--Update: The deadline for submissions has now closed. Thanks to everyone (more than 1000 of you!) who submitted--

The best submissions are personal, and come from your unique perspective and experience of the Australian media.

Have you ever made a complaint about something you’ve seen or read in the media? Did you find the process easy, or the outcome successful? Has the presentation of a story struck you as particularly outrageous? Are you concerned that you only have access to a limited number of newspapers or sources?

This inquiry will be looking at certain topics in more specific detail. Click below to find out more.

What should I say in my submission?

As we said, the best submissions will come in your own words with your unique perspective and experience.

You might like to support calls that media experts are making to improve our media landscape:
– There should be just one regulator for all media: an independent statutory body, not an industry-funded one;
– Complaints must be handled faster, with more accountability on the part of journalists, and corrections published more quickly and more prominently (ie. the same size and placement of the original);
– Independent journalism outlets should be encouraged and supported
– Given high levels of concentration in Australia, mechanisms should be found to increase diversity nationwide, including regional and rural areas;
– Journalists should disclose any gifts or sources of funding, and editorial advertising supplements should explain this to readers clearly, not just by labels like 'special reports';

Our hope is that the media inquiry helps deliver effective codes of practices or regulations, access to quality journalism, enhanced media diversity, better complaints processes, and a media that operates in the public interest.

What is the Independent Media Inquiry?

In the wake of the News International phone-hacking scandals in the UK, Australians began to focus on the standards to which media organisations are held here at home.

Are there effective processes in place that would prevent the media from acting in such a way here? Is the media operating in the public interest? Could we be doing more to ensure all Australians have access to the quality journalism they deserve? Thanks largely to this debate – and public pressure from organisations like NewsStand – the Government agreed to hold an inquiry to look into these issues.

What exactly will be examined?

The inquiry has alluded to the subject matter to be covered in its Terms of Reference. Here’s how we’ve translated the major issues:

Regulation: The Australian Press Council is the newspaper industry’s self-regulator, funded by the major newspaper publishers themselves. It has been called a ‘toothless tiger’, incapable of effectively and independently curbing the factual inaccuracy, bias, unfairness, creep of opinion into news, intrusion on privacy, and payment for stories that many believe is negatively affecting our news media. Arguably the most vital regulatory function is the handling of grievances – currently the Australian Press Council abides over the near-lawless newspaper world, while the government regulator the Australian Communications and Media Authority prosecutes broadcast violations. Can this situation continue? Should there be a regulator to rule them all? What about a complaints tribunal? Does self-regulation even work?

Standards: The media currently employs their own voluntary 'codes of practice', outlining behaviour and practices that are and aren’t permitted. Are these codes enough, or must we do more to enforce proper media standards? Are they even relevant for new online media sites, or do we need codes specific to online news? The Australian Press Council and the industry peak body the Media Arts and Entertainment Alliance have their own codes. Should membership to these organisations be mandatory? Should all news outlets require a licence to publish or broadcast news, as radio and television stations already do?

New media and business models: The major editorial crisis in journalism – the broadcasting of extreme opinions in order to increase audience share – can in part be attributed to the changing of the business model since the advent of the internet and blogosphere. How should news business models adapt to absorb these changes? What role should government play in supporting or encouraging new, independent players?

Access and support: Do we need to make it easier for smaller, independent journalism companies to enter the market and reach an audience? Is it a level playing field for all ideas and opinions out there in the 'marketplace of ideas'? What can we do to ensure that those people who are attacked in the media can adequately respond?  

Is the inquiry examining the issue of media ownership?

The way the Government and the media are talking about it, you’d be forgiven for thinking the inquiry had no mandate at all to look at the most important question facing our media landscape: the concentration of media ownership. But any inspection of the inquiry’s Terms of Reference shows that in fact, an examination of ownership is well within its scope.

The inquiry is specifically looking at how diversity can be enhanced under a traditional media business model that is changing. It can also can target anything that affects the ability of the media to operate in the public interest – it would be difficult to seriously address that without examining what role the concentration of ownership plays.

Is the inquiry only looking at print media?

The inquiry is focusing on how traditional print media is changing with new technology pushing more content online, but the Terms of Reference definitely leave the door open to wider-ranging discussions.

If you want to discuss the issue more broadly than in those terms, you will still be within the scope of this inquiry - but you might also want to consider submitting to the Convergence Review that is running simultaneously.

How is this inquiry different from the Convergence Review?

Both inquiries are looking at similar issues – i.e. how the changing nature of communications technology is impacting existing regulations – but the Convergence Review is examining “the changes in media and communications caused by the convergence of older technologies such as television with the internet”, while the media inquiry is specifically focusing on the effectiveness of existing regulations and codes of practice of traditional media, especially print media.

The focus of this inquiry (the findings of which will be incorporated into the Convergence Review) is making sure we have effective codes of practices or regulations; access to quality journalism; enhanced diversity of the media; better complaints processes; and a media that operates in the public interest.

More reading:
Media Inquiry Terms of Reference: http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/independent_media_inquiry

Media Inquiry Issues Paper: http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/139837/Independent_Media_Inquiry_Issues_Paper.pdf

New Matilda: http://newmatilda.com/2011/09/14/media-inquiry-welcome-start

Centre for Policy Development: http://cpd.org.au/2011/09/ben-eltham-first-a-media-inquiry-then-regulatory-reform/

Crikey: http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/09/16/beecher-media-inquiry-has-mandate-to-address-problems/

The Conversation: http://theconversation.edu.au/broad-terms-for-media-inquiry-but-what-about-ownership-3369