Academic literature on the topic 'Television stations Licenses Australia'

Horsfield, Peter. "Down the Tube: Religion on Australian Commercial Television." Media International Australia 121, no. 1 (November 2006): 136–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x0612100116.

Herd, Nick. "‘The Weaker Sisters’: The First Decade of ATV-0 Melbourne and TEN-10 Sydney, 1964–1975." Media International Australia 121, no. 1 (November 2006): 119–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x0612100115.

Dick, Nigel. "The Road to Television Networking." Media International Australia 99, no. 1 (May 2001): 67–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x0109900110.

Azubuike, Chieme, and Stella I. G. Ikiriko. "Challenges and Prospects of Private Broadcast Media Ownership in Nigeria: A Study of Stations in Port Harcourt." Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 10, no. 5 (September 1, 2019): 90–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/mjss-2019-0070.

Ginsburg, Faye. "INDIGENOUS MEDIA FROM U-MATIC TO YOUTUBE: MEDIA SOVEREIGNTY IN THE DIGITAL AGE." Sociologia & Antropologia 6, no. 3 (December 2016): 581–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2238-38752016v632.

Harrison, Kate. "The Changing Face of the Television Industry." Media Information Australia 44, no. 1 (May 1987): 16–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x8704400105.

Ali, Christopher. "A broadcast system in whose interest? Tracing the origins of broadcast localism in Canadian and Australian television policy, 1950–1963." International Communication Gazette 74, no. 3 (March 28, 2012): 277–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1748048511432608.

Ould Mohamed Baba, Elemine, and Francisco Freire. "Looters vs. Traitors: The Muqawama (“Resistance”) Narrative, and its Detractors, in Contemporary Mauritania." African Studies Review 63, no. 2 (November 18, 2019): 258–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/asr.2019.37.

Noble, Grant, and Kate Freiberg. "Discriminating between the Viewing Styles of the Commercial and ABC Child TV Viewer." Media Information Australia 36, no. 1 (May 1985): 22–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1329878x8503600109.

Ukah, Asonzeh. "BANISHING MIRACLES: POLITICS AND POLICIES OF RELIGIOUS BROADCASTING IN NIGERIA." RELIGION, MEDIA AND POLITICS IN AFRICA 5, no. 1 (June 1, 2011): 39–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.54561/prj0501039u.

Australia. Parliament. House of Representatives. Standing Committee on Transport, Communications, and Infrastructure. The role and functions of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal: Report from the House of Representatives, Standing Committee on Transport, Communications, and Infrastructure. Canberra: Australian Govt. Pub. Service, 1988.

Pardo, Juliana Rubiano. El contrato de concesión de espacios de televisión. Santa Fe de Bogotá, D.C: República de Colombia, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Socieconómicas, 1991.

United, States Congress Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Communications. Broadcasting Improvements Act of 1987: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Communications of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, One Hundredth Congress, first session on S. 1277 ... July 17 and 20, 1987. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1987.

United States. Congress. House. Committee on Energy and Commerce. Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance. Antitrafficking of broadcast licenses: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, One Hundredth Congress, first session on H.R. 1187 ... June 17, 1987. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1988.

Die Rundfunkveranstaltungsfreiheit und das Zulassungsregime der Rundfunk- und Mediengesetze: Eine verfassungs- und europarechtliche Untersuchung der subjektiv-rechtlichen Stellung privater Rundfunkveranstalter. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1999.

Diercks, Thorsten. Die Zulassung als Veranstalter landesweiten privaten Rundfunks nach nordrhein-westfälischem Recht. [S.l: s.n., 1992.

Television's pirates: Hiding behind your picture tube. Mangonui, Far North New Zealand: Far North Cablevision, Ltd., 2007.

Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang. Regulating media: The licensing and supervision of broadcasting in six countries. New York: Guilford Press, 1996.

Wang Weiji bai ke. Xianggang: Bai juan chu ban she, 2014.

United, States Congress Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation. Community Broadcasters Protection Act of 1998: Report of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on S. 1427. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 1998.

"elimination of cultural difference. McNamara assured an Australian journalist: “The show is Australian through and through” (quoted by Gill 1993: 2). At the time of writing, neither American nor Australian responses are known. However, the summer release in the US – like that of Neighbours – is significant. This is the holiday season, the season when stations introduce material in which they place less market faith. Neighbours’s failure in the American market begs questions about the differential circulation there of Australian televisual and filmic texts. Jon Stratton and Ien Ang have argued the centrality of television to the modern nation-state’s basic reliance on . . . the nuclear family as the basis for social order, as the site of morality and for the organization of desire . . . . Through (modern) television, the nation could be forged into an encompassing imagined community in a way which was both more extensive and intimate than the newspaper – Benedict Anderson’s exemplary medium endowed with this role – was able to achieve. (Stratton and Ang 1994) Television’s homogenizing rhetorical space appears to be particularly resistant in the American case to incursions from outside its boundaries. Film differs somewhat. While both film and television production in the US are safely dominant in their local market, film eludes the familiar and familial domestic space of television. Crocodile Dundee succeeded strikingly in lowering the threshold of recognition of Australian media product in America. Yet, despite the film’s massive success in Australian terms (US$174 million US gross box-office, far above Crocodile Dundee 2, second at US $109 million, and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, third at US$36 million), it has made less great waves in US market terms. Among Variety’s “All-Time Champs of the 1980s,” it ranked only twenty-third, sandwiched between Honey, I Shrunk the Kids and Fatal Attraction, and earned only 31 percent of the takings of the top film, E.T. (Variety 1993: 10). Neighbours’s failure in the US television market should be measured not only in terms of the fact that US television is more strenuously resistant to foreign imports than is US film distribution–exhibition, but also in terms of the relative lack of success, by American standards, of even Australia’s greatest film export success. France: “Viewers have been bluffed by vandals” Neighbours play a particular role in Australia. In that country of infinite spaces, the sparse population must practise solidarity and good neighbourliness to survive. In an urban environment, however [sic], caring quickly descends to malevolent snooping. Faced with this soap, it is difficult to observe the evangelical precept of loving one’s neighbours as one loves oneself. (A.W. 1989: 7)." In To Be Continued..., 124. Routledge, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203131855-26.

"far, far cry from the broad swathe beaten to the British market by soaps ranging from The Sullivans to Flying Doctors and from Prisoner: Cell Block H to Country Practice which preceded the Neighbours phenomenon there. “The accents” were constantly cited as a crucial point of resistance. KCOP: “People couldn’t understand the Australian accent” (Inouye 1992). WWOR: “We received some complaints about accents, but maybe that’s not the real issue” (Darby 1992). KCOP: “The actors are unknown, and it takes place in a country that few people know about” (Inouye 1992). WWOR: “One problem with anything from out of this country is making the transition from one country to the next. We’re all chauvinists, I guess. We want to see American actors in American stuff” (Leibert 1992). The tenor of these reflections in fact gainsays the New York Daily News’s own report five days prior to Neighbours’s first New York transmission: The program was test-marketed in both cities, and viewers were asked whether they prefer [sic] the original Australian version or the same plots with American actors. “All of them chose the Australian program over the US version,” Pinne said. It won’t hurt, he added, that a program from Australia will be perceived as “a little bit of exotica” without subtitles. (Alexander 1991: 23) The station’s verdict within three months was clearly less sanguine. Australian material did not stay the course, even as exotica. Two additional factors militated against Neighbours’s US success: scheduling, and the length of run required to build up a soap audience. Scheduling was a key factor of the US “mediascape” which contributed to the foundering of Neighbours. Schedule competition tends to squeeze the untried and unknown into the 9–5 time slots. Whatever its British track-record, the Australian soap had no chance of a network sale in the face of the American soaps already locked in mortal combat over the ratings. The best time for Neighbours on US television, between 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., could be met no better by the independent stations. For the 6:00–8:00 p.m. period, when the networks run news, are the independents’ most competitive time slots, representing their best opportunity to attract viewers away from the networks – principally by rerunning network sitcoms such as The Cosby Show and Cheers. An untried foreign show, Neighbours simply would not, in executives’ views, have pleased advertisers enough; it was too great a risk. Even the 5:00–6:00 p.m. hour, which well suited Neighbours’s youth audience, was denied it in Los Angeles after its first month, with its ratings dropping from 4 per cent to 1 per cent as a consequence. Cristal lamented most the fourth factor contributing to Neighbours’s demise: the stations’ lack of perseverance with it, giving it only three-month runs either side of the States. This is the crucial respect in which public service broadcasting might have benefited it, by probably giving it a longer run. Until the late 1980s, when networks put on a daytime soap, they would." In To Be Continued..., 121. Routledge, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203131855-23.