Bodies such as IAWRT should promote the best of film, radio and television, one of the Association's longest serving members told the Biennial Conference.
In her keynote address, Elizabeth Kirkby urged members to resist the temptation to give audiences ‘a diet of western rubbish'.
‘Our programmes should reflect the history of our separate cultures, and ensure that we use the technology that we have to make meaningful programmes that will inform and inspire our audiences; that will make our children and our grandchildren proud of the unique culture of their country.'
The full text of Elizabeth Kirkby's address follows:
It gives me great pleasure to be here today, to meet old friends and also make new ones. I have been a member of IAWRT for a long time, and it is good to be back again in S.E.Asia, and to see what a vibrant city Phnom Penh is today; so different from my first visit in 1968.
After living and working in Malaysia for fifteen years, I went to Australia in 1965.
I had heard of IAWRT whilst I was still with Radio Malaysia in 1963, I think that was the first time that the IAWRT Board had made an attempt to attract members from outside Europe. As I expect you know, our Association was formed by a group of European women after World War II, British, French, German, Scandinavian , also one Australian, Catherine King. They were determined to ensure that women would be involved as equals in broadcasting, and would contribute fully to the exciting new world of television.
So much has changed since then, not only the greatly expanded membership of IAWRT, with members now in Pakistan, India, Africa and the Philippines, but through communication technologies that were unknown when the Association was founded.
At the beginning, most of the members worked for ‘national' radio stations, the ABC in Australia, the BBC in Britain, Norddeustcher Rundfunk and Deutsche Welle in Germany, and the national broadcasters in Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Norway. The expansion of commercial radio and the vast network of commercial television stations that we know today were not even contemplated.
In Britain, the first commercial opposition came from Radio Luxembourg, enjoyed by the teenagers of the era because it played pop music on Sundays. Sir John Reith, the iconic Director General of the BBC, was a very conservative Scot who didn't believe in frivolous entertainment on the Sabbath.
When I was first employed by Radio Malaya, we came under the direction of the Ministry of Information charged with ‘nation building' and the dissemination of anti-communist propaganda in a British colony. This meant that we broadcast in a variety of languages not only in English. There were four programme divisions to carry the responsibility of broadcasting in English, Tamil, Malay and several Chinese languages. Mandarin was the official language, but many thousand Malayan Chinese spoke Hakka, Hokien, Cantonese and other Chinese languages. Sadly, we called them dialects which shows our ignorance. But our main aim, in those early days, when Malaya was still under military occupation after World War II, was to persuade the Communist guerrilla fighters in the jungle that life under a democratic western government would be far better, and could lead, as it did, to independence.
At the start, I was a member of the English language service, but for the last two years I was Head of the Talks and Features Unit, writing and producing radio documentaries which were then used by all the other language services. It was a valuable experience for me as I learnt a great deal about the customs and way of life of all the other nationalities living in Malaya, and later Malaysia.
It was a culture shock for me to come to Sydney, when the ‘white Australia' policy was still in force; the streets and the shops seemed drab and lacking in vitality. Today, of course, Australia is a multicultural society, not only Sydney and Melbourne, but in the country also. There are Sudanese, Lebanese, Chinese and Vietnamese, also Africans, even in the small town where I live with only 4,000 inhabitants. This is only one of the changes that I have seen in my time as a ‘new' Australian, although some of the Lebanese and Chinese families settled there many generations ago.
Broadcasting in Australia has changed beyond belief. When I was first an ‘on air' presenter for the ABC, every word I spoke on air had to be scripted. The script was vetted by the programme organiser in advance and woe betide you if you departed from the script.
In the 1960s, women broadcasters were tolerated, just, providing they discussed suitable topics for women. My programme, ‘Morning Call' was really a radio version of a women's magazine. Discreet health information, hints on home decoration, family cooking, children's ailments, interviews with other women who were housewives, doctors or teachers, perhaps an outstanding female athlete! But public affairs and news were in the male domain. I was dismissed brusquely when I asked if I could audition as a newsreader. ‘No one will listen to the news if it is read by a woman,' I was told. I often wonder what the men who made that judgement think now when they watch the news on television, when the newsreader is frequently a glamorous young blonde, and the all important financial news is presented by young women.
The fight now is to promote ‘on air' presenters who are middle aged women.
Of course, it isn't only that the style of broadcasting that has changed; it is the technical revolution that has occurred.
When I was first collecting interviews for my documentaries, I went out with a sound engineer to operate the recording equipment. I was very proud when I first got my own portable recording machine, reel-to-reel, but weighing about 15 pounds. I gave it to our local museum a few months ago, and as I carried it in, I wondered how I had ever managed to lug it around on the job. Last week I was told of a Zoom H2 digital recorder, about the size of an iPod which is professional quality and has been devised specifically for radio interviews. Television stations now use material taken on mobile phone cameras if they want to take advantage of a police chase or similar event captured by an enthusiastic amateur.
News interviews are on the web within hours of their broadcast, transcripts and digital recordings of interviews are promoted with the closing credits. The news stories of the day can be found on the web, as well as interviews with pop stars, politicians and leading sports men and women. You can pick them up in colour, sound and vision on your laptop or mobile phone. We can watch news broadcasts, sporting fixtures and public ceremonies on a mobile phone, as well as on screens in airports, coffee shops and clubs. TV stations now provide almost instant coverage of tidal waves, earthquakes and ceremonial events beamed to world-wide audiences. Even war zones are included as news teams are embedded with the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is instant communication by email as well as by phone; this explosion of technology was not available even fifteen years ago.
As broadcasters perhaps what we should consider now is whether all this advanced technology is being used to the best advantage. As broadcasters, are we happy that our programmes are often edited to meet the demands of television and radio commercials?
How do we feel about Twitter and Facebook? Do we agree with Rupert Murdoch that viewers/listeners should pay to download what they have seen on TV, or read in a newspaper and then transferred to the web?
I don't know how much you are affected by commercial advertising, but in Australia, as in America, all our TV channels are now dominated by advertising. It is not unusual in a half hour programme to have up to 12 minutes of advertising.
Obviously, the commercial TV channels and radio stations are the worst offenders; it is their source of income. But it means that the programme content is tailored to suit the advertiser. If the advertiser is willing to pay more to have their product advertised during a football match or a cricket match, the viewer will get more sport. If the advertiser wants a quiz show, such as ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?' or a so-called reality show like ‘Big Brother', then the TV station gives priority to that type of show.
I find this situation very depressing, as it means that TV in Australia, and in England, now caters for the lowest common denominator, as worthwhile drama, documentaries and discussion programmes are sidelined. I would like to suggest that my concern isn't simply because TV channels no longer cater for my demographic, an audience of educated, aware adults over the age of 50. It is the fact that the young audiences are being fed pap (at the best), and dangerous rubbish(at the worst).
My opinion of ‘dangerous rubbish' are the horror movies that purport to show battles against extra-terrestrial beings and grisly adventures in haunted houses. My satellite channel Austar now gives me the choice of 110 channels (if I pay for them all) but few are worth watching, and whichever channel I choose, the programme content is interrupted by advertising.
I now have more channels then ever, but they all carry advertising. Although advertising in Australia is now controlled to a degree, cigarette advertising is banned, and alcohol advertising is being brought under control, we haven't managed to control the advertising of junk food, even though we are now recognised as one of the most obese nations in the world; doctors are concerned that some children are now dangerously obese.
I agree that health professionals now influence television programmes also, and this month I could have watched ‘Mind over Matter' from the UK or ‘Ruby' from the US, both lifestyle programmes that aim to help overweight people lose weight. But, I would like you to consider that if they hadn't been exposed to junk food ads in the first place, they wouldn't be overweight now.
I have brought my satellite TV guide with me, so you can see for yourselves just what I have been referring to, and if you are now wondering why I have spent time today talking about the downside of our profession and not concentrated on all the good programmes that are made by our organisation, I'll explain.
Of course, there are great television and radio programmes being made, and the technological advances that have been made in my lifetime are exciting. But although we have digital cameras, make programmes on video discs and edit on laptop computers, perhaps we should spend a little time thinking about what we can do individually to slow the avalanche of ‘dangerous' advertising; to ensure that there are more ‘ad free ‘programmes for children. They do exist, an example is the BBC's ‘Cheebies'. It is laudable to import all the new technology that has been invented in the US and Europe, but it isn't necessary to import the ‘rubbish' programmes also.
National culture and national values are of supreme importance, something that we should find easy to remember here in Phnom Penh.
Cambodia is heir to a thousand years of civilisation. Khmer kings have ruled over Cambodia, including Laos and most of Thailand, since the year 900 AD. The capital at Angkor Wat was completed in 1150 where the Khmer kings reigned for over three hundred years. Originally Angkor was a Hindu temple, until the Buddhist shrine at Angkor Thom was built in 1177 A.D. We are meeting in a country that has a long tradition of involvement in both Buddhism and Hinduism, which are reflected in the temples and shrines. The Khmer people used Sanskrit which dates back to 1600 B.C and is now prized as the language of scholars.
To put this history into context, we should remember that the façade of Notre Dame was only commenced in 1201 AD, and English as we know it was first used by Shakespeare in 1594.
When remembering the achievements of the West, we should also remember the architecture and civilisation of the East ... and we should also remember the less valuable contributions the west has imposed on the rest of the world.
Our consumer culture is nothing to be proud of, and to my mind, its impact is matter for concern, particularly when we are happy (and some are proud) to promote unhealthy food and horror movies.
If Rupert Murdoch has his way we are to be forced to pay to download sensational news items from tabloid newspapers on the web, and sadly it is apparently a sign of civilisation when cities in Asia and Africa can boast one or more MacDonald's!
As now a very old member of IAWRT, both in years and length of membership, I will leave you with this thought for the future.
We have done so well in transforming our Association into a truly ‘international' association; now can we spend time ensuring that in our organisations we promote the best of radio, film and television made in what is now known as ‘Anglosphere'. That we persuade managements that it is not an ‘advance' to offer our viewers a diet of western rubbish, quiz shows that pander to gamblers by offering big money prizes, slick commercials that tempt children with fast food, chocolate and ice cream. Horror movies based on medieval superstition are not the only way to please our audiences.
I am not suggesting that our programmes should be dominated by classical music or serious drama, as an actor for many years in a popular soap opera, ‘No 96', that topped the ratings in Australia between 1972 and 1976, that would be ridiculous!
But our programmes should reflect the history of our separate cultures, and ensure that we use the technology that we have to make meaningful programmes that will inform and inspire our audiences; that will make our children and our grandchildren proud of the unique culture of their country.
In Australia, maybe in other countries also, that will mean fighting for a national broadcasting network supported by government funding so that there is no need to depend on the whims of the advertisers.
It doesn't matter if the funds come from a licence fee or from taxation, as long as there is one network that is able to survive without advertising revenue.
That's my thought for today, again thank you for asking me to join you. I know we are going to have an enjoyable and stimulating few days. I look forward to sharing them with you. Thank you.
