While the Australian parliament continues to mull over the future of Internet gambling, members of the TV industry are pressing the government to reconsider the wording of a proposed ban on interactive gaming.
The Federation of Australian Commercial TV Stations (FACTS), the industry's trade organization, is worried that a loosely worded section of the government's interactive gambling bill could put an end to a wide array of popular programming on Australian television.
The controversy centers on the bill’s definition of "gambling services" and how it can be construed. FACTS claims that the definition can be interpreted to include popular shows ranging from "Survivor, " "Who Wants to be a Millionaire, " "The Weakest Link, " "Home and Away" and others.
Most shows have co-existing viewer hotlines and contests with the programs.
The shows could be in jeopardy because a "gambling service" is one that requires payment of a consideration, which in the TV networks' case would be the cost of the phone call.
FACTS said many television shows and promotions involving prizes, an element of chance or audience interaction could be caught under the wide definition of an interactive gambling service.
FACTS sent an inquiry to the Senate explaining its concerns. The group has also expressed its support for the concept of exempting wagering from the bill to protect sporting broadcasts.
"In the future, the capabilities of digital TV will allow more direct forms of interactivity through the set-top box," FACTS said.
"FACTS submits the bill should not limit services offering interactivity with broadcast material, rather than interactive gambling, purely on the basis of the technology used to provide them," the submission said.
According to FACTS, a failure to change the bill might result in less local TV, potential job losses in the production industry and a restriction on digital TV revenue sources.
FACTS said it was impossible to know what future digital TV services might be provided. It did not explain why the telephone betting exemption should be extended to datacasting services provided through digital TV.
"FACTS members provide coverage of a range of sporting events, including horse and harness racing which will be affected without a wagering exception," it said. FACTS argued that the gambling bill unintentionally contradicted parts of the government's digital TV policy.
"It is federal government policy to introduce a broader range of services delivered using the television receiver," FACTS said. "Part of the delivery of this policy intent relies on the ability for broadcasters to offer innovative and interactive services."
If the legislation is passed, according to FACTS, the landscape of Australia television could be changed.
"If much of the existing Australian content, such as our diverse range of game shows, are classed as interactive gambling services, holders of commercial television broadcasting licenses will need to find alternative content," the group said.
"It is unlikely in the short term that this new content would be Australian, or could make the same contribution to Australian culture as the existing popular entertainment."
Submissions to the Senate inquiry show the proposed laws have also roused international ire. The Swiss-based World Lottery Association (WLA) said Australia actively markets Internet lotteries overseas, unlike many countries which only allow lottery sales within their own borders.
By not recognizing geographical boundaries, Australia was competing with state-run national lotteries, which benefited sports, culture, science and education.
"These sectors are of course concerned that their sources of income might diminish as a result of unfair, international competition," WLA said. "The national lotteries cannot compete on the prize pay-out, since their primary objective is to create maximum profit to the good causes."