In an age which is largely digital at the corporate level, duplication can be avoided easily and content that is generated by one service used for another. In this context, it is puzzling as to why the Australian Broadcasting Corporation runs two 24-hour news services, one on radio and the other on TV.
The ABC, which is funded by the Australian taxpayer, has a radio station known as NewsRadio. The primary purpose of this station was to broadcast some part of the proceedings of parliament live and also Question Time; hence it was known as the Parliamentary and News Network when it came into service in 1994.
Later the name was changed and, apart from the few hours of parliament each week, it has a round-the-clock news service, often drawing on input from German, Dutch, American and British radio stations.
For the last six years or thereabouts, the ABC has set up a 24-hour television news channel known as ABC News 24. It again uses some content from the BBC and Al Jazeerah, this being late at night.
{loadposition sam08}The question is, with the country's government constantly saying that it is short of money because of the fall in mineral prices - for which Australia has depended on for much of its revenue - why has there been no move to consolidate these two services and simply stream the ABC News 24 content on radio?
One reason the ABC may be persisting with this duplication of effort is because it is an inefficient organisation that has far too many layers of management.
Purists may argue that TV content is not suited for radio in many instances. But the ABC has long overcome any squeamishness over such mixing. For an example, one only need consider the TV programme Insiders, a political current affairs show which is streamed on radio at the same time as it is shown on TV.
While most of the Insiders content can be understood in the radio context, there is one section called Talking Pictures, which can only be understood by the listener if he or she can see the cartoon or news photo which is being referred to by the presenter.
If the ABC has no problem about broadcasting this content on radio, where it is possible to be wondering what on earth is being talked about, then why the reluctance to also use its news broadcasts and other shows on radio?
One can, of course, run parliamentary proceedings and question time as before on radio – though what good it does anyone of even average intelligence is difficult to comprehend. A decent sum of money will be saved and the staff in question can be deployed elsewhere in the ranks of the company.
Of course, one reason the ABC may be persisting with this duplication of effort is because it is an inefficient organisation that has far too many layers of management. Only this can account for the fact that shooting a two-minute clip for the news often requires the presence of as many seven staffers, something I have witnessed in person.
Earlier this week, the ABC's new chief Michelle Guthrie announced some changes at the organisation, and there are reports that about 200 people, about 115 in management and 85 from journalist ranks, will lose their jobs.