‘The great geoblock of Wollongong’: Bruce Gordon tells Nine to turn off live streaming, but to what end?
Bruce Gordon’s WIN has launched legal action to block Nine’s live streaming service 9Now in regional areas. Nic Christensen looks at the competing agendas that may be behind the move and the odds of the regional TV player being successful.
I’m willing to bet Bruce Gordon isn’t the first media mogul to dream of switching off the internet.
WIN’s surprise legal action isn’t quite the equivalent of demanding that the “interweb” be turned off for his viewers, in areas such as Wollongong, Canberra and Mildura and other regional hubs (like most of Tasmania and Western Australian), that fall within his broadcast areas. But it’s definitely up there in ‘outside the box’ legal demands made by an Australian media mogul.
As this ACMA media ownership snapshot shows, Gordon’s TV Network WIN broadcasts to a large part of the country, including our nation’s capital.
Source: ACMA Click to enlarge.
But the Bermuda-based billionaire owner is demanding that Nine geoblocks its live streaming service to those areas where it broadcasts so as to not compete with its affiliate stations, which he owns.
The WIN court action raises a number of key questions both practical and philosophical, not least on a technical level: can you geoblock all of Wollongong? And if so do you block just IP addresses or ask consumers to provide postcodes? Won’t that just drive people to use VPNs?
The answers to these questions will likely come up in court today.
But even if you can technically achieve such a goal should an individual, who is also Nine’s largest shareholder, actively seek to deny regional viewers a service that their city-dwelling brethren have, while simultaneously denying revenue to his fellow Nine shareholders?
Sure he can try, but whether it’s a good look is another issue altogether.
It is interesting that WIN’s legal action appears to have caught Nine by surprise. Gordon has been pushing for a seat on the Nine board since he upped his stake in the Network back in October, and it’s hard to imagine taking this new court action will help his case.
As always with Gordon there’s never just one agenda at play and it’s worth noting that the likes of fellow regional TV networks Prime and Southern Cross Austereo will be expected to watch Gordon’s court action with interest. Although neither was invited to join the court action.
Related content:
Ever since Seven announced in August that it would begin live streaming its broadcasts (a move duplicated quickly by Nine), the initiative has angered and frustrated the struggling regional TV players.
To quote the likes of Southern Cross Austereo boss Grant Blackley, the move makes a “mockery” of the existing reach rules – laws that are supposed to prevent any one broadcaster from reaching more than 75% of the population – but this court action will only further heighten the pressure on the Coalition to act and allow regional players to merge.
Whether that’s solely Gordon’s aim here is hard to know, but it’s worth noting that should WIN be successful in establishing what one TV executive described last night as “the great geoblock of Wollongong”, it is likely to be seen as a leveraging tool, ahead of the negotiations with Nine on its affiliate fees.
Late last year as negotiations struggled between the two sides (Nine insisting on raising fees, WIN saying it couldn’t afford them) the two sides kicked the can down the road in the hope that media reform would be passed before negotiations resume. The interim deal only lasts until June.
For WIN to get that negotiating leverage and force Nine to restrict access to 9Now, its refreshed catch-up service, which also offers live streaming, it will likely challenge the 2000 decision of former communications minister Richard Alston that “streaming is not broadcasting” in court.
It’s a contentious point and I can certainly see WIN’s argument that Nine is broadcasting into its licence areas. But at the same time the deliberate decision to ask a court to deny its viewers access to a service already available to metropolitan viewers, for reasons of pure financial self interest, shows a level of chutzpah rarely seen in Australian corporate life.
It might be a different story if WIN had its act together on digital and had its own offering (it doesn’t). Plus it has just the traditional broadcast rights to Nine content anyway.
Now whether or not you agree with the idea that streaming is broadcasting, WIN will – in the coming days, and possibly weeks – seek to test some key propositions that will be central to the future of broadcast and digital media. Likely arguing that Nine’s live stream is a form of broadcast and one that breaches its affiliate agreement.
The move will add tension to WIN’s relationship with Nine and does nothing for the regional broadcaster’s perception as a modern broadcaster (relevant when you’re asking media agencies and their clients to invest money with you).
Who will win may be unclear at this stage, but rest assured it will make for some interesting viewing.
Related: WIN takes Nine to court to try and block its live streaming service 9Now in regional areas
Nic Christensen is the media and technology editor of Mumbrella
Congratulations on writing the first article about Gordon to not mention his age in the first para. 87, as you asked.
User ID not verified.
Damn kids! Damn kids and their internet and their loud doof-doof music!
I fought and died in 3 world wars so Wollongong could be protected from the modern crazy ways of those gay muslim lesbians that seek to change the way we live.
Lets keep the internet and streaming out of Wollongong so we can keep it as the utopian village it once was.
oh! got to go… the latest 1960’s rerun of Bruce Gingel News broadcast will be on right after Romper Room.
User ID not verified.
You clearly have no idea how much Win pays Nine for that content. That’s all this is about.
User ID not verified.
Funny – old people running archaic, failing organisations vigorously trying to hold onto their own old-school distribution agreements that made them so much money in the past….. when their customers just want open access, and are probably not watching the content on their platform anyway. Is there a defibrillator in the room?
User ID not verified.
Helensburgh will not stand for this!
User ID not verified.
Still impossible not to describe him as the ‘Bermuda-based billionaire’ though.
User ID not verified.
“WIN’s surprise legal action isn’t quite the equivalent of demanding that the “interweb” be turned off for his viewers, in areas such as Wollongong, Canberra and Mildura and other regional hubs (like most of Tasmania and Western Australian), that fall within his broadcast areas. But it’s definitely up there in ‘outside the box’ legal demands made by an Australian media mogul.”
Oh, so will this automatically be L.A.W. in about, 6 months, or does Rupert have to say it before it becomes our only worldview?
Which oligarch gets the big chair in Australia this week?
User ID not verified.
Daddy.
User ID not verified.
Bermuda-based billionaire.
Just gotta love that alliteration. Jealous, cause in decades of writing, I never once got me a story that allowed for “Bermuda- based billionaire!
User ID not verified.
I live north of Wollongong so don’t worry Gordon the internet is so bad “streaming” live content is just a pipe dream…we hope to be able to stream content in some point in the next 10-20 years.
Can’t wait…
User ID not verified.
Does anyone think of the viewer anymore? Hey TV execs, there is actually someone behind the glass… maybe not for much longer.
User ID not verified.
WIN dragged its heels on introducing digital TV – which was paid for entirely by the government – and got it running only within the last few weeks of the year when the money was provided the year before.
WIN refuses to provide any of the new channels and has consistently campaigned to reduce the number of channels that is currently broadcasts.
They run a campaign on their own channels demanding changing the laws so they can flog their network to Murdoch (The Bruce Gordon Retirement Plan), on the spurious grounds of protecting local news (which they have generally closed anyway).
User ID not verified.
Quick – hold back the tide – I’m sure there’s a way… Seriously? I’m with you Bluey.
User ID not verified.
It’s to do with the government and their reach laws. Not 9.
User ID not verified.
We will not let progress stand in the way of our antiquated business models!
User ID not verified.
People still watch that crap?
User ID not verified.
Surely it’s more to do with the amount that WIN pay 9 for re-broadcasting their content. WIN currently pay 39% of revenue and 9 want 50% of the dwindling revenue. Revenue which will dry up with the streaming of the content from 9 in Sydney. Its purely a negotiating point.
User ID not verified.
“Old man yells at cloud.”
User ID not verified.
And the Murdoch Government (headed up by Abbott/Turnbull) is nobbling the NBN for purely sensible reasons (“we’re from the government, we’re here to help you”) and CERTAINLY NOT to make it a weakened competitor to the free-to-air-but-here’s-a-word-from-our-sponsors television status quo.
Sadly, younger folk (the future) are voting with their feet.
Even grown-ups are watching less reruns.
User ID not verified.
If 9NOW live streaming is shut off will 9NOW’s catch up service still be available to regional viewers?
User ID not verified.
Solution: WIN’s own streaming service
User ID not verified.