Overview of regulations for children's broadcasting

There are many arguments for regulating the programming of television where it is aimed at, or potentially viewed by children. A couple of good summaries are here and here. Given the ease that issues surrounding children can be used politically, I’m surprised the ACMA/ABA haven’t issued reams of guidelines and codes. They have, however, provided the Children’s Television Standards (CTS), which need to be met as a licencing condition for Australian television broadcasters. "The objective of the CTS is to ensure that children have access to a variety of quality television programs made specifically for them, including Australian drama and non-drama programs."

The CTS appears to be reviewed and updated regularly (see here and here). Perhaps this is not surprising as it has been observed:

The quality of children's programming on commercial television has been a major issue since the commencement of television in Australia. The basic policy position with regard to children and television has been as follows:

• Children are entitled to be provided with quality, age specific and comprehensive programs geared to their special cognitive abilities and experiences;
• It is part of the public interest responsibility of commercial television licensees to provide such programs;
• Children, like adults, are entitled to a viewing choice and are entitled to the diversity of ideas and information that is central to broadcasting policy; and
• Commercial television has unparalleled access and large resources to reach young viewers, and licensees cannot expect to pass their responsibilities to the child audience to other outlets.

As a result the CTS outlines the ACMA/ABA must classify children’s programming before broadcast and; commercial broadcasters are required to meet minimum annual quotas of material in two classifications: 260 hours of children’s programs (C) and 130 hours of pre-school programs (P). C programs must include at least 32 hours of Australian children’s drama, 25 of which must be first release – meaning it is new content.

I am given the impression the ACMA/ABA establishes screening times for children’s programming through codes of practice, such as this (dated) one from the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations.

The CTS details acceptable advertising within programming for children, including their content, classification, ratio to programming and frequency. The ACMA/ABA also enforce the classification of advertising within periods that may be viewed by children, such as weekend sporting broadcasts as shown in this recent news release.

In July 2004 the ACMA/ABA established tighter regulations for advertising aimed at children, particularly food and beverages, in response to extended criticism from community and health groups.

From what I've seen compiling this brief summary, I expect the CTS is effective in maintaining community expectations of children's broadcasting - especially given the frequency of revisions the document appears to undergo.

Overview of Australian television code(s) of practice

The Australian television industry broadcasts following guidelines established by the Federal Government in the Broadcasting Services Act. These broadcasters are considered to self-regulate their programming by operating within the Code of Practice established by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA, formerly the Australian Broadcast Authority, ABA. I’ll refer to both as they still seem to be in the process of changing over).

This system is better described as co-regulation as the television industry follows agreed guidelines that are developed through consultation. The broadcasters can establish their own codes of practice and register them with the AMCA/ABA, such as those of the ABC and SBS, but the ACMA/ABA ultimately establishes standards with respect to particular matters. It is worth noting they can amend a code of practice “and whilst its breach attracts no ‘penalty’, the ABA may nevertheless impose conditions on the issue and/or renewal of licences.”

Professor David Flint, former Chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Authority, has said

The Australian system of co-regulation brings the regulation of broadcasting closer to the self-regulation the print media enjoys. Is this not more consistent to the standards of a democratic society, one where the various forms of media are converging?

He noted this relies on the power the AMCA/ABA has to regulate where codes of practice are lacking but he was satisfied the system operated successfully through comparison with attitudinal studies undertaken by the AMCA/ABA.

It is interesting Professor Flint thought complaints are not the best method to gauge community standards, suggesting they are not necessarily typical or representative. Complaints are, however, a democratic method for viewers to take issue with broadcasting.

Under this system of co-regulation complaints from viewers are directed to the offending station. They must be made in writing and within 30 days of the offending broadcast. The broadcaster then has 60 days to reply to your complaint. If they do not do this or you are unhappy with their response you are then encouraged to raise the issue with the ACMA/ABA, forwarding copies of any correspondence.

This system of regulation is not without critics. My view, not unlike Professor Flint, is it relies on a certain sort of person to pursue a complaint if they have to put it in writing. In recent years some complaints by politicians have been given discussion in the media, such as the 68 complaints made by former Senator Richard Alston, then Minister for Communications – the portfolio that oversaw the ABA. On that occasion the ABC’s Independent Complaint Review Executive dismissed all but two of these complaints:

It found the two instances were one of: "speculative reporting" and the second, a "tendency towards sarcasm" However, the review found 'AM' reported "reliably and competently" over 30 days of war coverage and that none of the Minister's complaints amounted to evidence of systemic anti-American or anti-coalition and partisan reporting.

An example of where the ACMA/ABA has acted in response to a broadcaster not responding to a complaint can be found here.