FTA soon DOA?
Posted December 30th, 2009 by debritz
It won't be long into the new year until the free-to-air TV network bosses in Australia -- especially those at Channels 9 and 7 -- resume their war of words over who's got the biggest ... er, ratings. But behind the bravado must be the realisation that they're in a business that's shrinking. While their second (and soon third) digital channels will extend their profitability in the short term, the networks will never be the licences to print money they once were. Long gone are the days when a large percentage of the audience would gather around the TV to watch a single program, such as the MASH finale. At least not at the same time and on the same channel. According to blogger David Dale, the biggest TV audience this century was for the Hewitt v Safin Australian Open tennis final in 2005, which scored 4.04 million viewers for Channel 7. That's about one in five of the Australian population. In the previous century, more than 6 million people (one in three Australians) watched Princess Diana's 1997 funeral, her 1981 wedding to Prince Charles and the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games opening and closing ceremonies. But these are among the exceptions rather than the rule. Today an audience of two million -- one in 11 Australians -- is regarded as something to celebrate at the networks. On an average night, perhaps on one in six of us are even watching FTA television. The rest of us are doing something else -- including a growing number who are on computers, some of them (often illegally) downloading exactly what they want to watch and watching it when they please. And that, of course, is the future of what we now call television. The real money will be in the production of shows that people want to watch, however, whenever and wherever they choose to watch them.
PS: The top-rating show on FTA in the US last week -- Sunday Night Football on NBC -- was watched by 19.04 million people. That's only 1/27th of the population. Even allowing for the silly season, it's clear FTA ain't a powerhouse any more.


Brett, I reckon the "Freeview" idea down under is so flawed.
If I were Freeview, I'd promote the content you can't get on pay. I'm not talking about first run Australian drama, and other programs but local city based content. Encourage networks to invest in it, and viewers won't go to pay. Same with the idea of ACMA fast tracking issuing TV licences for the Gold Coast.
Networking ain't luring people to Freeview, If I wanted 15 stations, exactly the same as Sydney I'd get Foxtel, where you have the choice of 100+ stations the same as Sydney.
Local television in the States is a growing medium, as the advent of digital television, has the individual stations (not the networks they affiliate with) using their digital subchannels, for various purposes, from weather, to retro programming. If this strategy was applied to Australia, with the expansion of commercial spectrum to allow for two HD channels (one simulcast, one alternative programming) and three SD channels (one simulcast, and up to two extra SD channels with alternative programming) you could have two national networks (say for 7, the original network both in HD and SD and 7Two in SD and HD), and a local city-exclusive station.
The five channels per commercial licensee, would be a boon, as you'd get a viable competitor to Foxtel, while retaining the local content people tune into, like local news, current affairs and local events.