The highly unusual intervention during a commercial rights negotiations process indicates the Albanese government is determined to ensure sport remains easily accessible to the general public,and comes ahead of a review of ‘anti-siphoning’ laws which give networks first dibs on certain sports rights and are bitterly opposed by pay TV giant Foxtel.
The AFL is in the final stages of negotiations with potential partners about the rights to show matches from 2025,but the talks hit a speed bump last week when against reducing the amount of live matches that were available for free.
Rowland’s intervention comes amid pressure from free-to-air television networks,clubs and state ministers about the implications of putting games behind a paywall.
Communications Minister Michelle Rowland spoke directly with the AFL about its broadcast rights.Louie Douvis
A spokesperson for Rowland told this masthead she had taken the additional step of speaking directly with potential broadcast partners and the AFL about the matter.
“While not involved in the commercial deliberations between the parties,the Minister has engaged with stakeholders,including representatives of the AFL and broadcasters,” a spokesperson said. It is unclear if she engaged before or after the public announcement. The AFL declined to comment.
The AFL is confident its next deal will not breach anti-siphoning laws - which determine which key sports and cultural events should be available for free. The league is focused on ensuring people continue to watch games,as well as having money to invest in grassroots footy.
Negotiations with companies including Nine Entertainment Co (owner of this masthead) and Paramount owner Network Ten are continuing and a deal is still expected to be finalised before the end of the AFL season in late September.
Media and AFL sources the sporting body was seriously considering a renewed deal with its incumbent partners Foxtel and Seven,but the two companies are at loggerheads over key elements of a future arrangement,including the number of live matches on free-to-air.
The AFL hopes will deliver a record figure that will allow it to invest in the game and its players. Under the current deal,it will receive $946 million over two years from Seven and Foxtel.
If the deal with the incumbents goes ahead,Seven will be able to stream the games it broadcasts on free-to-air on its online service,7Plus,which was In exchange,Foxtel is expected to receive giving it the exclusive rights to home-and-away rounds broadcast on that day.
each week by up to two hours in interstate markets to give Foxtel more exclusivity for its streaming service Kayo Sports.
The AFL broadcast rights are a test of the federal anti-siphoning laws,which were created in the early 1990s when streaming services did not exist and Foxtel was the major cable TV provider.
Free TV Australia,the lobby group for commercial broadcasters Seven,Ten and Nine,has to allow the public free access to major events.
Nine,which ownsThe Sydney Morning Herald andThe Age,also owns subscription streaming service Stan,which airs sport such as rugby union. Channel Ten is owned by US film studio giant Paramount.
The government has made a review of the scheme a priority.
Foxtel boss Patrick Delany said this month to get ahead of the Murdoch-controlled pay TV company and acquire all the rights to a sport with no requirement to air the games for free.
Labor made a pre-election pledge to review anti-siphoning laws to ensure global streaming services could not win the rights to major sporting events such as the AFL and Australian Open before free-to-air broadcasters have the chance to bid.
Rowland made headlines last Wednesday when she issued an unprecedented public warning to the AFL,asking it to keep live matches on free-to-air television. “I encourage the AFL Commission and its broadcast and streaming partners to ensure there is no diminution in the availability of AFL matches on free-to-air television under the new deal,” Rowland said.
Nine chief executive Mike Sneesby declined to comment on the AFL rights negotiations,but said it was risky to put too many games behind a paywall. He said the company supported Labor’s review of the scheme even though it owns a streaming service and has the ability to put as many games as it desires behind a paywall. “If you put[a sport] behind a paywall,you’re going to face the issue that we’ve seen with some sports where their audience shrinks. We might do a deal that is primarily a subscription-driven deal,but be able to offer the things that that sport needs on free-to-air.
“If you look at what we do with rugby,we broadcast more rugby on free-to-air TV than is required under the anti siphoning requirements. Why? Because we believe building the audience for that sport is going to deliver a result in our subscription business.”
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories,exclusive coverage and expert opinion..