Comments on: ACMA slaps Today Tonight. Again.

By: TV MAN

TV MAN — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 04:03:33 +0000

Please note it was the promo that breached ACMA, not the story. The story was spot on. Yes, a Brisbane cab driver was asked if he knew how to get to Circular Quay and he didn’t. I’m sorry but if you are a Brisbane cabbie and you don’t know that Circular Quay is in Sydney then you shouldn’t be driving a cab. Might point out they were asked Brisbane landmarks and didn’t know where they were either. Melbourne cab drivers have to pass a landmark test before they get a job.

By: Mary Cetwerschuk

Mary Cetwerschuk — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:22:01 +0000

Should children be smaked?
to learn there lesson??
from the age of 4 yrs to 13 years of age?

By: Wen

Wen — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:00:00 +0000

Thanks televisionau! Maybe this is why SBS puts all those disclaimers before every World Watch news program…

By: TelevisionAU

TelevisionAU — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:21:00 +0000

there have been times when network stations (eg. GTV9 Melbourne or QTQ9 Brisbane) have got in trouble for a program coming from another station within the same network (eg. TCN9). But looking through the ACMA website this seems to be a rare if not first occasion that an independently-owned affiliate or relay station (in this case TNT9) has been subject to a ruling for a program they get fed from a capital city network (7). But as David points out, the viewer has to make the complaint against the channel they saw the program on, so 7 effectively gets let off the hook. Doesn’t seem fair in light of the current networked set-up where regional stations have little control over what they put to air as it’s mostly fed from a network. I think ACMA needs to change how this complaints process works so that the stations that make the shows are accountable, not just the one that puts it to air.

By: Wen

Wen — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 08:29:00 +0000

Still seems a little unfair that Southern Cross gets slaped and Seven gets nothing. Is this a first for Aus affilates?

By: David Knox

David Knox — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 07:28:00 +0000

As the ACMA approach is to first let the complainant sort the matter with the broadcaster (and only approach ACMA if the issue is unresolved) I’d say the original complaint was directed at TNT9.

By: TelevisionAU

TelevisionAU — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 07:18:00 +0000

seems to be a loophole in the rules where a regional affiliate (TNT9/SCT) cops the blame for a program that even though they’ve paid for and aired, is not one that they have any editorial control over. It’s not like they could have reviewed the show before it went to air and now they wear the penalty for Seven’s lapse in privacy standards? The same story i assume went out on Seven in the other states (TT is not produced in TAS as far as I know) but Seven who made the show doesn’t cop anything. Perhaps ACMA needs to review their complaints processes??