage media diversity, or should it spend its vast budget regardless of the commercial impact on independent media?
- Should the ABC now have a mandated responsibility (and budget) to produce more quality “accountability” journalism at a time when commercial media companies are shedding journalists and editorial resources on a vast scale?
- Should the ABC be in the business of providing a publicly funded platform for the views and opinions of its employees — as it does on The Drum website?
- If the ABC is mandated to promote the arts, how can it justify dumping its only television movie show just because the presenters decided to retire?
- How relevant are its charter requirements to deliver international broadcasting in the internet and satellite TV era?
- Should the ABC aim to create content for all Australians across all age groups and demographics, or is its primary role to produce content for niche audiences who aren’t served by other media?
We can all explain the precise filters that measure the purpose of government-funded schools, hospitals and roads. So what are the precise filters that explain why the ABC exists and how that $1.2 billion should be spent?
•If the ABC is mandated to promote the arts, how can it justify dumping its only television movie show just because the presenters decided to retire?
Good question but maybe again, it was a funding decision?? Apart from anything else, the ABC provides non-commercial, free to air programming for everyone and that includes a whole lot of people who can’t afford pay TV but don’t want to watch endless programs about cooking and building houses (filled with endless commercials….). Its coverage in the bush is second to none.
Personally, I think ABC24 is a bit of a dud and I would much rather see the money spent on that go to building up current news and current affairs progs on ABC 1 (or 2).
At a time when the commercial media is more and more being downsized and beholden to commercial interests, we need the ABC.
Eric,
what a load of self-serving tosh. Let’s start with the funding. You have conflated the costs of all public broadcasting (including SBS). Then recognise that 20%+ of all funding simply gets transferred to a private monopoly company that handles the broadcasting of ABC signals. Arguments about ‘public funding’ of the ABC are a furphy. The formula used to be straightforward until Rudd/Gillard buggered it: Commercial broadcasters use public airwaves to conduct their business and pay a license for it. This in turn goes towards substantially funding public broadcasting. So, commercial businesses are clipped for using public assets and we get public broadcasting (topped up with a bit of regional funding and ads on SBS). Neat. Taxpayer benefits.
Your moan about the ABC crowding our commercial on-line operators sounds very James Murdoch circa 2010. Provide a better service, take advertising if you can and compete Eric, don’t complain about the ABC eating your lunch. They were in the kitchen long before you and no one forced you to start a business in this space. Given Business Spectator et al now all Murdoch owned anyway, ‘new’ media is looking surprisingly like ‘old’ media to the rest of us.
Actually the charter is a pretty good starting place for a discussion about the role of the ABC and is as valid as ever- though obviously the current government forgot to read the parts about overseas services. You are free to bid for them now, so don’t complain. Space precludes a detailed response your questions, but they are easily dealt with. In sort the ABC’s role is to serve all Australians as often as it can in the national interest without having to be defined by a profit imperative. Its success at this is judged by widespread support from all but a bunch if self-interested politicians and wannabe media moguls.
Wow, Crikey attacking the very justification for the existence of a not-for-profit information source funded by and representing ALL Australians. A Society would function just fine if there was no non-commercial media and, say, Rupert controlled everything? How about ALL Hospitals private. Would that be less of an anachronism if 2014?
This is not the Crikey I thought I knew. Whatever it is, I don’t like it.
I don’t like it either Peter, I wonder if the writer has another pay person some were, Crikey may have just as well plagiarised this from The Australian, if your going to head to the far Right Crikey, you might as well sell to Murdock, I can read crap like this any time if I want to buy far right media papers from Murdock
I must have read something else. How is this attacking the ABC. Those questions are valid and if answered may provide a framework for further discussion. If I had time I’d try to answer them myself. Maybe later tonight.