logo
Is this the end of free-to-air TV? A veteran weighs in

Is this the end of free-to-air TV? A veteran weighs in

Fitz: I can't believe he said that!
Meakin: He did say that, and when Kerry Packer saw it, he was outraged, and we were promptly summoned into his offices in Park Street, and bawled out for discussing virginity in prime time. We defended it, and the argument turned on him not wanting eight minutes of that rubbish on his channel. I said, 'It wasn't eight minutes, Mr Packer'. He said, 'Well, how much was it?' I said, 'It was five minutes, 29 seconds'. He insisted it was eight and took a bet that he was right, and when an executive emerged from the next office with a stopwatch, and it was 5 minutes and 29 seconds, I won. So Kerry gave me a $10 note because I'd won the bet, and we were given a lift back to Channel Nine in his chauffeur-driven Mercedes. And that was Packer; he used to sound off on a number of occasions, and ring up to object to a story, but if you held your ground he'd generally back you, and mutter 'over-ruled again'.
Fitz: At Mike Willesee 's funeral you told a great story of the A Current Affair host standing his ground against Packer?
Meakin: Yes, we ran a promo for a story which covered the infamous 'Goanna' allegations about Packer being involved in organised crime – for which he was subsequently completely exonerated – but straight after the promo went to air, we got a furious phone call from his legal adviser – one Malcolm Turnbull – threatening to sack everyone if the story went ahead. So I advised Mr Willesee that we'd had this call, and what Kerry and Malcolm were threatening. And Willesee said, 'Tell Kerry, if he doesn't like the story, he can sue himself'. We ran the story.
Fitz: All right, well back to the present day, and this week has seen major news shows The Project, which you were heavily involved with, and the ABC's Q&A bite the dust. As a serious question, and you're better qualified than anybody to answer, what is going on?
Loading
Meakin: No show – or very few shows – last forever. I mean, Four Corners and 60 Minutes have been around forever, and probably will be around forever, but everything else seems to have a shelf life, and that's been the case since, since [Christ] played fullback for Jerusalem. Television programs are like restaurants. For a long while, you can't get in because there's such a waiting list, and then all of a sudden people are over it, and no one comes there any more. So you can't necessarily read too much into it.
Fitz: Sure. But as one who loved Q&A, and whose wife was on The Project, I've followed it closely. We can all see that the ratings of these shows have fallen off a cliff in the last few years. Why?
Meakin: Because audiences for most TV shows have fallen off a cliff. People aren't into free-to-air television the way they used to be.
Fitz: This is my point. You and I have children who have certainly heard of free-to-air television but never liked the sound of it, and there's now whole swaths of the population that simply don't watch FTA television at all. Is that what we are witnessing? Are these major programs being axed the death-throes of free-to-air television?
Meakin: That's overstating it. But you know, times are certainly very tough, and really tough for the people who've lost their jobs. And I particularly feel for those I worked with at The Project because they're friends, and in some cases they're finer professionals than many I've worked with at some of the most high-flying programs in Australian TV history.
Fitz: Hopefully, most of them will find their way to the new investigative show Ten has announced, 10 News +. Do you have confidence that it will work?
Meakin: Well, I applaud them for trying. I think whether it works or not is going to depend on the level it's resourced and, as you know, Channel 10 does not have the reputation of throwing money around. They're not in a position to throw money around. But if it's well resourced, fine. As for the investigative angle, that can be very costly ...
Fitz: [ Wryly. ] I've heard it said.
Meakin: But it can be very powerful. I know that some people have been arguing that The Project 's reputation was damaged by the Brittany Higgins interview. Well, I reckon if they – and we – had done more investigative news stories like that, the program would still be there. Against that, while I love investigative journalism, it's hard to raise a business argument for it when it can cost so much money to pursue – and then defend.
Fitz: Way back when I got to know you in the early '90s at the Nine Network, the dictum for news was, 'If it bleeds, it leads'. These days, particularly with radio and TV, it seems to me to be, 'If it hates, it rates'.
Meakin: I don't know about that. That's not a saying I've ever espoused.
Fitz: I know you never did! I just invented it, to summate a lot of what seems to rate well in this age of social media, and for stuff to go viral, which seems to be the constant end game.
Meakin: Oh well, they used to say 'Divide the nation and multiply the ratings', so there's nothing new under the sun, and yes, there are certainly a lot of people here generating conflict, but that's not just in the radio studio or on television.
I mean, a lot of it is coming from places like the White House, where from Trump and Musk just about everything that comes out of their mouth is mendacious. And instead of some of the media doing its job to call out the lies, they put them to air unchallenged, which sees a lot of people believing them. And then when the media does tell the truth, Trump calls them all 'fake news', whereupon his followers then hate the media – and instead go to the sources which can reinforce their prejudice.
Fitz: That is indeed the age we're in. What can the serious media do about it?
Meakin: At the risk of sounding like an old fart, we of the media have got to keep jealously guarding what little reputation we have left, and deliver the news straight, unbiased and as honestly as we possibly can – and hope that the people will come back, as that is precisely what is needed now, and everyone is starting to recognise it.
Fitz: Which brings us to the demise of Q&A, which seemed to me to be a textbook example of how you take a seriously successful show and drive it into the ground, changing formats, changing timeslots, changing hosts every year or two – or even less – and playing it safe with too-often dull guests. Do you agree?
Loading
Meakin: I found it 'worthy'. And when you call a program worthy, it's both a compliment and an insult – but the bottom line is that not enough people found it worthy in a good way. But the first thing to say is the show's been around for 18 years and has had a bloody good innings. But a lot of questions, in my view, sounded very stilted and rehearsed. When it truly worked, there were people in authority answering tough questions. That's not happening any more. And I note here, the ABC's explanation for it being cancelled: 'It's time to rethink how audiences want to interact and to evolve how we can engage with the public, to include as many Australians as possible in national conversations.' Well, there's a bureaucratic gob-full if ever I heard one!
Fitz: What would Kerry Packer do, if he had control of programs like The Project and Q&A in this situation?
Meakin: Kerry, God bless him, wasn't blessed with patience. And he didn't like being beaten. So I suspect he would have sacked an executive producer or two and demanded changes to the format before pulling the pin. Fixing a failing program isn't easy. The causes are inevitably a matter of debate. The solutions can be cruel and may not work. So it's often easier to wield the axe.
Fitz: When Q&A debuted in 2008 it was one of the first to harness Twitter, so the audience could make commentary on it in real time, building a live buzz and with it an audience that would start to tune in. These days, social media seems to be having the opposite effect?
Meakin: Well, I think social media has made it very hard for people to be opinionated on television. And what's the point of making a stand or expressing an opinion honestly held when, within seconds, half the population is going to want to decapitate you?
Fitz: You do what I do. You don't read 99.9 per cent of it, and you pity the poor bastards with such tiny lives that they have nothing better to do with their time than emit anonymous toxic farts in the Twitter wind.
Meakin: That's what Waleed did – declined to read any social media at all – and right now, he doesn't seem to have a gig. But he is too good not to have one soon. It will go on. There will always be a need for media people like him. They just need the right format and platform.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions
Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions

Sydney Morning Herald

timean hour ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions

Washington: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spent all day telling TV interviewers that high-stakes negotiations to end a war are best done behind closed doors. Then his boss opened Truth Social. Rubio was doing the rounds on the Sunday morning political talk shows, politely declining invitations to reveal what was sought from Russian President Vladimir Putin when he met US President Donald Trump in Alaska, or what Putin was willing to give up, if anything. 'These peace deals, these peace agreements and negotiations, they don't work when they're conducted in the media, either through leaks or through lies,' Rubio told This Week on ABC. 'They don't work if you go out and say aggressive and abrasive things about one side or the other – because then they just walk away.' On CBS' Face the Nation, he said: 'We're not going to negotiate this in the media … There's no conditions that can be imposed on Ukraine. They're going to have to accept things, but they're going to have to get things, too.' Loading And on Fox Business, Rubio said: 'If one side gets everything they want, that's not a peace deal. It's called surrender. And I don't think this is a war that's going to end any time soon on the basis of surrender.' All told, Rubio was clear and consistent throughout his major television appearances. This was a difficult negotiation between two warring parties that were not inclined to make concessions, he said. The US was doing its best to mediate a conflict it was not directly involved in, and meeting Putin was not a sin – in fact, it was crucial, and Trump was the only one who could do it. He actually made a fairly persuasive case about the realities of diplomacy and the need to give it a chance. But then on Sunday night (Monday AEST), Rubio was majorly undercut by his boss when Trump – amid a burst of social media activity – put Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on notice.

Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions
Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions

The Age

timean hour ago

  • The Age

Ahead of crucial meeting, Trump and Rubio pull in opposite directions

Washington: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spent all day telling TV interviewers that high-stakes negotiations to end a war are best done behind closed doors. Then his boss opened Truth Social. Rubio was doing the rounds on the Sunday morning political talk shows, politely declining invitations to reveal what was sought from Russian President Vladimir Putin when he met US President Donald Trump in Alaska, or what Putin was willing to give up, if anything. 'These peace deals, these peace agreements and negotiations, they don't work when they're conducted in the media, either through leaks or through lies,' Rubio told This Week on ABC. 'They don't work if you go out and say aggressive and abrasive things about one side or the other – because then they just walk away.' On CBS' Face the Nation, he said: 'We're not going to negotiate this in the media … There's no conditions that can be imposed on Ukraine. They're going to have to accept things, but they're going to have to get things, too.' Loading And on Fox Business, Rubio said: 'If one side gets everything they want, that's not a peace deal. It's called surrender. And I don't think this is a war that's going to end any time soon on the basis of surrender.' All told, Rubio was clear and consistent throughout his major television appearances. This was a difficult negotiation between two warring parties that were not inclined to make concessions, he said. The US was doing its best to mediate a conflict it was not directly involved in, and meeting Putin was not a sin – in fact, it was crucial, and Trump was the only one who could do it. He actually made a fairly persuasive case about the realities of diplomacy and the need to give it a chance. But then on Sunday night (Monday AEST), Rubio was majorly undercut by his boss when Trump – amid a burst of social media activity – put Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky on notice.

Government working toward helping banned Meta users raise complaints
Government working toward helping banned Meta users raise complaints

ABC News

time3 hours ago

  • ABC News

Government working toward helping banned Meta users raise complaints

Anfas Azad spent six years and more than $80,000 in digital ads building an Instagram page for his online jewellery business, which he operated from Brisbane. In July, he was banned from all Meta-owned platforms for allegedly breaching its community standards. Over 6,000 of his followers were gone in an instant. Without a retail store or other means of interacting with potential customers, Mr Azad essentially lost his livelihood. "A jewellery business is all about trust, and to see years of work just crumble for no clear reason or fault of your own is devastating." Instagram said Mr Azad breached Meta's standards on child exploitation, abuse and nudity, but it did not say which post or actions breached the platform's rules. "It's a very serious issue and I haven't done anything as such," he said. "I still don't know what exactly happened … It's embarrassing and it's insulting." Mr Azad is one of dozens of Australian users to have contacted the ABC to say they were falsely accused of breaching Meta's standards — including its child abuse rules. Many say their businesses were up-ended and their personal lives were deeply affected, but there is no functional way of appealing the account bans because users are directed to automated processing systems. The Australian government has responded by saying it has taken steps to address the way major digital providers operating in Australia handle internal disputes. The ABC understands that the Australian government wrote to the Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI) and major digital platform providers operating in Australia in February 2024. It requested a voluntary internal dispute resolution (IDR) code to help users raise issues and get better outcomes, including with regard to the loss of their online accounts. An IDR code is a set of guidelines — voluntarily agreed to by industry members — for handling complaints. "The Australian Government is working with the Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI) and major digital platform providers operating in Australia on a voluntary internal dispute resolution code to help users raise issues and get better outcomes, including loss of accounts," a government spokesperson said. It is understood that Australia's digital industry association is in the process of finalising this code, and the government will monitor the outcomes of this process. In the meantime, banned users like Mr Azad feel helpless. "What can I do? There's nobody to speak to, there's nobody to contact," he said. "This could happen to absolutely anyone, and there is no protection. Meta seems to be above the law. "I don't think it should be allowed for business pages to just be taken down like that." Users across the globe have also raised this issue, with nearly 37,000 people signing a petition blaming Meta's "broken AI enforcement systems" of wrongfully banning accounts. They say the only way to speak to a human is to pay for Meta Verified, and even then, many say the support team is unhelpful. Desperate to speak to a customer representative, Mr Azad said he contacted Meta's marketing department, but they stone-walled him. "They simply said, 'There's nothing we can do, this is not our department, we are only in charge of advertising,'" he said. "And when I asked who do I contact to explain my situation, they said, 'Sorry, there is nothing we can do, we are only in advertising,' and they don't redirect you to anyone. "The irony is, even though they are human beings, they speak to you in a loop like robots." Meta acknowledged in July that a "technical problem" had caused the wrongful suspensions of some Facebook groups, but it denied its platforms were more widely affected. A spokesperson did not answer previous ABC questions about why it wrongly accused another Australian user of violating its policies. Within hours of the ABC contacting the company about the case, Meta reinstated the banned account. The ABC has contacted Meta again about Mr Azad's case. The tech giant has not commented on claims that Meta's AI is to blame for unfairly banning people. Instagram states AI is central to its "content review process," and Meta has outlined how technology and humans enforce its policies. In July, Meta said it was taking "aggressive action" on accounts breaking its rules. It reported the removal of about 635,000 Instagram and Facebook accounts for sexualised images or comments related to children under 13. Meta's wide-ranging policy on child sexual exploitation has changed three times since December 2024. Mr Azad's Instagram account was disabled on July 18, which coincides with one of the dates the company made amendments to its policy. Meta has not said what impact, if any, these changes had on the cases the ABC has raised with it.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store