Pretty much. Although Seven & Nine are at least still producing the local news from Mt Coot-tha, at Ten during the space of less than a year we’ve seen:
And what’s left? Just the shell of a once great newsroom and that’s pretty much it? While it’s to my understanding that Drew Jarvis is still the executive producer of children’s television at Ten (a position based at TVQ) I don’t think he’s overseeing much nowadays.
I agree with Kylie, bulldoze the old studios, put a covered BBQ area on the slab and leave the carparks for the public. The towers at 10 and 9 will have to stay with the 9 site just needing a transmitter hut. The only disadvantage for 7 and 9 is they can’t sell the land to fund their new studio down in town - no reason they couldn’t just do a talent only studio like the Gold Coast and integrate it from Sydney. Only cost to 7/9/10 will be the demolition and site clean up. A talent only studio in town or at Bowen Hills would not cost a lot for 7 & 9.
Regardless, there has been plenty of time to maintain the facilities as ‘fit for purpose’ as the stations changed - rather they’ve decided to sit on them as is. I get that the rules that allow them to occupy the sites are somewhat unique and offer some limits on what they can do, but thats not a really strong excuse
… and so you have some suggestions as to what they could have done to make them more fit for today’s purpose that doesn’t simply waste money? and they haven’t just sat on their hands … for example, 7 have moved their national archives and digital dubbing facilities to BTQ’s Mt Coot-tha site to make use of some of the formerly empty studio space …
… well that’s a bit of burying your head in the sand when your wacky opinion has been trashed … I carefully pointed out that “the loss of local production” was a direct result of politicians fiddling with the Act regulating broadcasting and you call that “mansplaining” … gee there’s no pleasing some people is there
… you’ve obviously never heard of this famous line:
“Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
… particularly people who constantly post on social media that it was John Howard who changed the broadcasting laws that have resulted in the “concentration of media ownership” that everyone complains about … much better to keep reminding people of facts and not someone’s politically biased version …
Bet the demolition and site clean up would not cost more than a couple of years rates and maintenance up there particularly if the slab could be left for a BBQ area and perhaps some netball courts.
I dare say that if the government is potentially looking at redeveloping the sites, they’d do more than a bbq site (particularly considering the Olympic bid).
Possibly a conversion to a function centre within the existing shell of the buildings or government owned studios which could be rented?
I know there are rules about how the site can be used but given the Olympic bid I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if those rules are amended to maximise the potential of the sites.
Those site have huge potential without really changing the footprint of what is already there.
Meanwhile, if you stopped pining for ancient history, you’d see that for better or worse things have changed and some of those changes you continue to bang on about have been made by successive governments (of both major persuasions) most of which at the behest of some of your former employers in an effort to try and maintain their feifdoms from ever-approaching marauders
We have broadcasting rules that aren’t in the interest of the people, rather are in the interest of the operators, but not new ones because that would upset the business model of those already in the game. We also have rules that actively stop new services and lock up poorly allocated yet highly valuable spectrum allocations with no intention to change, because it will upset an industry who get to dictate their own terms
None of this shit is new - in fact broadcasting history in this country is littered with this stuff. Nor is it not new, there doesn’t seem to be an impetus to make meaningful change.
Things have to change and quite possibly a lot faster then they are now. You can only do plain so much about falling consumption without doing something about it - the market is changing rapidly and technology advances are diminishing the role of many broadcasters and publishers as delivery and consumption habits shift. History starts to mean little to the future
The decision, mate, was made by the executives of the companies. The same companies that now whinge that they have big studios and nothing to do with them.
… absolutely true “mate” … the executives based in Sydney (or New York) who replaced the local executives that used to run those local television stations owned mostly by local shareholders who were bought out by marauders like Skase and Bond who paid ridiculous prices when a certain Paul Keating, at the behest of his boss and a certain Kerry Packer, changed the laws that had previously prevented anyone from owning more than two television licences in Australia and then, when he became “boss” himself, changed the Broadcasting Act to ensure that people were no longer required to be a “fit and proper person” to hold those licences … and yes again, because those “unfit and improper” owners paid far too much for these assets they sent the entire industry broke which means the companies are now governed by accountants who determine that the old studios where local programs used to be made for local audiences are now a liability and have to be got rid of …
@bacco007 now do you understand why I “continue to bang on about” this because some people just refuse to get it …
… and you wonder why I am “pining for ancient history”