A fourth commercial free-to-air TV network? Should be a no-brainer

The argument also falsely equates quality with cost, and assumes that competitive strategy is always based around cost minimisation. Lower-cost local production has a real ability to connect with audiences if it is done well. A notable example of this is the ABC’s Australian Story series. In late June, almost 1000 people attended a recent event at the Brisbane Sheraton to commemorate those who had appeared on the program, exceeding expectations fourfold and making it the Sheraton’s biggest event for some years. This was on a cold night in Brisbane, among a population that is notoriously reluctant to go out when the temperature drops.

On the digital transition, no set of policy settings could have been less inclined to promote digital TV than those adopted in Australia. This was spotted in the Productivity Commission’s Broadcasting Inquiry Report in 2000, a document quietly shelved by the Howard government but exemplary in its empirical rigour and its willingness to question the orthodoxies of industry insiders.

In an era of rapid technological change, the policy challenge is how to harness the economic gains of innovation for the national good, while minimising any resulting social disruption and disadvantage. The best policy response under such circumstances is to promote competition in order to promote new commercial strategies and maximise adaptiveness to changed circumstances, and to reinforce the necessary social and cultural "safety nets" so as to not weaken one’s own culture or disenfranchise the most disadvantaged sections of the population.

In broadcasting, what should have followed were: policies to promote competition both across and within its market sectors (e.g. competition within free-to-air TV, as well as its competition for audiences with pay TV); bolstering support for the ABC and, to a lesser extent, the SBS as the guarantors of quality programming and local content; and a managed transition to digital TV that promoted its attractiveness to those who could afford to pay, thereby reducing the number of those who may require assistance if there is a future shut-down of the analog signal. In broad terms, this is what has happened in Britain under the Blair Labour government since 1997.

Instead, what has happened in Australia since 1996 has been that the market power of incumbent commercial broadcasters has been reinforced, while public broadcasters have been de-funded. At the same time, new revenue opportunities for the government itself from the sale of new licences have been foregone. In every sense other than the calculus of political advantage from supportive media mates, the decision to go ahead with a fourth commercial free-to-air television licence should be a no-brainer.