Presenter: Daniel FeatherstoneGeneral Manager, Indigenous Remote Communications AssociationResearch Masters candidate, Murdoch University

Presenter: Daniel FeatherstoneGeneral Manager, Indigenous Remote Communications AssociationResearch Masters candidate, Murdoch University

Towards a Policy for Remote Indigenous Media and Communications Towards a Policy for Remote Indigenous Media and Communications

• Why won’t the current NBN model address the unmet demand for basic telephony or overcome digital divide issues in remote Indigenous communities?

• Why has Digital Switchover resulted in the abolition of BRACS community TV broadcasting of local language content, and transferred the maintenance costs for the satellite equipment needed to access TV services to households?

• Why did the Indigenous Broadcasting Program reduce to supporting radio broadcast delivery during a critical change period to convergence and multi-platform delivery?

• Why did the introduction of a National Indigenous TV service result in the loss of the Indigenous Community TV service it was intended to build upon, with almost none of the the $80 million of funding to date going to remote producers?

• Why does the primary remote media employment program, the National Jobs Package, pay the same wages for senior broadcasters as new trainees?

• Well intentioned policies, poor outcomes for remote Australia.

• Why won’t the current NBN model address the unmet demand for basic telephony or overcome digital divide issues in remote Indigenous communities?

• Why has Digital Switchover resulted in the abolition of BRACS community TV broadcasting of local language content, and transferred the maintenance costs for the satellite equipment needed to access TV services to households?

• Why did the Indigenous Broadcasting Program reduce to supporting radio broadcast delivery during a critical change period to convergence and multi-platform delivery?

• Why did the introduction of a National Indigenous TV service result in the loss of the Indigenous Community TV service it was intended to build upon, with almost none of the the $80 million of funding to date going to remote producers?

• Why does the primary remote media employment program, the National Jobs Package, pay the same wages for senior broadcasters as new trainees?

• Well intentioned policies, poor outcomes for remote Australia.

Irrunytju (Wingellina) Community

Ngaanyatjarra MediaNgaanyatjarra Media

“Media is one of the most powerful tools for cultural maintenance. We have the choice to empower ourselves and strengthen our sense of identity, cultural ownership and self worth. By making our programs in language we are able to watch and hear the type of programs, stories and music we enjoy. When we hear our own voices on radio and see our faces on TV, it makes us feel proud of who we are.”

(Ng Media Strategic Plan 2003-6)

“Media is one of the most powerful tools for cultural maintenance. We have the choice to empower ourselves and strengthen our sense of identity, cultural ownership and self worth. By making our programs in language we are able to watch and hear the type of programs, stories and music we enjoy. When we hear our own voices on radio and see our faces on TV, it makes us feel proud of who we are.”

(Ng Media Strategic Plan 2003-6)

Began 1992 as Irrunytju Media, based on cultural video recording & community radio

Grew into RIMO supporting 15 RIBS (BRACS) communities with a range of programs:

• regional radio broadcasting• video & TV production• training & employment• IT access facilities & training• music development • language / cultural programs• cultural events & music festivals• telecommunications• technical services• archiving• regional coordination and support

Began 1992 as Irrunytju Media, based on cultural video recording & community radio

Grew into RIMO supporting 15 RIBS (BRACS) communities with a range of programs:

• regional radio broadcasting• video & TV production• training & employment• IT access facilities & training• music development • language / cultural programs• cultural events & music festivals• telecommunications• technical services• archiving• regional coordination and support

Pilbara and Kimberley Aboriginal

Media

Pilbara and Kimberley Aboriginal

Media

Top End Aboriginal Bush Broadcasting AssociationTop End Aboriginal Bush Broadcasting Association

Pitjantjatjara Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Yankunytjatjara

MediaMedia

Central Australian Central Australian Aboriginal Media Aboriginal Media

AssociationAssociation

Pintupi Anmatjere Warlpiri Media

Pintupi Anmatjere Warlpiri Media

Ngaanyatjarra Media

Ngaanyatjarra Media

Torres Strait IslandsTorres Strait Islands Media AssociationMedia Association

Queensland Remote Queensland Remote Aboriginal MediaAboriginal Media

Remote Indigenous Media Organisations

Part 1: History of remote Indigenous media

& policy development

Part 1: History of remote Indigenous media

& policy development

1980: 1980: Australia’s first Aboriginal owned and controlled radio station Central Australia’s first Aboriginal owned and controlled radio station Central Australian Aboriginal Media Association (CAAMA 8KIN) started broadcastingAustralian Aboriginal Media Association (CAAMA 8KIN) started broadcasting

1982: 1982: National Aboriginal and Islander Broadcasting Association (NAIBA) National Aboriginal and Islander Broadcasting Association (NAIBA) established, continued until 1985 established, continued until 1985

1983: 1983: Anthropologist Eric Michaels begins 5-year AIAS TV study at YuendumuAnthropologist Eric Michaels begins 5-year AIAS TV study at Yuendumu

1984: 1984: Ernabella Video and Television established, initially as 1-year TAFE program Ernabella Video and Television established, initially as 1-year TAFE program

1984: 1984: Warlpiri Media Association formed following video training programs in 1983Warlpiri Media Association formed following video training programs in 1983

October 1984: October 1984: DAA Taskforce release ‘Out of the Silent Land’; recommended DAA Taskforce release ‘Out of the Silent Land’; recommended BRACS program to enable remote communities to insert of local video and radio BRACS program to enable remote communities to insert of local video and radio programs over the incoming mainstream TV servicesprograms over the incoming mainstream TV services

A Brief History of Remote Indigenous MediaA Brief History of Remote Indigenous Media

April 1985: April 1985: First local TV transmission begins at Yuendumu First local TV transmission begins at Yuendumu and Ernabella – described as ‘fighting fire with fire’and Ernabella – described as ‘fighting fire with fire’

August 1985: August 1985: AUSSAT B1 satellite launched; B2 in Nov 1985 AUSSAT B1 satellite launched; B2 in Nov 1985 

1986: 1986: Eric Michaels’ report ‘The Aboriginal Invention of Eric Michaels’ report ‘The Aboriginal Invention of Television: Central Australia 1982-6’ releasedTelevision: Central Australia 1982-6’ released

1987:1987: Imparja TV wins bid to become Commercial TV Service Imparja TV wins bid to become Commercial TV Service for Central zone, begins broadcasting January 1988for Central zone, begins broadcasting January 1988

1987: 1987: BRACS begins in 81 communities, with equipment BRACS begins in 81 communities, with equipment designed and installed by Telecom between 1988 and 1991; designed and installed by Telecom between 1988 and 1991; poor design and limited training led to lack of usepoor design and limited training led to lack of use

1991: 1991: DAA Indigenous broadcast policy paper proposes funding DAA Indigenous broadcast policy paper proposes funding for Indigenous Media due to social justice functions for Indigenous Media due to social justice functions

1992: 1992: Broadcasting Services Act 1992 includes the object: Broadcasting Services Act 1992 includes the object: ““to ensure the maintenance, and where possible, the development of to ensure the maintenance, and where possible, the development of diversity, including public, community and Indigenous broadcasting, in diversity, including public, community and Indigenous broadcasting, in the Australian broadcasting service in the transition to digital the Australian broadcasting service in the transition to digital broadcasting”broadcasting”

A Brief History of Remote Indigenous MediaA Brief History of Remote Indigenous Media

December 1992: December 1992: National Indigenous Media Association of Australia (NIMAA) National Indigenous Media Association of Australia (NIMAA) established with members in print, radio, TV and video, multimedia and film established with members in print, radio, TV and video, multimedia and film

January 1993: January 1993: ATSIC releases first Indigenous broadcasting policy, 5 key areas: ATSIC releases first Indigenous broadcasting policy, 5 key areas: 1) Equity 2) Cultural restoration, preservation & growth 3) Efficiency of Communication 4) 1) Equity 2) Cultural restoration, preservation & growth 3) Efficiency of Communication 4) Employment 5) Enhanced self-imageEmployment 5) Enhanced self-image

1993: 1993: BRACS Revitalisation Strategy established for recurrent training, R&M, and BRACS Revitalisation Strategy established for recurrent training, R&M, and operation costs; BRACS extended to 20 more communities, total of 101 sites. operation costs; BRACS extended to 20 more communities, total of 101 sites.

1994: 1994: NIMAA recommends 8 regional Indigenous media organisations to NIMAA recommends 8 regional Indigenous media organisations to coordinate the BRS & ongoing regional training, support and management.coordinate the BRS & ongoing regional training, support and management.

April 1996: April 1996: ATSIC review into development of ATSI Media led to ‘Digital ATSIC review into development of ATSI Media led to ‘Digital Dreaming’ report in 1998 (Dr Helen Molnar et al) Dreaming’ report in 1998 (Dr Helen Molnar et al)

19971997: National BRACS Review undertaken by Neil Turner; completed 1999. : National BRACS Review undertaken by Neil Turner; completed 1999.

19981998: Imparja digital uplink enables 6 regional radio networks via Aurora satellite: Imparja digital uplink enables 6 regional radio networks via Aurora satellite

September 1999September 1999: First test broadcasts on Imparja’s Channel 31 by Warlpiri : First test broadcasts on Imparja’s Channel 31 by Warlpiri Media, PY Media and PAKAM, entitled ‘Feeding the Beam’Media, PY Media and PAKAM, entitled ‘Feeding the Beam’

A Brief History of Remote Indigenous MediaA Brief History of Remote Indigenous Media

20002000: Productivity Commission report into Broadcasting recommends exploring : Productivity Commission report into Broadcasting recommends exploring the feasibility of an Indigenous Broadcasting service.the feasibility of an Indigenous Broadcasting service.

20002000: DCITA establish ‘Networking the Nation’ funding (from 1: DCITA establish ‘Networking the Nation’ funding (from 1stst Telstra sell-off) Telstra sell-off) for innovative communications solutions for remote/ regional Australiafor innovative communications solutions for remote/ regional Australia

December 2000December 2000: Release of ‘The Belonging Network’, ATSIC/NIMAA feasibility : Release of ‘The Belonging Network’, ATSIC/NIMAA feasibility report’ into the development of a National Indigenous Broadcasting Service.report’ into the development of a National Indigenous Broadcasting Service.

February 2001: February 2001: Remote Media Summit in Canberra; end of BRS programRemote Media Summit in Canberra; end of BRS program

September 2001: September 2001: NIBS Conference at Rockhampton; NIMAA foldsNIBS Conference at Rockhampton; NIMAA folds

October 2001: October 2001: Indigenous Remote Communications Association established at Indigenous Remote Communications Association established at Remote Video Festival in Umuwa; establishment of ICTV proposedRemote Video Festival in Umuwa; establishment of ICTV proposed

May 2002: May 2002: Indigenous Community TV broadcasts begin on Ch. 31 by PY MediaIndigenous Community TV broadcasts begin on Ch. 31 by PY Media

Sept 2003Sept 2003: Australian Indigenous Communications Association established: Australian Indigenous Communications Association established

April 2004April 2004: DCITA sets review into viability of an Indigenous Television Service: DCITA sets review into viability of an Indigenous Television Service

 

A Brief History of Remote Indigenous MediaA Brief History of Remote Indigenous Media

20052005: RIBS TV Transmitter rollout enables 147 remote communities to get ICTV: RIBS TV Transmitter rollout enables 147 remote communities to get ICTV

20052005: DCITA announces $48.5million over 4 years for National Indigenous : DCITA announces $48.5million over 4 years for National Indigenous Television service, to “build on the Indigenous Community Television Television service, to “build on the Indigenous Community Television narrowcasting service” and “carry substantial programming for remote narrowcasting service” and “carry substantial programming for remote audiences and made in remote communities”audiences and made in remote communities”

2006: 2006: Indigenous Broadcasting Program Review reduces IBP to radio only Indigenous Broadcasting Program Review reduces IBP to radio only

July 13 2007July 13 2007- NITV launched on Imparja’s channel 31; ICTV taken off air- NITV launched on Imparja’s channel 31; ICTV taken off air

2009:2009: Indigitube launched Indigitube launched

November 13 2009November 13 2009: Launch of ICTV on Westlink channel as weekend service: Launch of ICTV on Westlink channel as weekend service

June 2010June 2010: Review of Government Investment in the Indigenous Broadcasting : Review of Government Investment in the Indigenous Broadcasting and Media sector announced, also and Media sector announced, also 11 year extension of NITV funding year extension of NITV funding

February 2011February 2011: Stevens Review (IBMS) report released with 39 key : Stevens Review (IBMS) report released with 39 key recommendations; only 2 enacted to date (no government response yet)recommendations; only 2 enacted to date (no government response yet)

2011: 2011: Digital Switchover via Direct-to-home model begins in QueenslandDigital Switchover via Direct-to-home model begins in Queensland

December 12 2012: December 12 2012: NITV launched as free-to-air channel on SBSNITV launched as free-to-air channel on SBS

March 18 2013: March 18 2013: ICTV launch as full-time channel on VASTICTV launch as full-time channel on VAST

A Brief History of Remote Indigenous MediaA Brief History of Remote Indigenous Media

Part 2:Examples of

‘one size fits all’ policy outcomes

Part 2:Examples of

‘one size fits all’ policy outcomes

National Broadband NetworkNational Broadband Network

Why won’t the current NBN model address the unmet demand for basic telephony or overcome digital divide issues in remote Indigenous communities?

Why won’t the current NBN model address the unmet demand for basic telephony or overcome digital divide issues in remote Indigenous communities?

National Broadband NetworkNational Broadband Network

“a high speed broadband network that is planned to reach 100 percent of Australian premises with a combination of fibre, fixed wireless and satellite technologies...” (NBN Co 2012:2)

“a high speed broadband network that is planned to reach 100 percent of Australian premises with a combination of fibre, fixed wireless and satellite technologies...” (NBN Co 2012:2)

Issues:

DTH model based on western household model

Very low home ICT access

Unmet demand for basic telephony not addressed

no expansion of mobile telephony; most appropriate telephony mode (Brady & Dyson 2009, CLC 2007)

Existing remote fibre networks not linked to NBN

Market model fails in RIC

No last-mile delivery solution (eg-WiFi)

Latency and asymmetry via satellite restrict some applications

Issues:

DTH model based on western household model

Very low home ICT access

Unmet demand for basic telephony not addressed

no expansion of mobile telephony; most appropriate telephony mode (Brady & Dyson 2009, CLC 2007)

Existing remote fibre networks not linked to NBN

Market model fails in RIC

No last-mile delivery solution (eg-WiFi)

Latency and asymmetry via satellite restrict some applications

Case Study: Ngaanyatjarra Lands Telecommunications ProjectCase Study: Ngaanyatjarra Lands Telecommunications Project

• 3 levels Government/ community orgs/ telco partnership

• $5.8million project completed 2007

• 400km of fibre optic cable extended to 6 communities

• Satellite solution to 6 communities

• WiFi in all 12 sites

The Broadband for the Bush AllianceThe Broadband for the Bush Alliance

Aims:

1.To promote and represent remote regions’ digital aspirations and priorities.

2.To advocate for best telecommunications infrastructure and services for remote Australian communities, businesses and dwellings.

3.To co-ordinate a research network aimed at addressing knowledge gaps in remote communications needs.

4.To build capacity of stakeholders to participate in a digital environment.

5.To share knowledge and experience.

6.To facilitate and support trials/projects/research aimed at achieving improved digital outcomes.

Aims:

1.To promote and represent remote regions’ digital aspirations and priorities.

2.To advocate for best telecommunications infrastructure and services for remote Australian communities, businesses and dwellings.

3.To co-ordinate a research network aimed at addressing knowledge gaps in remote communications needs.

4.To build capacity of stakeholders to participate in a digital environment.

5.To share knowledge and experience.

6.To facilitate and support trials/projects/research aimed at achieving improved digital outcomes.

Why has Digital Switchover resulted in the abolition of BRACS community TV broadcasting of local language content, and transferred the maintenance costs for the satellite equipment needed to access TV services to households?

Why has Digital Switchover resulted in the abolition of BRACS community TV broadcasting of local language content, and transferred the maintenance costs for the satellite equipment needed to access TV services to households?

Digital Television SwitchoverDigital Television Switchover

Digital Television SwitchoverDigital Television Switchover• Direct-to-home (DTH) model chosen for RICs to

enable all 17 channels of mainstream TV

• No funding option to upgrade local broadcast facilities to digital, despite recommendation of pooling of subsidy (Stevens Review 2010 Rec. 36)

• Community TV broadcasting of local language content ceases; no funding for digital transmitter

• Ongoing maintenance of DTH equipment transferred to householder (despite Stevens Review Rec. 38)- prohibitive costs, lack of coordination with state/ local governments

• Reduced ability to view TV outside of houses

• No redundancy service if DTH service fails

• Gap in accessing Indigenous TV services during DTH rollout period

• Direct-to-home (DTH) model chosen for RICs to enable all 17 channels of mainstream TV

• No funding option to upgrade local broadcast facilities to digital, despite recommendation of pooling of subsidy (Stevens Review 2010 Rec. 36)

• Community TV broadcasting of local language content ceases; no funding for digital transmitter

• Ongoing maintenance of DTH equipment transferred to householder (despite Stevens Review Rec. 38)- prohibitive costs, lack of coordination with state/ local governments

• Reduced ability to view TV outside of houses

• No redundancy service if DTH service fails

• Gap in accessing Indigenous TV services during DTH rollout period

Why did the Indigenous Broadcasting Program reduce to supporting radio broadcast delivery when the broader communications sector was planning for convergence and multi-platform delivery?

Why did the Indigenous Broadcasting Program reduce to supporting radio broadcast delivery when the broader communications sector was planning for convergence and multi-platform delivery?

Indigenous Broadcasting Program Indigenous Broadcasting Program

Indigenous Broadcasting Program (IBP) Indigenous Broadcasting Program (IBP)

IBP began 1987 to support urban, regional and remote Indigenous broadcasting

By 2006, the sector doubled, yet funding remained the same level- $13.3 million in 2006/7. Demand outstripped funding 2:1.

Review of IBP in 2006 sought to equalise funding by population band sizes, centralise RIBS funding to RIMOs, and focus funding on radio broadcasting; All video production funding to come via new NITV service

Impacts for sector:

Radio only negated video/TV focus of most RIMOs & stalled moves to convergence & multi-platform delivery (against industry trends)

Remote sector urged separate funding program between regional /urban radio stations and RIMOs/ RIBS to recognise different scope & reduce competition

Range of programs delivered by RIMOs- video/ TV, ICT, music, tech services, archiving, culture & language, telecoms – further siloed without coordination

IBP began 1987 to support urban, regional and remote Indigenous broadcasting

By 2006, the sector doubled, yet funding remained the same level- $13.3 million in 2006/7. Demand outstripped funding 2:1.

Review of IBP in 2006 sought to equalise funding by population band sizes, centralise RIBS funding to RIMOs, and focus funding on radio broadcasting; All video production funding to come via new NITV service

Impacts for sector:

Radio only negated video/TV focus of most RIMOs & stalled moves to convergence & multi-platform delivery (against industry trends)

Remote sector urged separate funding program between regional /urban radio stations and RIMOs/ RIBS to recognise different scope & reduce competition

Range of programs delivered by RIMOs- video/ TV, ICT, music, tech services, archiving, culture & language, telecoms – further siloed without coordination

Why did the introduction of a National Indigenous TV service result in the loss of the Indigenous Community TV service it was intended to build upon, with almost none of the the $80 million of funding to date going to remote producers?

Why did the introduction of a National Indigenous TV service result in the loss of the Indigenous Community TV service it was intended to build upon, with almost none of the the $80 million of funding to date going to remote producers?

National Indigenous TelevisionNational Indigenous Television

National Indigenous TelevisionNational Indigenous Television

In 2005, DCITA announced $48.5million over 4 years for a National Indigenous Television service, to “build on the Indigenous Community Television narrowcasting service” and “carry substantial programming for remote audiences and made in remote communities”.

No delivery platform provided, resulting in NITV replacing ICTV on Imparja channel 31

Also in 2006, IBP removed video production; all screen funding to come via NITV

A mainstream programming & commissioning model was adopted by NITV

Of the $80million investment in NITV to June 2012 (about 80% for content), almost none reached the remote production sector

Impacts: Loss of Indigenous Community TV platform Loss of production capacity and impetus for production in remote sector Loss of relevant language-based service for remote audience Significant division within the Indigenous media sector Drop in production and broadcasting of remote community & cultural content

In 2005, DCITA announced $48.5million over 4 years for a National Indigenous Television service, to “build on the Indigenous Community Television narrowcasting service” and “carry substantial programming for remote audiences and made in remote communities”.

No delivery platform provided, resulting in NITV replacing ICTV on Imparja channel 31

Also in 2006, IBP removed video production; all screen funding to come via NITV

A mainstream programming & commissioning model was adopted by NITV

Of the $80million investment in NITV to June 2012 (about 80% for content), almost none reached the remote production sector

Impacts: Loss of Indigenous Community TV platform Loss of production capacity and impetus for production in remote sector Loss of relevant language-based service for remote audience Significant division within the Indigenous media sector Drop in production and broadcasting of remote community & cultural content

Why does the primary remote media employment program, the National Jobs Package, pay the same wages for senior broadcasters as new trainees?

Why does the primary remote media employment program, the National Jobs Package, pay the same wages for senior broadcasters as new trainees?

National Jobs Package (NJP)National Jobs Package (NJP)

National Jobs Package (NJP)National Jobs Package (NJP)

A transition to work program off CDEP, started in 2009 for arts & broadcasting

RIMOs have a direct employer relationship and provide training, support, better wages and conditions for workers than CDEP

Some issues:

Wages fixed rate - no tiers or annual increments;

Not designed for multi-site delivery;

Fixed 20 hours - not flexible to organisational/ worker needs (like CDEP);

Most RIMO training & support focussed on NJP workers;

Added level of administration and reporting.

A transition to work program off CDEP, started in 2009 for arts & broadcasting

RIMOs have a direct employer relationship and provide training, support, better wages and conditions for workers than CDEP

Some issues:

Wages fixed rate - no tiers or annual increments;

Not designed for multi-site delivery;

Fixed 20 hours - not flexible to organisational/ worker needs (like CDEP);

Most RIMO training & support focussed on NJP workers;

Added level of administration and reporting.

Why ‘one size fits all’ programs typically don’t fit Why ‘one size fits all’ programs typically don’t fit

• Centrally determined, inflexible approach

• Assumptions based on mainstream context

• Failure to recognise Indigenous diversity

• Different experience (ecology) of communications modes and technologies

• Market failure

• Lack of existing infrastructure or services

• Harsh conditions- climatic, environmental, social, political

• Language barriers & cultural differences

• Lack of community participation and ownership

• Community needs and local planning not considered

• Lack of relevant research/evidence to guide policy

• Centrally determined, inflexible approach

• Assumptions based on mainstream context

• Failure to recognise Indigenous diversity

• Different experience (ecology) of communications modes and technologies

• Market failure

• Lack of existing infrastructure or services

• Harsh conditions- climatic, environmental, social, political

• Language barriers & cultural differences

• Lack of community participation and ownership

• Community needs and local planning not considered

• Lack of relevant research/evidence to guide policy

Part 3: Part 3: Towards a new Towards a new policy approachpolicy approach

Stevens Review (2010)Stevens Review (2010)

“The Australian Government…still lacks a well articulated forward-looking strategy that takes into account both the potential of the sector and the rapid changes in technology. The sector is not appropriately recognised as a professional component of the broader broadcasting and media sector that provides an essential service to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people whether they live in urban, regional or remote areas. It is under-resourced, lacks critical capacity and skills and suffers from being administered across a range of portfolios.” (p.1)

“In the Indigenous broadcasting and media sector a ‘one size fits all’ approach will not work given the significant differences between communities resulting from geography, history and custom. The government’s investment in and strategy for the sector must be flexible. The overriding objective must be building the capacity of the sector and giving it the tools to enable it to adapt and take advantage of rapidly converging broadcasting and communication technologies, the looming digital switchover, and the enormous opportunities that are being opened up with the rollout of the NBN. A key outcome must be to engage the creativity and energy of younger Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.” (p.1)

“The Australian Government…still lacks a well articulated forward-looking strategy that takes into account both the potential of the sector and the rapid changes in technology. The sector is not appropriately recognised as a professional component of the broader broadcasting and media sector that provides an essential service to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people whether they live in urban, regional or remote areas. It is under-resourced, lacks critical capacity and skills and suffers from being administered across a range of portfolios.” (p.1)

“In the Indigenous broadcasting and media sector a ‘one size fits all’ approach will not work given the significant differences between communities resulting from geography, history and custom. The government’s investment in and strategy for the sector must be flexible. The overriding objective must be building the capacity of the sector and giving it the tools to enable it to adapt and take advantage of rapidly converging broadcasting and communication technologies, the looming digital switchover, and the enormous opportunities that are being opened up with the rollout of the NBN. A key outcome must be to engage the creativity and energy of younger Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.” (p.1)

Key points (Meadows 2012:25):

• Indigenous media in Australia has evolved in a policy vacuum, marked by policy uncertainty and a lack of political will to acknowledge the place of Indigenous languages and cultures

• Indigenous media as a news topic is virtually absent from broader public sphere discussion promoted by mainstream media

• The key policy moment in Indigenous media policy was the decision to replace ICTV with the $48.5million NITV in 2007

• Indigenous media policy advocacy has been marked by competing policy agendas and tensions between the ‘soft voices’ from the bush communities and the ‘loud voices’ from the eastern seaboard

• There is a lack of understanding of the media-related practices of policy advocates and policy managers

• ‘Policymaking is nine-tenths press release and one-tenth substance’ (Althaus et al 2007)

Key points (Meadows 2012:25):

• Indigenous media in Australia has evolved in a policy vacuum, marked by policy uncertainty and a lack of political will to acknowledge the place of Indigenous languages and cultures

• Indigenous media as a news topic is virtually absent from broader public sphere discussion promoted by mainstream media

• The key policy moment in Indigenous media policy was the decision to replace ICTV with the $48.5million NITV in 2007

• Indigenous media policy advocacy has been marked by competing policy agendas and tensions between the ‘soft voices’ from the bush communities and the ‘loud voices’ from the eastern seaboard

• There is a lack of understanding of the media-related practices of policy advocates and policy managers

• ‘Policymaking is nine-tenths press release and one-tenth substance’ (Althaus et al 2007)

‘When the Stars Align: Indigenous media policy formation 1988-2008’ (Meadows 2012)‘When the Stars Align: Indigenous media policy formation 1988-2008’ (Meadows 2012)

A new national policy:A new national policy: build on Article 16 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.

2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect Indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity. (UN 2008:7-8)

identify Indigenous media as an essential service (Molnar et al 1999);

recognise convergence & range of modes/ platforms for media and communications;

support innovation and enterprise;

recognise diverse needs and contexts of remote, regional and urban Australia;

have central tenets of self-determination, language and cultural maintenance, digital inclusion, professionalism, and social and economic development;

link to broader Indigenous & cultural policy frameworks;

be adequately resourced to enable the sector to achieve its full potential.

build on Article 16 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.

2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect Indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity. (UN 2008:7-8)

identify Indigenous media as an essential service (Molnar et al 1999);

recognise convergence & range of modes/ platforms for media and communications;

support innovation and enterprise;

recognise diverse needs and contexts of remote, regional and urban Australia;

have central tenets of self-determination, language and cultural maintenance, digital inclusion, professionalism, and social and economic development;

link to broader Indigenous & cultural policy frameworks;

be adequately resourced to enable the sector to achieve its full potential.

Need for a remote specific policy modelNeed for a remote specific policy model

A specific, flexible policy approach for remote media and communications to address the unique context, scope and challenges

Address the mis-match between existing policy and current reality in communities

A development communications approach to program planning, evaluation & capacity building

Consider needs of all 1113 remote communities

A specific, flexible policy approach for remote media and communications to address the unique context, scope and challenges

Address the mis-match between existing policy and current reality in communities

A development communications approach to program planning, evaluation & capacity building

Consider needs of all 1113 remote communities

Community ownership and participation in policy development- Indigenous people and orgs as key informants

Programs driven by local planning and priorities with recipient –based performance indicators

Effective change management strategies needed to address a 'crisis of change’

Inter-connection with other programs –arts, culture, language, land management, education, health etc

Community ownership and participation in policy development- Indigenous people and orgs as key informants

Programs driven by local planning and priorities with recipient –based performance indicators

Effective change management strategies needed to address a 'crisis of change’

Inter-connection with other programs –arts, culture, language, land management, education, health etc

Media & ICT Training • Employment • Media Production • Language & Culture Programs • Radio, TV & Communications Networks Resourcing • Events & Festivals • Repair & Maintenance • Business Development • Regional Coordination • Promotions • Advocacy

Media & ICT Training • Employment • Media Production • Language & Culture Programs • Radio, TV & Communications Networks Resourcing • Events & Festivals • Repair & Maintenance • Business Development • Regional Coordination • Promotions • Advocacy

Supported by Regional Media Supported by Regional Media Organisation with:Organisation with:

Part 4: Part 4: The role of researchThe role of research

Collecting evidence for Indigenous policy makingCollecting evidence for Indigenous policy making

“Without evidence, policy-makers must fall back on intuition, ideology, or conventional wisdom—or, at best, theory alone. And many policy decisions have indeed been made in those ways. But the resulting policies can go seriously astray, given the complexities and interdependencies in our society and economy, and the unpredictability of people’s reactions to change.” (Gary Banks 2009:5)

However:

“A preference for hard research data- in particular, quantitative studies- by government policymakers places the Indigenous media environment in an invidious position. All of the available research into Indigenous media processes and practice is qualitative- there are few, if any, numbers involved. It presents policymakers with the challenging task of making sense of ‘values’ rather than relying on ‘evidence’ in a narrow sense.” (Meadows 2012:26)

“Without evidence, policy-makers must fall back on intuition, ideology, or conventional wisdom—or, at best, theory alone. And many policy decisions have indeed been made in those ways. But the resulting policies can go seriously astray, given the complexities and interdependencies in our society and economy, and the unpredictability of people’s reactions to change.” (Gary Banks 2009:5)

However:

“A preference for hard research data- in particular, quantitative studies- by government policymakers places the Indigenous media environment in an invidious position. All of the available research into Indigenous media processes and practice is qualitative- there are few, if any, numbers involved. It presents policymakers with the challenging task of making sense of ‘values’ rather than relying on ‘evidence’ in a narrow sense.” (Meadows 2012:26)

Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Qualitative vs Quantitative Research

Policy makers rely heavily on quantitative research/ statistics => remote media orgs require data for KPIs and to identify sector gaps and needs (see www.irca.net.au)

Quantitative data collection in RICs is challenging: remoteness/access; variability of context; small sample size; high mobility, household

makeup, cross-cultural communication issues, multiple names, low participation etc;

Data and analysis can be unreliable

Qualitative research needs more time & resources, but more accurate, locally specific and contextualised results; still challenging to achieve

Some good examples: Meadows et al (2007) ‘Community Media Matters’; Turner (1998) ‘Review of BRACS’; Molnar et al (1999) ‘Digital Dreaming’; Rennie et al ‘Home Internet Use in RICs’ (longitudinal study- ongoing); Kral and Schwab (2012) ‘Learning Spaces’; Brady & Dyson (2009) ‘Mobile phone usage in Wujal Wujal’; Hinkson (2002) ‘New Media Projects at Yuendumu’; Big Hart project evaluations; etc

Policy makers rely heavily on quantitative research/ statistics => remote media orgs require data for KPIs and to identify sector gaps and needs (see www.irca.net.au)

Quantitative data collection in RICs is challenging: remoteness/access; variability of context; small sample size; high mobility, household

makeup, cross-cultural communication issues, multiple names, low participation etc;

Data and analysis can be unreliable

Qualitative research needs more time & resources, but more accurate, locally specific and contextualised results; still challenging to achieve

Some good examples: Meadows et al (2007) ‘Community Media Matters’; Turner (1998) ‘Review of BRACS’; Molnar et al (1999) ‘Digital Dreaming’; Rennie et al ‘Home Internet Use in RICs’ (longitudinal study- ongoing); Kral and Schwab (2012) ‘Learning Spaces’; Brady & Dyson (2009) ‘Mobile phone usage in Wujal Wujal’; Hinkson (2002) ‘New Media Projects at Yuendumu’; Big Hart project evaluations; etc

Need for research partnershipsNeed for research partnerships

How do we provide meaningful ‘evidence’ of program outcomes to support industry renewal and development and promote investment ?

Communities are research –weary; need relevant outcomes for the community

We need partnerships with researchers through:

Program evaluations

Sector outcomes - social, cultural, political, developmental

Audience research

Analysis of availability (quantitative) and usage (qualitative) of ICTs

Supporting change management

Building linkages with other programs

Innovation in the sector – R&D

Build pathways for information flow from communities back to policymakers

How do we provide meaningful ‘evidence’ of program outcomes to support industry renewal and development and promote investment ?

Communities are research –weary; need relevant outcomes for the community

We need partnerships with researchers through:

Program evaluations

Sector outcomes - social, cultural, political, developmental

Audience research

Analysis of availability (quantitative) and usage (qualitative) of ICTs

Supporting change management

Building linkages with other programs

Innovation in the sector – R&D

Build pathways for information flow from communities back to policymakers

A Communicative Ecologies ApproachA Communicative Ecologies Approach

An holistic research approach to describe the complete range of communication media and information flows existing within a community

Identifies the dynamic relationships between social interactions, culture, discourse, communications media and technologies for individuals, groups or communities

Three layers of a communicative ecology (Foth & Hearn 2007:9-18):

1. A technological layer - devices / platforms that enable communication;

2. A social layer- people and social modes of organisation;

3. A discursive layer - the content of the communication

Research methodology: ethnographic action research & participant evaluation

Key findings: Programs that build on existing community activities and modes of communication and technologies are more likely to get ownership and engagement and have successful outcomes

An holistic research approach to describe the complete range of communication media and information flows existing within a community

Identifies the dynamic relationships between social interactions, culture, discourse, communications media and technologies for individuals, groups or communities

Three layers of a communicative ecology (Foth & Hearn 2007:9-18):

1. A technological layer - devices / platforms that enable communication;

2. A social layer- people and social modes of organisation;

3. A discursive layer - the content of the communication

Research methodology: ethnographic action research & participant evaluation

Key findings: Programs that build on existing community activities and modes of communication and technologies are more likely to get ownership and engagement and have successful outcomes

The challenge… The challenge… to develop an appropriate and flexible policy framework which promotes a robust media and

communications sector in an era of convergence, drawing on community needs and aspirations

Strategy – a symbiotic relationship of community organisations & practitioners, peak bodies and researchers working together with policy makers to achieve this aim

to develop an appropriate and flexible policy framework which promotes a robust media and

communications sector in an era of convergence, drawing on community needs and aspirations

Strategy – a symbiotic relationship of community organisations & practitioners, peak bodies and researchers working together with policy makers to achieve this aim

Remote Media & Communications: Keeping Communities and Culture Strong

Remote Media & Communications: Keeping Communities and Culture Strong