All Media Fund launched
Screen Australia has officially launched the $3-5m All Media Fund for “interactive or multi-platform innovative, risk-taking storytelling”.
“It has never been more important to support Australian stories on Australian screens no matter how screen content is accessed or downloaded,” said CEO Ruth Harley.
The All Media Fund was first announced at last November’s SPAA Conference in Sydney. It comprises two streams:
• Digital Ignition, providing development support for innovative interactive projects (including games) with a strong storytelling component – on television, online or hand-held devices; and
• All Media Production, providing production support for linear and non-linear (interactive) projects that push the creative envelope – exclusively for interactive projects (games, websites, apps, alternate/augmented reality, re-virtual worlds, MMORPG and interactive factual/drama) with a strong narrative.
“All Media Production is platform agnostic and rather than a minimum licence fee, requires the attachment of a recognised and appropriate entity that will communicate the content to the public. In this way we hope to encourage traditional and new players to develop break-out programming,” added Harley.
Applications for All Media close on August 8, followed by a second round in February 2010.
At the Melbourne event, Screen Australia also released the final Convergent Television guidelines, which provides $30-35m to support quality Australian drama, children’s and documentary programming. These guidelines take effecte from July 1.
The guidelines can be found at www.screenaustralia.gov.au/funding.
All Media Fund:
“Key team members must have relevant credits in their chosen fields: for
example, a filmmaker must have at least one project that has been
theatrically released, broadcast on primetime national television, or
screened at a recognised film festival; a game developer must have at
least one produced and released game; and a web developer at least one
major produced and released online project.”
Whats hilarious about this absurd box ticking criteria is a filmmaker could have had a million hits online for a short or transmedia project, and never have had a film screened at a festival and that same filmmaker won’t be able to apply for a fund designed to push Australian content onto the very digital channels they wish to use this fund for.
“Support narrative content in both linear and non-linear
forms that pushes the envelope of creative storytelling, and to provide
practitioners with opportunities to take risks, extend their skills and explore
new storytelling tools and platforms.”
Here’s the deal SA, having a film screened at a festival is a great honor, but it is no complete yardstick of your success or viability as a filmmaker. Lots of very good films go unnoticed and find success online. Ditch the stupid criteria and you might find the quality of projects on offer might increase.
utterly fed up with this outdated vision and stupid criteria..and the criteria is so wishy washy, it applies to some and doesn’t apply to others…its a friggin roulettte wheel!
Why not judge the merit of the project in question?
Screen Australia wishes to stimulate ‘all media thinking’ across all its
programs, you might pay lip service to “all media thinking” but you sure as hell aren’t paying any notice to some silent success stories online.
User ID not verified.
Again I’d like to add: Who dreams up this criteria and why? All this criteria does is to continue to look after the same people who tick all the boxes. You need to have something on prime time (irrespective of how crappy it might have been) or screened at a recognized film festival to access a fund that desires to push filmmakers into the digital space. What about the filmmakers who have utterly no desire to screen at “recognized film festivals” and feel that growing an audience online (and have done so successfully) reaching an audience of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions over years…where’s their recognition?
As opposed to somebody who had a film screen at a festival and maybe a couple of hundred watched it..maybe a few thousand if it toured the circuit. Its this weird desire to push film makers into new platforms of storytelling and at the same time giving no credit to those who have been doing it for years and have learnt an enormous amount (and could probably share that information if you asked nicely) and would also like to access funding but can’t because they can’t meet this absurd criteria. The criteria is in fact protectionism and defeats the purpose of having the fund in the first place
Again I ask…appraise the project in question not the boxes ticked. You won’t get innovation if you keep handing out $ to people who tick boxes, you’ll get innovation and diversity by backing projects that are creative and ambitious. Especially in the digital space.
“All Media Production is platform agnostic and rather than a minimum licence fee, requires the attachment of a recognized and appropriate entity that will communicate the content to the public. In this way we hope to encourage traditional and new players to develop break-out programming,” added Harley.
So much of Dr Harley’s stuff is just hollow rhetoric..sounds great in a speech
I applaud the fund…great idea…but it seems like most SA funds..designed to reward the recognized and appropriate entity’s, I understand it, but will this build an innovative industry..maybe Pictures in Paradise will move online, fingers crossed (not) it could be A Heartbeat Away.
User ID not verified.
The website still reads just like that of the ATO!!! Plop…
User ID not verified.