Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts

Thursday, December 27, 2018

Do the current statutory media control and diversity rules in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth) (“BSA”) serve the public interest in today’s media environment?

One of the most fundamental aspects of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 is that it seeks to promote a situation where the Australian media is regulated significantly for the purpose of safeguarding the national broadcasting environment. This bill is essential for in serving the public interest because it provides the necessary allowances and regulations to the type of material that broadcasters can provide for public consumption. One of the most significant aspects of this bill is that it promotes the removal of genre restrictions that would otherwise have hindered the advancement of the Australian media to suit the interests of those individuals in society who would like greater diversity in their programming. Furthermore, in the interests of the public, this bill is also important because it allows commercial broadcasters to have a greater opportunity for multichannelling, which they were previously not allowed to have. This is a significant step because the public has an opportunity to have a wide range of channels to view outside those that are dominated by national broadcasters; meaning that there is a wider variety of information that they can access outside those that are essentially censored by the state. In the contemporary media world, it is a significant step especially considering that a growing number of individuals are developing special interests which can be fulfilled to a greater extent through the presence of more specialized channels whose content that can view and enjoy.
The rapidly advancing media world means that there is need to ensure that the interests of local media are safeguarded and the BSA is an essential aspect of this endeavor. This is mainly because it is through the advancement of commercial media services that it will be possible for locally made content to remain dominant in the market especially considering that there is massive competition from media from other countries, especially the United States. The influence of foreign media can, therefore, be contained through this bill because, while it does not provide any significant restrictions on foreign media, it allows for privately owned local media outlets to ensure that they have a greater share of the market. This is extremely important especially considering that it is through the willingness of the BSA to allow for a reduction in the influence of national broadcasters that it is possible to bring about the competition that is needed to make sure that there is a significant improvement in the quality of programming that is provided locally. Healthy competition in media is a necessary aspect of contemporary society because it makes it possible for broadcasters to make sure that they are able to better connect with their audiences in a bid to find out their interests and work towards the development of content that is closely linked to these interests. The ability of broadcasters to bring about greater diversity is, therefore, safeguarded within this bill because it helps to advance the interests of local broadcasters when it comes to a higher quality of programming while at the same time creating the diversity that is needed to ensure that most of the population in the country is able to receive content that is in line with its interests.
This bill is also essential in the development of an environment where, while commercial broadcasters are provided with greater freedom to operate, those with the potential of promoting content that is harmful to the public will be restricted. Such a situation would make sure that commercial broadcasters have a greater responsibility towards their audiences when it comes to their content. Moreover, through this step, it will be possible for the government to make sure that media content that might prove to be a threat to the public, such as channels that advance the cause of terrorism organizations, are kept out of the public sphere; allowing Australians to live their lives as freely as possible. The need to regulate commercial broadcasters is in the public interest and this can best be done through restriction to the allocation of licenses, as stated in the bill. The BSA provides for greater involvement of the government when it comes to the allocation of broadcasting licenses, with the minister taking a direct hand when it comes to content that might be contrary to the interests of the public. In this way, it will be possible to make sure that the regulation of content in media remains constant while at the same time providing for the advancement of local content in media that promote the Australian way of life.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Eddie Mabo

Eddie Mabo was an Australian man who played a crucial role in the recognition of the right of the indigenous people to own the land in the country. He was born in the Torres Strait Islands in 1936 and it was one of his fundamental beliefs that the land upon which he was born belonged to him and his people. An indigenous Australian, he displayed an astute knowledge of the fact that the land upon which he was born was rightfully indigenous, and that the laws that had been instituted by the colonial settlers and their government did the indigenous people a great injustice. For almost a decade, this man fought for the rights of his people by taking a case to court with the intention of having it overturn the terra nullius land system in Australia which alienated the indigenous people from their land. The sheer determination of this man, against all odds, ensured that he had one of the greatest wins in Australian history for an indigenous person, because the ruling made, overturning the terra nullius system, ensured that over three hundred years of injustice had almost come to an end. The overturning of this system further granted the indigenous people the confidence of identifying themselves with the land of their ancestors and ensured that their right to it was recognized beyond doubt. Eddie Mabo was a man who rose from humble origins as a gardener to becoming one of the national icons of Australia because of the fact that he was deeply involved in fighting for the rights of his people.
While he was born in the Torres Strait Islands, Mabo spent most of his life in Queensland, and was in fact not a well known figure in his home island until after he took his case on indigenous land rights to court. It was only after his death from cancer as well as the court victory over the land issue five months later that his fellow indigenous people on the island welcomed his as one of their own. His victory did not only affect the people of his home island but also all the indigenous people of Australia and this is the reason why Mabo has become one of the most respected men among them. The idea that an indigenous person could almost singlehandedly challenge the Australian status quo and gain a great victory from it was one of those instances which were unheard of in the history of this country. The indigenous people had long been suppressed by the colonial government, and later by the white settlers who dominated and continue to dominate almost every aspect of life in Australia. Mabo’s posthumous court victory ensured that the indigenous people were recognized as a legitimate part of the Australian population with the same rights as those who dominated the society. Furthermore, it may have played a role in the recognition of indigenous people as reasoning human beings who had, throughout the history of the colonization of Australia had been treated unfairly; the court case was therefore the first step in correcting the injustice done to them.
The overturning of the terra nullius policy can be said to be, in reality, a policy of inclusion whose purpose is to ensure that all the Australian people have an equal chance to compete in making their dreams and aspirations come true. Previously, indigenous groups were completely excluded from the majority of economic activities in Australia except for those which were considered to be labor intensive. Moreover these groups were rarely ever accepted in the mainstream Australian life, therefore, Mabo’s court victory can be said to have been a step towards the inclusion of the indigenous people into the center of Australian society. From the very beginning of the Mabo’s case in court, there has been opposition towards it with those against it stating that it is giving an unfair advantage to minority groups over other people in Australia. Those who are opposed to the overturning of the terra nullius system further state that this action went against the proper way of Australian life because of the belief that did not treat all people equally, and instead it gives unfair privileges to those people who would otherwise not have deserved them. These arguments are not very logical considering the injustices which were committed against the indigenous Australian groups in the past. The white population in Australia has been, for a long time, dominant, and Mabo’s court victory was a direct challenge to this status. This may help to explain why Mabo’s grave was vandalized and racist terms painted all over it. This vandalism forced the exhumation of his body and its reburial in his ancestral home in the Torres Strait; a place for whose people he had fought for and won the right to own the land upon which they had lived from time immemorial.
Mabo’s court victory has over the last two decades come to have a significant impact on the people of the islands where he was born. Among the most significant aspects of this has been the recognition that the indigenous people were greatly marginalized in matters concerning health when compared to the mainstream Australian population. This has led to the improvement of the healthcare facilities which are available for them, ensuring a higher life expectancy than in previous years. The declining child death rates has led to a decline in the birth rates, because parents are now more secure because they know that there are enough resources available today to ensure that their children survive. Another reason for this is the fact that the economic conditions prevalent in the indigenous Australian society today do not allow parents to have more than a few children at a time because they cannot afford to have more even if they wanted to. This results in not only fewer children, but it also means that there are fewer ties to the extended family and this in turn means that in subsequent generations, there will be fewer uncles, aunts and cousins, on whom to rely, than in previous generations.
The life expectation of native Australians between the years 1991 and 1996 was projected to be fifty six and sixty one years for men and women in that order. This was found to be considerably lower than that of the mainstream population which was estimated to be between 75 and 91 years for men and women respectively. Furthermore, it was found that the death rate among many indigenous people was at a much higher rate than those of the mainstream Australian population. In fact, the death rate was so high that that they exceeded the general Australian population in every age group that was analyzed. Most of the people from indigenous populations died before reaching the age of fifty, and this was attributed to the lack of the proper healthcare facilities that other Australians have access to. The indigenous population has been completely marginalized in all matters concerning health and this has contributed a great deal in the high mortality rates among them, just when they are at their prime. It has been found that one of the leading causes of death among this population are cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes, and these made up 75% of all the deaths that were reported within this population. The rates of hospitalization was much higher among the indigenous people than that of the general Australian public, with these being much higher in all the age groups that were assessed.
While Mabo’s court victory may have been the first step towards the improvement of the lives of the indigenous people, there is still a lot to be done to achieve this objective. Racism is still as prevalent as it was before the ruling, as seen when Mabo’s grave was vandalized just one day after his funeral with racist terms being painted all over his headstone. In addition, the health status of indigenous people, for whom Mabo fought, while it has improved somewhat, still has a long way to go before it can reach the status that the other Australians enjoy. Life expectancy is still low, with many indigenous people not living to be more than fifty years old, an occurrence which is a great tragedy in a country which prides itself in being one of the most developed in the world. The fact that an indigenous person had to go to court in order to get basic land rights for its people shows just how ironic Australian democracy is because it favors those people of Caucasian descent more than the natives of the land. This has created a situation where the latter are dominated completely and they have little say in their own destiny. It is to either bow to the status quo or risk the continued marginalization of their society. This is something which should not be accepted, not only by the indigenous people themselves, but also by the government because the latter should be at the forefront of protecting the rights of the indigenous people. The indigenous people should also fight for their own rights because not to do so would mean that their situation will not be recognized, hence a solution will not be attained. It such a thing was to happen, then the legacy of such indigenous men as Eddie Mabo would be forever tarnished.