Book Notes: "Homage to Catalonia" by George Orwell

Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


I received this book as a gift at around the same time as I had started Hemingway's "The Fifth Column and Four Stories of the Spanish Civil War". I must say I was impressed by Orwell's (or should I say Blair's) writing style as it seemed very distant from 1984. I found it difficult to put Homage down despite being very busy with work and other pressing issues. Nevertheless, I intend to explore the rest of Orwell's work. It is a real shame that he died at such a young age. One can only wonder whether such genius had more to offer or otherwise simply ran out of steam. Regardless, I am rather grateful for being gifted such an important work.



View all my reviews

From: The Conversation: Archaic cross-media ownership laws won't save local content

© Depositphotos.com/@marzolino

Communication minister Malcolm Turnbull’s proposal for changes to cross-media ownership laws has reignited calls for the government to protect local content.

On the surface, it appears reasonable to expect government to regulate for the provision of local news coverage. Indeed, Nationals leader Warren Truss wants to ensure that “genuine localism” is maintained should there be any changes to cross-media ownership laws.

With Australia’s population concentrated in the larger metropolitan regions, “the bush” is rarely seen as a profitable market for commercial media operators, hence the assumption that government should intervene. But are traditional concerns about content versus carriage relevant in the NBN era?

Content is one thing…

Nine Network chief David Gyngell has labelled Australia’s media ownership laws “archaic”, arguing media companies will struggle to invest in their local news content without the ability to expand beyond the current level limited by the law.

Commonly referred to as the “two out of three rule”, ownership of more than two of either television, radio or newspaper services in a given region is prohibited. And no individual provider is permitted to reach more than 75% of the population. Further, regional free-to-air broadcasters are required to provide local media content throughout Tasmania, and regional areas of NSW, Queensland and Victoria. It is likely that any consolidation of existing media interests will signal the end of regional broadcasters WIN TV, Prime Television and Southern Cross. But will this mean the end of local content?

Carriage is another…

When you can access global content via NBN, the distinction between television, radio and newspaper will no longer matter. And how can you limit a provider’s online reach? Improvements to broadband, driven by the NBN, enable global content to be consumed ubiquitously. Consequently, restricting cross-media ownership for the sake of parochial interests will only assist global competitors. Existing ownership rules restrict the business models available to local firms.

With global competition, it is folly to think that government can legislate for localism. Today, major portions of content on television and online are actually generated by consumers (famously labelled “prosumers” by Alvin Toffler in 1980). However, old-school localism is substantially one-sided.

The former Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chief Graeme Samuel argues the issues of carriage and content are being confused. If there is demand for local media content, then the market will deliver it. This view reflects the global trend towards the reconvergence of the communications industries that were deliberately segregated during the 19th century.

The concept of the common carrier emerged to ensure telegraph operators could not control the distribution of news stories to newspapers. Obviously, regulating carriage in an era where television, radio and newspaper content can all be delivered via the internet is rather passé.

Part of the cross-ownership legacy is the way we watch television. Many lounge rooms are dominated by a television. Consequently, free-to-air programs remain popular as it is comfortable to simply sit down and watch TV. But devices such as the XBox and Telstra T-Box enable online content from global providers (such as Youtube and Netflix) to be watched in the same manner. This means the government’s ability to protect local content through regulation will be increasingly over-stated as online content becomes part of our ingrained habit of consuming television programming. Indeed, the government has indicated it is unwilling to prevent Australians from accessing legitimate services from overseas providers.

Defining localism

Often neglected in this debate is whether localism ever existed in the first place. Until the 1990s, regional areas such as Queensland’s far north had only two local television stations. Local, yes, but hardly diverse. And viewers had virtually no ability to participate in the development of local content. Localism is much more than simply requiring commercial television stations to provide local news services. Which begs the question: what is “genuine localism”?

Broadband services certainly enable greater consumer participation in news media production. And the rise of Facebook and Twitter have seen changes in the ways that news media content is consumed.

Discrete groups of like-minded individuals sharing information via social networks would be the closest thing to a “genuine” localism. But how any Australian media provider can compete in this global space with one of its three “arms” tied behind its back is anybody’s guess.

The traditionally separate news media carriage services do not have the influential power they once had. The reach of news media services is not restricted by the type of infrastructure used. These older telecommunications and broadcasting networks were necessarily controlled by national governments and regulating content was much more practicable. The reconvergence of news media services, facilitated by NBN, makes the cross-ownership laws increasingly irrelevant.

Social networks transform the traditional top-down localism of television programming to a more participatory localism driven by consumers. This further erodes the relevance of Australia’s cross-ownership laws.

There are valid concerns for the regions that market failure may prevent local commercial news service delivery. But equally, regionally-focused companies with markets demarcated by outmoded ideas about communications technologies will not help.

Placing restrictions on cross-media ownership where the distinction no longer exists is hardly the recipe for a commercially viable and internationally competitive communications industry. Ideas about localism need to change too if the advantages of reconvergence are to be realised by Australian media companies. Indeed, regulating for localism may well benefit overseas competitors rather than the people it was designed to serve.

Michael de Percy does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The Tragedy of the Television Network: You can't legislate localism

© Depositphotos.com/@lunamarina

In today's Australian newspaper, Communication Minister Malcolm Turnbull's attempt to bring about media reform has met the usual calls for protecting local content. In Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss' words, "genuine localism" needs to be protected so that "local content, diversity and local presence" are not eroded.

Having experienced "genuine localism" in Canada's very diverse and locally-driven communications industry, I find it difficult to see how government can create "genuine localism" here in Australia.  Legislating localism is a purely Australian approach to politics and much of this stems from the Federal Government's centralising tendency which has snowballed since federation over a century ago. But what does "genuine localism" mean?

In the media regulation space, Levy (2003) referred to problems of conducting research on policies relating to competition, diversity, and localism and the impact of new media on traditional media. At the time of Levy's speech, many of the now-popular social media sites were inaccessible to most Australians, either because the sites were yet to be created or otherwise a lack of access to broadband which enables a full multi-media Internet experience. Since then, of course, the impact of new media on traditional media has been significant.

Levy (2003) mentions research that determines how people actually use traditional and new media as an important metric for media regulation. In the reinvigorated Australian media ownership debate, there has been little debate about the impact of new media on localism, with an entrenched belief that somehow local television and radio stations are uniquely placed to "fix" such policy problems and restore localism to communities. But that still does not help us understand what is meant by localism.

In examining different approaches to development, Mohan & Stokke (2000) consider the extent that localism dominates opposing views of how best to develop society. In particular, they point out that "revised neoliberalism and post-Marxism share... a belief that states or markets cannot and should not be solely responsible for ensuring social equality and welfare growth". However, each opposing extreme differs in the impact of "top-down" (revised neoliberal) versus "bottom-up" (post-Marxian) approaches to institutional reform. The former suggests that state agencies and community organisations can enable greater participation whereas the latter suggests an approach which represents "a challenge to hegemonic interests within the state and the market" (Mohan & Stokke 2000: 249). The important point for the discussion here is that an attempt to "valoris[e] the local over the general" may well be a consequence of a "political space" that has been either "imagined" or "constructed" over time. Indeed, the National Party's platform of protecting rural Australia is a value widely shared in the community, as can be seen in the recent government and charitable initiatives for farmers suffering from drought. Car manufacturers were not so fortunate.

Defensive localism may be considered a by-product of an imagined or constructed political space. For instance, the growing trend towards the purchasing of organically-produced food is often conflated with purchasing locally-grown food products which may or may not be organic. Such localism, Winter's (2003: 29) research suggests, is largely "an ideology of localism based on sympathy for farmers" rather than necessarily a demand for higher-quality produce. Localism, then, may be considered an ideal rather than a reality in a national policy context.

Pratchett's (2004: 358) identification of three different conceptualisations of local autonomy is relevant here: "as freedom from central interference; as freedom to effect particular outcomes; and as the reflection of local identity". In an age where, increasingly, Toffler's (1980) "prosumer" (a consumer of media content who also participates in the development of such content) is prevalent, regulating traditional media on the basis of a hierarchical top-down media production model denies the contemporary reality of the ability of "prosumers" to participate in media content production. Albeit consumers may provide suggestions for existing television programs such as "Suggest a Story" for Channel 7's Sunrise program (see also Channel 9), this provides only limited participation at the fringes of Australian commercial television news media. Based on Pratchett's conceptualisations, local autonomy, freedom from central interference and freedom to effect particular outcomes are not present, but local television content may indeed reflect some aspects of a local identity.

There are many other studies which further develop the concept of localism but for my purposes here, the concept of localism in Australian news media content (aside from a handful of community television stations such as 31 Digital in Queensland), there are no truly local, as opposed to national, commercial television programs produced in Australia), is based on an imagined or constructed political space that refers, in particular, to the existing regional television networks and the local consumers of such news media. It is quite a normative idea about how things "ought" to be.

Moreover, for Briffault (2000), localism "is not simply a theory intended to advance certain normative goals. It is also a means of protecting the interests of those who receive advantages from the existing governance structure". Yet "genuine localism" would seem to be very much a normative concept: freedom from interference by a central, market-driven news media provider; freedom to participate in the production of local news media content; all the while projecting a sense of local identity. Based on the limitations of traditional media, broadcasting can only continue to reflect the local identity. This is far from ideal and certainly only as genuine as the producers of such content can reflect the diversity of any given community. It follows that such reflections can only be achieved through regulation as there is hardly a market incentive for such an expensive commercial activity.

Which brings me to the "genuine localism" so staunchly defended by the National Party and the difficulties that now face Mr Turnbull. The localism purported to exist in the traditional news media industry is expensive, short-lived, and can only be achieved through regulation. To enable a diverse, professional and commercially successful news media service in Australia - which can compete with the influx of overseas news media that now permeates both traditional and "new" media (to use the somewhat passé term) - requires much more than staunchly defending the status quo that existed in the previous century. But the major difficulty for Turnbull is navigating through "the interests of those who receive advantages from the existing governance structure". Given that the National Party is firmly entrenched in the Coalition, Turnbull's free market ideals will no doubt be reined in by the National's (along with Labor's) default protectionist position.

While there is no clear answer to the Australian media ownership puzzle, the Right's twentieth century policy dilemma - free trade or protectionism - is a fitting backdrop for those who persist with twentieth century views about news media production. You can't legislate localism.

References

Briffault, R. (2000). Localism and regionalism. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=198822.

Levy, J.D. (2003). Statement by Deputy Chief Economist of the Federal Communications Commission to the Conference on Media Diversity and Localism: Meaning Metrics, and the Public Interest, Fordham University, New York, 15-16 December.

Mohan, G. & Stokke, K. (2000). Participatory development and empowerment: the dangers of localism. Third World Quarterly, 21(2), 247-268. doi:10.1080/01436590050004346.

Pratchett, L. (2004). Local Autonomy, Local Democracy and the ‘New Localism’. Political Studies, 52(2), 358-375. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2004.00484.x.

Winter, M. (2003). Embeddedness, the new food economy and defensive localism. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(1), 23–32.