Comments on: Industry questions ABC3 deals

By: SHINTARO

SHINTARO — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 10:52:33 +0000

Kirben: Your knowledge is obviously better than mine on some of these things. I work in the industry but I’ve been in Europe for some time now and the only thing I can tell you for sure is that the perception of Oz children’s programs is generally pretty positive from over here.

While I’ve kept in touch with Oz ratings, drama and entertainment programming I’ll admit that my knowledge of kid’s programs is kinda dated. The last I knew we were making some terrific things and I’m quite disappointed to hear that is apparently no longer the case. If it’s true, then I can agree that maybe quotas are hard to justify right now.

Thank you very much for taking the time to explain the situation to me.

By: Kirben

Kirben — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:06:13 +0000

Shintaro: Do you actually watch Australian kids series on (free to air) TV? or are you part of the industry?

Recent animated (Animalia, Dogstar, Master Raindrop, Pealie, Pixel Pinkie, Zeke’s Pad) and live action series (Blue Water High, Mortified, Street Smartz, Wormwood) shown on (free to air) TV are very poor quality, compared to what is available overseas.

Dogstar by Media World would be a perfect example, listed as a comedy, but a humorless and literary stupid (characters, story and world) series. I still can’t believe Dogstar got a second series, which will basically repeat the same basic story again. The worse part is Media World actually produced good cartoon series (New Adventures of Ocean Girl, Silver Brumby) in the distant past.

Why should Pay-TV (or even free to air) TV networks even be forced to show a quota of Australian series ? I see this as nothing more, than protectionism of the local industry. I would like to see an Australian company produce a series as good as Avatar – The Last Airbender (Nickelodeon) or Oban Star-Racers (Jetix/Disney).

By: SHINTARO

SHINTARO — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:14:32 +0000

Most Australian children’s programs are definitely Not poor quality and many of them distribute very well overseas. I think a small quota, based on the budget of the channel concerned, would be a great idea.

By: Jobin

Jobin — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:40:11 +0000

That Paul Robinson is just trying to get publicity for his channel by putting the competition down…as if no one is going to see right through his ‘criticisms’.

I hope the abc does well – it sounds good

By: Brad

Brad — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:59:31 +0000

I agree with Kirben. Most Australian content is at poor quality. I’d much rather watch what the rest of the western world is watching. Australia is becomming to Australian, on free-to-air anyway..

By: Kuttsywood

Kuttsywood — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:47:21 +0000

I swear Nick had more Oz content in 1999 than in 2009. Remember, it had stuff like Nick Takes Over Your School, reruns of kids stuff from the FTA’s, plus strong scheduling, who remembers the old school Nick opener at 6am?

Now, there is nothing from the FTA’s on Nick, Nick at Nite is gone, not even the 90′s reruns. It’s as if the channel’s become the iCarly/Spongebob channel.

I honestly think, that Nick and Disney (CN don’t need local content, other than introductions for special events) should be given a “10% local content by 2011″ policy by Foxtel, otherwise they don’t get their badly needed expansion (i.e Disney XD, Nicktoons, timeshifts for their main channels).

By: Vic

Vic — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:42:05 +0000

I don’t see a problem with having experienced producers lowered to the same level as those that are just starting. What should count for everything is the quality of content they produce, not how long they’ve had time to make connections with people in the business.

If ABC3 didn’t go for the jugular when acquiring content, they would have been left with a whole lotta nothing. People have to realise that the TV business, be it public or private, is not pretty at all.

By: Kirben

Kirben — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:23:12 +0000

Why shouldn’t kids be able to watch similar shows, if they don’t have pay-tv? the amount of new kids programming on (free to air) TV has really suffered, since the start of Pay-TV, but no one seems to care at all (as usual).

Why do TV networks have to bid against each other, forcing up the prices though? are they all trying for exclusive rights? many kids series have been shown on (free to air) TV, and Pay-TV at the same time before.

The ABC already has a clear bias for Australian content, no matter what the quality, and shows far too much Australian content already. Frequently buying Australian series, already been shown by the commercial TV networks.

Producers of older Australian content just want to make easy money, from their older content. Most of which is terrible, and wasn’t even worth watching the first time around.

The ABC should be spending more money on decent new content (ie Danny Phantom, Redwall), new seasons of regular series (ie Arthur, Fairly OddParents, Wolverine and the X-men) or even bringing back some timeless classics (ie Adventures of TinTin, Little Lulu Show, Mysterious Cities of Gold, Rupert). Instead of wasting even more money, on poor quality Australian content.

By: Russell

Russell — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:56:14 +0000

Not sure what all the fuss is about from
people complaining. Of course new original Australian content costs money. And yes ABC3 is publicly funded.

ABC3 is launching with 40% Australian content.
After more than 10 years in this country Nickelodeon, Disney Channel and Cartoon Network would be lucky to have 1% Australian content. Disgusting. Likewise Nick Jr, Playhouse Disney, Boomerang, Cbeebies And Kidsco.

Thank god for ABC3. I hope it dominates all the foreign kids channels in the ratings.