This is just laziness on GWN7’s part. They could request that Seven provide them with copies so the episodes could be played out in order.
2 Likes
Make the metropolitan networks equally as responsible. Let’s say CTC and NBN fail to air the minimum amount of local content, and it’s found that Nine/TCN did not allow those two stations to opt out for local programming. You fine all three, or strip one, two or all three of their licenses.
The metro stations essentially control the regional stations via their programming arrangements. Surely you could make the metro stations block out parts of the day where they cannot stream programs that isn’t local.
If the commercial sector doesn’t want to do it - change the ABC charter to have them produce regional news. AND have the commercial sector fund it as a major fine. Like, 25% of all stations revenue going to the ABC to do local news. Wouldn’t that screw them over. 
7 Likes
should make the 9 local news local news segments a lot longer then they are now . its only 5 or 6 mins long segments and maybe cross regional ie say have central vic and western vic stories on the same news services where people who are in the dual area can get both?
Your idea makes sense in a way, however, given the fact they film inserts for their bulletins, from a cost perspective, maybe a statewide edition could air on say GEM. Presumably, if they are doing the same in all 4 areas (as described by ACMA) - Gippsland, Nth Central Victoria, South West Victoria and Upper Murray & Goulburn Valley. If so, they could do a half hour edition on GEM and air it as 7pm instead of the program aired by GEM at that time (currently Are You Being Served?, repeated at 11:30am the next day).
In Southern NSW, the same could occur as they also have 4 markets. In QLD, it would be harder, but still achievable… Perhaps airing 2 editions - the difference could be for Darling Down viewers, dropping FNQ for the Darling Downs edition and the rest of regional QLD (except Wide Bay and Sunshine Coast) would air the same edition.
Obviously additional production costs with news intros and outros, but overall could produce a quality product and show stories of significance in adjoining regions.
Thoughts???
1 Like
i like ur idea:) bit like win news does all australain news but keep it or call it 9 news regional victoria , and if win can do the all australian news then 9 can do a regional only victorian news even ifs say the next day how australian news is
I’d prefer Nine to concentrate their efforts on the current regional bulletins so at some point in the future so they are watchable.
I agree that they need to put more effort in, but after decades of being trashed and neglected due to being the third place affiliate, they have a brand to rebuild… If they can boost their performance, maybe at some point, they can concentrate on a solid 30 minute bulletin either as a dual region scenario (of up to 2 regions) for local news.
I can only see this happening if/when the Nine Network either scale back their news services to half hour again or cut Hot Seat back to 30 minutes (or replace it entirely) to insert another half hour show (or two half hour shows if Hot Seat was axed).
Other than that, I think regional areas are stuck with minimal local news on the main bulletin of the day.
1 Like
Time to bring a thread back from the dead…
WIN TV Grffith and Imparja were two of the twelve licensees mentioned in this article…how do you not meet regulations. Local content, yes, but Australian content? Don’t they get this all networked?
ACMA, being the whores they are, have forgiven them. Toothless tigers.
1 Like
In a statement, ACMA said all the affected regional channels were recipients of Nine Network programming which was altered without warning.
This is interesting - it’s almost suggesting that the regional networks need to be a bit quicker on the uptake of multichannels if they wish to rely on the metro derived content in order to meet their quota targets
It looks like the failure to carry 9LIFE is the sole reason why these areas failed to meet content requirements. The requirement not met is “Non-primary Channel Transmission Quota (Hrs)” of which there needs to be a minimum of 1400 hrs. Note the channels that carry Seven and Ten content exceed this requirement significantly, and so do the licencees who carry 9LIFE in their broadcast areas.
Mumbrella suggets that Nine shifting content to 9LIFE is the reason why licencees did not meet this quota in 2017 (and were not penalised) but must rectify the situation in 2018. I guess that comes down to whether licencees carry 9LIFE (either for the first time, or once more) as a separate channel or re-shuffle content around?
There are actually 15 licences that have failed to meet quotas if you count VAST.
Terrestrial
-
Broken Hill Television Pty Ltd - Southern Cross Broadcasting - BROKEN HILL TV1: 1377 hrs
-
Spencer Gulf Telecasters Pty Ltd - Southern Cross Broadcasting - SPENCER GULF TV1: 1377 hrs
-
West Digital Television No.2 Pty Ltd - WIN Television - GERALDTON TV1: 1368.32 hrs
-
Imparja Television Pty Ltd - Other - REMOTE CENTRAL &
EASTERN AUSTRALIA TV1: 1188.33 hrs -
WIN Television SA Pty Ltd - WIN Television - RIVERLAND TV1: 1379.15 hrs
-
WIN Television Griffith Pty Ltd - WIN Television - GRIFFITH AND MIA TV1: 1084.95 hrs
-
Mildura Digital Television Pty Ltd - WIN Television - MILDURA/SUNRAYSIA TV1: 1360.80 hrs
-
WIN Television SA Pty Ltd - WIN Television - MOUNT GAMBIER/SOUTH EAST TV1: 1379.15 hrs
-
West Digital Television Pty Ltd - WIN Television - SOUTH WEST AND GREAT
SOUTHERN TV1: 1368.32 hrs -
Tasmanian Digital Television Pty Ltd - Southern Cross Broadcasting - TASMANIA TV1: 1317 hrs
-
West Digital Television No.3 Pty Ltd - WIN Television - KALGOORLIE TV1: 1368.32 hrs
-
West Digital Television No.4 Pty Ltd - WIN Television - WESTERN ZONE TV1: 1368.32 hrs
VAST
-
WA Satco Pty Limited - WIN Television - WESTERN AUSTRALIA TV3: 1368.32 hrs
-
Eastern Australia Satelite Broadcasters Pty Ltd - Other - NORTHERN AUSTRALIA TV3: 1188.33 hrs
-
Eastern Australia Satelite Broadcasters Pty Ltd - Other - EASTERN AUSTRALIA TV3: 1188.33 hrs
2 Likes
Here are the details on the ACMA website to see it in context:
It would’ve been adventageous for 9 had ACMA penalised regional licensees, serving as a persuasive reminder to pay for the 9 Life content.
I also do not believe that regional broadcasters had no idea that Australian content had been shifted to 9 Life. They would be well aware of programming changes, as astute as many of the members reading this and any proper regulatory systems should be logging the local content with periodical reviews.
I prefer the metro format of the report to the far more brief report for the regionals.
There is a glaring omission in the report, metro. Looking forward to your discussion of it too.
4 Likes
Relating to that Mumbrella article stating that Seven, Nine and Ten have only met bare minimum children’s content requirements.
I say one thing for Nine. Approach the rights-owners to bring back Adelaide classic Humphrey B. Bear, would be even better if they could make it in Adelaide again. It wouldn’t take up much space either, bonus.
I guess Seven could take another look at “The Fairies”. My youngest cousin was addicted to it, so they must’ve been doing something right. 
Yet another Adelaide production.
Those are the only 21st century local non-ABC children’s programs I can think of off the top of my head…
2 Likes
Although I don’t like the chances of this happening anytime soon, I personally think it’d be a really good idea if Seven, Nine, Ten + leading Australian children’s TV producers were to temporarily put aside their differences and come together for some extensive market research on the future of kids programing on commercial television in Australia.
1 Like
A slight surprise that even News Corp are unhappy with their old buddy (former shareholder of Network Ten) Bruce Gordon?
Interesting read alongside the recent announcement of Seven network branding for SCA’s Seven network stations.
Disappointing that the Fairfax article didn’t say WIN are the Network Ten affiliate.
1 Like
Read: News want easy targets.
If they want something they’re going to have to put forward a decent offer that entices an acceptance.
2 Likes
i cant wait for bruce to go and win becomes more watchable
2 Likes
Not withstanding that it makes it difficult for News Corp to lowball - Gordon plays an interesting game with these investments, they are low enough not to trigger any ACMA issues, but they are significant enough that any potential buyer effectively needs to do a side deal with Gordon to get their deal across the line.
He’s well within his rights as a shareholder to be somewhat hostile when it comes to takeover deals, but this needs to be weighed up against the almost predatory behaviour this represents, considering many of the investments he has is in media companies who directly compete with his empire
5 Likes
I can’t wait for EVERYONE at Seven, Nine, Ten and affiliates to go. Television in general would be more watchable.
I recommend the Threads and Day After style of annihilation. 
Just out of interest, what would you like to see in place of everyone (or even the stations as a whole?) at Seven, Nine, Ten and it’s affiliates?
Stations that actually serve the areas to which they are licensed to, preferably with some sort of local ownership and/or management control, local branding that isn’t a poor man’s version of straight copy of the metro brands, and more local content besides news. And this applies to radio as well.
If they can’t be arsed doing so, kill the licenses, allocate the spectrum to mobile broadband and use the money to fund public education with not one cent going to private or Catholic education.
1 Like