Policy makers face a number of difficulties meeting the traditional cultural and social objectives of broadcasting and film policy development in a rapidly changing digital environment. This new environment requires broadcasting policy and film policy alike to substantially adjust their settings to “speak to” new governmental, industry, and political priorities. Broadcasting and film policy-making frameworks now need to adjust to policy and industry settings stressing the knowledge economy and information society. This both creates a new centrality for audiovisual production as a “content creation” industry and raises new problems for the various local film and television production ecologies (including the cultural policy that has sustained them) that have developed. This article will use Australian developments to suggest ways broadcasting and film policy is both making and not making this adjustment.
Australian Film Commission and Film Finance Corporation. 1999. Report on the Film and Television Production Industry. Sydney: Australian Film Commission and Film
2.
Finance Corporation. Bennett, T., M. Emmison, and J. Frow. 1999. Accounting for Tastes: Australian Everyday Cultures. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Canadian Conference of the Arts. 1998. Final Report of the Working Group on Cultural Policy for the 21st Century. Ottawa: Canadian Conference of the Arts.
4.
Canadian Content and Culture Working Group. 1996. Ensuring a Strong Canadian Presence on the Information Highway. Report to Advisory Council on the Information Highway. Ottawa, Canada: Advisory Council on the Information Highway.
5.
Cutler & Company. 1994. Commerce in Content: Building Australia's International Future in Interactive Multimedia Markets. Canberra, Australia: Department of Industry Science and Technology, CSIRO, and the Broadband Services Expert Group.
6.
de Moragas Spà, M., C. Garitaonandía, and B. López, eds. 1999. Television on Your Doorstep: Decentralisation Experiences in the European Union. Luton, UK: University of Luton Press.
7.
Department of Communication and the Arts. 1994. Creative Nation: Commonwealth Cultural Policy. Canberra, Australia: Department of Communications and the Arts.
8.
Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. 2000. Convergence Review. Canberra, Australia: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.
9.
Gonski, D.1997. Review of Commonwealth Assistance to the Film Industry. Canberra, Australia: AusInfo.
10.
Graham, A., et al. 1999. Public Purposes in Broadcasting: Funding the BBC. Luton, UK: University of Luton Press.
11.
High Level Group on Audiovisual Policy. 1998. The Digital Age: European Audiovisual Policy. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
12.
Hitt, M. A., R. D. Ireland, and R. E. Hoskisson. 1999. Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization Concepts. 3d ed.Cincinnati, OH: South-West College Publishing.
13.
Holdsworth, N.2001. Mixed Reception for Mosfilm Plan: Progress vs Historical Implications at Heart of Debate over Studio. Hollywood Reporter Weekly International Edition, 10-16 April, 12-57.
14.
House of Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport. 1998. Fourth Report: The Multimedia Revolution(HC 520-1). London: HMSO.
15.
House of Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport. 1999. Third Report: The Funding of the BBC(HC 25-1). London: HMSO.
16.
Iordanova, D.1999. East Europe's Cinema Industries since 1989. Media Development46 (3): 13-17.
17.
Lealand, G.2000. Regulation—What Regulation? Cultural Diversity and Local Content in New Zealand Television. Media International Australia Incorporating Culture & Policy95:77-89.
18.
Leiboff, M.2000. The Reconfiguration of Culture Post-Project Blue Sky: Culture as a Service in Broadcasting Law. Media International Australia Incorporating Culture& Policy95:63-76.
19.
Macmillan, S.2001. Barrandov and Boyana Studios Attracting Investors. Screen Daily, 2 August. Retrieved 7 August 2001 from http://www.screendaily.com.
20.
Monitor Company. 1999. US Runaway Film & Television Production Study Report. Report for Directors Guild of America & Screen Actors Guild. Los Angeles: Directors Guild of America & Screen Actors Guild.
21.
O'Regan, T.2000. Normalising Media Regulation. Media International Australia Incorporating Culture & Policy95:5-8.
Productivity Commission. 1999b. Transcript of Proceedings at Sydney on Monday, 6 December 1999(984-1078). Melbourne, Australia: Productivity Commission.
Rose, N.1996. The Death of the Social? Re-figuring the Territory of Government. Economy and Society25 (3): 327-356.
26.
Schlesinger, Philip. 2000. Television Production, Audio-Visual Policy and the Creative Industries. Television: Past, Present and Future Conference, University of Queensland, Brisbane, 3 December.
27.
Thomas, J.2000. It's Later Than You Think: The Productivity Commission's Broadcasting Inquiry and Beyond. Media International Australia Incorporating Culture& Policy95:9-18.
28.
Tracey, M.1998. The Decline and Fall of Public Service Broadcasting. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
United States Trade Representative. 2000. Audiovisual and Related Services. Retrieved 10 August 2001 from http://www.ustr.gov/sectors/services/audio.html.
30.
Vizard, S. 1999. Seachange in Australian Content. 1999 Andrew Olle Media Lecture, 22 October 1999. Retrieved 25 February 2000 from http://www.abc.net.au/specials/olle99.
31.
Wildman, S.1999. The Economics of Minority Programming. Aspen Institute Forumon Diversity and the Media. Aspen, CO: Aspen Institute.
32.
World Commission on Culture and Development. 1996. Our Creative Diversity. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
