What You Think | radioinfo

What You Think

User Opinion Story
Anthony The Koala
1 October 2019 - 10:12am
Here are a couple of discrete interpretations of the data from the ratings of survey 6:

MSR - 1.1% Sydney, 1.6% Brisbane, 0.2% Melbourne. Only a marginal improvement in Sydney and Brisbane over the last year. With such low ratings, especially 0.2% for Melbourne, how long can MSR be economically viable, especially for a labour-intensive format?

2CC and RN: I made a prediction elsewhere on this site that it would be the first time that Sydney-based broadcaster Fran Kelly would defeat the other Sydney-based broadcaster Alan Jones (2GB, 2CC and 4BC). But Fran was only there for a short time during the ratings period. Nevertheless RN beat 2CC.

2CH improved overall by 0.5% to 3.6%. On closer examination the over 65 demographic, 2CH had the 2nd highest rating at 9.2% compared to ABC-FM at 9.4%. The 45-54 group perferred to listen to Smooth-fm. For the 40 to 54 demographic, it is spread "roughly" around 10% to 12.2%KIIS, Smooth, WS-FM and MMM while 2CH rates 0.9%.

Thank you,
Anthony from exciting and dynamic Belfield
Radio ratings survey 6: Golden result for 104.3 Melbourne, 96FM soars MIX slides in Perth
Anthony The Koala
25 September 2019 - 2:09am
While what I said about the definition of broadcasting needs further clarification by the Minister under s6(c) of the Act still holds. I want to make it clear.

Reiterating that content provider providing for many client-server streams does not come under the definition of broadcast under the Act. The significance mentioned in Mr Ahern's article means that transmitting client-server streams does not have to adhere to broadcast standards.

I have not fully enumerated the definition of broadcasting. I mentioned that if there is a transmission of a particular event such as a sporting match, the effect of the content provider providing many client-servant streams at the same time is effectively a broadcast. Similarly, a content provider such as a radio or TV station transmitting audio and/or video content via a client-server IP stream at the same time as the broadcasting over the air is effectively a broadcast over the internet even though legally it is not broadcasting over the internet.

More discussion needed on what the Minister needs to extend the definition of broadcasting OR by a amendment to the legislation in order that content providers adhere to standards such as providing a certain percentage of Australian content.

I may have been unclear on ad-hoc transmissions of content over an IP stream using a client-server model. Under a "proposed" amended definition of broadcast, I would not include people or entities who like to podcast their audio and/or video content. Nor would it include Youtube or other social media content, unless it is a Australian content provider continuously transmitting audio and/or video and provides several server-client streams. A transmission from an overseas content provider cannot be required to adhere to Australian standards.

Consequently should internet-only radio or TV stations be legally defined as a broadcasting such as internet-only radio station new2uw, http://www.new2uw.com/ ? In addition should if server-client streams are the method of transmission of content, under the extended definition of broadcast under the Act, should the definition of broadcast be extended to include the number server-clients?

So, if an entity uses 5G broadcast technology, the entity is legally defined as a broadcaster. For server-client IP streams, either the definition extended or modified by the Minister or a legislative amendment may be required. Factors to consider are (i) the number of server-client streams, (ii) the simultaneous transmission of the IP stream with the 'broadcast', (iii) the continuity of the transmission of content without random access to programs, (iv) that audio and/or video podcasters who don't continually transmit be exempt from broadcasting.

While it is fine for Australian content providers it won't cover transmissions from outside Australia, broadcasting or IP streams.

Thank you,
Anthony from really exciting Belfield
5G - the future for radio?
Anthony The Koala
20 September 2019 - 4:47am
I felt to comment on Mr Ahern's article on the definition of broadcasting on the internet, in the article at https://www.radioinfo.com.au/news/alston-determination-defining-broadcasting-services-extended .

The article suggested that the regulation defining broadcast a broadcast excludes point-to-point communications as defined in the definitions section s6 "broadcasting service" subsection (b) of the Broadcast Services Act (Cth), http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/bsa1992214/s6.html. The article also included reference to subsection (c) can define or extend the meaning broadcastcasting because the current state of point-to-point communication does not require audio and video-on-demand services to adhere to standards required of broadcasters, for example Australian content.

Audio-on-demand and video-on-demand definitely fall into the exclusion of broadcast. But how does one apply or extend the definition to broadcasting to audio and/or video on demand? The current method of delivering IP streams from source to consumer is the client-server method of delivery. That means the content provider's servers have to make provision for handling many client-server relations.

For one-off ad-hoc transmission of video and/or audio streams, the process would definitely fall into the exclusion of the definition of broadcasting under s6 of the Act. BUT if there is a one-off event of audio and/or video streaming, the number of client-server relations are required. If the video and/or audio IP streams under a client-server model are delivered almost simultaneously, then it has the effect of broadcasting even though it does not fall legally into the definition of broadcasting under the Act or the Minister does not expand/define the definition under subsection (c) of the Act.

Given Mr Cridland's article on the 5G and the new technology of broadcasting streams instead of client-server relations, would fall under the Act because the content provider has "....equipment appropriate for receiving that service, whether the delivery uses the radiofrequency spectrum, cable, optical fibre, satellite or any other means or a combination of those means....."

It follows that if 5G can deliver content in a 'broadcast' method instead of a client-server relation, the content provider would have to abide by the regulation. For the traditional client-server model of content delivery, the definition of broadcast would need to be clarified by the Minister as to the timing of delivery of several client-server connections; how to define when the number and timing of client-server connections occur, whether the content is the same for all client-servers and the frequency of the offering of the particular video and/or audio stream. For the latter, the frequency of the offering of the particular video and/or audio stream could be a 'one-off' like a sporting match or other live coverage. For repeat transmission of content via a client-server connection, it is a repeat of the same content at a scheduled time. In other words, the content is scheduled rather than randomly accessed by the user in the case of video and/or audio on demand.

In sum, content providers under the 5G technology would come under the definition of broadcast while the Minister needs to clarify the definition of broadcast under s6 "broadcasting service" subsection (c) especially where video and/or audio on demand is scheduled at a particular time or times.

Thank you,
Anthony of exciting Belfield
5G - the future for radio?
Richard Morris
19 September 2019 - 10:01pm
Just back from IBC - where we heard about the high power German trial with 5G as a replacement for TV - and the low power trial in Scotland with 5G as a future replacement for DAB. I agree 5G broadcast is many years away as a consumer proposition. The question I have is this - do the network operators have as much power as they used to have over the feature set of mobile phones? Does anyone have any figures for the quantity of phones that are curently sold "sim free" or "dual sim" ? However I also agree there are many hurdles to getting compatible mobile phones built - it's not just the network operators who might wish to block this. Apple will presumably also be reluctant to add free to air TV/ radio to an iphone. 5G - the future for radio?
Eugene Delargy
19 September 2019 - 11:46am
Mark may have moved to Brisbane 26 years ago, but am sure he was at 4BC for a few years in the middle of the 90's then back on Sydney radio and cable/Sydney TV.

Filled in over the last decade and ended up in full time employment when Macquarie removed dozens of staff in 2015 resulting in over 90% of the station content being from 2GB.

After Friday, 100% of shifts on 4BC irrelevant to Brisbane.
All I know is I am going on holidays... to my happy place to fish: 4BC's Mark Braybrook
15 September 2019 - 6:59pm
While no one should lose their job for free speech, there is a line that can only be crossed so many times. People should be respected, this was coming many months ago. One month ago Calling Kerri-Anne Kennerley a dog after losing her husband. Threatening to join a bash "egg boy" to teach manners? Sticking up for and advising downloading Brenton Tarrant/manifesto video as must watch, were all "over the line" .Supporting Milo's boys should be with older men as right of passage under age all culminated into an intolerable viewpoint for radio. There is shock jocks and just absolutely shocking. The boundary was broken, nothing to do with "free speech". Or being "right wing". To use that is very weak. By these outrageous views cumulated in your dismissal 3 years very late. Radio talk presenter 'Sacked for Conservative Commentary'
Anthony The Koala
10 September 2019 - 4:54pm
I wish to add to the discussion against the use of lossy compression in broadcasting and the further aggravation of quality caused by recording equipment.

As I was browsing the comments archives of this site, I came across the name of renowned designer of audio mixing desks for various TV and radio stations including the ABC, Mr Poul Kirk.

One of the earliest archived articles was against the use of lossy audio files in the production of advertisements. In this article, Mr Des DeCean commented that despite the convenience of size of a lossy audio file such as MP3 and MP4, counselled against its use of emailing lossy files. Mr Poul Kirk concurred with that, source: https://radioinfo.com.au/news/avoid-using-email-digital-radio-ads. The preferred method of 'transfer' between studios is lossless compression such as WAV.

The quality of sound is further aggravated by the quality of the source recording. Mr Kirk commented on the quality of recording equipment used by 'garage bands', https://radioinfo.com.au/news/dont-play-bad-quality-music-radio-poul-kirk .

In a previous life working in a radio and TV station, I was trained to be critical of the signal going to air. Today, I am listening to CDs of supposed 'digitally remastered' recordings, one can still hear 50Hz or 60Hz hum and its harmonics and tape hiss. Here are a few examples. These are not exhaustive.
* 'Smiley' sung by Ronnie Burns. You can hear 50Hz hum and its harmonics every time the harpsichord is played. You can still hear tape hiss.
* 'Eagle Rock' sung by "Daddy Cool". Introduction to the music featuring the lead guitar and the singer vocalising "Now listen!.......", 50Hz hum, its harmonics and tape hiss.
* 'Ebb Tide' sung by the 'Righteous Brothers'. In the beginning you can hear 60Hz and its harmonics in the beginning only.
* 'Step Inside' sung by Cilla Black. First few bars before the first bass note, you can hear 50Hz hum and its harmonics. It is repeated in another segment of the song. This suggests that the loud parts of the music are masking the hum.

Just a thought,
Thank you,
Anthony from exciting and dynamic Belfield

Commenting on digital radio
10 September 2019 - 2:34pm
Thanks for the comment. It is always a difficult thing to cover.
We try to follow the old convention of not reporting details of suicide deaths as it was always thought that it may inspire copycats, but I acknowledge that there is a new approach where talking about it (in the right way) can be helpful.
We will think on it and try to do better next time (let's hope there is no next time).
Meanwhile, if you are troubled and thinking of suicide please remember these things:
* People love you and will miss you if you are not there.
* It is a cruel thing to inflict on those who are left (this is the message Robin Bailey wants conveyed after the suicide of her husband).
* Not having you in the world is a loss - do not underestimate your contribution, even if you feel right now that it is not significant.
* You are not alone. Seek help here https://www.beyondblue.org.au, 1300 22 4636

If you know someone who is at risk, ask them (really ask them) Are You OK? and read tips on how you can help here.

Steve Ahern
Vale Glen Hannah
Anthony The Koala
9 September 2019 - 3:08pm
The author is correct that it's management's decision to remove Dean Mackin. It is also correct that management lives or dies by that decision. The problem with 2HD's weekend afternoon programming is that it is not constant. It's several weeks of sporting coverage and a sprinkling of Dean's programming. Irregularity in programming may not necessarily produce pleasing ratings for that timeslot.

If sport is to be a regular occurrence on Saturday afternoons, then Dean should have been allocated a more regular schedule. In fact he's competently handled other shifts including weekend breakfast or when he substituted for Carter Edwards during weekend nights. That was certainly a management decision.

I have also said elsewhere on this site that management is inconsistent in making decisions to get rid of someone. If management didn't like his narrative, why did it take three years to get rid of him? I've discussed the issue of a radio station taking a particular narrative such as 2GB and how intelligent presenters of a left-wing persuasion would not be employed.

I also mentioned that according to Mike Carlton's book "On Air" the then 2UE management asked him to take on a more right-wing narrative and he refused. Then about 30 years ago, during the days when 2GB was in the doldrums, evening presenter the high-rating Brian Wilshire, discussing car racing on air. It was reported that management called the switchboard (not on the air) and was dictating to Brian not to talk about car racing. On air and in an extremely angry tone, Brian expressed that he was "p*ssed off" at management's interference in his program. Brian continued to broadcast for the next 25 years plus.

Management may have the right to suggest to the presenter to take on guests of an opposite viewpoint to the presenter. Dean could have interviewed a member from the Greens or Labor party. Dean could have asserted his views without being rude as he is with callers disagreeing with him.

In a similar way, Dean always accepted anyone calling into his program, something that he has no control of. I have never heard him being rude or shouting down to callers if they disagreed with him.

Management cannot dictate what kind of view a presenter takes. That is political interference and is unnacceptable.

It follows that I agree with Peter Lewis that it was prepared to employ Alan Jones who had a particular narrative. I doubt that management would dictate to Alan Jones how and what to say. Similarly, if management was consistent, it would not have interfered with how Dean should say what he says.

It is speculation, in the spirit of the Broadcast Operations Group potentially employing Alan Jones, Dean's mistake was hinting of another station's presenter's sponsors withdrawing their sponsorship and that he supported that presenter remaining on that station. I suspect that was Alan Jones a competitor to 2HD and thus 2SM. And no, I am not talking about presenters interviewing other presenters from other stations and management inconsistency in dealing with this issue - I've discussed this elsewhere.

On balance, the Saturday afternoon shift should be sports or talk not this on/off sport for a few weeks and then talk for a few weeks. This is unstable programming. If you go for sports coverage, then when there are no matches, it should be sporting talk, not current affairs.

I hope that Dean returns to the air.

Thank you,
Anthony of exciting and dynamic Belfield

Radio talk presenter 'Sacked for Conservative Commentary'
Peter Lewis
9 September 2019 - 8:54am
So this is the same network that was prepared to hire Alan Jones if he wasn't signed by 2GB?? Radio talk presenter 'Sacked for Conservative Commentary'


radioinfo ABN: 87 004 005 109  P O Box 6430 North Ryde NSW 2113 Australia.  |  All content © 2012. All Rights Reserved.