OFFICE OF SENATOR THE HON STEPHEN CONROY
MINISTER FOR BROADBAND, COMMUNICATIONS AND THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
DEPUTY LEADER OF THE GOVERNMENT IN THE SENATE

Funding of SBS

Thank you for your correspondence to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy concerning funding for the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) and advertising on SBS television. The Minister has asked me to respond on his behalf.

The SBS is one of Australia’s most important cultural institutions. In October 2008, the Australian Government released a public discussion paper aimed at stimulating ideas and comments about the future roles of SBS and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).

The ideas contained in the 2431 submissions received were invaluable in informing the Government’s consideration of funding for SBS and the ABC over the next triennium.

In the 2009-10 Budget, the Government announced additional funding of $20 million over three years to SBS to enable it to provide up to 50 hours of new Australian content annually.

This funding will allow SBS to build on its established track record for innovative and cutting edge Australian multicultural stories by commissioning a mix of drama, documentary comedy and entertainment programming.

In the Budget, SBS also received ongoing operational base funding of $118.7 million in 2009-10; $120.6 million in 2010-11; and $123.3 million in 2011-12. In addition to ongoing operational funding, SBS will receive ongoing transmission funding for the triennium of $249.2 million.

Advertising

SBS is permitted under its legislation to operate on a hybrid funding model which includes up to five minutes of advertising per hour during periods before programs begin, after programs end or during natural program breaks.

In 2008-09, SBS is expected to realise $68.3 million from the sale of goods and services, primarily television advertising revenue. Along with the free-to-air commercial broadcasters, SBS’ advertising revenue is likely to be affected over the short-term as a result of the global economic downturn. A new restriction on in-program advertising would substantially reduce the amount of funding available to SBS to support the provision of high quality and diverse programming. In the current economic climate, it is not proposed to require SBS to change its approach to advertising at this time.

Thank you for bringing these important matters to the Government’s attention.

MINISTER FOR BROADBAND, COMMUNICATIONS AND THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Parliament House, CANBERRA ACT 2600
Email minister@dbcde.gov.au

There were over 2,400 submissions received by the Department and in a media release the Minister said “The enthusiastic response we have received, confirms that the ABC and SBS are two of Australia’s most important and loved public institutions. They have entertained, educated and informed generations of Australians.”

The consultation called for submissions on how the ABC and SBS should be positioned to best respond to the challenges and opportunities of the emerging digital, online and global media environment.

“I have noted the interest a number of submissions have shown in the national broadcasters providing a diversity of high quality programming and content, including children’s programming, Australian drama and content in languages other than English,” Senator Conroy said.

“The Government will certainly be taking note of these submissions as we consider the next funding round for the ABC and SBS and consider policies for the long-term future of public broadcasting in this country.”

Senator Conroy said “These submissions will help shape our national broadcasters over the next decade and ensure their future strength and independence as they continue to play a central role in Australia’s emerging digital landscape.”

A full alphabetical list of all submissions may be found at: http://www.dbcde.gov.au/media_broadcasting/consultation_and_submissions/abc_sbs_review/_submissions

Save Our SBS believes that some one thousand submissions were made on line via the Save Our SBS campaign that encouraged people to make submissions regarding the SBS.

Special Broadcasting Service Amendment (Prohibition of Disruptive Advertising) Bill 2008 (Bill Number: 08050)

at

http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/TranslateWIPILink.aspx?Folder=BILLS&Criteria=BILL_ID:s620%3BSEQ_NUM:0%3B

The Explanatory Memorandum

at

http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/TranslateWIPILink.aspx?Folder=EMS&Criteria=BILL_ID:s620%3BEM_TYPE:EM%3BSOURCE:Senate%3B

23 Nov 2007 SaveOurSBS:

“Mary Kostakidis & SBS settle”

Mary Kostakidis and SBS settled their dispute today (23 November 2007).

The parties reached an amicable agreement out of court. A directions hearing for the case was to be heard in the Federal Court in Sydney earlier today but was not because the two parties reached a last minute agreement .

Details of the settlement are not known.

Long time presenter of SBS World News Australia and once former executive on the original SBS Board, had been in disagreement since August this year. In mid August it was reported that Kostakidis walked out on SBS over an alleged breach of contract.

It was also reported that Kostakidis was unhappy about the commercialisation of SBS. In late 2006 SBS began interrupting programs for commercial breaks and have been accused of operating like more like a commercial broadcaster than and public broadcaster.

Many commentators have said that SBS was foolish to go down the commercial path and risk loosing their most respected and valued presenter. Kostakidis was considered to be the flagship of the station.

Julian Burnside, QC, represented Kostakidis in the dispute.

It is understood that Kostakidis alleged that under the terms of her contract, she was to allowed exercise some editorial control and that SBS breached that condition. She was unhappy about one of her co-presenters, Stan Grant and the dominant commercial flavour of the news. It was reported that at one stage SBS had decided tha all segments should end with a tabloid type story that was easy to digest.

In January 2006, World News Australia changed from a half hour bulletin to a one hour bulletin.

In a statement issued by SBS, the Chairman of the SBS Board, Carla Zampatti, today paid tribute to Ms Kostakidis’ 21 years of service as a news presenter, also pointing out that she had first joined the broadcaster in an
executive role in 1980. "SBS fully acknowledges Mary’s immense contribution over the years," Ms Zampatti said.

Meanwhile Kostakidis said: "I would like SBS viewers to know that I leave with absolute good will towards the organisation and wish it all the best. It has been a privilege and an honour to front the flagship news program and to speak to a discerning audience that values public broadcasting."

[Save Our SBS interprets that last comment to mean, if you value public broadcasting it will now be up to others to continue the battle to save SBS from it commercialisation approach and stop the ads].

The issue of interrupting programs for advertisements is the reason that Save Our SBS http://www.SaveOurSBS.org formed. That issue will not die as, like Kostakidis, we too value public broadcasting and do not want to see our multicultural broadcaster operate as a pseudo commercial network.

Read some past blog about Mary Kostakidis

You can track the development of this
story and read other blog comments
here
and
here too.

Good luck and best wishes.

Your strength of character is what endeared us to you and is what will see you through this.

With the support of those you love and those you do not even know, regardless of the outcome, your triumph is within yourself.

Congratulations for what you have done for the media and the culture of Australia.

You are missed on our screens but we hold you in our hearts.

Tim Moulton.

Do you think that if Kevin Rudd were to promise to remove all advertising and excessive promotions from SBS, and adequately to fund [it] from the public purse with no strings attached the ALP would win every marginal seat in the country?

Would you vote for a party that made such a promise?

(If you are not sure how to Register or Login to become a ‘blogger’ please read: “How To Browse This Web Site, Register & Comment” and “How To Register And Become A Blogger On SaveOurSBS” which you will find about half way down the Home Page: http://www.SaveOurSBS.org then return here to write your commnet).

Would you vote for a party that promised to fully fund SBS and stop the advertising?

Write your comment below.

I would think that a promise by Kevin Rudd to remove political interference, advertising and excessive promotions from the ABC and SBS, and adequately to fund both organizations from the public purse with no strings attached would alone win him enough extra votes to carry every marginal seat in the country.

I hope that the current executives and board of SBS will be sent packing as soon as possible.

I would think that a promise by Kevin Rudd to remove political interference, advertising and excessive promotions from the ABC and SBS, and adequately to fund both organizations from the public purse with no strings attached would alone win him enough extra votes to carry every marginal seat in the country.

I hope that the current executives and board of SBS will be sent packing as soon as possible.

It’s not just the quality of some of the programs that SBS has dumbed down SBS has also been dumbed down by the mere fact that they now interrupt all the TV programs with commercials. It’s unbearable.

The changes made at the start of this year to World News 6:30 edition – the silly social chit chat and the forced smiles that the presenters seemed to have been told to do; the Movie Show being cut from a quality half hour show to an insulting 12 minute fill in type show being not much more than an advertorial for the program’s web site which is so blatantly cluttered with ads it is actually unreadable.

I stopped watching World News 6:30 edition a while back. I gave the Movie Show a go for a while after Margaret & David left but when SBS degenerated it into a fill in show I gave up. Now I find I am watching less and less SBS and more and more ABC.

The overall program line-up is just not as good as it used to be either. It all seemed to begin with the introduction of that very commercial looking program, the Iron Chef. They don’t even subtitle it. It was barely bearable when there no ad breaks in it. Now we have to put up not just with the added hype and annoyance of ad interruptions but also with American dubbed voices instead of SBS subtitles! How cheap and commercial looking and sounding can you get? The recipes might be good but the way SBS presents the Iron Chef has turned me off.

Where’s the opera? Where are the arts type programs? Has SBS dumped these forever?

There is now a long list of programs that are just have either been removed, buried in the wrong time slot late at night or are just plain crappy. I think SBS have lost the plot if they want to appeal to a wider audience. I thought that was what the other TV channels were supposed to do, not SBS.

I really feel quite upset that a handful of people have ‘stolen’ my SBS from us, the public. I don’t care if I’m accused of being elitist. So what? What’s wrong with being elitist anyway? We have boutique clothing shops and other elite things in life. I don’t want to watch crappy commercial type TV.

Even the quality of the ads on SBS now looks crappy too. The ads on SBS used to be of a higher quality. They were soft sell art style type ads that blended in between programs. Not anymore.

By the way: I did not switch off SBS when it used to run the advertisements between the programs only. Did Shaun Brown ever provide any proof that that is what the viewers did or is it just that the advertisers will pay more to interrupt a program? Sounds like we viewers have been sold out to the advertisers. Now it’s their station not ours.

I used to enjoy SBS. In my opinion Shaun Brown and the SBS Board have a lot to answer for. I want them to hand back our SBS so it is run the way it used to be.

It’s not just the quality of some of the programs that SBS has dumbed down SBS has also been dumbed down by the mere fact that they now interrupt all the TV programs with commercials. It’s unbearable.

The changes made at the start of this year to World News 6:30 edition – the silly social chit chat and the forced smiles that the presenters seemed to have been told to do; the Movie Show being cut from a quality half hour show to an insulting 12 minute fill in type show being not much more than an advertorial for the program’s web site which is so blatantly cluttered with ads it is actually unreadable.

I stopped watching World News 6:30 edition a while back. I gave the Movie Show a go for a while after Margaret & David left but when SBS degenerated it into a fill in show I gave up. Now I find I am watching less and less SBS and more and more ABC.

The overall program line-up is just not as good as it used to be either. It all seemed to begin with the introduction of that very commercial looking program, the Iron Chef. They don’t even subtitle it. It was barely bearable when there no ad breaks in it. Now we have to put up not just with the added hype and annoyance of ad interruptions but also with American dubbed voices instead of SBS subtitles! How cheap and commercial looking and sounding can you get? The recipes might be good but the way SBS presents the Iron Chef has turned me off.

Where’s the opera? Where are the arts type programs? Has SBS dumped these forever?

There is now a long list of programs that are just have either been removed, buried in the wrong time slot late at night or are just plain crappy. I think SBS have lost the plot if they want to appeal to a wider audience. I thought that was what the other TV channels were supposed to do, not SBS.

I really feel quite upset that a handful of people have ‘stolen’ my SBS from us, the public. I don’t care if I’m accused of being elitist. So what? What’s wrong with being elitist anyway? We have boutique clothing shops and other elite things in life. I don’t want to watch crappy commercial type TV.

Even the quality of the ads on SBS now looks crappy too. The ads on SBS used to be of a higher quality. They were soft sell art style type ads that blended in between programs. Not anymore.

By the way: I did not switch off SBS when it used to run the advertisements between the programs only. Did Shaun Brown ever provide any proof that that is what the viewers did or is it just that the advertisers will pay more to interrupt a program? Sounds like we viewers have been sold out to the advertisers. Now it’s their station not ours.

I used to enjoy SBS. In my opinion Shaun Brown and the SBS Board have a lot to answer for. I want them to hand back our SBS so it is run the way it used to be.

It’s not just the quality of some of the programs that SBS has dumbed down SBS has also been dumbed down by the mere fact that they now interrupt all the TV programs with commercials. It’s unbearable.

The changes made at the start of this year to World News 6:30 edition – the silly social chit chat and the forced smiles that the presenters seemed to have been told to do; the Movie Show being cut from a quality half hour show to an insulting 12 minute fill in type show being not much more than an advertorial for the program’s web site which is so blatantly cluttered with ads it is actually unreadable.

I stopped watching World News 6:30 edition a while back. I gave the Movie Show a go for a while after Margaret & David left but when SBS degenerated it into a fill in show I gave up. Now I find I am watching less and less SBS and more and more ABC.

The overall program line-up is just not as good as it used to be either. It all seemed to begin with the introduction of that very commercial looking program, the Iron Chef. They don’t even subtitle it. It was barely bearable when there no ad breaks in it. Now we have to put up not just with the added hype and annoyance of ad interruptions but also with American dubbed voices instead of SBS subtitles! How cheap and commercial looking and sounding can you get? The recipes might be good but the way SBS presents the Iron Chef has turned me off.

Where’s the opera? Where are the arts type programs? Has SBS dumped these forever?

There is now a long list of programs that are just have either been removed, buried in the wrong time slot late at night or are just plain crappy. I think SBS have lost the plot if they want to appeal to a wider audience. I thought that was what the other TV channels were supposed to do, not SBS.

I really feel quite upset that a handful of people have ‘stolen’ my SBS from us, the public. I don’t care if I’m accused of being elitist. So what? What’s wrong with being elitist anyway? We have boutique clothing shops and other elite things in life. I don’t want to watch crappy commercial type TV.

Even the quality of the ads on SBS now looks crappy too. The ads on SBS used to be of a higher quality. They were soft sell art style type ads that blended in between programs. Not anymore.

By the way: I did not switch off SBS when it used to run the advertisements between the programs only. Did Shaun Brown ever provide any proof that that is what the viewers did or is it just that the advertisers will pay more to interrupt a program? Sounds like we viewers have been sold out to the advertisers. Now it’s their station not ours.

I used to enjoy SBS. In my opinion Shaun Brown and the SBS Board have a lot to answer for. I want them to hand back our SBS so it is run the way it used to be.

It’s not just the quality of some of the programs that SBS has dumbed down SBS has also been dumbed down by the mere fact that they now interrupt all the TV programs with commercials. It’s unbearable.

The changes made at the start of this year to World News 6:30 edition – the silly social chit chat and the forced smiles that the presenters seemed to have been told to do; the Movie Show being cut from a quality half hour show to an insulting 12 minute fill in type show being not much more than an advertorial for the program’s web site which is so blatantly cluttered with ads it is actually unreadable.

I stopped watching World News 6:30 edition a while back. I gave the Movie Show a go for a while after Margaret & David left but when SBS degenerated it into a fill in show I gave up. Now I find I am watching less and less SBS and more and more ABC.

The overall program line-up is just not as good as it used to be either. It all seemed to begin with the introduction of that very commercial looking program, the Iron Chef. They don’t even subtitle it. It was barely bearable when there no ad breaks in it. Now we have to put up not just with the added hype and annoyance of ad interruptions but also with American dubbed voices instead of SBS subtitles! How cheap and commercial looking and sounding can you get? The recipes might be good but the way SBS presents the Iron Chef has turned me off.

Where’s the opera? Where are the arts type programs? Has SBS dumped these forever?

There is now a long list of programs that are just have either been removed, buried in the wrong time slot late at night or are just plain crappy. I think SBS have lost the plot if they want to appeal to a wider audience. I thought that was what the other TV channels were supposed to do, not SBS.

I really feel quite upset that a handful of people have ‘stolen’ my SBS from us, the public. I don’t care if I’m accused of being elitist. So what? What’s wrong with being elitist anyway? We have boutique clothing shops and other elite things in life. I don’t want to watch crappy commercial type TV.

Even the quality of the ads on SBS now looks crappy too. The ads on SBS used to be of a higher quality. They were soft sell art style type ads that blended in between programs. Not anymore.

By the way: I did not switch off SBS when it used to run the advertisements between the programs only. Did Shaun Brown ever provide any proof that that is what the viewers did or is it just that the advertisers will pay more to interrupt a program? Sounds like we viewers have been sold out to the advertisers. Now it’s their station not ours.

I used to enjoy SBS. In my opinion Shaun Brown and the SBS Board have a lot to answer for. I want them to hand back our SBS so it is run the way it used to be.

It’s not just the quality of some of the programs that SBS has dumbed down SBS has also been dumbed down by the mere fact that they now interrupt all the TV programs with commercials. It’s unbearable.

The changes made at the start of this year to World News 6:30 edition – the silly social chit chat and the forced smiles that the presenters seemed to have been told to do; the Movie Show being cut from a quality half hour show to an insulting 12 minute fill in type show being not much more than an advertorial for the program’s web site which is so blatantly cluttered with ads it is actually unreadable.

I stopped watching World News 6:30 edition a while back. I gave the Movie Show a go for a while after Margaret & David left but when SBS degenerated it into a fill in show I gave up. Now I find I am watching less and less SBS and more and more ABC.

The overall program line-up is just not as good as it used to be either. It all seemed to begin with the introduction of that very commercial looking program, the Iron Chef. They don’t even subtitle it. It was barely bearable when there no ad breaks in it. Now we have to put up not just with the added hype and annoyance of ad interruptions but also with American dubbed voices instead of SBS subtitles! How cheap and commercial looking and sounding can you get? The recipes might be good but the way SBS presents the Iron Chef has turned me off.

Where’s the opera? Where are the arts type programs? Has SBS dumped these forever?

There is now a long list of programs that are just have either been removed, buried in the wrong time slot late at night or are just plain crappy. I think SBS have lost the plot if they want to appeal to a wider audience. I thought that was what the other TV channels were supposed to do, not SBS.

I really feel quite upset that a handful of people have ‘stolen’ my SBS from us, the public. I don’t care if I’m accused of being elitist. So what? What’s wrong with being elitist anyway? We have boutique clothing shops and other elite things in life. I don’t want to watch crappy commercial type TV.

Even the quality of the ads on SBS now looks crappy too. The ads on SBS used to be of a higher quality. They were soft sell art style type ads that blended in between programs. Not anymore.

By the way: I did not switch off SBS when it used to run the advertisements between the programs only. Did Shaun Brown ever provide any proof that that is what the viewers did or is it just that the advertisers will pay more to interrupt a program? Sounds like we viewers have been sold out to the advertisers. Now it’s their station not ours.

I used to enjoy SBS. In my opinion Shaun Brown and the SBS Board have a lot to answer for. I want them to hand back our SBS so it is run the way it used to be.

Then along came digital TV. We purchased a set top box. And for the first time we could see SBS properly!! O joy!

Shortly after that, however, the French films, in fact most of the films, just disappeared. It was like we were being punished for enjoying something so much. It was like it was too good to last.

When we, the general public – the tax payers funding 80% of his [SBS] station, had the “cheek” to complain that our films have been taken away Mr Shaun Brown resorted to name-calling. He spoke at the National Press Cub. Those at the top of SBS have called us elitist and they don’t want to cater for elitists. Mr Brown wants us to watch the advertisement-and-promo-interrupted-rubbish he puts on because it suits the advertisers.

Mr Brown doesn’t seem to care about the time, effort and expense that I, and thousands of people like me, went to, to receive an SBS signal in the first place.

Then along came digital TV. We purchased a set top box. And for the first time we could see SBS properly!! O joy!

Shortly after that, however, the French films, in fact most of the films, just disappeared. It was like we were being punished for enjoying something so much. It was like it was too good to last.

When we, the general public – the tax payers funding 80% of his [SBS] station, had the “cheek” to complain that our films have been taken away Mr Shaun Brown resorted to name-calling. He spoke at the National Press Cub. Those at the top of SBS have called us elitist and they don’t want to cater for elitists. Mr Brown wants us to watch the advertisement-and-promo-interrupted-rubbish he puts on because it suits the advertisers.

Mr Brown doesn’t seem to care about the time, effort and expense that I, and thousands of people like me, went to, to receive an SBS signal in the first place.

It has now started ruining its television programmes by interrupting them with advertising breaks.

For a while now the ABC has been interrupting radio programmes with non-paid-advertising or promos. Are these ABC programme promos intended to soften up the ABC listeners to future paid-advertising breaks in the programmes?

Eventually, just as sponsorship on the SBS ended up as commercial advertising interruptions to television programmes, will the programme advertising or promos make way for full commercial advertising on ABC radio?

Both the SBS and the ABC are Government (tax payer) owned public broadcasters, and thus should be fully financed by the Government.

Despite the denial by the Managing Director, Mr. Shaun Brown, the SBS is definitely being dumbed. With commercial advertising on its channel, it can not be but dumbed down.

Ed: The Act of parliament that establishes the ABC specifically bans it from broadcasting advertisements on its radio or television services. At this stage no mention is made of the ABC internet services. Unlike the ABC, since 1991 the SBS Act never banned advertising on SBS, although SBS then indicated that it might like to seek sponsorship. For more details about this please read “FAQ SBS Advertising & Legislation” and “FAQ SBS Funding” on this web site.

As of 29 August 2007 the petition clock counter hit 3600 signatories. Of those 51% of the people who signed had post codes from NSW. 14% of those that signed were from Victoria, 12% from Queensland, 13% from SA, and the balance from other parts of Australia. The first person signed in July 2007.

Remove the ads and Grant too. Come back Mary!!

R & C Mann, Gilston, Qld

1. For members to affirm your commitment to the SBS Charter.

3. And to affirm the SBS values of “open discussion and constructive debate” and the “fostering of honest, trusting and mutually respectful relationships” AND commit to provide industrial support to any staff member who may be bullied, intimidated, silenced or marginalised for practicing these values at SBS.

The union called on “SBS management and the SBS Board to spell out how they will reverse the changes that have taken place at SBS over the past several years which have actively inhibited the realization of these values of openness and constructive debate“. They called on “SBS to demonstrate to staff how these new “purposes and values” will be met in a truly meaningful way at SBS“.

And the CPSU also called on “all SBS employees to join the campaign to Save our SBS and to encourage their friends, family and work colleagues to do the same. Go to http://www.saveoursbs.org” concluded the CPSU internet site report. The full story from the CPSU site can be read on the CPSU web site.

First came a reduction in movies and other entertainment, particularly on weekends (unless you care to wait until 11.30pm to watch something very ordinary), then the commercials and last but not least, sweeping changes to the evening news which meant the demise of Australia’s foremost sports program. In comes Stan Grant, straight for chck’n'noodle news, and the whole character of an outstanding news service changes.

Mary Kostakidis and her team provided an outstanding program.

Ratings are unlikely to ever increase when the viewer demographic SBS management hope to entice is not in the least interested, and the already loyal viewers switch off altogether.

Message: BRING BACK MARY. Where is the campaign for Mary – without doubt Australia’s most professional news reader. (L H submitted this comment on 24 August 2007)

EDITORS NOTE TO THE ABOVE QUESTION:

There is a separate petition in support of Mary Kostakidas. That other petition was not written nor organised SaveOurSBS however we agree with the sentiments expressed in that petition to support Mary Kostakidis. If you have not signed our petition, essentially over very similar issues, i.e., the commercialisation at SBS please do so. You may want to sign both petitions

http://petition.saveoursbs.org THIS LINK IS TO THE OFFICIAL “NO ADVERTISEMENTS OR SPONSORSHIP ON SBS.” AMONG OTHER THINGS IT CALLS FOR A CHANGE IN LEGISLATION AND WAS WRITTEN BY US. Please sign it.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/marykostakidis/ THIS LINK IS TO A PETITION IN SUPPORT OF MARY KOSTAKIDIS. WE DID NOT WRITE IT. IT WAS WRITTEN BY ANOTHER GROUP NOT SaveOurSBS. WE ARE NOT THE ORGANISER NOR THE SPONSOR OF THAT PETITION.

Message: Just noticed a quote or at least an attribution in the Thursday edition of The Australian 23/8 that Shaun Brown stated when saying that it would not be a good idea to merge ABC and SBS because in comparison with the ABC, that SBS was a ‘lean and sleek’ organization. Well, to anyone with a basic understanding of the English tongue, it cant be both. Is this the level of English that we expect from a top media exec, or the bumbling of a used car salesman determined to destroy something that has been brilliant. (J L submitted this comment on 24 August 2007)

The above are just a few of the comments sent in to http://www.SaveOurSBS.org on 24 August 2007. We were not able to publish all the comments received due to the enormous numbers received. The comments above are fairly representative of most of the types of comments received that day. We prefer that people who want to make a comment about Mary Kostakidis do so, not by emailing us, but rather, by clicking on the Register link in the far right column instead. However please read our Home Page first to find out how to become a blogger and what is involved. Some of the comments above were edited by us for clarity. Ed.

Sign the petition to protect SBS, stop the ads and maintain our multicultural public broadcaster funded fully by government. Click http://petition.saveoursbs.org and wait while you are redirected to the petition server.

Post your blog comments below.

To: comments@sbs.com.au

I don’t know where the present Board and its CEO got their brief to change SBS this way, particularly dumbing down the News with the ridiculous use of 2 presenters playing at being cheery friends. It’s an insult to the viewers and all these changes show with what contempt the Board and senior management hold the viewers. Australia needs another vacuous “commercial” TV channel like it needs a hole in the head. The complex structure and culture that was SBS has been taken over and trashed by vandals – what a great legacy for the board members to be remembered for. Thanks a lot.

Message: I would like to remark that the dumbing down of the evening news is the reason I rarely watch it now. (J H submitted this comment on 23 August 2007)

Message: I am totally incensed that the management of SBS permitted the ratings, that is the number of people watching at any one time, to fall. Indicating that the high quality of “different” material available on SBS had been reduced and the product line-up “dumbed down” in an attempt to match commercial television. The news that we, and countless friends of ours, used to watch nightly, has been so altered and destroyed by its commercialisation and slickness that we no longer watch it. Mary should be returned as before as a half hour show, get rid of the ads at half time, if we have to have ads, and preferably rid of them totally, remove Grant to some other show that I will not watch and make the SBS as it was, an entertaining, professional friendly channel for the average multiracial Australian. It is inconceivable that Mary was given such short shrift when it was she, amongst others, who increased the ratings (I C-S submitted this comment on 23 August 2007)

The above are just a few of the comments sent in to http://www.SaveOurSBS.org on 23 August 2007. We were not able to publish all the comments received due to the enormous numbers received. The comments above are fairly representative of most of the types of comments received that day. We prefer that people who want to make a comment about Mary Kostakidis do so, not by emailing us, but rather, by clicking on the Register link in the far right column instead. However please read our Home Page first to find out how to become a blogger and what is involved. Some of the comments above were edited by us for clarity. Ed.

Sign the petition to protect SBS, stop the ads and maintain our multicultural public broadcaster funded fully by government. Click http://petition.saveoursbs.org and wait while you are redirected to the petition server.

Post your blog comments below.

Keep those signatures and comments coming, and we will be able to demonstrate the need for a change.

I want to see and hear Mary Kostakidis and Lee Lin Chin and serious presenters like Anton Enus. It is reasonable to train some new journalists, but I do not want to see MK relegated to the rubbish items about cute puppies.

I will not watch the news again in its current format.

Message: As an ABC journalist and radio news reader, I’d like to voice my dismay over the treatment of Mary Kostakidis. I find it disgraceful that the doyenne of Australian newsreaders has been forced out by a coterie of commercial interests, management and in my opinion a pedestrian co-presenter. (A K submitted this comment on 22 August 2007)

Message: What about another petition to bring back Mary Kostakidis. (T B submitted this comment on 22 August 2007)

Message: Here is a message for Mary Kostakidis: Ever since I first arrived in Australia I’ve admired your appealing, affirmative and often humorous communicating style when presenting the news on SBS. I sincerely hope you achieve what you want for yourself and all your eager fans. All the Best.
PS: I do not watch the news when you are not the news reader. (B P submitted this comment on 22 August 2007)

Message: I write in support of Mary Kostakidis. She and Lee Lin Chin are the faces and the souls of SBS World News that we all love and respect. The tragedy is that the SBS Board appointed an executive from TVNZ who apparently appointed Stan Grant. Are they in cahoots? We were doing beautifully with Mary in lead role. New Zealand has the civilised world’s worst television. It is unwatchable, commercialised rubbish. It is an affront to the intelligence of the NZ people. For anything extra, in their wisdom (or lack of it) TVNZ, which is supposed to be a public broadcaster, was sold out to commercialism. There is no educational or enlightening content, no analysis, no world news, just ‘Rush along to the nearest advertiser blahblahblah’. In my opinion, SBS shouldn’t have appointed any executives from TVNZ. Coming to the antipodes from Britain and the BBC and Channel 4 with all their riches of knowledge, information, enlightenment, it had to be Australia with the SBS (particularly Mary) and the ABC rather than the cultural desert of NZ and TVNZ. All you can do there is read books and listen to the radio. We want you back, Mary, to lead the SBS. Tell the SBS executives who came from TVNZ to go home. No wonder there’s distress when a presenter from CNN and an executive from TVNZ muscle in on the sensitively and intelligently run SBS. (V B submitted this comment on 22 August 2007. The original comment was edited by SaveOurSBS. Ed)

Message: Save Mary Kostakidis!!! (S R submitted this comment on 22 August 2007)

Message: Dear SBS, For some time I have been noting with great disappointment the shift of SBS-TV from an erudite independent and factual source of news and world affairs, with an adult and global approach, to a more strident tabloid ‘grab attention and flog it to them’ culture. The hiring of Stan to read (or does he opinionate?) the news is, to me, a stomach-heaving slap. Going so far down market won’t probably gain you much of channel 10’s audience but will certainly lose much of your current and potential viewers. (W W submitted this comment on 22 August 2007. The original comment was edited by SaveOurSBS. Ed)

Message: I am just want to say thanks for getting this website up http://www.SaveOurSBS.org and running and allowing organised opposition to the changes at SBS. We have been committed viewers for many, many years and have always appreciated the professionalism and multicultural approach of SBS. We have also always enjoyed Mary Kostakidis presentation of the news, thoroughly professional and unsensational. Not so now that Stan Grant has joined the news presenting. If he remains and the current commercial approach is unchanged, SBS will have lost another two viewers who are appalled at the commercial appeal to the lowest common denominator. Furthermore, as someone of 59 and my husband 71, we both find it offensive that our age group is considered superfluous to SBS’s viewing requirements and now content is to be aimed at younger viewers. Memo to SBS management – there is a growing, greying population and you ignore us at your peril! Very best wishes to http://www.SaveOurSBS.org for your success in bringing SBS back to its original charter and to an ethical broadcasting station not obsessed with ratings, age groups and ignoring the ethnic population. Warm regards, (M D & B N submitted this comment on 22 August 2007)

The above are just a few of the comments sent in to http://www.SaveOurSBS.org on 22 August 2007. We were not able to publish all the comments received due to the enormous numbers received. The comments above are fairly representative of most of the types of comments received. We prefer that people who want to make a comment about Mary Kostakidis do so, not by emailing us, but rather, by clicking on the Register link in the far right column instead. However please read our Home Page first to find out how to become a blogger and what is involved. Some of the comments above were edited by us for clarity. Ed.

Sign the petition to protect SBS, stop the ads and maintain our multicultural public broadcaster funded fully by government. Click http://petition.saveoursbs.org and wait while you are redirected to the petition server.

Post your blog comments below.

SBS will only suffer if Mary departs as for years she has been a major draw card with her presentation, demure and such clear diction. Why oh why do they have to spoil it all by introducing Ads, and not well thought out formats. It has been most noticable that Mary was being given the “Short Straw” especially in the news!

I agree….this has gone Far too far!!!

Bummer, this has really gone too far.

I share your sentiment that “ad breaks just don’t hold water” and your love it seems of the SBS’s excellent series, Inspector Montalbano.

Hell hath no fury like an audience spurned!

Giacomo

There have been major changes to the SBS since the introduction of advertising, but they have not happened overnight. We can chart developments at the SBS since strictly limited advertising was introduced in 1992-3.

* 1992
SBS Managing Director Brian Johns moves programs in languages other than English (LOTE) out of prime time as advertising is about to start. [i] Subsequent chief executives maintain the practice of English language domination of prime time, with LOTE programs broadcast either in the mornings, afternoons, or late at night, when many people would be at work, asleep, or otherwise occupied.
* March 2003
SBS management is involved in a dispute with its own journalists over the introduction of advertising into news programs, which had previously been exempt. MEAA NSW secretary says 40 journalists had written to management claiming that sponsorship of news and current affairs programs compromised editorial integrity and could result in reporters being disciplined or fired for airing unfavourable stories about advertisers. [ii]
* November 2003
More key staff to leave. “Since the arrival in January of former Television New Zealand (TVNZ) executive Shaun Brown as the head of television, there has been a succession of changes on and off screen at the Special Broadcasting Service. At first they seemed incremental. But over the past few months, long-established people and programs have been removed or relocated, new line-ups have been launched and pivotal programs reshaped. Since August 2002, the head of television has left, the chief programmer has resigned and the head of internal production has been told his job no longer exists”. [iii]
* December 2003
The Federation of Ethnic Communities Council says that SBS has lost its way. FECCA Chairman Abd Malak claims “The only people who like SBS TV now are the cappuccino crowd – well-educated, middle-class people, it’s mainly sex and soccer, I think” He added that his organisation was “very close to giving up on SBS TV…..In the last three or four years they have separated themselves from ethnic communities. They don’t come to our functions or religious festivals”
The dismissive, not to say insulting, response from SBS Managing Director Nigel Milan was “We’re not going to cover the clog dancing from Brisbane Town Hall.” [iv]
* January 2004.
The Age’s media writer Ross Warneke comments on the banishment of non-English programs from prime time. “The bulk of its ‘ethnic content’ these days is its morning news marathon, with hour after hour of foreign language news services relayed from everywhere from Manila to Madrid”. [v]
* May 2004
Staff become disenchanted. The Age’s Debi Enker writes that SBS staff fear “that the search for a broader audience is leading to the acquisition and commissioning of programs that are ‘safer and blander’, that SBS will become ‘a poor man’s version of a commercial network rather than providing a challenging alternative’. The harshest critics fear SBS will end up looking like a second-rate cable-TV station, running reality TV shows and English-language drama series that the free-to-air channels have rejected as either being too limited in their appeal or too provocative.” [vi]
* June 2004
SBS joins with commercial broadcasters to oppose the tightening of restrictions on tobacco advertising through the insidious practice of product placement. [vii]
* October 2004
SBS joins with the existing commercial stations to restrict competition and to argue against the granting of an additional free to air TV licence. The reason – more competition would impact on their advertising income. [viii]
* November 2004
Veteran SBS film critic Margaret Pomeranz, who together with co-host David Stratton deserted SBS for the ABC comments:
”I think that the current management has a much more commercial bent than any previous management. They seem to be after the young female demographic, and I worry about this, because this is a demographic already catered to in excess on the commercial television stations. SBS was meant to broaden the scope of television in this country, extend what was already available, or that was always my vision of it. And I think it was the vision of a lot of people there as well. We were so little we didn’t rate very well, although during the ‘90s under Peter Cavanagh, our ratings increased at really a remarkable rate. And for all of this new direction towards a more commercial bent, young female demographic, SBS is appealing to less viewers than it did before.” [ix]
* June 2005
George Zangalis, President of the National Ethnic and Multicultural Broadcasters Council, and a former member of the SBS board, issues a media release criticizing the direction of SBS TV. He says, “The SBS was established as a multicultural broadcaster, but has been moving away from its original charter. Programming in community languages has shrunk, while English programming has grown. Advertising has increased and become increasingly strident. Rather than focusing on different cultures, the SBS seems to be moving towards mainstream sports like cricket and now AFL. There is plenty of this type of programming on the ABC and the three commercial channels.” [x]

* August 2005.
When first introduced, advertising on SBS is limited to five minutes per hour, and is not permitted to interrupt programs. It can only be used to top and tail programs. There are media reports that the SBS Board wants these restrictions lifted, and Managing Director Nigel Milan commissions a confidential survey on possible audience reactions to program interruptions. [xi] However the government does not remove the ban on advertisements interrupting programs. The experience of the early history of advertising in the US is relevant here.

* February 2006.
The SBS confirms the complaint made by George Zangalis, President of the Ethnic Broadcasters Council, in June 2005, that SBS advertising has increased and become increasingly strident. SBS’s director of commercial affairs, Richard Finlayson says that the broadcaster has reviewed “the type of ads it will and will not accept. In the past SBS has been reluctant to carry some ads, such as hard-hitting, in-your-face retails ads. That’s changing” [xii]

2. How corporate underwriting changed to sponsorship and then became full blown advertising – the U.S. experience.

Sometimes “sponsorship” or “corporate underwriting” is raised as a more palatable alternative to brash and hard-sell advertisements. What is wrong, it has been asked, about “The Macquarie Bank Einstein Factor” – a simple announcement at the front of the program that it is supported by the Macquarie Bank?

There are three things that concern Friends of the ABC, and many listeners and viewers, about advertising:

First there is the concern that advertising will distort programming priorities.

Second there is the concern that managers and program makers will be wary of airing any criticism of important advertisers – it can act as an unseen form of censorship.

Third is the irritation factor – advertisements are often unduly loud, repetitive, and disruptive of the program’s flow.

Simple corporate underwriting of the “Macquarie Bank Einstein Factor” kind would be less susceptible to the third concern, but is in no way exempt from the first two concerns. Moreover such corporate underwriting would attract only a fraction of the income that “real advertising” would bring, thus defeating part of the purpose.

An account of how corporate underwriting gradually transformed into sponsorship and then into full blown advertising in the United States is relevant here.

Advertising first appeared on the SBS in 1992-3, and its effect has indeed been gradual. However the same was true about advertising in the United States, where it took some ten years to make its real impact felt. When it started, in the 1920s, it was genteel and low key, but by the 1930s it was crass, loud and aggressive.

Advertising was not the main support for radio in its early days in the US. David Sarnoff, of RCA for example, advocated a tax on radio receivers, as a way of supporting broadcasting. Some stations were funded by colleges and universities. Others received support from philanthropists. However advertising grew steadily, if slowly at first.

Initially it was very discreet. Prices were never mentioned. The mention of personal items, like toothpaste, mouth wash or underclothes was taboo. Companies attached their names to entertainers, like the Ipana Troubadours, the Browning-King Orchestra and the Goodrich Silvertown Orchestra. There was no mention that Ipana made toothpaste, Browning King made overalls and Goodrich made tires, let alone any suggestion that listeners should buy these products. A strict ban on the mention of prices and store locations remained. The broadcasting lobby group, The National Association of Broadcasters, proposed that sponsorship announcements be banned from prime time listening, on the basis that it was family listening time.

All this changed with the 1929 crash. CBS, one of the major networks was in trouble. George Washington Hill, President of American Tobacco, came to the rescue. Cremo cigars were suffering from rumours that they were made with spit. He needed to counter the rumours, and was prepared to pay. CBS capitulated, and in between tunes from the Cremo Military Band an announcer shouted: “There is no spit in Cremo.” NBC soon followed suit, sponsorship became advertising, and aggressive. [xiii]

International experience has clearly shown that advertising impacts on the program priorities of public service broadcasters. [xiv] Despite the fact that advertising accounts for only 15% of SBS income, its impact has by now become clear.

Darce Cassidy, February 2006

[i] Brian Johns, ‘SBS: Coping with a Strange Idea’, in Multicultural Australia: The Challenges of Change, D. Goodman et al. Carlton, Scribe, 1991

[ii] Kylie Walker, SBS clashes with journalists over ads, The Age, 9 March 2003

[iii] Sydney Morning Herald, 11 November 2003

[iv] Christopher Kremmer, Ethnic groups find SBS sex and soccer a turn off, SMH 20 December, 2003

[v] Ross Warneke, Public broadcasters face big year, The Age, 8 January 2004

[vi] Debi Enker, Where to now, SBS?, The Age, 27 May 2004

[vii] Letter from Julie Eisenberg, SBS Head of Policy, to Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, 17 June, 2004

[viii] Provision of Commercial Television Broadcasting Services after 31 December 2006, SBS Submission to the Department of Information Technology, Communications and the Arts, October 2004

[ix] Radio National Media Report, 4 November 2004

[x] NEMBC Media Release, 8 June 2005

[xi] Errol Simper, Borrowed time up for Milan, The Australian, 11 August 2005

[xii] Neil Shoebridge, FIFA world cup kicks off SBS ad sales, Australian Financial Review, 27 February 2006

[xiii] Erik Barnouw, A History of Broadcasting in the United States, Vol 1, New York, OUP, 1966

[xiv] McKinsey and Co, Public service broadcasters around the world, London, 1999 (mimeo)

[The above comment was originally published by Darce Cassidy from Friends of the ABC in February 2006, prior to the implementation of the current SBS policy to insert advertising within programs. Save Our SBS thanks Darce for resubmitting it here. Ed.]

Yes, we are silenced. “Speaking out” incurs being hounded and pummeled for it, or else losing one’s job over it. Silenced? Well, yeah, it has become VERY quiet around the place…

The advertising is a disgrace the way it’s being instrumented: catering to the advertiser as to where the ads are placed, instead of catering to the needs and sensitivities of a given program.

Multiculturalism is no longer of importance, it seems. Apparently, “We’ve done that. Been there.” Now we’re supposed to be moving to a wonderful-brand-new-world of what “for all Australians” really means. According to the spin of Shaun Brown, what “for all Australians” really means now is that it is predominately FOR Australians…

Please sign the petition!

So we have to wait until midnight to see a program with no ads on SBS. They probably couldn’t find any sponsors anyway.

If they can show one movie with no ads once, then SBS ought to do that all the time. Just like they used to.

“Come Clean On Commercialisation” by Quentin Dempster

With the federal election campaign already in full swing Quentin Dempster previews the policy debate about the future of public broadcasting.

“Stiff and stiffer.” Those erectile dysfunction ads on SBS television are helping to spotlight the Howard government’s insidious agenda for public broadcasting in Australia.

The 2004 Liberal Party election manifesto made no mention of stretching or reinterpreting the SBS Act’s definition of “natural breaks”. From 1992, when advertising was introduced at SBS through an amendment to the SBS Act, the SBS board’s consistent legal advice was that “natural breaks” meant ads could only be broadcast between programs, not during them, with the possible exception of lengthy sporting coverage. That interpretation prevailed from 1992 to 2007. Last year the [Carla] Zampatti-chaired board at SBS overruled that 15-year internal legal advice to seek an external counsel’s opinion.

That process produced for the SBS board a legal opinion that “natural breaks” could be interpreted as meaning convenient spots within programs. Equipped with this highly questionable and still legally untested opinion, the SBS board, without advance notice or consultation with its audience, set about turning SBS television into a fully commercial channel.

In fact, the Zampatti board’s business plan is to turn SBS Television into Australia’s fourth free-to-air commercial channel.

Don’t take my word for it. An eagle-eyed informant, knowing my aversion to commercialising public broadcasting in Australia, spotted the SBS business strategy in B&T, the advertising industry magazine.

On January 17, just as SBS was to start broadcasting ads through its new hour-long news, documentaries, feature films and other programs, B&T told the advertising and marketing industry that SBS was out “to position SBS as Australia’s fourth commercial network”.

B&T quoted SBS commercial director Richard Finlayson: “We have tended to fly under the radar and people just have not taken us seriously. Our long-term agenda is that we do not want people to just think about the three commercial networks but SBS as well. We are now taking a more aggressive approach to communicating our message and particularly with building our relationships with key media.”

The Zampatti board has embarked on this fully commercial business plan with the informal agreement of the Howard government that appointed it.

Again, this fundamental change to the role and funding of SBS within the broadcast media was not in the ruling Liberal Party’s 2004 election manifesto.

The Howard government has no mandate from the Australian people to do this. The communications minister, Helen Coonan, says advertising within programs at SBS is a matter for the “independent” SBS board. But when the other commercial television networks realise what is in play, the minister, and undoubtedly the prime minister, will suffer the wrath of those competing in a now very tight free-to-air TV advertising market. Was it government policy to impose a fourth fully commercial television channel by stealth when Coonan’s recently announced media reforms ruled out such a channel?

The Zampatti board will say that the Special Broadcasting Service Act caps advertising at just five minutes an hour, unlike Seven, Nine and Ten, which can broadcast up to 15 minutes an hour. But after bludgeoning the SBS audience with in-program advertising and achieving their reluctant acceptance, it is only a matter of time before the board seeks the removal of the cap.

The ethnic communities of Australia, for which SBS was created by the Fraser government (1975-83), have almost given up on SBS. With its ratings-chasing programming in sport and the replacement of all foreign language programming with English language programs in prime time, SBS seems to have abandoned its original charter to enhance its commercial revenue. It is now rejigging its news and current affairs output to adopt a more “commercial feel”.

There needs to be an important reassessment of the future of SBS. The taxpayers of Australia, who have invested ten of millions of dollars each year in SBS, should be consulted. The ABC would have a stronger case to merge with SBS and take on its multicultural charter obligations through the internet, digital multi-channel free-to-air television and digital radio, if the ABC were not already infected with the commercial virus. This virus has been injected into its veins by the Howard government through the [Maurice] Newman board.

The Newman board has restructured the ABC divisions, replacing ABC Enterprises (which manages ABC Shops and other related products) with what it is calling ABC Commercial.

With the ABC Act expressly prohibiting advertising on ABC radio and television, ABC Commercial wants to construct a new business plan around cybercast advertising on ABC Online. Broadcasting is rapidly morphing into cybercasting. If you miss tonight’s edition of The 7.30 Report, ABC TV News, or any other ABC copyright program, soon you will be able to go to your computer and play the full digital video at any time. People are already watching the popular The Chaser’s War on Everything and Four Corners’ broadband editions through their internet.

There is nothing in the ABC Act to prevent the Newman board from inserting advertising in and around this content.

The spirit of the ABC Act, drafted in 1983 before the internet was invented, is clearly against advertising. But the board has helpful legal advice that because the act is silent on internet advertising, there is nothing in the act to prevent cybercast advertising. (Lawyers. Don’t you just love ’em?)

Again the Howard government, through Coonan, says it is a matter for the ABC board. But the government has no mandate from the Australian people to distort the existing funding base of the ABC and, through the commercial imperative this will create, its very purpose.

Public broadcasters view their audiences as citizens in a democracy to be informed, engaged and challenged through innovative, high-quality and comprehensive programming, not as consumers to be delivered up to advertisers.

Both the ABC and SBS boards will say enhanced commercial returns will mean more Australian programming. This is superficially attractive. But what sort of programming? Mark Scott, the ABC’s new managing director, is a former editorial director of John Fairfax Holdings Ltd. We are told his Fairfax experience demonstrates that it is possible to separate church and state – editorial from commercial. This was rubbish at Fairfax and will be rubbish at the ABC. Just read Fred Hilmer’s book, The Fairfax Experience (Wrightbooks, $32.95).

Hilmer, the former Fairfax chief executive (and Scott’s mentor), set about transforming The Sydney Morning Herald and the other papers with multipleadvertorial sections and high-gloss magazines and inserts, getting maximum display advertising bang for the distribution buck. In the process Hilmer squeezed the space available for and investment in news and quality journalism. The revenue imperative (the state) overruled editorial (the church).

Fairfax now allows advertising stickers to obliterate its front-page headline. Did the editor ever object, at least to symbolically protect the paper’s editorial integrity on behalf of readers who buy the paper for its news?

Cybercast advertising at the ABC will be self-defeating. When push comes to shove in the pre-Budget Cabinet expenditure review committee, treasury advisers will monitor the ABC’s commercial revenue and downwardly adjust the taxpayer appropriation accordingly.

We now await the federal election campaign with interest. The future of public broadcasting should be on the agenda so that the Australian public can at least feel it is being consulted about its taxpayer investment in this sector.

The ABC board should have a transition strategy in the event that, as the polls now consistently indicate, there is a change of government. It should be telling the public just what the ABC can do for Australia through the digital free-to-air multi-channel and broadband revolution.

The ABC could have an ABC Education division with a free-to-air English and other languages channel, a technical and further education channel, a dedicated Australian-made children’s channel and other nation-building services which exploit this extraordinary and exciting technology. But the new chairman has not said “boo” on any important topic of strategic importance to the ABC since his appointment last year.

The current ABC board cannot be relied on to advocate the cause of independent public broadcasting. It is in an ideological and party-political bog. If it is out to destroy the so-called ABC culture; introducing advertising on the ABC should do the trick.
The current threat is insidious.

Our minds must be clear. Labor policy announced this month is to prohibit cybercast advertising, stop the party-political stack of the ABC board and restore the staff-elected director position in the ABC Act. This is most welcome in an institution which has been under sustained ideological attack and vilification for more than a decade. But it is also hard to forget that under the Hawke/Keating governments 1983-1996 the ABC was substantially defunded. Pressure must be maintained on any incoming Rudd Labor government to rebuild the ABC’s creative capacity and to protect the multicultural purpose of SBS.

In this regard, we need to know exactly what Kevin Rudd and Rupert Murdoch discussed at their New York meeting in April. Murdoch does not give photo ops to wannabe prime ministers without securing policy undertakings or, more euphemistically, understandings.

Murdoch would want extended indefinitely the outrageous regulatory protections for his 25 per cent share in the now highly profitable Foxtel pay-TV. He’d also be seeking ways in which he and James Packer could wrest the other 50 per cent of Foxtel away from Telstra without having to pay an extortionate price. He would also want the ABC to be further marginalised, just as public broadcasting is marginalised in the US.

Where would public broadcasting stand in the event of a change of government in Canberra? Please let us know, Mr Rudd. In the meantime, those who want the ABC to survive as an adequately funded, independent, mainstream and non-commercial public broadcaster will have to fight hard.

We must never get tired.

~~~~~~

Quentin Dempster is a journalist, author and ABC broadcaster. In June 2006 he was elected to the ABC board as staff-elected director. The position was subsequently abolished by the Howard government. Due to format compatibility SaveOurSBS has not included the cartoons by Lindsay Foyle who is a pocket cartoonist for The Australian. The original story with the cartoons can be viewed at Walkley Magazine.

Your Comments

You may like to comment on this topic.

Please submit any material that you write in English only.

Sign the petition to protect SBS, stop the ads and maintain our multicultural public broadcaster funded fully by government. Click http://petition.saveoursbs.org and wait while you are redirected to the petition server.

SaveOurSBS

Having seen it at the cinema I was wondering how SBS would treat it with ads. Well, to SBS’s credit they ran it without any breaks. If ever there was a program that lacked natural breaks, of course this was it.

SBS did “bookend” the film with about 4 or five ads at each end. Although this film was treated with respect, unfortunately it seems that many others are not.

Thanks for the site … G

After the departure of Margaret & David from SBS, the Movie Show took a short break from the small screen and later returned however with different presenters and a slightly altered format. The ‘new-look’ Movie Show remained as a half-hour show.

It now seems that the SBS-TV audience did not take as well to that ‘new-look’. As SBS is now more focused on ratings and the advertising dollar, SBS have done all but flick the show.

The Movie Show on SBS is now a 10 minute fill-in type show amounting to not much more than an advertorial for the Movie Show web site. And guess what is on their web site? Ads of course. Lots of them.

Is this proof that SBS are now simply using a TV show merely to generate income?

I preferred SBS-TV as it was for many years, when the ads were between programs only. However I believe that SBS, being a public tax-payer funded broadcaster, should not be allowed to run any advertisements at all. None! The current management could easily revert to their previous policy of only running ads between programs and not in them.

Look at what SBS has done to the Movie Show. Once you start to carry ads, the whole equation changes, forever.

In my opinion it would seem that the current management of SBS are no longer truly committed to the notion of what a public broadcaster should be. I am not impressed!

This documentary series had 3 breaks for advertisements & promos . The breaks were not natural. All of the breaks looked forced to me.

In the series “Cutting Edge” SBS televised the BBC program “The Prisoner: How I Planned To Kill Tony Blair” Tuesday 9 Jan 2007. The program began at 8:34pm.

8:34 PM program started.
8:52 PM 1st advertisement break.
9:05 PM 2nd advertisement break.
9:19 PM 3rd advertisement break.
9:35 PM program finished.

According to the end credits this program was produced by the BBC.

The BBC does not make programs formatted for commercial break interruptions.

The documentary maker of this production chose to use a chapter and verse ‘book-style’ of story telling to tell this story. Hence the program consisted of a number of chapters and it seemed to me that SBS “forced” the breaks at the end of certain chapters.

This approach taken by SBS-TV may have worked if the documentary maker had cut the program with an altered pace where SBS inserted the breaks. Of course the documentary maker did not use the chapter and verse ‘book-style’ as some sort of cue for commercial interruption. Hence the breaks looked unnatural in their placement.

The idea of dividing the program into chapters was a very clever approach to bring the viewer into the experience of the danger and suspense that was being experienced and told. Obviously the idea was for the audience to be placed into the same situation as the story being told. The point of view of no relief, no letting up, being trapped and without a break. No rest. As such this program was never supposed to take a break (for commercials) as that would and did destroy the very portrayal of what the program was about.

All the breaks in this program looked like “forced” breaks.

The problem was that this program was never supposed to be ‘paused’ for interruptions at these, or any other points.

As the program was slowly paced and required a great deal of concentration it took a long while after each commercial break to establish pace of the program again. On every occasion just when it seemed the pace was almost established, bang, suddenly another commercial break. Even the presentation to air looked abrupt with the unsightly, oversized font, lower screen program name graphic supered over the program picture which then suddenly cut to the full screen “CUTTING EDGE” high chrominance graphic (bearing no resemblance to the actual program style or the fonts used in it). This was followed a second later by a fast and abrupt fade to black and into the first commercial spot at the head of the break(s). Actually each break began with a promo but it was just as intrusive as an ad!

In my opinion all the breaks were suitably placed by SBS to totally destroy the timing and the dramatic real-life events. Hence all the breaks looked very unnatural. SBS paid no attention to the viewer experience or it seems the documentary makers method of telling a rather chilling story.

If SBS ‘force’ the ad breaks into the program, how can they then say that the ad breaks were ‘natural’? Isn’t that a contradiction in terms?