Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

AUSTRALIA

ABC Radio National's bland vision

  • 20 October 2008

On Thursday, the Senate called on ABC management to immediately make public the reasons for its decision to cut programs from Radio National's 2009 schedule. That followed Religion Report presenter Stephen Crittenden's announcement to his listeners on Wednesday that eight programs including his own were being 'decommissioned'. Crittenden said: 'The ABC's specialist units have been under attack for years, but the decapitation of the flagship program of the religion department effectively spells the death of religion at the ABC. That such decision has been taken in an era when religion vies with economics as a determinant of everything that's going on in the world almost beggars belief.' Religious commentator Paul Collins developed the argument further in Wednesday's Crikey, suggesting that replacing Radio National's specialist programming with interdisciplinary content is 'derived from the half-witted, post-modern conviction that everyone can do anything'.

He said it produces 'a few prosaic 'man-in-the-street' questions [from] the type of journalist who doesn’t know the difference between an Anglo-Catholic and an Evangelical'. The problem is that the only statement from ABC management was both brief and lame, and did not even admit to a move away from specialisation. Hence the Senate's 'please explain'. In announcing a review of the ABC and SBS, Minister for Communications Stephen Conroy said on Thursday: 'We need to make the right decisions now if the national broadcasters are to thrive in a digital, online and global media environment.' It appears that the main reason for Radio National's changes is the reality that its content has more of a future in podcasts and other forms of digital delivery, than traditional broadcast radio. This is about making the most of new technology, and only to be admired. In fact, it's precisely what Eureka Street did when we abandoned print for online in 2006. But the issue of digital delivery is being confused with the actual content. The station is currently conducting a listener survey aimed to assist it to provide a 'better service'. But all the questions are about delivery platforms. There is no opportunity for listeners to tell management that they believe a better service means maintaining and enhancing specialist content. It seems specialist content is simply not on the mind of the station's management. The need for the ABC, and Radio National in particular, to provide a serious forum for informed debate has only increased with Fairfax's commercially-motivated decision earlier this year to dilute its editorial content. As journalism educator