How broadcasters got tenure

One of the most important and contentious policy issues surrounding the introduction of digital terrestrial broadcasting in Australia has been the treatment of incumbent broadcasters. Commercial TV broadcasters are widely perceived to have been treated more favourably than other organisations, particularly in the allocation of spectrum. This and other aspects of policy about digital TV have been criticised for, amongst other things, limiting the likelihood of innovation in the use of spectrum. This paper explores the origins and development of Australian broadcasters' 'incumbency'. Framed by Brian Winston's and Clayton Christensen's ideas about technological change and institutional adaptation, it examines three aspects of Australian broadcasters' incumbency: first, the ways Australian broadcasting laws developed to give broadcasters increasingly secure tenure over their licences; second, the ways intellectual property laws were modified to settle the competing interests of content providers and broadcasters with the introduction of new broadcasting and broadcasting-related technologies; and third, the contest for VHF and UHF spectrum in the early years of television, a contest whose settlement and resettlement provides both a striking parallel and a continuing influence on policy choices nearly half a century later. The broad aim is to better understand the public choices which might be made about the allocation of responsibility for innovation in communications technology and services.