Radio is already deregulated and 60% of radio is owned 100% by a foreign
company (DMG & RG CAPITAL out of the Bahamas). The laws should be tightened
not loosened, A company should not be allowed to own more than 15 radio
stations nation wide also they should allow a company to own 4 TV markets
and ten newspapers. This would give diversity of ownership
Ray
"Thomas 'bacco|007' Baxter" <privacy@no-spam> wrote in message
news:13jn8pbecc072.1v5dpigfmzecj.dlg@no-spam
> Alston's new Media Bill now likely to pass Senate
> http://www.amt.org.au/newsitem.php?id=1223
> 21 Jun 2003
>
> After fifteen months of Parliamentary consideration and intensive
> negotiations, the Government has decided to proceed with a Senate debate
on
> its new Media Ownership Bill, hoping to gain support from key independents
> to pass the bill. That support is now more likely since the independents
> seem to have won some concessions for increased ABC funding in return for
> their votes.
> The second reading debate in the Senate commenced on 24 March 2003 and was
> postponed while Communications Minister Alston had further discussions to
> gather the required number of votes to pass the bill. The government now
> believes it has the numbers and will introduce the legislation next week.
>
> The legislation seeks to implement the Coalition's 2001 Federal election
> commitment to provide for exemptions from the cross media rules and to
> remove the foreign ownership restrictions contained in the Broadcasting
> Services Act 1992.
>
> The Bill, which would allow the Australian Broadcasting Authority to issue
> cross-media exemptions in certain circumstances, was introduced into the
> House of Representatives on 21 March 2002 and has since been debated and
> passed by the House. The Bill was also considered by a Senate Committee in
> June 2002.
>
> Senator Alston, who is sponsoring the bill says: ´From day one, Labor has
> said it is opposed to the legislation despite telling the industry before
> the last Federal election that it favoured such reforms.
>
> While the legislation has been before the Parliament, the Government has
> held extensive discussions with Independent and One Nation Senators and
> examined all sensible proposals for amendment in an effort to reach a
> workable compromise.ˇ
>
> As a result of negotiations with Independent and One Nation Senators, ´a
> number of significant enhancements to the Bill have been developed. In
> combination, these enhancements provide strong safeguards to protect
> diversity of news and opinion and to prevent market dominance by any media
> group.ˇ
>
> During the debate, the Government will move four further amendments to
> maximize chances of the bill getting through the Senate:
>
> * An extension to all metropolitan markets of the restriction on owning
> more than two out of the three types of media covered by the cross media
> rules in any one licence area (the proposal in the media ownership Bill
> only applies to regional markets).
>
> * A requirement that the ABA impose a licence condition on all commercial
> television broadcasters in regional aggregated markets requiring the
> broadcast of a minimum amount of local news and information.
>
> * A requirement that a mandatory review of Part 5 of the Broadcasting
> Services Act 1992 (ownership and control provisions) be conducted in three
> years time.
>
> * Amendments to tighten the circumstances in which approval of a temporary
> ownership or control breach under section. 67 of the Broadcasting Services
> Act could be granted, including ensuring that approvals are granted only
> for the minimum necessary time.
>
> In addition, the Government has indicated that it is prepared to
favourably
> consider the following increased safeguards to ensure diversity of news
and
> opinion suggested by Independent and One Nation Senators:
>
> * An amendment stipulating that a cross-media merger cannot be approved
> unless five independently owned commercial media outlets (across radio,
> associated newspapers and TV) in metropolitan markets, and four in
regional
> markets, remain in the market after the cross-media acquisition occurs.
>
> * A requirement that the ABA impose a licence condition on all
metropolitan
> commercial television broadcasters (in addition to regional broadcasters)
> requiring the broadcast of a minimum amount of local news and information.
>
> * Amendments to permit datacasting of local-based, regional sporting
> events.
>
> * A prohibition on ownership of more than one associated newspaper per
> market applicable to holders of cross-media exemption certificates.
>
> * An amendment to extend application of the current proposed 'two out of
> three' rule to include small local newspapers in regional areas, subject
to
> an aggregated circulation threshold and a by-way-of-sale requirement to
> ensure that the very small weekly or largely free newspapers are not
> captured.
>
> * A requirement that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
> (ACCC) fully examine and report on whether a proposed cross media merger
> satisfies the requirements of s50 or is otherwise authorised under s88 of
> the Trade Practices Act 1974 (TPA) before the ABA can issue an exemption
> certificate.
>
> * An explicit provision confirming that nothing in the media ownership
> provisions of the BSA exempts a merger from the restrictive provisions of
> the TPA. This ensures that competition tests administered by the ACCC will
> apply. Those tests have regard to all relevant markets, including those
not
> subject to the cross media rules, such as the Internet and Pay TV.
>
> Current existing safeguards, already in place, include:
>
> * A prohibition on any media company operating more than one commercial
> television licence in a licence area.
>
> * A prohibition on any media company operating more than two commercial
> radio licences in a licence area.
>
> * A prohibition on any media company operating commercial television
> licences which reach more than 75 per cent of the Australian population.
>
> * A requirement for separate and distinct editorial decision making
> responsibilities (including news management, compilation, gathering and
> interpretation capabilities) in cross media holdings.
>
> * A requirement for public disclosure of a cross media relationship.
>
> * A requirement that regional cross media holders with television or radio
> licences provide a minimum level of local news and information.
>
> These provisions are supported by the continuing operation of the
> competition provisions of the TPA, which prevent mergers or acquisitions
> that would substantially lessen competition.
>
> ABC News Radio Rollout If the Government gets Senate support for its media
> ownership reforms, it will ´commit the necessary funding to extend ABC
News
> Radio to all transmission areas with more than 10,000 people, subject to
> spectrum availability.ˇ
>
> This will provide up to 62 areas of regional Australia with new or
improved
> access to a dedicated national news service.
>
> Regardless of the outcome of the Senate debate, the Government has
> expressed its ´appreciation to the four Independent and One Nation
Senators
> for their genuine interest in the media ownership issue and their strong
> commitment to ensuring that the Government's legislation protects
diversity
> of news and opinion, which is so important to all Australians.ˇ
>
> Shadow Communications Minister Lindsay Tanner is not as enthusiastic as
> Senator Alston about the new bill, calling it ´tinkering with media
> ownershipˇ and ´a complete joke.ˇ
>
> ´Senator Alston˙s tinkering with the media ownership bill doesn˙t alter
the
> fact that this Bill will lead to Australia˙s media being dominated by
three
> media giants,ˇ said Tanner.
>
> ˇThe proposed amendments announced today will still allow a massive
> reduction in media ownership in Australia. It will still permit News
> Limited to acquire the Seven Network, PBL/Nine Network to acquire Fairfax,
> and the Ten Network to acquire Southern Cross, thereby creating three
> commercial media giants totally dominating the market.ˇ
>
> He says the proposed amendments won˙t stop a media mogul from owning
Sydney
> or Melbourne˙s major television station and newspaper.
>
> ´The minor sweeteners provided by the Government to allay specific
concerns
> raised by independent Senators are no compensation for the loss of media
> diversity this Bill guarantees,ˇsays Tanner, who urged the Senate to
oppose
> the bill.
>
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:44:22 +1000, "Matthew Cook" <mattax@no-spam>
wrote:
>Ian D wrote:
>
>> And Rupert get's Network 10 and keeps 70% of the press.
>
>If Rupert really wanted Ten, he could have it now. It's illegally owned by a
>Canadian press baron at present, why not a US one?
Because Keating's cross media ownership laws:
1. Prohibit a newspaper owner from owning a TV station
2. Prohibit foreign ownership (the Candian uses a corporate structure
and an exemption to get around that).
dewatf.
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 21:53:58 +1000, Thomas 'bacco|007' Baxter
<privacy@no-spam> wrote:
>Alston's new Media Bill now likely to pass Senate
Is it?
The Democrats and ALP are against it.
The 4 independants could pass it though:
Murphy is still looking at the issue of regulating diversity.
Lees is holding out for more funding for the ABC.
Harridine is exerting pressure by amending the bill to put back the ban
on TV and newspaper cross ownership. He could just be using it as a
bargining chip for something else though, we shall find out after the
bill is introduced today. Len Harris and the ALP have stated that they
will support Harridine's amendment.
dewatf.
"Ray" <rgomerski@no-spam> wrote in message news:<zJNJa.441$p8.18847@no-spam>...
> Radio is already deregulated and 60% of radio is owned 100% by a foreign
> company (DMG & RG CAPITAL out of the Bahamas). The laws should be tightened
> not loosened, A company should not be allowed to own more than 15 radio
> stations nation wide also they should allow a company to own 4 TV markets
> and ten newspapers. This would give diversity of ownership
Ray - Much as I hate Murdoch (technically a foreigner) controlling 70%
of the press - the press is different to the electronic media.
Radio and Television frequencies are finite and MUST be regulated -
otherwise there'd be chaos. But - in a democracy - anyone can start
up a newspaper.
Keating had the right approach introducing the cross-media ownership
laws. It was basic enough. Either you could be a Baron of Radio, or
TV, or Prince of Print. The two station ownership of radio stations
rule has its plusses and minuses. My view is that it's generally a
minus in capital cities as otherwise we'd have more diverse ownership
- but it has enabled some regional cities to get a second alternative
station that otherwise they mightn't have got. And capital city
owners would argue similar economies of scale.
But I agree with you. There should be no loosening of the current
rules any further. It would only reduce Australian ownership and
bring in new players (like Clear Channel - run by beancounters not
even worried about ratings as much as profit). Maybe the foreign
ownership laws with radio should be looked at - as I'm sure there are
many caring radio Aussies who would LOVE to own a radio station.
Murdoch's "control" of the press is extremely unfortunate. All of his
papers in Oz have the same hands on editorial bent. Whereas the
Fairfax papers are free to disagree editorially - and they do. This
is the way it should be - but you can't do it with legislation.
Going off at a tangent ... I was interested watching the 2000 US
Presidential election on CNN, Fox, BBC World, and Sky News. It was
amazing that in a country of 270 million people the four major
Networks all took their polling from the one survey provider. And
they all got it wrong! Gore actually won. But the US Supreme Court
stacked with Republic appointees gave it to Bush and stopped the
counting of the Florida vote. Television really played its part. And
the world is much more dangerous place as a result.
We MUST protect diversity! ... where we can ...