The way we watch Content Favors Global Cultural Diversity over Australian Content

What we watch on our own terms through streaming, downloading and multi-platform viewing is being disregarded. Video on Demand (VOD) is becoming a major profile for Australian audiences, changing the screen content consumption patterns and implications for audience engagement, meaning we still want a cultural identity just not in a traditional way (Screen Australia 2018). Since our Australian film industry is vastly dominated by American Hollywood content, in 2005 a USA-Australia free trade agreement (FTA) was established. This is a bi-lateral trade treaty which removes constraints on the free flow of trade between the countries with free market integration (Breen 2010, pg. 658). The intention of this is to advocate local culture and promote diversity which leads onto the concept of digital determinism.

Digital Determinism

The theory of Digital determinism identifies patterns in free trade, the structural power between relationships and the threat to overwhelm smaller countries and their agencies (Middlemost 2018). This is American industries having the power to influence our industry. The discussion of the treaty between the two countries outlines the need for Australian cinema to make way into the international film industry through free trade and how people access the content. The ‘failure’ of Australian content is vastly due to deficiencies in funding, production and government film agencies rather than the content itself (Averayd 2011, p. 36). But with the inclusion of the FTA and co-productions, people may be sceptical of losing our significant Australian content. This can be evident in films such as Bait 2012 being a co-production with Singapore that doesn’t really shout Significant Australian content (Middlemost 2018).

(Image Sourced from: http://www.dhakamovie.com/bait-2012-720p-bluray/)

The audience is changing

The issue isn’t the content, it is the measurability of the audience. Now we have a sense of protectionism and there needs to be a clear understanding of different ways of accessing Australian content. Our audience has become more fragmented and there are niche pockets of audience that are reached through various multiplatforms. VOD and cinema aren’t the only ways of viewing content anymore and content only exists when distributed properly (Aveyard 2011, p. 38). So rather than focusing on the traditional forms of media it is seen that alternative methods are the way to reach your intended audience (Hemert TV & Ellison E 2015, p. 39).

(Image Sourced from: https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/infographics/australian-audiences-are-watching-online)

Australian content is in fact still being consumed. VOD is the prominent form of content viewing. YouTube holds 69% of content viewing, ABC iView 54% and Plus 7 holds 46%, but ultimately 40% of people viewing VOD are watching Australian content. VOD is a personalised medium where people selectively pick what to view and with 40% being Australian content (Screen Australia 2014), this shows the significance of Australian created content. Commercial broadcasters do not engage with the audience which is a fundamental component of online streaming in which you can still have a large audience for niche content (Scott, MC 2016).

Our world is becoming more and more interconnected and it is almost inevitable that our cultural ties that have woven Australian cinema for decades may be lost for the purpose of jobs and boosting the economy. But we are not a failing industry and through FTA’s we still retain our local produce for film and online content.

 

References

Aveyard, K 2011, ‘Australian films at the cinema: rethinking the role of distribution and exhibition ‘, Media international Australia, no. 138, pp. 36-45.

Breen, 2010, ‘Digital determinism: culture industries in the USA-Australia Free Trade Agreement’, New media & society, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 657-676.

Hemert TV & Ellison E 2015, ‘Queensland’s film culture: the challenges of local film distribution and festival exhibition’, Studies in Australasian Cinema, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 39-51.

Middlemost, R 2018, ‘Making space for Australian content: free trade agreements, and how we watch’, University of Wollongong, Lecture Week 6, delivered 15 January 2018.

Scott, MC 2016, ‘The battle for audiences as free-TV viewing continues its decline’, The Conversation, 22 April, Accessed 15 January 2018 https://theconversation.com/the-battle-for-audiences-as-free-tv-viewing-continues-its-decline-58051

Screen Australia 2014, ‘Online and Demand: Trends in Australian online video use https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/reports-and-key-issues/reports-and-discussion-papers/online-and-on-demand

Are Australian Jobs more Important than Australian Culture?

Art vs Policy, Australian Audience vs Australian films and any attention vs no attention at all. All these debated topics so far have noted the different divides the Australian film industry is faced with, leading to the discussion of Australian jobs vs Australian culture in the film industry. Australia’s vast landscape and values have been explored numerous times throughout our film history, some for creating a tourism market and financial gains. But possibly the greatest way we can improve the economy through film is engaging with other nations. Having a greater access to resources and creating content that appeals to a broader spectrum of people will ultimately create more jobs for Australians in this industry.

The Australian film industry is a major component to nations economy, bringing in a staggering $5.8 billion in GDP. This includes access 46,600 full time jobs and even though this is a fluctuating number with 12% drop since 2012, (This study was completed in 2015) the film industry is still a major factor to the economy (Screenrights 2015). For this reason, there is a strong importance for Australians to have jobs and be able to contribute to the economy on a national and international level. This then leads to the debate Australian jobs are more important than Australian culture. Now I’m not blatantly saying that we should ignore the notably Australian features of an Australian film and conceal them with our international counterparts’ culture, but it couldn’t hurt to contribute our skills and capabilities and engage in transnational productions to retain our jobs. At least 50% of lead roles and 75% of support roles must be filled by Australian performers in co-productions which is why it is essential to continue co-productions (Middlemosst 2018).

(Image Sourced from: https://www.screenrights.org/news/industry-news/2015/02/australian-screen-industry-brings-58-billion-to-nations-economy)

Let’s take the film Babe 1995, being a co-production with America. Through viewing this film there are some observations are not overtly Australian in Nature. The depiction of a farmer, a fairytail-esk vibe of the film that could essentially be set in any country, results in a universal story loves by many nations. However, as an Australian and familiar with general outlook of Australian farmland and Australian actors, I can accept this film as Australian legacy. It is examples such as this that show that co-productions can hint little increments of Australian values, while provide high paying jobs for Australians in the film industry. Movies like this are created through investments from Screen Australia as producer offset for co-productions is guaranteed money (Screen Australia 2016).

(Image sourced from: https://dvdcover.com/babe-1995-se-ws-r1/)

Co-productions are not de-nationalising the Australian film industry but rather our capabilities are becoming unbundled, making a globalisation from within. Operating in localised and subnational settings contributes to the global system (O’Regan & Porter p. 6) and the co-productions help facilitate and create opportunities for co-partner alliances for example Adoration 2013 starring Naomi Watts and Robin Wright (Screen Australia 2016). There still needs to be some Australian creative contribution under Screen Australia guidelines. It may seem that I am disregarding the cultural value of Australian content over the financial gains and economic contribution that the Australian film industry brings in, but co-productions can play a major role for jobs created in the industry. We still have our significant Australian content films produced but ultimately they merely cover a fraction of the box office as discussed in a previous blogpost, so it is essential for us as Australians to engage with other nations to create content that we can be proud of that also includes Australian creative contributions.

 

References

Middlemost, R 2018, ‘Cross national casting, transnational co productions, location incentives and runaway productions’, University of Wollongong, Lecture Week 5, delivered 8 January 2018.

O’Regan, T & Potter, A 2013, ‘Globalisation from within?: the de-nationalising of Australian film and television production’, Media international Australia, no. 149, pp. 5-14.

Screen Australia 2016, ‘Doing Business with Australia Producer Offset and Co-productions’ January, viewed 9 January 2018. https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/getmedia/45690cc7-08f1-4aa3-9209-de197b1d876d/Doing-Business-with-Australia-booklet.pdf

Screenrights 2015, ‘Australias film industry bings $5.8 Billion to nations economy, Screenrights, 10 February, viewed 9 January 2018. https://www.screenrights.org/news/industry-news/2015/02/australian-screen-industry-brings-58-billion-to-nations-economy

Critical Regionalism Verses Regional Tourism in Australia

If you had to describe the features of a Quintessentially Australian film you would associate them mostly with our rugged Australian outback, luscious farmland or even out coastal presence. These landscapes are very common across Australian Films, Crocodile Dundee 1986 and Oddball 2015 just to name a few. The phenomena of the landscape, specifily the Australian outback has been persistent ever since the exploitation of ‘genre films’ and the wave of Australian films essentially being ‘about the Landscape’ in the 1970’s-80’s and also in contemporary films (Brabazon 2001, p. 150). So then it is seen that perhaps the purpose of these films is created for tourism, to exploit the features of Australia, to draw tourist into these locations. These features are undeniably Australian, providing our national image to an international audience.

This is when the idea of Critical regionalism verses regional tourism comes about. National tourism organizations market a specific nation, for this case it is Australia and then the focus is drawn towards particular regions to seek and establish local distinctiveness (Dredge & Jenkins 2003, p. 383). The argument then arises on how the national identity will emerge, as the relationship between Critical regionalism and regional tourism can be determined through films that portray a strong identity from a particular location. For Oddball 2015, a you can book a tour showing off Warrnambool that follows the dogs journey, creating a ‘fan tourism’. This is a positive representation of a location that provided a good representation of Australian films and Australia.

(Image Sourced from: http://www.piecesofvictoria.com/2015/09/warrnambool-hits-the-cinemas-in-oddball/)

For the Case of Suburban Mayhem 2007, for me being an Australian and familiar with the area the film was based and also the area it was film in, Stereotypes already emerge for me for how I portray these places. For example, Wollongong, the location the story is loosely based on, provides picturesque shots of the ocean, scenery and the suburban lifestyle which is something I have become familiar since going to University at Wollongong. But the unfortunate fact is also the ‘boganness’ and drinking, parting persona created by the character Katrina which could misinterpret the way the audience views these areas and Australia as a nation. So the debate of any attention is good attention may not necessirly work positively towards films such this as it reveals the features of Australia that may not be typical Australia and it is important to show more diversity and complexity.

(Image Sourced from: https://www.empireonline.com/movies/suburban-mayhem/)

Another perspective on of Critical regionalism verses regional tourism is the notion of The Australian Outback for Tourism and the representation of Australia. But the interesting thing is, the Australian Outback, as beautiful as it may be doesn’t necessarily accept culture but rather rejects it in the identity trope to which can only be conquered by individuals and not a culture. You must adapt to survive which is well represented in Pricilla Queen of the desert 1994. The imagining of the outback represents paradoxical hostility and attraction with endless possibilities (Frost 2010 p. 709). This film continued the tradition of Ocker comedies, that reveals the continuing influence pervasive heteronormativity has and how a cultural contraction is faced between the outback and masculinity (Kunze, 2013, p. 52).

To discuss is any attention good attention for Critical regionalism verses regional tourism, some representation of regionalised areas of Australia work favourability for a national identity, but for some people, this is the only means in which they view Australia. They may base their ideology off our party lifestyle or possibly be attracted to a specific location because of a film.

 

References

Brabazon, T 2001, ‘A pig in space?: Babe and the problem of landscape’, in Craven, Ian (ed.), Australian cinema in the 1990s, F. Cass, London, pp. 149-158

Dredge, D & Jenkins JM 2003, ‘Destination place identity and regional tourism policy, Tourism Geographies, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 383-407.

Kunzee, PC 2013, ‘Out in the outback: Queering nationalism in Australian film comedy, Studies in Australasian Cinema, vol. 7 no. 1, pp. 49-59.

Warwick, F 2010 ‘Life Changing Experiences Film and Tourists in the Australian Outback’, Annals of tourism research, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 707-726.