What audiences want – Audience expectations for content safeguards
A position paper for professional content providers
Executive summary
Australia’s content landscape has changed
Australians currently enjoy an unprecedented level of access to media content. From our longstanding terrestrial free-to-air commercial, national and community TV and radio services, to pay TV, print newspapers and online news services, and the vast marketplace of online subscription, catch-up and other streaming platforms that have emerged over the past decade, Australian audiences have considerable choice over what, when and how they consume content.
Research undertaken by the Australian Communications and Media Authority highlights that Australians are consuming more content than ever before. On average, we watched 26.6 hours of TV and online video content per week in 2021, up from 21.4 in 2019. There is widespread adoption of online services across all age groups, with household take-up and use of both subscription and advertising-supported on-demand services rapidly accelerating since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. And in 2021, for the first time, more Australians watched video content online than via traditional broadcast TV, with 58% viewing content provided by online subscription services in a given week, as compared to 54% who had watched live or recorded free-to-air television.
Audiences have new ways to navigate their way to content
Smart TVs are fast becoming the dominant way in which consumers access audio-visual content at home. At June 2021, 70% of Australian adults had a smart TV connected to the internet, up from 64% in 2020. Smart TVs increasingly provide a ubiquitous entry point for audio-visual content, allowing viewers to shift between traditional TV and a variety of live, catch-up, pay-per-view and subscription streaming services in a relatively seamless manner. However, while households with adequate broadband may increasingly choose to access TV services over the internet, few would realise that content viewed across these different platforms may be subject to different regulatory rules.
Music, podcasts and other audio content is similarly delivered over a variety of platforms, including AM, FM and digital radios, mobile apps, digital TV, and, increasingly, smart home speakers. Listeners of radio-like services across these platforms may not know if they are accessing a commercial, community or even a narrowcasting service, which are again subject to different regulatory rules.
Traditional print products delivering news, information and entertainment are also increasingly available online, alongside content from both local and international digital native news and media organisations.
Co-regulation currently sits at the heart of the regulation of audio-visual content
Under the current co-regulatory arrangements established by the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA), Australian broadcasters are required to develop industry codes of practice that establish content safeguards for their TV and radio audiences.
The BSA requires commercial, community and subscription broadcasters to take account of ACMA research, such as this paper, and to undertake adequate public consultation prior to submitting a code of practice to the ACMA for registration. We may register the code if we consider that that it provides appropriate consumer safeguards for the matters that it covers. Once registered, the ACMA can investigate complaints from the public about matters covered by the code.
The ACMA’s role is somewhat different for the national broadcasters – ABC and SBS – that develop and settle their own codes without any registration by the regulator.
Australia’s co-regulatory regime for broadcasting shares many features with content regulation in other western democracies, such as the UK and Canada. These regimes require broadcasters to be responsive to audience concerns, often underpinned by industry-developed codes of practice that establish rules for content that can be enforced by regulators.
It is incumbent on the Australian broadcasting industry to effectively deliver on co-regulation to maintain the confidence of audiences and the broader community. Failure of co-regulatory approaches – where audience expectations are not met by appropriate safeguards – may result in direct intervention by the regulator or further consideration of the efficacy of co-regulatory arrangements by government.
Current codes of practice are out of date and do not cover all content available to Australian audiences
There are currently 9 industry codes of practice registered by the ACMA, covering and developed by associations representing different segments of the broadcasting sector. The safeguards provided under these codes vary considerably reflecting, in part, concepts in the BSA regarding the ‘influence’ of particular services. These concepts anticipate stronger safeguards for more influential services, such as commercial broadcasting versus localised narrowcasting services.
Many of these codes have not been updated for some years. For example, the commercial television code of practice was last reviewed and updated in 2015, and the subscription broadcast television code in 2013. With the changing nature of audiences over these periods, we consider it timely for all broadcasters to consider the applicability of their current codes in the contemporary environment.
We also have some concern that industry associations representing some segments of the industry are no longer fully operational or may not be adequately resourced to undertake code development processes. Under these circumstances, there is a question as to whether some codes are currently extant, and whether an industry standard should instead be introduced.
Finally, most current codes of practice do not apply to online content, even when that content appears on a broadcaster’s live-streamed, catch-up, or on-demand platform. Online content provided by streaming platforms such as Netflix, Stan and Disney+ are currently not subject to regulation applied to broadcasters in Australia.
It is timely to review codes of practice and the scope of self- and co-regulation
In light of the rapidly expanding content landscape, the ACMA considers it timely to explore contemporary audience expectations for content safeguards, and for all broadcasters to consider whether:
-
current codes of practice adequately address these expectations for services covered by those codes
-
new rules need to be developed to cover live-streaming, catch-up and
-
on-demand services to give certainty to audiences in their viewing choices.
We also suggest streaming services and other online-only providers of professional content should take note of the expectations of audiences identified in this paper as they review and update their own (currently self-regulatory) practices and processes, such as community guidelines and terms of service.
Reflecting this, our guidance has been deliberately expressed in a platform-neutral manner, on the basis that all providers of professional content targeting Australian audiences should aim to adopt a common set of content safeguards, regardless of the distribution platform.
To that end, a number of new concepts are introduced in this paper to better define potential future coverage of codes (‘content providers’ and ‘professional content’) and expectations for different types of content (‘news and journalistic content’ and ‘general content’).
We have identified a range of consistent, contemporary audience expectations
Informed by our regulatory monitoring, compliance and research activities, existing industry safeguards, the findings of previous government reviews, and broader public discourse on community standards, we have considerable insights into the kinds of protections or safeguards that contemporary Australian audiences may expect when consuming professional content.
Bringing these insights together, this paper articulates our current views on contemporary audiences’ expectations across 9 distinct areas of focus:
-
Accuracy and impartiality – audiences expect facts and information in news and journalistic content to be accurate and presented in a fair and impartial manner, supported by available evidence
-
Commercial interests – audiences expect a separation between the editorial and business activities of content providers, and to be made aware of any relevant commercial arrangements, or other commercial interests, when consuming news and journalistic content
-
Distressing high-impact content – audiences expect content producers to treat distressing high-impact news and journalistic content with care, and provide appropriate warnings
-
Emergency information – audiences expect that emergency news and information, when provided by content providers, will be timely, accurate and accessible
-
Classification and content guidance – audiences expect clear and meaningful information to assist in making informed content choices for themselves and those in their care, including children
-
Advertising restrictions – audiences expect content providers to exercise judgement, in line with community standards, about restricting advertisements for certain products and services
-
Highly offensive and discriminatory material – audiences expect that highly offensive or discriminatory material that is unsuitable for general dissemination will not be made available by content providers, except in limited circumstances where it is justified by the context and appropriate warning measures are in place
-
Fair portrayal – audiences expect that ordinary individuals participating in content, and depictions of underrepresented or vulnerable groups, are portrayed fairly and accurately
-
Privacy – audiences expect that private information will not be disclosed in the course of disseminating content, unless justified in the public interest.
For each of these expectations, we examine:
-
the application and operation of current content safeguards
-
contemporary and emerging issues that raise concerns for audiences
-
‘best practice’ approaches that could be adopted across industry to meet audience expectations.
We acknowledge that identifying prevailing community standards is not easy and a diversity of views will naturally exist. As such, this paper seeks to give content providers insights into what, in our view, are the core expectations of contemporary audiences.
Meaningful regulatory design incorporates key accountability principles
Successful self- or co-regulation arrangements are predicated on industry’s ability to demonstrate that it is accountable for its activities. This paper also provides guidance on developing effective self- and co-regulatory content rules and safeguards, based on the following interrelated principles of accountability:
-
transparency – the process of making information about an organisation’s activities available and accessible to the public and key stakeholders
-
participation – the processes by which an organisation or an industry enables other parties to play an active role in activities that are of interest or affect them
-
evaluation – the process by which an organisation monitors and reviews their performance against stated goals or objectives
-
complaints handling – the mechanisms and tools made available to the public to raise concerns about an organisation’s decisions and actions and processes for acceptance and resolution.
We believe consideration of these accountability principles is essential for developing, reviewing and maintaining robust and effective content safeguards that continue to be responsive to audience expectations and engender audience trust.
The ACMA will engage with content providers on how these contemporary audience expectations can be addressed
The guidance in this paper is not prescriptive. Rather than specify what specific rules or measures must be set out in content policies, codes or instruments, the ACMA seeks to provide industry with our knowledge and views on what audiences expect when consuming content and best practice approaches to deliver these desired outcomes.
Following publication of this paper, we will engage with regulated television and radio broadcasters and their representative bodies about their existing broadcasting codes. In particular, we expect to discuss specific current or emerging pressure points, with a view to progressing code reviews already underway and seeking commitments about timing of industry code reviews that are due.
We also welcome opportunities to engage more broadly with content providers across industry about the approaches outlined in this paper and other ideas for strengthening and harmonising content safeguards to align with Australian audience expectations.