media
19 Nov 2008
Who Killed SBS?
Why did Mary Kostakidis really quit? What made Stratton and Pomeranz flee to the ABC? You won't find your answers in The SBS Story, writes David Ingram
To say The SBS Story is hagiographic might be to overstate the matter — but not by much. Part-funded by the Australian Research Council as part of a linkage project with SBS, this book veers between genuine independent academic critique and the kind of slick corporate giveaway that could easily have been commissioned by SBS's own marketing department.This is a shame for readers wanting to know why Mary Kostakidis really resigned, why David Stratton and Margaret Pomeranz fled to the ABC or how many millions SBS spends on Top Gear. Nor will it enlighten industry insiders seeking to know why all those who might have once challenged the direction taken by Managing Director Shaun Brown have resigned, retired or not had their contracts renewed.
It is certainly a world away from acerbic potboilers like Who Killed Channel 9? by Gerald Stone, who is Deputy Chairman of SBS — although one cannot imagine Stone writing with similar frankness about SBS. The decline of multicultural activism — or active multiculturalism — and the changes wrought by Board appointments under the Howard government not only mean that SBS has been dramatically tamed but also that the language available to analyse it has become constrained.
This is regrettable for its three authors, especially Ien Ang, whose solid credentials in the field of multicultural research are long established.
To be fair, the authors do attempt to illuminate the role SBS plays in Australian public life with, if not a spotlight, then at least the warm glow of theory. They argue that since the 1970s Australia and SBS have experienced three waves of multiculturalism. The first was "ethnic" and largely focused inwards on the needs of migrant communities. The second, "cosmopolitanism", flourished in the 1990s as the broadcaster captured shared experiences of diversity with catchphrases like "the world is an amazing place". We now live in a third era of "popular multiculturalism": comfortable, blended and so pervasive that it needs no name.
Of course, those who still think multiculturalism is important might not think much of this latter multiculturalism-lite. The authors do acknowledge the three versions of multiculturalism have existed less as serial ideologies than as competing contemporary strands, with some ascendant while others are in decline. They also recognise that for some — perhaps the new and isolated migrants least served by multiculturalism-lite — there is still the need for practical support from institutions such as SBS.
Unfortunately, Ang and her co-authors tend to recite the SBS dogma that its radio language programs cater for migrants through old-style ethno-multiculturalism while SBS TV — the child that ate the parent — embodies popular multiculturalism.
This argument was born with SBS TV in the early 1980s, but where it differs today — and what has finally made SBS anathema to many of its traditional supporters — is in the unilateral reinterpretation of the SBS Charter by Brown and his Board. The corporation's many critics argue that Brown's blinkered emphasis on serving "all Australians" ignores the other 193 words of the Charter which speak of the original multiculturalism — whether "ethnic" or "cosmopolitan". Further, to claim that SBS Radio still serves the needs of new migrants with poor or no English overlooks the fact that, under Brown, radio has been consigned to the backwaters of the corporation, internally and publicly.
Unhappily, this book serves SBS viewers no better. It does not examine exactly why the Board, headed by Howard favourite Carla Zampatti, has failed for eight years to gain "any significant increase in base funding". And for media pundits and would-be advertisers there is no proper explanation of why, after almost 30 years and with occasional flashes of brilliance such as East West 101, SBS TV still flounders in the ratings with only a five per cent share — or one in 20 people — of the main metropolitan markets. One should, however, marvel at Brown's capacity for spin; he really is a glass "1/20 full" optimist rather than a "19/20 empty" realist.
Even for the hardcore SBS loyalists — those the authors call "ethnics and eggheads" — the fact that no-one with clear ethnic community credentials is now sitting on the Board is barely mentioned. Nor is there any proper discussion of why SBS introduced ads into the middle of programs or what funding alternatives might have been tried had the much respected Sir Nicholas Shehadie still chaired the Board.
These are issues at the heart of the opportunity missed. Most organisations depend on the calibre of those who lead, on their actions and interactions, but nowhere in The SBS Story is there any hard-headed critique of the individuals in charge. It is as if SBS runs on ideology alone, untouched by human hands. It would have been fascinating to hear from ex-Board directors like former Fujitsu Australia Chairman Neville Roach, academic Dr Amar Galla or actor Peter Carroll, all voices of dissent now gone. Now they would have real stories to tell.
The SBS Story could have been so much sharper, so much more valuable to the debate about our media and Australian identity. And to be charitable, one suspects the generally laudatory tone owes less to pressure from SBS than to the authors' unwillingness to provide ammunition to conservative critics such as Andrew Bolt and Paul Sheehan, who have called for SBS to be closed down. Better a leaky SS SBS limping across the watery wastes of Australian commercial broadcasting than no SBS at all.
Only towards the end do the authors briefly bare their teeth, to question whether, after all the eulogising, everything the SBS Board and management have done has actually benefited the broadcaster and the society it is meant to serve.
But by then it's too late.
Weighed down by panegyric quotes from the more than 60 current and former employees interviewed over three years, leavened only by a sprinkling of gainsayers like community broadcaster George Zangalis — "the love affair [with SBS] has come to an end" — the book sinks under the dead weight of SBS self-satisfaction, its authors dragged down and finally, with one despairing wave, submerged.
The SBS Story: The Challenge of Cultural Diversity by Ien Ang, Gay Hawkins and Lamia Dabboussy (UNSW Press: 2008)
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
I have to assume that the p**s weak action of the Rudd Govt. in making moves to have ABC Board independently selected/appointed will also apply to the SBS. This some years down the track may do something to revive the ‘dodos’, but it is probably too late already. There are no "Friends of the ABC/SBS" in the Rudd mob. None that are willing to put their heads up, anyway.
Twelve years of Howard appointments of lick-spittle fellow travellers, nut-cases,idealogical warriors and blind-sided so-called historians has turned both the ABC and the SBS into shallow imitations of their former selves, just as Howard intended. Keep ‘em dumb, un-educated and mindless, is what he intended, and he has succeeded to about the ninety-ninth degree. The changes being pushed by the present ABC board will give the ABC the coup de gras!
Total absolute mindless garbage!!!
Again, as in so much, the Rudd mob have been willing participants in all this. Pity that the Greens did not win the last election! I did my bit.
Dazza.
It probably doesn’t matter who destroyed SBS, the only question is can we save it. The neanderthals who run SBS these days have turned what was arguably, one of the best television channels in the world, into a parody of commercial television and a mouthpiece for American news services. No doubt SBS died for the same reason the world is now reeling … greed, greed, greed and more greed.
SBS was doomed the moment it went commercial. When any TV station decides to become commercial, management has to adjust their programming in order to fit in with the dictates of the advertisers. Therefore SBS’s board of directors gave their audience an unfortunate view of self-emasculation. In one panoramic sweep they managed to commit Sepuku, to knacker a valuable community asset and proceeded to sh-t in the face of their audience.
I’m sure I speak for many others when I acknowledge that there is one station only which doesn’t cater to a audience of ten year olds. That station is, of course, Channel Two. Also, it is amazing how many activities crowd into one’s life when television watching is reduced to a bare minimum.
IMO, SBS will never recover. Not while the advertisers hold the whip hand. And who ever heard of advertisers volunteering to quit an exploitable market?
Dear David,
The answer is a Royal Commission of Inquiry or a thorough Senate Inquiry into the activities of SBS. Perhaps you would be willing to testify under oath as to what you saw and heard at the multicultural broadcaster. Im sure the taxpayer who paid your salary would be interested in your testimony.
Im surprised to learn that you were at SBS for 13 years, yet you don’t mention the unfair treatment of the hugely popular and well respected reporter Vladimir Lusic removed from SBS TV under political pressure….
Plus the whole heap of other scandals rattling inside SBS’s closet; the way it plays ethnic favourites etc etc.
kindest regards
Sasha Uzunov
freelance photo journalist (Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan)
ex-Australian soldier (2 tours - East Timor)
www.sashauzunov.freeservers.com
http://wanews.org/news/sbs.htm
Do we really need SBS?
Venise I have to respond to your comments… SBS was doomed long before it went commercial. Like a company stripped of any assets, advertising was then offered as the only possible saviour.
The advertising is killing SBS for me. It has to be a particularly gripping programme these daysthat keeps me from turning the TV off before the end of it.
When you can watch PBS/BBC (& some SBS) docos on the Web before they are shown in Oz, why would you sit through the ads and promos?
SBS is dead?
It may be obvious that SBS has been seriously mistreated, particularly in the news division.
But dead?
What was this golden age? Was it the 1990s? When South Park was its highest rated programme and its domestic content was primarily Fat Pizza?
The SBS evening news is still the only one that opens with wars and genocide instead of ‘Australian Celebrity in trouble’ or ‘Murderer guilty’.
I think today flashes in the pan like East West are more common than many are willing to admit. Newstopia (despite a horrible title), is easily the best Australian comedy on television and is regularly critical of the direction SBS is headed and its budgetary constraints.
Also, at risk of sounding like a knuckle dragger, I don’t know how anyone can talk about SBS without bringing up sport. The World Game at SBS has advanced in professionalism and quality constantly and is today the only sports coverage on television that isn’t afraid to use words with three syllables and breed intelligent discourse of their game. With Stephen Conroy making the decision to put the Socceroos on the anti-siphoning list like the rest of our national teams, football on SBS will become even more important.
Furthermore, SBS along with the ABC is the only network to take full advantage of internet capabilities with a serious and well promoted ‘watch again’ feature and hours of extra content on its site. Much like the BBC in Britain, both have pioneered new areas which will undoubtedly see growth while their competitors continue to misuse and mistrust global and inescapable digital trends.
I hope SBS get a board that will fight for funding, and a board that will not force a commercial face onto the broadcaster. But to dismiss it as already dead?
"the ABC is the only network to take full advantage of internet capabilities"
Yeah, great … IF you have ADSL2 for their iView!
"When you can watch PBS/BBC (& some SBS) docos on the Web before they are shown in Oz, why would you sit through the ads and promos?"
Yeah, if you have unlimited broadband you can stream that many shows a month.
My point is not that it is currently widely accessible, merely that it is the direction the media is heading and ABC and SBS have been developing the infrastructure and expertise at far greater rate than commercial rivals.
One only has to look at things like BBC Radio Online or the success of NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox and Commedy Central’s streaming service to realise that as soon as the new broadband network is up and running, online media content will become increasingly important. 7,9,10 are well behind the ball.
Like David Ingram, I would like to know why "our Mary" and "David and Margaret" felt the need to leave SBS. Since we have no answers we can only guess. One presumes that "Incapability Brown" made their lives hell and that they jumped before they were pushed. Maybe the current Review into SBS and the ABC will provide answers. Even if we don’t get answers, the Review may provide remedies. One obvious one is what might be termed "a little judicious bloodletting". How about sacking Brown, the Board and the monsters they have set to stalk the corridors of SBS? They could be replaced with decent competent people; SBS (and the ABC) could be given proper funding and allowed to do the job they were intended to do. I might even watch it again.
i agree with scott mitchell. i haven’t read the book yet so can’t comment on it, but despite the pressures it still does a good news reporting within the constraints of tv. and even if it didn’t id still watch it for the football
Beckspt, I have a feeling you would know more about the history of knives going through backs and sundry other in-house going’s on at SBS than I do. I do know however, that I used to live in a Greek area of Prahran whose TV sets were always on SBS, but these were the older people and I don’t know what their kids watched.
My comment was based on my own reaction to a station so clearly having lost it’s way, prior to plumping for the obvious solution of going commercial. Because as SBS is going now, it is behaving like a high-wire act. On the one hand they clearly want a better audience than the other commercial stations, and on the other hand they want the goodies that go with advertising. And not un-naturally they are failing on both counts.
ScottMitchell: I wouldn’t know a football if I fell over one. So I’ll take your word for it that they are good at sports coverage. But may I ask; if it is so good, how come the other commercial stations get the major sporting events? The answer has to be that SBS doesn’t have the money to pay for this sort of coverage. Which brings me back to my comments to Beck. They could only get that sort of money if they wallowed as deeply in the garbage-can as channels 7, 9,10 delight in doing.
This is all a another way of saying-it’s like a roundabout isn’t it? The advertising dollar is there to command ONLY IF A TV STATION programs itself to an audience of ten year olds as it is this same age group which doesn’t seem to mind everything being explained to it in words of one to two syllables and can tolerate high decibel shouting.
Clearly, SBS is both unable and unwilling to reach this kid’s market. (Here I’m absolutely on SBS’s side) But the net result is a TV station knows not if it is coming or going.If there is a way of breaking this nexus I’m sure SBS would like to know about it.
Sacha68: Don’t you ever get sick of beating your own drum? The listing of your CV after each comment is, quite frankly, embarrassing. Also, why is it that people like you are always calling for a Royal Commission into everything? Take it from someone who was v knowledgeable on such matters. A man called John Wren. It was his contention that Royal Commissions existed to clear the guilty.
Whether the sporting events the commercial channels acquire are ‘better’ is really a judgement call. They’re certainly more publicised. Suffice it to say, SBS was the only network to cover the most interesting Ashes series for the last couple of decades when we lost to England, they covered the 2006 Football World Cup, the 2008 Euros, were broadcast partners for the Olympics, play the Tour De France every year and the European Champions League.
It’s not perfect, and you’re right, there are incentives to dumb down content. But SBS punches way above its weight, and for me it’s probably the most watchable network.
I challenge anyone to name a single film played on the ABC or commercial networks which comes close to the top 20-30 films SBS played this year.
I just don’t see how all that content can be seen as ‘dead’. By what definition is SBS ‘dead’ and ready for consignment to the dustbin but the ABC is ‘alive’?
Long live SBS! The SBS could always be improved (no outside advertising for a start), but it still holds a substantial niche market in airing events from under-represented sports groups and ethnicities. And it challenges the ABC with its nightly world news coverage.
The book’s title ‘The Challenge of Cultural Diversity’ is such a negative and divisive title. Perhaps a more appropriate title would have been ‘The Celebration of Cultural Diversity’, that is unless all of the authors are culturally challenged themselves?