People will think we're not professional if we don't have a watermark.

So – the ABC wasn't a professional outfit before this year, but showing a complete disregard for your corporate logo in the haphazard application of the watermark fixes that? Oh please… Take a look at the following stupidity –

This screen grab has 3 watermarks – 2 top right and one bottom right. The ‘Insiders' one isn't even keyed properly (notice the blocky bleeding outline). Professional, eh? Let's all raise our glasses and drink a toast to chequeing deetayls & proffesionalllismmn (however you spell it)

People call the ABC up about programs they don't even show!

Is that right? Well, 3 of the other Free-to-Air stations have watermarks, so all that means is that there are some low IQ viewers out there who can't figure out who to call. Big Deal. When Channel 7 lost transmission for over 45 minutes on 13/4/05, apparently some people (dozens in fact) rang Channel 9. (Maybe networks should watermark their phone number too!)
Look, we know there are people who barrack for Collingwood and watch Eddie – so what? ;-)

If the programs are good enough, you won't notice the watermark!

Hmmm, let's see then – I've got a great idea for determining the quality of programs – find a test audience, roll tape and very slowly increase the size and/or opacity of the watermark over the course of the show. If people object almost straight away to the watermark, it's obviously a turkey. If it gets twice as big and twice as opaque before they complain, it's OK. If by the end the watermark fills the screen and the audience don't care – it's obviously a great show!!! Square One, I think…

We accept that some people don't care about watermarks, but some do. The vast majority certainly won't care if it isn't there and aren't likely to request it.

Don't be stupid - the quality of a program does not make a watermark invisible.

Stop attacking the ABC! It's ‘Everyone's ABC!'

It certainly is ‘Everyone's ABC', and it certainly isn't because we hate the ABC that we are formalizing this campaign. As stated elsewhere, there are a number of reasons. But the main ones are that the ABC should not degrade their images (which one of their arguments admits to) and the ABC should continue to be an alternative to the commercial networks, not start looking the same. Remember, it was the commercial networks that adopted watermarks first.

This decision falls way outside the guidelines set out in the ABC Charter. The Charter opens with a paragraph that includes the statement, “broadcasting services of a high standard.” Introducing the watermark is indicative of an ABC management that doesn't take the reasons for its existence seriously nor does it seem to understand why people watch it, nor seems capable of being accountable or reasonable on a matter that affects everything they show.

We have also mentioned elsewhere, all we actually want to be able to do is watch the ABC without having interruption and distractions from pesky on-screen graphics that are not part of the show. It makes some things unwatchable. In fact, some of us here at LogoFreeABC have stopped watching the ABC altogether, after it previously being a major part of our TV viewing.

We do not believe that requesting more money from the government for the ABC is going to get this decision reversed, as, for example, Friends of the ABC do. It's not that we want to see a poorer ABC, its just that it isn't logical to think that getting more funding will get the watermark off.

We just want clean pictures. It's really simple – and terribly easy for the ABC to deliver. All they need to do is decide not to switch something on. Until this happens, we are not going to stop. The ABC could stop this campaign in ten seconds. The ball's in their court.

GET A LIFE!

Of course, we here at LogoFreeABC agree that TV shouldn't be the central part of any healthy lifestyle. Unless you have trucks constantly rolling down your street, there is so much fresh air out there that needs breathing in, you really can go out and enjoy it when the sun is shining. Walk the dog, kick the footy, ride a bike, stand outside the ABC with placards yelling “No watermark, no watermark…”, etc.

However, when the day is done and we sit down to be entertained by a good show, it's not silly to want that experience to be as good as it can possibly be. Especially if you've paid for it. (Those of us that are taxpayers, anyway!)

Does a dirty windscreen bother you? Do you wipe off smudges on a window? Does a fly sitting on a TV screen irritate you? If so, then you really should join this campaign. We guarantee, there are no good reasons to have watermarks – they are an outdated technology, and paying for it and letting a public organization get away with it will only encourage further intrusions later (eg. split screens, lower frame promos, etc.) Keep in mind that when the 7 Network introduced watermarks back in June 1999, the ABC, along with the other networks, thought they were a daft idea and claimed they would never employ them. And here we are today...