[LINK] Fwd: MR26-12: Media statement by Chris Chapman on the Convergence Review

[Paul Brooks]

On 1/05/2012 8:16 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> Chapman is fighting a rearguard action, putting on a brave face, etc.
>
> ACMA has been completely useless as a consumer protection 
> organisation,


IMHO the wheels fell off when the two functions were merged due to a glib glossing
over of the words 'standards' and 'regulation'.
The ACA comms side was (and is) primarily concerned with *technical* standards and
regulation, interoperability, safety, reliability.
The Media side seems to be primarily concerned with *behavioural* standards and
regulation, dealing with things like cash-for-comments, advertising 'standards', and
whether the ABC radio was sufficiently impartial (looking at the ACMA site this
morning). Regulating behaviour is a very different beast from regulating technology
and spectrum, perhaps one organisation is not suited to trying to do both.


> APF submitted that ACMA should under no circumstances be given any 
> role in the standards regulation aspects, but rather that a new 
> public regulatory body should take responsibility for establishing 
> standards for print, broadcast and networked media, dealing with 
> complaints, and imposing sanctions.

This seems to describe the behavioural standards arm.
Maybe there's a need for three organisations - the technical standards arm of the old
ACA, and the two media behaviour regulators called for with the convergence report.
P.