‘Bidding for sport will become commercially unviable’: Senate recommendations miss the mark for free-to-air TV
The Australian free-to-air television industry is reeling after the the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee delivered a toothless and antiquated set of recommendations regarding anti-siphoning laws for sport, and prominence for free-to-air digital services on smart TVs.
Current anti-siphoning laws require major sporting events to be broadcast free to Australians, however this law currently only covers linear broadcast (antennas), meaning the third of Australians who only watch TV digitally, cannot access these sports if the digital rights for an event are owned by a subscription service and put behind a paywall.
The free-to-air channels have been lobbying to bundle digital and linear broadcast rights together in the anti-siphoning laws, in keeping with how Australians actually view TV. The Senate committee’s report into amending the Prominence and Anti-siphoning Bill, however, said the laws do not need to be updated.
“Bidding for sport will become commercially unviable if free-to-air broadcasters can only acquire a narrow range of terrestrial rights, leaving paid services to acquire exclusive digital coverage,” Bridget Fair, CEO of Free TV, said of the recommendations. “This is exactly the nightmare scenario the government is trying to avoid with this bill – so it must be amended to reflect modern viewing habits.”
James Warburton, the outgoing CEO of Seven West Media said: “The Senate committee has released a report that does not see merit in ensuring free sport for all Australians, particularly those who don’t have an aerial.”
“Seven strongly urges the Government to ensure that the anti-siphoning scheme includes the free digital simulcast of the broadcast stream.”
Beverley McGarvey, president of Network 10, likewise said the recommendations “do not provide equitable access for all Australians to free and local broadcasters and fails to meet contemporary audience needs.
McGarvey points out that live streaming and BVOD viewing will “very soon be the most popular way Australians watch their favourite sports, so leaving BVOD platforms out of changes to the anti-siphoning rules doesn’t reflect contemporary audience needs.”
The Greens party has also slammed the outmoded recommendations, saying if the Bill is passed in its current form, it will “be obsolete before it is even fully implemented.”
“This scheme must be amended to bundle free-to-air digital and broadcast rights together, reflecting the changing nature of Australian viewing trends and the rise of broadcasting video-on-demand services.”
Bridget Fair points out that the proportion of households watching TV online is set to grow to half by 2027.
“The increasing number of Australians who watch their free sport on TV using the internet, because they have no aerial, will miss out unless the new laws are amended to stop paid streaming services buying up exclusive digital rights and putting sports behind a paywall,” Fair said.
“We’re running a real risk that in the not too distant future, if you want to watch your favourite sports, you will need to pay multiple streaming services to do so.
“Knowing that every Australian can freely access the big footy finals or gather around the TV for the Boxing Day cricket will be a thing of the past. 2 As the proportion of households watching TV online grows to half by 2027, the antisiphoning list will be fundamentally undermined if it does not apply to digital rights.”
The Senate recommendations also “missed the mark” when it comes to ensuring prominence for free-to-air apps from the free-to-air broadcasters on smart TVs. Free TV had lobbied for all smart TVs to place these apps in a prominent position within six months, and for all existing TVs to be upgraded with these changes.
The report recommended a 12-month deadline, without any software upgrade for existing sets.
“While we welcome the Committee’s recommendation to reduce the implementation period for the new prominence framework from 18 to 12 months, the report misses the mark by not applying the new requirements to existing sets in the market,” Fair said.
“Every person with a connected TV sees the look and feel of their existing set updated on a regular basis. The changes required to implement the new prominence rules are no different. Unless we incorporate existing sets in the prominence framework, only those who buy a new TV will see any change, and people who can’t afford to upgrade their sets will miss out, even though their connected TV sets can be, and regularly are, updated over the internet.
“If we don’t make this important change, the legislation will not make any meaningful difference until late this decade.”
McGarvey notes that “delaying prominence rules for a year, and limiting it to just new devices, means only those who can afford a new TV will be able to easily access local free-to-air broadcasters.
“The majority of Australians with existing devices, will be denied the same access to free TV that’s vital to connecting our communities, keeping us safe in emergencies, reflecting our unique identity, and giving everyone a front row seat to iconic sporting and cultural events.”
Warburton also sees this as a missed opportunity.
“For it to be effective over the coming years it needs to apply to TV screens already in the home,” he said.
Keep up to date with Mumbrella Daily
Got a tip?
Nathan Jolly is the Deputy Editor of Mumbrella. He joined the team in July, 2023.
Linkedin
topics
AFL
Bridget Fair
free TV
James Warburton
Melbourne Cup
NRL
Prominence and Anti-siphoning Bill
Seven
Have your say