首页> 外文OA文献 >Sport on television: to siphon or not to siphon?
【2h】

Sport on television: to siphon or not to siphon?

机译:在电视上体育:虹吸或不虹吸?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

• Siphoning refers to the practice used by pay television broadcasters by which they appropriate, or ‘siphon off’ certain events that have been traditionally shown on free-to-air television so that viewers who do not subscribe to their services are unable to view those events. • Australia’s free-to-air broadcasters lobbied government extensively to ensure that a list of programs which could not be siphoned by pay television was in place to coincide with the introduction of pay television in the mid 1990s. The list detailed events that can not be shown on pay television until telecast rights have first been acquired by a free-to-air broadcaster. • Pay television operators initially objected to the introduction of an anti siphoning list on the grounds that it would inhibit the development of pay television.• The list has undergone considerable review since its introduction. This has resulted in some minor changes, but a list, per se, appears to be entrenched firmly as part of the media landscape in Australia.      • Arguments surrounding the maintenance of the list have been consistent. Free-to-air broadcasters claim that the list serves the public interest, and therefore it should be maintained. Pay television operators oppose the list, which they argue serves the interest of free-to-air broadcasters, not the public.  • The diametrically opposing stances of these powerful interest groups have ensured that anti siphoning is not an issue that governments can ignore. At the same time, anti siphoning has proven an issue that governments, despite various efforts at compromise, have not been able to resolve to the total satisfaction of the broadcasters or other participants, including viewing audiences.     • This paper traces the history of the anti siphoning regime in Australia. It discusses its development and explores the arguments for and against its retention, both in past context and in relation to a current government inquiry into the relevance of the scheme in a changing 21st century media environment.   Image: dpstyles / flickr
机译:•虹吸是指付费电视广播公司采用的适当做法,或者“虹吸”传统上已经在免费电视上显示的某些事件,以使那些不订阅其服务的观众无法观看这些事件。事件。 •澳大利亚的免费广播公司广泛游说政府,以确保与1990年代中期引入的收费电视相吻合的是,收费电视无法吸引的节目清单已经到位。该列表详细列出了免费广播公司首次获得电视转播权之前在付费电视上无法显示的事件。 •付费电视运营商最初反对引入反虹吸清单,理由是它会抑制付费电视的发展。•自从引入清单以来,清单经过了相当多的审查。这导致了一些细微的变化,但是就澳大利亚媒体格局而言,列表本身已牢牢地根深蒂固。 •有关维护列表的争论是一致的。免费广播公司声称该清单符合公共利益,因此应予以保留。付费电视运营商反对这份清单,他们认为这符合免费广播公司而不是公众的利益。 •这些强大的利益集团截然相反的立场确保了反虹吸不是政府可以忽略的问题。同时,反虹吸已证明是一个问题,尽管采取了各种折衷措施,但政府仍无法解决广播公司或其他参与者(包括收看观众)的完全满意问题。 •本文追溯了澳大利亚反虹吸政权的历史。它讨论了它的发展,并探讨了在过去的背景下以及与当前政府对21世纪不断变化的媒体环境中该计划的相关性的调查有关的支持和反对的理由。图像:dpstyles / flickr

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号