I know that wasn’t your point, just a potential reason for the disparity, potentially a double up, if will.
I think there’s a problem with your maths.
REMOTE CENTRAL & EASTERN AUSTRALIA TV1 IMP 406,550
REMOTE CENTRAL & EASTERN AUSTRALIA TV2 CDT, QQQ 388,270
MT ISA TV1 IDQ, ITQ 18,280
Total (388,270+ 18,280) = 406,550
You’ve used the figures from the overlap of those areas with Australia S40, which isn’t 100% of those areas. The complete numbers are:
REMOTE AND REGIONAL WESTERN AUSTRALIA TV1 WOW 604,975
SOUTH WEST AND GREAT SOUTHERN TV1 SDW, SSW 364,160
KALGOORLIE TV1 VDW, VEW 54,696
GERALDTON TV1 GDW, GTW 49,500
WESTERN ZONE TV1 WAW, WDW 167,832
Total (363,160 + 54,6969 + 49,500 + 167,832) = 636,188
Difference is 31,213. This is because there is overlap in the 7WA/10 West areas so some people get counted twice.
3,320 people are in KALGOORLIE TV1 AND SOUTH WEST AND GREAT SOUTHERN TV1
4,551 people are in KALGOORLIE TV1 AND WESTERN ZONE TV1
2,853 people are in GERALDTON TV1 AND WESTERN ZONE TV1
21,188 people are in SOUTH WEST AND GREAT SOUTHERN TV1 AND WESTERN ZONE TV1
Total: 31,912, which still gives a difference of 699. This would be because the people in the overlap between Kalgoorlie, South West and Western Zone are still being counted twice.
Good, you’ve narrowed it. How do you eliminate the disparity and identify the overlap?
I don’t think these were ever linked to on here, the regional broadcaster’s responses last year to the previous Federal Government’s white paper on media reform. Provides further insight into their arguments over the outdated legislation on ownership.
That joint submission from the regional broadcasters is a frustrating read - handouts and carveouts appear to be the only way to make the declining industry sustainable.
It would be interesting to see if Seven as Prime new owner supports the submission or they have a different view
Exactly. If Seven were to buy out all the Seven signals SCA broadcast, they would have close to nationwide coverage except for Griffith, Loxton and Mt Gambier. I highly doubt Seven would allow the likes of WIN to carry both Nine and Ten. Or would they come to arrangement where all the fully owned SCA 10 signals could be brought as a 50/50 JV between WIN & Seven and would the Fed Govt allow that?
From The Australian
Federal government extends ‘Alston Determination’ for streaming services
The federal government has extended legislation that allows Australia’s commercial free-to-air broadcasters and their linked streaming services to abide by different broadcasting rules.
Known as the Alston Determination, the legislation means certain types of live streaming services are excluded from the definition of a “broadcasting service”, which allows them to operate under a separate set of regulations.
The Alston Determination was introduced by former communications Minister Richard Alston in 2000 and dictated that TV or radio programs that used the internet “do not fall within the definition of a broadcasting service”.
For example, in the lead-up to the federal election in May, live-streaming platforms aired political advertising, while a broadcasting blackout still applies to political advertising on commercial free-to-air stations in the three days leading up to the poll.
Statement from Senator Sarah Henderson, Shadow Communications Minister
Why did the Albanese Government fail to act until the death knell on critical regulations covering commercial broadcasters and streaming services operating in Australia?
This not only shows Labor’s incompetence, but its disregard for Australian media companies and other digital streaming services which require legal and commercial certainty to operate.
The remaking of the ‘Alston Determination’ by the government, just days before it expired, imposed an unacceptable level of risk to Australian commercial broadcasting and streaming companies.
Commercial television and radio stations, and live streaming services, deserve much better than this chaotic law making by the Albanese Government.
The extension of the Alston Determination for a lengthy five years also shows that Labor doesn’t have the ticker to implement the necessary media regulation reforms before the next federal election.
As set out in my letter (below) to Labor’s Communication’s Minister, the ACCC Digital Platforms Inquiry recommended there should be a harmonisation of media regulation between traditional media and those delivering services over the internet. Labor clearly has no intention of tackling the big reform challenges in the media sector in the foreseeable future.
Everyone is expecting Tony Burke to reveal at least which streamers will be subject to a levy on Monday, and to lay down the principles underpinning the quota system his government will introduce. Not putting a number on it would no doubt be greeted with groans by the production sector, but given the complexities that lie ahead it might not be the worst idea in the world.
How though? They’re an overseas company.
wouldn’t they have reps or managers?
Yeah but why would they want to make local content?
Local content drives subscriptions.
Local content that feeds into Netflix es global pipeline is part of Netflix’s global strategy
They produce hundreds of series a year in Mexico Brasil India japan Korea France Spain Germany Poland Italy uk and More.
Netflix needs sub growth Internationally as US is pretty much tapped out. This is driven by local content not us content
what right does the government have to force this on the international streaming providers? in a way, if they’re forced, it goes against an open internet
Australia is a sovereign nation.
Europe has done the same thing and the streamers are booming there. Netflix has just opened a massive office in Warsaw.
Broadcasters have Australian content regulations. Steamers should too.
Netflix in particular has a focus on local content that feeds into global pipeline to keep churn low and drive new subs.
still goes against an open internet
I understand your view but have little pity for streaming services and copyright holders who engage in geoblocking (i.e. pretty much all of them). To me that fundamentally goes against the concept of an open internet even more than any local content requirements imposed by a country they operate in.