The failure of "copycat" Australian versions of overseas shows? ...Australian versions of Top Gear, for example. Pointless Australian television. More Australian made television is best if its original....except the Underbelly franchise....and (for Alastair's benefit) I'm unconvinced on The Slap (!)
TV doesn't exist to create jobs, but to communicate truth and beauty. So Australia needs the best TV wherever it comes from. "More Australian TV" is like affirmative action in employment or trade protections in industry and will always affect quality and prevent the person so privileged from being all they can be.
I am actually in favor of more Aussie TV programming, but that would be what I'd argue if I was arguing the negative case.
Thanks. We've got rebuttal covered for any mention of pointless Australian television - reality shows etc. (We're proposing a model ... "whereby local tv content is increased from 55% to 65% over a ten year period. This will be achieved through increasing government funding to the Australian television industry on the condition that the money be spent producing more Australian made dramas.")
We've got the quality issue covered by arguing that we must up the quantity in order to up the quality (practice makes perfect etc.)
I'm hoping our opposition isn't sophisticated enough to suggest Mark's idea.
We're talking a lot about national identity (Oh no! Australians are calling 911 in an emergency! This is a symptom of a major problem!) and Australian jobs.
The kids are okay. Unfortunately we are debating another team from our school so there's a good chance that we won't win this one. (We've won the last 3.) But who cares? After this, debating season is over. Hello Sunday afternoons again!
Drama covers a lot of kids shows and many comedies. Doesn't just mean... dramatic dramas! Things acted with a story. We do okay at the moment for news content etc.
Basically, it suited our argument to limit it to drama.
It costs too much to make things completely here. As much as people got up in arms about us splitting the work between here and our Singapore studio to make Bananas in Pyjamas, if we didn't, it wouldn't have gotten made, and I'd be out of a job, along with a stack of other people.
A rebuttal to Mark's point is that TV is not only about viewing of beauty, but about its creation. Do we want Australia to be constantly taking in beauty of creation from other places, but never providing the incentive to create themselves by keeping a 'glass ceiling' (I'm really laughing now) that keeps Australian creatives from ever getting their work on TV? Simply because overseas fare is cheaper/less risky? Do we really have such an inferiority complex?
:P
Sorry, I'm laughing at myself posting this at multiple levels, without really ever having communicated all the little thoughts I'm laughing at. Still, it could be a helpful contribution in case your opposition have Baddeley-level sophistication.
Yeah. I need to prepare them more for that line. For better or for worse, Australian's aren't going to give up tv. So we need more good stuff. Australia won't make sorkin or whedon quality if we don't start making more...
Kutz - pfft! Australia can never produce a large amount of high quality television because we are a country of only twenty-something million. We just don't have the population base to produce enough creative geniuses to create the community that will generate enough of the outcomes needed. We have to have a reasonable sense of what a small country can do, and realize that we need to import a lot of TV if we want a lot of high quality TV shows. We will only ever fill in some of the slots, not all or most.
:P
My suggestion for countering my original argument is to point to the ABC. It is a clear counterexample as it is a kind of trade protectionism - a government funded company. And it has arguably produced the best quality shows consistently over the last x years because it doesn't have to worry about ratings. That suggests that TV doesn't fit into the economic model as neatly as most industries do. The nice thing there is that is an argument based in a concrete example which is always effective when countering some all-encompassing abstract argument.
Crownies. Underbelly.
ReplyDeleteThe failure of "copycat" Australian versions of overseas shows? ...Australian versions of Top Gear, for example. Pointless Australian television. More Australian made television is best if its original....except the Underbelly franchise....and (for Alastair's benefit) I'm unconvinced on The Slap (!)
ReplyDeleteTV doesn't exist to create jobs, but to communicate truth and beauty. So Australia needs the best TV wherever it comes from. "More Australian TV" is like affirmative action in employment or trade protections in industry and will always affect quality and prevent the person so privileged from being all they can be.
ReplyDeleteI am actually in favor of more Aussie TV programming, but that would be what I'd argue if I was arguing the negative case.
Thanks. We've got rebuttal covered for any mention of pointless Australian television - reality shows etc. (We're proposing a model ... "whereby local tv content is increased from 55% to 65% over a ten year period. This will be achieved through increasing government funding to the Australian television industry on the condition that the money be spent producing more Australian made dramas.")
ReplyDeleteWe've got the quality issue covered by arguing that we must up the quantity in order to up the quality (practice makes perfect etc.)
I'm hoping our opposition isn't sophisticated enough to suggest Mark's idea.
We're talking a lot about national identity (Oh no! Australians are calling 911 in an emergency! This is a symptom of a major problem!) and Australian jobs.
The kids are okay. Unfortunately we are debating another team from our school so there's a good chance that we won't win this one. (We've won the last 3.) But who cares? After this, debating season is over. Hello Sunday afternoons again!
You mention Australia drama Simone but what about comedies and other areas such as children's content.
ReplyDeleteDrama covers a lot of kids shows and many comedies. Doesn't just mean... dramatic dramas! Things acted with a story. We do okay at the moment for news content etc.
ReplyDeleteBasically, it suited our argument to limit it to drama.
It costs too much to make things completely here. As much as people got up in arms about us splitting the work between here and our Singapore studio to make Bananas in Pyjamas, if we didn't, it wouldn't have gotten made, and I'd be out of a job, along with a stack of other people.
ReplyDeleteA rebuttal to Mark's point is that TV is not only about viewing of beauty, but about its creation. Do we want Australia to be constantly taking in beauty of creation from other places, but never providing the incentive to create themselves by keeping a 'glass ceiling' (I'm really laughing now) that keeps Australian creatives from ever getting their work on TV? Simply because overseas fare is cheaper/less risky? Do we really have such an inferiority complex?
ReplyDelete:P
Sorry, I'm laughing at myself posting this at multiple levels, without really ever having communicated all the little thoughts I'm laughing at. Still, it could be a helpful contribution in case your opposition have Baddeley-level sophistication.
Uh, you guys are all missing an obvious line of attack, I suspect.
ReplyDeleteWe don't need more TV of any stripe, we need less. Go smell some roses, etc etc.
(Exceptions allowed for Aaron Sorkin, or Joss Whedon, if only to avoid the flame war!)
Yeah. I need to prepare them more for that line. For better or for worse, Australian's aren't going to give up tv. So we need more good stuff. Australia won't make sorkin or whedon quality if we don't start making more...
ReplyDeleteKutz - pfft! Australia can never produce a large amount of high quality television because we are a country of only twenty-something million. We just don't have the population base to produce enough creative geniuses to create the community that will generate enough of the outcomes needed. We have to have a reasonable sense of what a small country can do, and realize that we need to import a lot of TV if we want a lot of high quality TV shows. We will only ever fill in some of the slots, not all or most.
ReplyDelete:P
My suggestion for countering my original argument is to point to the ABC. It is a clear counterexample as it is a kind of trade protectionism - a government funded company. And it has arguably produced the best quality shows consistently over the last x years because it doesn't have to worry about ratings. That suggests that TV doesn't fit into the economic model as neatly as most industries do. The nice thing there is that is an argument based in a concrete example which is always effective when countering some all-encompassing abstract argument.