ANTI-SIPHONING

The anti-siphoning scheme was created when subscription television commenced in Australia in the mid-1990s to counter fears that popular sporting events would become unavailable to non-subscribers.

The list currently contains in excess of 1300 sporting events that the Government has determined to be of national importance or cultural significance – far in excess of listed sporting events in similar schemes in other countries. 77% of events on the list are never shown by the free-to-air networks.

The anti-siphoning scheme is currently being reviewed by the Australian Government.

ASTRA’s POSITION

ASTRA strongly believes that the list needs reform.
ASTRA does not believe that the list should be abolished.
ASTRA is not asking for a single event on the list that the old TV networks consistently show to be removed from the list.
ASTRA and its members believe that events that the old TV networks do not show should be taken off the list so that new forms of media can bid for them fairly.

ASTRA and is members have consistently argued for reform of the anti-siphoning scheme.

Q&A

What is the disadvantage of the anti-siphoning legislation remaining as it is?
The main disadvantage is that it prevents keen sports fans from seeing the events that want to watch – when they want to watch them. Sport fans want to see sport live. The current arrangements mean that the Old TV networks have control over what and when sport programming is available, and too often it is delayed, cancelled or they choose not to show events at all. Another significant disadvantage is that the anti-siphoning list distorts the market for sports broadcasting rights and disadvantages sport clubs down to the grass roots level as they receive less revenue for their broadcast rights than they should.

Why is the anti-siphoning legislation viewed as anti-competitive?
The anti-siphoning list is anti-competitive as it does not allow sporting events to be sold to the highest bidder on an open market. This view is backed up by the ACCC and the Productivity Commission in their submissions to the Sport on Television review, and in the PC’s ‘Annual Review of Regulatory Burdens on Business: Social and Economic Infrastructure Services’, from August 2009. Research shows that 67 percent of Australians believe that sporting codes should be able to sell the broadcast rights to their events to whoever they choose.

Should the anti-siphoning legislation be amended to allow commercial television to broadcast the listed sporting events on their current digital channels (e.g. Ten’s One HD Channel)?
The point of placing sport on the anti-siphoning list is that all Australians should be able to view that sport. This is not achieved if the sport is broadcast on a digital channel given current penetration rates of digital reception in Australia.

Should the anti-siphoning legislation be extended to cover online and mobile media in light of the Government’s proposed National Broadband Network, which would enable rights holders to sell content directly to the national audience?
ASTRA’s view is that the anti-siphoning list should be reduced not extended.

SPORT ON TELEVISION: TO SIPHON OR NOT TO SIPHON?

The Parliamentary Library released a Research Paper that traces the
history of this anti siphoning regime. It discusses development of the
scheme and explores the arguments for and against its retention, both in
past context and in relation to a current inquiry into the relevance of
the scheme in the changing 21st century media environment.

Click here to read the publication.