Daily Travel Vloggers and YouTube. Passion or Poison?

Daily Travel Vloggers. If you subscribe to them on YouTube, the odds are you assume they have a perfect life. Travelling the world, working with prestigious brands, staying in luxurious destinations and rubbing shoulders with some of the YouTube and celebrity elite. As a subscriber, you are drawn into their world. Every. Day. Of. Their. Life. You become their friend, you turn on your notifications, you follow them on Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat so you don’t miss a thing, and you feel a part of their life…. until they quit.

Travel and daily vlog revolutionary, Casey Neistat, accumulated nearly 7million subscribers on his YouTube channel, known for his unique editing, risk taking and general not giving a f*ck attitude. When Casey quit, the internet lost its mind and I lost a friend. This was the loss and spark that ignited my curiosity about the reality of vlogging and YouTube. To question, challenge and rethink the perceived perfection of this world, and shatter it with the untold, unedited, unscripted and unpaid story.

Success is predicated on the intensely personal. You still have to pump out a video every day, and it has to feel intimate. You could afford to hire a crew to come document your life, sure, but fans expect you to be holding the camera, sharing your secrets, and opening up every facet of your life. (Popper, 2016)

My goal is to create an educational and informative website along with a mini documentary. A ‘go to’ for all things vlog, travel and YouTube related. A critical eye on the industry and to provoke people to question, challenge and consume with intention and thought. My goal is to create a new research piece every other week, focusing on various aspects of the daily travel vlogging world…

  1. Vlogging, capturing daily life and our sense of self
  2. Technology, cameras & gear (including 360 video)
  3. Sponsored content
  4. YouTube, traditional media and online content
  5. Travel & Tourism
  6. Quitting YouTube – the future of vlogging


Obviously in this early stage, much more research and critical thinking needs to go into how I’m going to approach these areas and then present them. Given the lack of research in this field, it may be difficult but it just means I may need to undertake some of my own research and content analysis. But to get us started, let me present Louis Cole aka. Fun For Louis.

In August 2016, Louis travelled to North Korea where he was escorted around the country side with his tour group. This vlog series received extremely critical feedback, including news networks accusing him of being paid by the North Korean government to create positive propaganda (Butterly, 2016).

“I am not an investigative journalist. I don’t really do political commentary and there are other places on the internet you can go to find those kinds of things.” Louis Cole

Whilst watching his vlogs you can appreciate his enthusiasm to showcase a bright and positive side to North Korea – one that is not often the narrative. However as Adam Liptak states ‘travel is inherently a political exercise’ (Liptak, 2016). How much doest this travel influencer, influence, shape or potentially manipulate our ideas of other nations, their people and international relations?

There’s also many questions to address about the platform itself. YouTube, and YouTubers are feared among the traditional media industry as they are a direct threat to their survival in this highly competitive environment. ‘Free online video, especially YouTube, is a vital channel for millennials; nearly half of them (46%) use YouTube every day versus 12% of non-millennial’ (L.E.K Consulting, 2016). The viewing habits of consumers (or should I say their valued audience or family) tell us that people want to be able to access content in an instant, easily and freely. And as explored in the Journal of Marketing and Competitiveness, users are engaging in this content because it’s entertaining and authentic.

“User generated content producers, bloggers and other amateur journalists are creating news content, and people who have been made subjects of news articles are responding online, posting supplementary information to provide comments, context, and counterpoints. Increasingly, the public is turning to online sources for information and consumption matters, such as bloggers, user reviews, and tweeters, reflecting the growing trust in alternative media; and, to user generated content produced by the mass media for entertainment purposes” (Mohr, 2014)

Screenshot 2017-03-20 17.49.01.png
A snapshot of Fun For Louis’ ‘perfect’ Instagram Page

This topic embodies the dilemmas and challenges we face when examining cybercultures. ‘Tensions between representations and reality.’ I’m excited to explore our sense of self, physical location, virtual reality, technology, tourism, sponsored content and ultimately answer if any of this really matters?


Butterly, A 2016, ‘Vlogger Louis Cole denies North Korea paid for his trip’, BBC, 18 August, viewed 18 March 2017, http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37114758/vlogger-louis-cole-denies-north-korea-paid-for-videos-of-his-trip

L.E.K Consulting, 2016 ‘Life-Stage Analysis of Millennials highlights major threat to traditional TV’,  L.E.K Consulting,  13 January, viewed 18 March 2017, http://www.lek.com/press-releases/life-stage-analysis-millennials-highlights-major-threat-traditional-tv

Liptak, A 2016, ‘You can’t vlog in North Korea and call it apolitical’, The Verge, 19 August 2016, viewed 18 March 2017, http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/19/12543958/louis-cole-north-korea-vlogger-youtube

Mohr, I 2014, ‘Going Viral: An Analysis of YouTube Videos’, Journal Of Marketing Development & Competitiveness, Vol. 8, No.3, pp. 43-48, Business Source Complete, viewed 20 March 2017

Popper, B 2016, ‘Why YouTube’s biggest stars keep quitting’, The Verge, 29 November, viewed 18 March 2017, http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/29/13776894/pewdiepie-quit-casey-neistat-vlog-youtube-vloggers


The Little Red Shirt That Captured The World’s Attention For All Of The Wrong Reasons

Aylan Kurdi’s body was found on a beach in Turkey in September 2015. Lifeless, his innocent body was dressed in a little red shirt and boots. At just three years old, Aylan Kurdi brought immediate light to a crisis previously ignored by the mainstream media and the rest of the world. When I first saw this image in September 2015, I remember staring blankly at my computer screen with tears rolling down my cheeks. I wasn’t sad or angry, I felt numb and empty. I remember being mesmerised by his little red shirt. There is no denying the overwhelming sadness this image brings us. However, there are certain questions and issues around this image that are important for us to address as we look through a lens at people and a world far from us.


Screen Shot 2016-03-19 at 4.20.19 pm
Refugees rescued from the coast of Libya. Source

Why this image?

Thousands of photos have been captured documenting the enormous movement of people since the beginning of the refugee crisis during the Arab Spring. The photo above is an example of a photo that would typically be used by the media to sensationalize and dehumanize refugees and their threat to our way of life (Klocker & Dunn, 2003).

‘Images of children suffering form the ultimate emotional argument, compelling us to move from sentiment to action, from the particular to the universal, from passivity to engagement’ (Kennicott, 2013). People around the world reacted to this image. It may not have been for the right reasons, but they saw shame and horror that they couldn’t ignore. (Sontag, 2003).

Cover of the Independent showing the body of Aylan Kurdi. Source

To look or not to look? To publish or not to publish?

A debate which arose following the publication of the photograph of Aylan’s body was whether or not to show the image, and whether or not we should be looking. Channel 10’s The Project stated that they would not show the image as it was ‘too distressing for viewers’ (Ting, 2015), followed by host, Carrie Bickmore, breaking down expressing ‘I am lucky that I and my children live in Australia’ (Ting, 2015).

“A picture of a dead child is one of the golden rules of what you never published.” (Laurent, 2015)

What is interesting is that the network’s primary concern is the wellbeing of its viewers. That they’re doing their audience a favour by not subjecting them to such horror of the reality of this migrant crisis. What about Aylan? His father? His Aunty? What about their distress and suffering?

A view that some may share with Sontag, is that by capturing images of suffering, ‘where news has been converted into entertainment for a small, educated population living in the rich part of the world, is that everyone becomes a spectator, suggesting that there is no real suffering in the world’ (Richard, 2010). Richard then goes on to suggest that we as ‘consumers of globalized media should refuse to look at photographs of suffering because suffering’s urgency is thereby diminished’ (Richard, 2010).

 ‘Perhaps the only people with the right to look at images of suffering, are those who could do something to alleviate it.’ (Sontag, 2003, pp. 37)

The Independent (as illustrated above) took another stance by putting Aylan on the front cover. By doing this, they are refusing to igrnore this issue and reaching out to those with the right to look who can do something about this suffering. And is that something that we as global citizens should be doing? Educating ourselves about what is happening in the world, and being motivated to do something about it.

The West vs. The Rest

One of the many cartoons that emerged after the image was published. Source

Laurent expresses that the child’s ethnicity played a critical part of the photo’s reception. He explains that ‘dozens of African kids have been washed up on the beaches of Libya and were photographed and it didn’t have the same impact’ (Laurent, 2015). This is then illustrated by Carrie Bickmore and the world’s reaction thinking that could be my child. Ethnocentrism is a key issue in mainstream media, why do we only pay attention when there are terrorist attacks in Paris but not Aleppo? Is it up to us as global citizens to seek global news, or should we sit back in our beach chairs and wait for it to be handed to us on the front page of a newspaper?

‘Hope for a New Life’ Warren Richardson. Source 

Other significant images of struggle and suffering

Whilst the image of Aylan Kurdi’s body is one whose importance will linger, there are many other significant photographs which capture the struggle and suffering of refugees. The image above ‘Hope for a New Life’ was captured by Australian photographer Warren Richardson in August 2015. A baby is being passed through the border from Serbia in to Hungary (World Press Photo, 2016). This image won the World Press Photo of the Year, a highly prestigious title in the name of visual journalism. And looking back over the past winners, there have been many which carry a similar theme. Where an audience sits at their computer screen, flicking through winning photographs of people subjected to torture, abuse and suffering absolutely unimaginable.

Moving On

We have two options. The first is to look away. We can ignore this little boy, face down on a beach, and lay on our beach chairs and carry on with our lives. Something the Australian government would prefer to do. Or we can choose to look, we can choose to be upset, confronted or angry. And we can choose to do something about it.

When I went to the ‘Let Them Stay’ rally in Wollongong on the 20th March 2016.


Further Information

You can see, what I regard, the most important photo of 2015, Aylan Kurdi found on the Turkish beach, here.

You can see the Project’s take on reporting this news here. 


Klocker, N & Dunn, K. M 2003, Who’s driving the asylum debate? Newspaper and government representation of asylum seekers, ‘Media International Australia incorporating media and policy’, No.109, pp. 71-92

Laurent, O 2015, ‘What the image of Aylan Kurdi says about the power of photography’, Time, 4 September, viewed 19 March 2016, http://time.com/4022765/aylan-kurdi-photo/

Kennicott, P 2013, ‘Why Syria’s images of people suffering haven’t moved us’, The Washington Post, 13 September, viewed 20th March 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-syrias-images-of-suffering-havent-moved-us/2013/09/13/30407f98-1bb3-11e3-8685-5021e0c41964_story.html

Richard, F 2010, ‘The Thin Artefact: On Photography and Suffering’, The Nation, 23 November, viewed 19 March 2016, http://www.thenation.com/article/thin-artifact-photography-and-suffering/

Sontag, S 2003, Regarding the Pain of Others, Chapter 3, Hamish Hamilton, London, England, pp. 36-52

Ting, I 2015, ‘The Project’s Carrie Bickmore breaks down over image of drowned Syrian toddler’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 4 September, viewed 19 March 2016, http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-projects-carrie-bickmore-breaks-down-over-image-of-drowned-syrian-toddler-20150904-gjetma.html

World Press Photo, 2016, ‘World Press Photo of the Year’, World Press Photo, 28 August 2015, http://www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo/2016/spot-news/warren-richardson








How Important Are Your Selfies?

“Status is: one’s value and importance in the eyes of the world” ~ Alain de Botton

A quick Google search of my name (below) doesn’t really reveal anything too surprising (thank god). Firstly, my Facebook profile. Secondly, my Do It In A Dress page, a fundraising campaign I participated in last year to raise money to educate girls in Sierra Leone. Third is Twitter, a platform I should probably use more but don’t. Then a lovely assortment of images from a variety of different sites. My blog sadly doesn’t appear until the bottom of the page, and then there’s a few other social platforms like Pinterest and LinkedIn. I’m always online, whether it’s Facebook, Instagram or Snapchat… I’m always looking for new things to share and to follow what people are up to.

Screen Shot 2016-03-12 at 12.27.21 pmScreen Shot 2016-03-12 at 12.27.37 pm

And why is this google search important? It’s a starting point for finding out more about myself. And how do people access this? Because I share it myself.

Self representation 

On Facebook this month (so far) I’ve shared 5 links to my blog, 2 articles to websites about social issues like women’s rights, uploaded 2 photos (1 photo with 60likes, and the other with 177likes), and been tagged in 4 photos (where 3 of them are incredibly unflattering – it looks like I’m a glitterfied zombie, or halfway through a lazy sneeze).

Screen Shot 2016-03-12 at 1.21.12 pm
The picture of my eyes that circulated my friends Facebook newsfeed and got a whopping 56 likes. Thanks guys…

According to The New York Times Customer Insight Group research conducted on ‘why people share,’ there are a number of different reasons why people share things online. And I’ve done all of them. Entertainment: a funny meme or dog video. Defining Ourselves: posting nice photos of myself or sharing a blog post. Relationships: sharing an old photo with a friend or posting on their wall for their birthday. Self fulfilment: satisfying the need to keep in touch with friends. And to support a cause: to show what you’re passionate about.

All of these aspects, while they appear in the interest the people around us, they’re  predominantly self centred. I share a post online because at the end of the day, I want certain people to perceive me in a certain way. And yes, even allowing the horrible photos (as demonstrated above) to be on my timeline is purposeful because (I hope) it demonstrates that I don’t take myself too seriously and can laugh at myself.

An infographic on why we share things online according to the New York Times Customer Insight Group. And I can acknowledge that I’ve shared things online for all of these reasons. Source

In fact, a recent study discovered that ‘self-shooting is an engaged, self-affirmative and awareness raising pursuit, where their body, through critically self-aware self-care, emerges as agentic, sexual and distinctly female. Thus, this is a reading of selfies as a practice of freedom’ (Tiidenburg & Cruz, 2015). However, an important question that arises from this research is what are these people being free or liberated from and how does this imply enslavement? On a fundamental note, Kim Kardashian has the ultimate freedom, she has a job (whatever it is), a roof over her head, food to eat and a family to be apart of. However, she is routinely criticised in the media, and some could say enslaved by the pressure to perform. Some may argue that her book Selfish is her way of owning what she has and refusing to let anyone define her.

Kim Kardashian’s selfie which graces the cover of her book Selfish. Source

“The Like is the wordless nod of support in a loud room.” – Seiter, 2015

Perception of Others

However, how Kim K or I represent ourselves is somewhat benign as ‘our identity is powered and influenced by other people’ (Evans, 2016) where our status and importance is determined by the people around us. And if we are constantly worried about how people are perceiving us, then this can lead to status anxiety. Many times I have asked a friend, even text someone to ask if they think this filter looks ok on a photo, or if the caption is witty enough. It’s very rare that I’ll post a picture without with approval of one of my friends first. And whilst I don’t consider this a crippling anxiety that keeps me up at night, it’s definitely a routine I’ve got myself into when posting on social media.

As long as we’re sharing online to friends or strangers,  we’ll always have some sort of status anxiety. It’s only natural for us to want people to be interested in what we are doing and share a connection over a picture of a video. However, it’s a significant issue when people are caught up in the ‘popularity paradox'(Tiidenburg & Cruz, 2015) instead of photographing themselves for their ‘liberation.’ It’s also an issue when status anxiety starts to dictate who we are and how we present ourself online, because as soon as we start to give in to status anxiety, you lose your liberation.


And if you’re not entirely convinced, let the following short clip illustrate all of the thoughts that flow through your mind when uploading and sharing a selfie.


Evans, N 2016, ‘Looking at ourselves’, BCM310, University of Wollongong, Lecture Slides, delivered 9 March

Seiter, C 2015, ‘The secret psychology of Facebook: Why we like, share, comment and keep coming back’, Buffer Social, 23 April, https://blog.bufferapp.com/psychology-of-facebook

The New York Times Customer Insight Group, ‘The Psychology of sharing: why do people share onine’, The New York Times, viewed 17 March 2016, http://nytmarketing.whsites.net/mediakit/pos/

Tiidenberg, K, & Gómez Cruz, E 2015, ‘Selfies, Image and the Re-making of the Body’, Body & Society, 21, 4, pp. 77-102, SocINDEX with Full Text, viewed 2 April 2016.

Australian vs. American Content

Debate: The way we watch favours global cultural diversity over Australian content

America has long since dominated the global film industry due to the strength of the industry and globalisation (Silver, 2007), and as we’ve been uncovering over the past few weeks, Australia’s film industry has been complicated. To strengthen ties and remove barriers between America and Australian film production, both countries signed a ‘bilateral trade treaty in 2005 providing the best means to enhance social and economic development’ (Breen, 2010). This FTA (free trade agreement) occurred against the backdrop of UNESCO’s ‘Universal Declaration of Cutural Diversity’ which was created to protect cultural rights in a globalizing world (Middlemost, 2016). Quite a contrasting image.

We can then look at digital determinism which ‘exposes the power of national technological dominance and its impact on national culture industries’ (Breen, 2010, pp. 660). This FTA therefore represents that the United States have a platform to influence and impact the Australian film industry. But will this always be beneficial? And if digital determinism is to continue in Australia, does that mean we’ll be watching more or less Australian content?

With the continuation of FTA agreements and the rise of co productions, people have developed a strong sense of protectionism which is strongly related to nationalism. We’re concerned about who will work on co produced films, where will the money go, who will come into the county… and with these questions, skeptics can then question if these decisions are good for Australian and Australians. This would then lead to strong economic and cultural protectionism which could see these FTA’s unravel and lead to fragmentation of content (Szakonyi, 2007). FTA’s should be focused around the audience and the people they are creating content for, and not companies to take advantage of free trade. However, with a FTA with the United States, this means that they ‘set the agenda for other countries and thereby retains a position of power and has intensified through FTA’s’ (Jin, 2011).


What, when, where and how Australian audiences are watching content online. Source

The Way We Watch

By analysing the infographic created by Screen Australia, we can see that Australian audiences are watching nearly an equal amount of Australian and international TV series on VOD services. It also states that Hollywood films are less dominant on VOD services than at the cinemas (Screen Australia, 2015). And these TV watching habits have dramatically changed in recent times. The Australian Netflix has over 1million subscribers (The Sydney Morning Herald, 2015), making it the largest VOD service in Australia. However, customers can only access limited Australian content. Plus, the Australian Netflix has about 10% of the American Netflix library. And Netflix are ensuring that we can’t access other libraries through VPN’s. So the way we watch – Netflix, ultimately affects whether or not we can access Australian content, or if we can only access international content.

Because the world is becoming increasingly globalized, we need to acknowledge the inter connectedness of the world which includes film industries. However, national film industries should be focused around consumer and audiences – not to economically benefit large production companies. If Australia is going to continue with FTA’s then we should ensure that these agreements protect cultural diversity but are also allowed to flourish to an international audience.




Breen, M 2010, ‘Digital determinism: culture industries in the USA-Australia Free Trade Agreement’, New media & society, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 657-676

Jin, D 2011, ‘A critical analysis of US cultural policy in the global film market: Nation States and FTA’s’, The International Communication Gazette, Vol. 73, No. 8, pp. 651-669

Middlemost, R 2016, ‘Making space for Australian content: Free Trade Agreements and how we watch’, BCM330, University of Wollongong, Lecture Materials, delivered 19 January 2016

Screen Australia, 2015, ‘Australian Audiences are Watching Online’, Screen Australia, March, viewed 2 February 2016, https://screenaustralia.gov.au/news_and_events/bulletins/didyouknow/2015/10Mar2015.aspx

Silver, J 2007, ‘Hollywood’s dominance of the film industry: how did it arise and how has it been maintained?’, Queensland University of Technology, November, viewed 2 February 2016, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16687/1/Jonathan_Derek_Silver_Thesis.pdf

Szakonyi, D 2007, ‘The Rise of Economic Nationalism under Globalization and the Case of Post-Communist Russia’, SRAS, 16 May, viewed 2 February 2016, http://www.sras.org/economic_nationalism_under_globalization

The Sydney Morning Herald, 2015, ‘Netflix hits 1million subscribers in Australia’, The Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 2 February 2016, http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/netflix-hits-1-million-subscribers-in-australia-20151113-gkygsj.html

Australian Media Content: Cynical Optimism

“Is it time to give up on Australian content?”

Why bother?

Australian films are… ‘dark and depressing, full of outmoded ocker stereotypes, rubbish’ (Quinn, 2014). We’ve already discussed some of the key assumptions around Australian media and it’s content (here) and pretty well established that there’s this underlying ‘urgh’ about Australian films. I had the same impression a few months ago, they never seemed that interesting, that’s even if I heard about them. And why would I spend so much money to watch it, when I could watch a Hollywood blockbuster for the same amount of money? All of these issues give us the sense that we should just give up on Australian media content.

The following table illustrates that Australian films have either been in a state of ‘boom or bust’ as ‘screen policy is highly visible in Australian cultural policy debates due to the screen industry’s perceived cultural importance and media profile’ (Burns & Eltham). It’s easy to see that the late 70’s to 80’s returned massive profits due to the rise of Ozploitation and the liberal funding scheme at the time (read here). However we can also see that there’s periods where next to no one is going to the cinema, like in 2004 where we only received 1.3% share. So with some pretty dismal stats… is it time we give up on Australian films?

Screen Shot 2016-01-31 at 9.24.03 am.png
Table of the Box Office takings to the % share. Source

The Revival Period

We just had our biggest year at the box office in 2015 ‘taking $84million at the local box office, which is 7.7% of the total – the biggest since 2001’ (Quinn, 2015). So, does this mean that instead of giving up… we should commit to transforming our national film industry to something bigger and better?

Screen Shot 2016-02-02 at 8.33.28 pm
Ozflix aims to solve some of Australia’s distribution issues. Source

Overcoming the issues

We already know that there is a market gap. That people are turning away from American and British media, however struggle to access new Australian content (Vickery, 2015). According to Aveyard, ‘films only exist when distributed properly’ (Aveyard, 2011) and she highlights the significant issues faced by being restricted to traditional means of marketing due to budgets, and then in turn receiving little at the box office (pp. 43). As David Elfick explains in the picture above, the window in access between the cinema and DVD access dramatically effects the success of the film. Lauren Carrol Harris (author of The Mule) says that we are left with an economic situation that sets up Australian films to fail’ (McClintock, 2014). To avoid being ‘more culturally and economically marginalised’ (Aveyard, 2011), Australian film and media need to move forward with innovation, creativity and some risks.

In 2016, a new VOD service called Ozflix will be launching. The aim of this service is to ‘rediscover Australian classics, launch independent new voices and celebrate our film industry’ (Nash, 2015). Perhaps this is what Australian media needs… to step away from traditional means of distribution and access. Van Hermet and Ellison support this idea, explaining that audience engagement is at the epicentre of a films success and in this digital age, social media and online participation need to be included (Van Hermert & Ellison). Perhaps if the people consuming the content were actively involved with Australian media, they would be more willing to pay to access it and also continue to watch it?

This infographic highlights how to use social tv and audience engagement to generate hype. Source


Screen Australia propose that new strategies or business models to overcome the issues illustrated above could include and address the following; ‘audiences want to see what they want, when they want, where they want and on the device they want, that producers and distributors need to experiment with alternative strategies to engage audiences and having an easy platform to access these films will make audiences more likely to pay for VOD services’ (Screen Australia, 2015, pp.22). The biggest solution will arise from innovation, creativity and engagement of audiences, all of which can be met by taking some risks and stepping away from our ‘safe zone.’

A change of heart

I must admit, I’ve completely changed my perspective over the course of the past few months studying Australian media content. I believe we need to change the negative stigma attached to Australian films because that’s the most damaging and influential part that led me to avoid watching them. Secondly, our access to films needs a facelift. If I couldn’t find a film on Netflix (I’m already subscribed) then the chances of me buying a DVD player are extremely slim, and there’s no way in hell Australian films are easy to find on… alternate sites (definitely nothing illegal here). However, in the past few months I’ve managed to watch films I’d never heard of like Little Death, Adore, Animal Kingdom and Tracks. And admittedly, I loved all four of those films. Of course there may be some less than amazing Australian films out there – but then again, I’ve seen my fair share of bad American films as well. As technology continues to evolve, so does our film industry, the way we talk about it and how we access it. I am extremely optimistic about the future. As we see new talent, new platforms and bigger and better ideas, I think this will only transfer over to our film industry and we’re in for some fine entertainment.

<p><a href=”https://vimeo.com/141530786″>Ozflix Sizzle reel</a> from <a href=”https://vimeo.com/ronbrown”>Ron V. Brown</a> on <a href=”https://vimeo.com”>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>





Aveyard, K 2011, ‘Australian Films at the Cinema: Rethinking the role of distribution and exhibition’, Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture & Policy, No. 138, pp. 36-45

Burns, A & Eltham, B 2010, ‘Boom and Bust in Australian Screen Policy: 10BA, the Film Finance Corporation and Hollywood’s ‘Race to the Bottom’, Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture & Policy, No. 136, pp. 103-118

McClintock, A 2014, ”The Mule’ and the future of film distribution in Australia’, ABC, 20 November, viewed 30 January 2016, http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/finalcut/’the-mule’-and-the-future-of-film-distribution-in-australia/5906368

Nash, C 2015, ‘Ozflix to launch in 2016’, Filmink, n.d, viewed 29 January 2016, http://www.filmink.com.au/2015/ozflix-to-launch-in-2016/

Quinn, K 2014, ‘why won’t we watch Australian films?,’ The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 October, viewed 27 January 2016, http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/why-wont-we-watch-australian-films-20141024-11bhia.html

Quinn, K 2015, ‘Australian film has had its biggest year at the box office ever. Why?’,


Screen Australia, 2015, ‘Issues in feature film distribution’, Screen Australia, July, viewed 31 January 2016, https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/getmedia/9598b9f7-321b-45f3-b5e8-7870166487fc/IssuesInFeatureFilmDistribution_2015-07-30.pdf

Van Hermert, t & Ellison, E 2015, ‘Queensland’s film culture: the challenges of local film distribution and festival exhibition’, Studies in Australiasian Cinema, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 39-51, DOI: 10.1080/17503175.2014.1002269

Vickery, C 2015, ‘Aussie viewers snub American TV shows in favour of locally made programs such as My Kitchen Rules’, News.com.au. News Corp Australia Network, 15 March, viewed 29 January 2015,  http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/tv-ratings/aussie-viewers-snub-american-tv-shows-in-favour-of-locally-made-programs-such-as-my-kitchen-rules/news-story/a6ea050bd2472620933add5507f1dd2a

Daring or Dangerous? Are Co-Productions the Future of Australian Films?

“I don’t know an Australian would have made this film” Andrew Mason (Producer)

I previously watched this film and was completely blown away by the tender provocativeness of the storyline and honest vulnerability of the characters, complemented by the stunning landscape of the NSW coastline. It was unlike any other Australian film I had seen before so I had to do a bit of research on this film. It turns out that Adore (also known as Two Mothers, Perfect Mothers and Adoration) is a French – Australian film that was released at the Sundance Film Festival in 2013 (Bodey, 2013). Australians love French cinema which is proven through the success of the Alliance Francaise French Film Festival ,in its 27th year in 2016 and the biggest festival of French films outside of France.

Culturally, France is renowned for their unapologetic romance and passion. Bodey explains that they know how to feel and if you love something, go for it’ (Bodey, 2013). The movie And as the producer Andrew Mason confesses ‘I don’t know an Australian would have made this film.’ The film is based on a short story by British author, Doris Lessing and was directed French director, Anne Fontaine. Yet the film features predominantly Australian actors and is set in Seal Rocks on the coast of Australia. This neat fusion of culture and cinematic ideas, create a hybrid film.

I have previously explored the importance of landscape in Australian films (check it out here), and this film is no exception. Bodey states that the isolation of the location – a small coastal town, plays on the idea that it is an Australian film and apart from a few references to Sydney, could be any coastal town in the world.

Adore. Source

To co produce with France also offers enormous benefits in audience reach, financial support and box office success. France has an extremely strong and unique film industry. In 2013, ‘270 feature films were produced with a combined expendituare of €1.25 billion’ (Screen Australia, 2014). Along with having a significantly larger budget, France also has a huge cinema watching audience. With a population of 66million and 196.3million annual cinema admissions, France is a strong country to co produce with (Screen Australia 2014). France and Australia have a MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) which was signed in 1986 and since then have co produced over 32 productions with a total budget of $265million (Screen Australia, 2014). The Australian minimum is 40% but the French minimum is 20% (Screen Australia, 2014) which illustrates the Australian film industry’s need to exercise tight control over our national industry and identity. The benefits of co producing with France are economically and culturally viable and beneficial to both nations.

Critics have said that co-produced films are ‘oriented towards global agendas and systems’ (O’Regan & Potter, 2013) and we could risk losing our national film identity. They are also concerned that internationalising a national film industry can lead to ‘loss of creative freedom and contribute to film distribution, production, post-production and visual effects also being internationalised’ (O’Regan & Potter, 2013). However, others believe that co productions are the key to the future and success of the Australian film industry, with unique and changing stories that can capture rich appreciate from audiences (Dillon, 2013)

A film like Adore contains significant Australian content, it just has a fresh French squeeze drizzled over it. It seems however, that Australian audiences aren’t ready to embrace such a big change in our national film industry just yet.



Bodey, M 2013, ‘Sons and lovers unite in French-Australian drama Adoration‘, The Australian, 16 November, viewed 14 January 2016, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/sons-and-lovers-unite-in-french-australian-drama-adoration/story-fn9n8gph-1226759727586

Dillion, J 2013, ‘On Australian Screens’, Scrope Screen Industry Views, Metro, Communication & Mass Media Complete, 176, pp. 112 – 119, viewed 17 January 2016

Screen Australia, 2014 ‘Co-Pro Program Partner Countries Profile: France’, Screen Australia, viewed 14 January 2016, https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/coproductions/partner_countries/france

O’Regan, T Potter, A 2013, ‘Globalisation from within?: The de-nationalising of Australian film and television production’ Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture & Policy, No. 149, Nov 2013

The Outback and Bad Publicity

Is any attention good attention?

We can’t begin to talk about the issue of good vs. bad publicity without mentioning Ms Miley Cyrus. The past few years have seen this star embark on one of the most outrageous and successful publicity campaigns of all times, starting with her infamous performance at the VMA’s with Robin Thicke in 2013. Her performance generated over 306 000 tweets per minute (Robinson, 2013), which were overwhelmingly negative. However, she managed to get an extra 100 000 followers on Twitter and it kick started the following years of raunchy videos and the release of a new album. Mily Cyrus has also used her fame to advocate for youth social issues like Homelessness and mental health through her Happy Hippy Foundation. So whilst the majority of publicity towards Miley Cyrus is negative, in this case, is negative publicity good publicity for her, her fans, her career and her foundation? It would seem so.

Miley being Miley. Source

‘Without the outback, Australian cinema might have been interchangeable with any number of other national cinemas. With it, Australian filmmakers have used the landscape to forge an identity that is of the land, while still seeking to understand its enigma’ (Shirley, 2011).

The same issue can be applied to Australian films.  ‘Our national cinema plays a vital role in our cultural heritage and in showing us what it is to be Australian’ (Bowles, 2007). Australian films seem to have an obsession with representing Australian culture and Australia through vast deserts, the outback and an ocker stereotype. This idea of Australia was introduced when Crocodile Dundee was released, promoting these stereotypical ideas (Middlemost, 2015). But the question stands, is this the sort of image we should be promoting to the world (and especially America?). And even though these films and characters are getting attention, is this publicity good publicity?

A classic Australian film with strong emphasis on landscape and the Outback is Priscilla Queen of the Desert. It emphasises the stark contrast in cinematography of the ‘drag queens, heightening the apparent inappropriateness of the figures which occupy the landscape, and to highlight its dominance over them’ (Thomas, 1996).

20 years later and Tracks is released. It’s a biographical film based off of the memoir of Robyn Davidson. This film depicts a strong and independent female lead and her connection with the earth as opposed to the contrasting image of drag queens in the desert. This film made around $500 000 domestically and over $4million worldwide (Box Office Mojo, 2016) illustrating this wild, untamed and nature of the Outback to the rest of the world. The film generated a lot of money in the box office, however there is also a strong correlation with Outback adventure films like Tracks and Wolf Creek and pop- culture tourism. With the promise of a ‘life changing experience’ (Frost, 2010) the above films promote not only Australia but a lifestyle. But as Shirley points out, an issue with emphasising the Outback in films is that it neglects different groups and perspectives of people that live in Australia (Shirley, 2011), ones that would be overlooked by tourists.


Tracks, however, does include very important voices that have often been omitted from Australian films, those of the First Australians and women. Despite the fact that many people roll their eyes at the thought of another film set in the Outback, it has provided Australian films a pivotal role in our nations film success. In conclusion, it seems that any attention and publicity Australian films can generate is good for the industry and many others like tourism. However, to avoid a calamity of a publicity stunt like Miley Cyrus, I believe we should play to our strengths as a film industry whilst steadily challenging what is on screen and what is missing. Regardless I believe landscape and the Outback will always be an iconic character in Australian films.




Bowles, K 2007 ‘Three miles of rough dirt road’ :towards an audience-centred approach to cinema studies in Australia’, Studies in Australasian cinema, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 245 – 260

Box Office Mojo, 2016, ‘Tracks (2014)’, Box Office Mojo, viewed 3 January 2016, http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=tracks2014.htm

Frost, W 2010, ‘Life changing experiences. Film and Tourists in the Australian Outback’, Annals Of Tourism Research, 37, pp. 707-726, ScienceDirect

Robinson P, 2013, ‘Why twerking Miley Cryrus thinks there’s no such thing as bad publicity’, The Guardian, 30 August, viewed 2 January 2016, http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/lostinshowbiz/2013/aug/29/twerking-miley-cyrus-no-bad-publicity

Shirley, B 2011, ‘The Outback on Screen’, Screen Australia, National Film and Sound Archive, viewed 4 January 2016, http://www.nfsa.gov.au/research/papers/2011/12/06/outback-screen/

Thomas, AJ 1996, ‘Camping outback: Landscape, masculinity, and performance in The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert’, Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 97

Ozploitation or Male Domination?

Have you ever watched an Australian film from the 70’s that was so bad, it was actually good? Then you were most likely watching an Ozploitation film. During this time ‘Australia as an institution required a national identity, consisting of images of itself emanating from its own culture and reflecting the characteristics of it’s population’ (Rayner, 2000). And what better way to do so than exploit the hell out our stereotypes. Ozploitation films were genre films, including horror, bikie gangs and sexploitation, and during the 1970’s and 80’s there were over 400 Australian films made. The biggest boom in Australian film history (Middlemost, 2015). This massive boom in the industry is due to the 10BA tax introduced at the time. Long story short, the 10BA meant that filmmakers got a 150% tax deduction, meaning that they were making money. (For the long story, click here). Whilst the era of the 10BA is over and Ozploitation films leave us cringing… the case study of Ozploitation films teach us that the Australian film industry was is dominated by men.

Trailer for ‘Not Quite Hollywood.’ 

Male Domination of the Australian Film Industry

If you watch the trailer for Mark Hartley’s 2008 documentary Not Quite Hollywood, you’ll notice just how masculine Ozploitation films were. The men reinforced ‘the essential Australian male, working-class, sardonic, laconic, loyal to his mates, unimpressed by rank, an improvisor and non-conformist’ (Rayner, 2000, pp. 95).

A scene from Stone (1974) Source
A ‘human hood ornament.’ From Fair Game (1986).

As you can see in the screenshots above, women are often portrayed as submissive, weak or victimized. In Ozploitation films ‘naked women are subjected to violence and brutal villains tend to demonstrate their power by driving fast or showing off their massive members’ (Fuchs, 2009). This submissive image of women contrasted to the macho man, highlights the inequality between men and women on screen.

Rebecca Giwing remembers working on Sandy Harbut’s biker movie,  Stone (1974): “It was as sexist in production as the world that it was portraying,” she says, “The women did as they were told and the blokes seemed to have all the fun.” As explained in Hartley’s Not Quite Hollywood, some of the women found it very empowering to be nude and sexual on camera, however as Giwin admits above, that wasn’t always applicable to all.

Infographic from Screen Australia. Source

However, gender inequality doesn’t just affect the actresses in the movies. It affects every women whether they’re in the industry or not. In Monica Davidson’s essay titled ‘Knocking on a Locked Door: Women in Australian Feature Film,’, it reveals that ‘of all Australian feature films made since the 1970s, a staggering 85% have been directed by men’ (Daily Review, 2015). And as you can see in the infographic above, the gap between men and women in the film industry is huge.

The case study of Ozploitation not only highlights the gender inequality during the 70’s and 80’s, but also allows us to question why we are still facing such inequality within the Australian film industry in 2016. It’s important that we demand change because ‘with their powerful influence on shaping the perceptions of large audiences, the media are key players for the gender equality agenda’ (Mlambo-Ngcuka, 2014).

However… there is hope! Screen Australia have recently committed to supporting, financing and encouraging the role that women play in the Australian film industry. Watch below for more information.

<p><a href=”https://vimeo.com/147555828″>Gender Matters</a> from <a href=”https://vimeo.com/user45340041″>Screen Australia</a> on <a href=”https://vimeo.com”>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>



Daily Review, 2015, ‘Australian film gender imbalance: Shock statistics reveal what’s old is new again’, Daily Review, 29 May, viewed 10 December 2015, http://dailyreview.com.au/australian-film-gender-imbalance-shock-statistics-reveal-whats-old-is-new-again/24701

Fuchs, C 2009, ‘The Wild Untold Story of Ozploitation’, PopMatters, 31 July, viewed 10 December 2015, http://www.popmatters.com/review/109172-not-quite-hollywood-the-wild-untold-story-of-ozploitation/

Middlemost, R 2015, ‘Funding and Policy: A History of Market Failure’, University of Wollongong, Lecture Week 2, delivered 8 December 2015

Mlambo-Ngcuka, P 2014, ‘Study: Film industry encourages sexism’, Women’s Weekly, 24 September, viewed 10 December 2015, http://www.aww.com.au/latest-news/news-stories/easing-weather-helps-to-contain-fierce-victorian-fires-24677

Rayner, J 2000, Contemporary Australian Cinema : An Introduction, Manchester : Manchester University Press, 2000, viewed 21 December 2015

Thomas, D J 2009, ‘Tarantino’s Two Thumbs Up: Ozploitation and the Reframing of the Aussie Genre Film’, Metro Magazine: Media & Education Magazine, 161, p. 90, Informit Literature & Culture Collection, viewed 15 December 2015

Australian Audiences: What’s Wrong With Us?

The problem isn’t Australian films, it’s Australian audiences

I love Australian films, with all their flaws and mistakes and even outright crassness on occasions … But if it is to continue to be part of our culture, Australian film needs a bit of kindness, and it needs audiences. – Margret Pomeranz, co-host of ABC’s At the Movies

When looking at the success or failure of Australian films, we quickly assume it’s because of the content. However, with 2015 being Australian films ‘biggest year at the box office, taking more than $84million (Quinn, 2015), it must be something other than what’s in the movie. But maybe it’s time we start looking at who’s watching the movie. Let’s turn the lens around and look into what’s the problem with Australian audiences.

Dwindling cinema goers for Australian films. Source

A significant ‘problem’ with Australian audiences, is that we are a leading nation of ‘pirates.’ The Intellectual Property Awareness Foundation’s 2010 report indicates that ‘more than half of Australia’s population has participated in piracy’ (The Conversation, 2014) because pirating is ‘free, convenient and quick, with 30 percent of pirates saying that legal content is too expensive (Reilly, 2015). As discussed in previous posts, price and time are big constraints restricting people’s access to go to the movies. And why would you spend money on something that you can get for free?

However, I hear from… a friend of mine… that it is extremely difficult to access Australian content online through pirating. Therefore, audiences may have to turn to Video On Demand Services like Netflix. However, the American Netflix has more Australian content than the Australian Netflix! So even if audiences are trying to do the right thing and paid for an Australian Netflix account to watch Australian content, their options are extremely limited.

Ozflix. Coming in 2016. Source

But is it all the audiences fault?

Even if we want to watch Australian films, we face the massive issue of access. Kaufman states that Australian films will continute to ‘find fewer audiences if the Old World distribution system remains the only way to connect films with audiences’ (Kaufman, 2009) So it only makes sense that we need to give our distribution and access to Australian films a facelift.  2016 will see the launch of Ozflix. A unique new platform allowing audiences to access a huge amount of Australian content (watch below for more information).

<p><a href=”https://vimeo.com/141530786″>Ozflix Sizzle reel</a> from <a href=”https://vimeo.com/ronbrown”>Ron V. Brown</a> on <a href=”https://vimeo.com”>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>

The success of Ozflix is yet to be known, with its launch occurring later in 2016. Ozflix and ‘VOD (video on demand) offers the potential to tap into specialised audience demand’ (Screen Australia, 2014). This new platform will allow audiences to engage with Australian content in a positive way, easier, cheaper and faster. This cheap and easy access to multiple platforms is a crucial market that the Australian media content industry needs to tap in to (Thank you Ozflix). As the government makes it harder and harder for people to torrent illegally, there is demand and room within our current market to support Australian Content moving to Video On Demand.
So whilst there may be a few problems with us as an audience and a few problems with Australian films… all in all, we’re not too bad. The issues seems to lie in access. In order for Australian films and content to flourish, it needs a dedicated and committed audience. Hopefully 2016 and Ozflix will cater to the audiences demand.



The Conversation, 2014, ‘Explainer: Where’s the audience for Austarlian films?’ The Conversation, 17 January, viewed 12 December, http://theconversation.com/explainer-wheres-the-audience-for-australian-films-20945

Kaufman, T 2009, ‘Shortcuts: finding Australian audiences for Australian films’, Metro: media & education magazine, no. 163, pp. 6-8

Quinn, K 2015, ‘Australian film has had its biggest year at the box office ever. Why?’, Sydney Morning Herald, 6 December, viewed 12 December, http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/australian-film-has-had-its-biggest-year-at-the-box-office-ever-why-20151204-glfut3.html#ixzz3wuc4sIIk

Reilly, D 2015, ‘Australians still pirating but most would ignore three strikes warning’, CNet, 22 July, viewed 13 December 2015, http://www.cnet.com/au/news/australians-still-pirating-but-most-would-ignore-three-strikes-warnings/

Screen Australia, 2014, ‘Online and on demand – Trends in Australian online video use’, Screen Australia, viewed 13 December,


The Australian Film Industry: A Battle of Culture and Policy

Weve got a unique lovable culture that we should celebrate. Weve got great talent, when the writers, directors, actors all come together when all the molecules coalesce thats when the magic happens. Gino Munari, Village Cinemas General Manager

And somehow the magic just doesn’t seem to be happening. Australian films and media content have been incredibly influential not only domestically, but internationally. With a long history of contributing towards a cohesive identity and representing Australian culture, Australian stories are ones that should be told on a global stage. The general assumptions around Australian media content, particularly Australian films are extremely underwhelming, with Burns and Eltham describing Australian films as ‘unpopular at the box office’ and a ‘failure of the domestic screen industry’ (Burns & Eltham, 2010). Whilst these key assumptions are common towards Australian films, there are more deep seeded issues like measuring success, funding, marketing and audience watching habits of Australian films that contribute towards this stigma. The overall negative stigma of the Australian film industry and Australian films lead people to believe there has been a market failure within the industry. Whilst admittedly there are significant issues that must be addressed to ensure funding continuation, protection and stimulation of Australian content, the market has not entirely failed. Instead, it needs a makeover, Muriel’s Wedding style.

Makeover time. Source

The Australian film industry has had a long history of being delicately intertwined with government policy, ultimately affecting the success of films. It is said that ‘screen policy is highly visible in Australian cultural policy debates due to the screen industry’s perceived cultural importance and media profile’ (Burns & Eltham, 2010). The 10BA existed throughout the 1970’s to 1980’s offering generous tax deduction of up to 150%, resulting in a boom in the industry (Burt, 2004). Some of Australia’s most successful films, like Crocodile Dundee and Mad Max, were produced in this time. However there were also a substantial amount of terrible films produced, some of them not even being released. With ‘skyrocketing budgets, shady deals and erosion of Australian cultural identity in an effort to appeal to global audiences’ (Burt, 2004), the 10BA days are well and truly over. In 1988, the Film Finance Corporation was created as a means to replace the 10BA and was to act as a film bank, becoming the ‘major source of finance in the 1990’s’ (Middlemost, 2015). Ultimately it was a failure, with only 25 movies produced a year in the 90’s and little profit. In 2008, Screen Australia was created under the Labor Government, a combination of the FFC, Film Australia Limited and the Australian Film Commission (Screen Australia, 2015). Screen Australia ‘aims to create an Australian industry that is innovative, culturally important and commercially sustainable’ (Screen Australia, 2015). With fluctuating policies, taxes and companies funding the film industry, it’s easy to see how the history of Australian film has either been in a ‘boom’ or ‘bust’ period (Burns & Eltham). However, with 2015 being the biggest year for Australian films since 2001, taking $84million or 7.7% of the local box office (Quinn, 2015), perhaps there is hope for future years.

An issue with films is how we measure the success or failure of a film. Traditionally and currently, a films success is measured by the amount of money it generates at the box office (in selling movie tickets). It is expensive to go to the cinemas. The minimum price of a ticket for a student is $10, plus the petrol to get there and the overpriced popcorn and soft drink… the whole experience can easily set you back $20. These limitations are highlighted in Torsten Hägerstrand’s three constraints on a audiences movement with money, time and transportation greatly influencing their ability to go (Holland, 2015). We have already acknowledged a huge information and research gap in Australians online movie watching habits (Middlemost, 2015). Personally I prefer streaming or watching a film on Netflix and eating my own food at home… cost efficiency. According to the ACMA (Australian Communications and Media Authority), 9 in 10 teenagers use the internet for entertainment purposes for approximately 14hrs 42mins per week (Raco, 2014). If there is a whole demographic of people who are actively choosing not to go to the cinema to watch Australian films because the whole experience is too costly, then the box office success is not a true indicator of a films popularity. It’s therefore evident that funding should go to future research to fill this knowledge gap. As Kaufman suggests, we should be asking questions like ‘how many people watch Australian films or television programs, or Australian content made for new platforms?’ (Kaufman, 2009). By addressing these questions we will be able to furthermore understand the ways in which Australians consume Australian media and work towards protecting and enhancing the Australian film experience for everyone involved.

Watching films through new media technologies like iPads. Source

Another aspect contributing to the supposed market failure of Australian films is the way that we talk about them. Timothy King argues that commentary, reviews and marketing play a crucial role in contributing to a films success at the box office (King, 2007). In his research, he found that if a film has a glowing review, then the success should be reciprocated at the box office. However, is it common to see the Australian press criticize the Australian film industry for lack of success with the implication that it should be doing better (Middlemost, 2015). Whilst commentaries of Australian films are predominantly negative, film critics on the other hand, are criticized for being too soft on Australian films (Quinn, 2014). Many people base their decision off going to watch a film off of reviews (King, 2007), so it’s important to place value and trust in film critics. It is argued that the Australian film industry needs to be re-branded (Kaufter, 2009). If not re-branded, at least a botox injection, something to give it a bit of liveliness and something for people to talk about.

Despite the behind the scenes issues like marketing, commentary and audience viewing of Australian films, we must also discuss that perhaps some of our content needs improving in order to protect the future of the Australian film industry. Criticisms of Australian content are generally affiliated with the films being ‘dark and depressing’ and ‘full of outmoded ocker stereotypes’ (Quinn, 2014). Sponsored by Screen Australia and Screen NSW (Tropfest, 2015), Tropfest is an annual competition that sees hundreds of short films submitted. Tropfest is a way to provide up and coming talent the opportunity to break into the film industry and have their creative and new innovative ideas heard. Or at least it was. Tropfest for 2015 was cancelled due to ‘terrible mismanagement of funds’ (Mackander, 2015). This illustrates the crucial role that funding plays in the Australian film industry. However, thanks to CGU Insurance, a private investment was made so that Tropfest will take place on the 14th of February 2016 (Tropfest, 2015). If we are looking for ways to improve the Australian film industry, then holding Tropfest is fundamental to not only encourage aspiring filmmakers, but also bridge the gap between them and large production companies (Mackander, 2015). This also illustrates that perhaps the film industry needs a mix of both private investors and government funding in order to maintain a healthy industry.

Tropfest. Source

Australian films are unique and crucial to Australians and Australian culture. It’s a hybrid type of film that should be allowed to change and evolve over time. The only way that can happen is if creative and innovative communities are given the opportunity to access the industry. It is also apparent that policies and funding directly affect the reception of films, visible through the 10BA tax, the FFC and Screen Australia. Another important note is that the audience has a large role to play in the industry. This being said, I don’t believe there’s been a market failure within the Australian film industry as such. More like a market glitch that can be resolved, and when the right molecules coalesce, that’s when the magic happens.

Further Information

Winner of Tropfest 2014


Burns, A & Eltham, B 2010, ‘Boom and Bust in Australian screen policy: 10BA, The Film Finance Corporation and Hollywood’s ‘race to the bottom’’, Media International Australia, No. 136, pp. 103-118

Burt, M 2004, ‘10BA – The Pot of Gold (of Old)’, Metro, 140, pp. 158-158, Communication and mass Media Complete, viewed 9 December 2015, http://ezproxy.uow.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=12876007&site=eds-live

Holland, T 2015, ‘BCM240: Week 5 Cinema’, Blergh, 25 August, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.blergh.org/2015/08/bcm240-week-5-cinema/

Kaufman, T 2009, ‘Shortcuts: finding Australian audiences for Australian films’, Metro: media and education magazine, No. 163, pp. 6-8

King, T 2007, ‘Does film criticism affect box office earnings? Evidence from movies released in the U.S in 2003’, Journal of Cultural Economics, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 171- 186

Mackander, M 2015, ‘Festival cancellation leaves ‘huge hole’ for emerging Australian filmmakers’, ABC News, 12 November, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-12/tropfest-short-film-festival-cancellation-leaves-hole/6934316

Middlemost, R 2015, ‘Introduction, key terms, debates and assumptions behind Australian content’, Lecture Notes, BCM330, University of Wollongong, 1 December 2015

Middlemost, R 2015, ‘Funding and Policy: A History of Market Failure’, Lecture Notes, BCM330, University of Wollongong, 7 December 2015

Quinn, K 2014, ‘Why won’t we watch Australian films?’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 October, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/why-wont-we-watch-australian-films-20141024-11bhia.html?rand=1449200398857

Quinn, K 2015, ‘Australian film has had it’s biggest year at the box office ever. Why?’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 December, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/australian-film-has-had-its-biggest-year-at-the-box-office-ever-why-20151204-glfut3.html

Screen Australia, 2015, ‘Cancellation of Tropfest 2015’, Screen Australia, 13 November, viewed 7 December 2015, https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/news_and_events/2015/gn_151113_Tropfest.aspx

Tropfest, 2015, ‘We’re Back’, Tropfest, 6 December, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.tropfest.com/au/news/tropfest-is-back/

Raco, E 2014, ‘Aussie Teens Online’, ACMA, 1 July, viewed 7 December 2015, http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/engage-blogs/engage-blogs/Research-snapshots/Aussie-teens-online#li=4CjCrptEqv4%3D&cs=3ABA593aXcCJ%2B9TWmsrhbg%3D%3D;