ACMA tells narrowcasters to ‘Use it or lose it’
15 October 2020 · News
Holders of low power open narrowcasting (LPON) services have been told by the ACMA to ‘Use it or lose it.’
The new direction comes in response to recent decisions by the Administrative Appeal...
You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
Tags: ACMA | LPON | LPON licences | UIOLI
The article says it all that if an entity which holds one or more HPON licences has six months to use it and that within those six there is little or no broadcasting, the entity will lose the 'privilege' of broadcasting over the frequency or frequencies. The electromagnetic spectrum is a scarce resource. That is one of the reasons for the Federal Government under s51(v) of the Constitution to make laws for postal, telegraphic and other like services.
I have read the AAT cases and in those cases, those licencees were not broadcasting regularly. Typically they were very adhoc, transmitting for a few hours here, not being on the air for a 'time'. There was definitely no regularity.
Unlike the pioneer broadcasters of the 1920s who broadcast for a few hours per night, they were regular. The Stephenson family who pioneered 2EU then 2UE were that. The HPON licencees did not.
What distinguishes those pioneer broadcasters such as the Stephenson family is that they were regular. They built up an audience such that a butcher and the Catholic Church were regular advertisers.
Whether these HPON licensees were permitted to broadcast advertisements, it is not the point. Their broadcasts were irregular. Even though the cases did not reveal the nature of the licensees' targeted audience, adhoc broadcasts is not enough to build an audience and to monetise the business.
In one cases, one entity blamed their irregular service on the failure of the solar-powered stations powering the HPON stations. That shouldn't never have been a problem. First the transmitters' (yes the licencees in all cases had a number of transmitters, hence the correct position of the apostrophe of possession) power ranges is between 1W and 10W. On transmitter power alone, there shouldn't be a problem in powering the transmitter. Many street lights in council-owned parks have large solar panels powering the park's lighting system with power consumption much greater than the sum of the power consumption of the HPON transmitters.
Second, if the studios are supposed to be solar-powered, it should not be a problem if the studios were solar powered. Think of households with a solar-system and backup battery.
For an HPON licensee to blame their solar power technology not functioning resulting in ad-hoc broadcasts is not an excuse. The licensee should have tested its solar-powered studio and transmitter techology before the commencement of the licence period. That's the licensee's problem.
Thank you,
Anthony of in-depth Belfield