deepred: Noel Skum's takeover of the former Twitter are a big part of the

FUG: When talking about a company, use their real name. We follow the principle that respect must go both ways.

deepred:

 

.. as a way of keeping partisan politics out of public broadcasting funding.

 

I'd much rather just keep public funding out of broadcasting thanks.

I think that there needs to be a complete divide between entertainment broadcasters which the govt should let fail and public broadcasters which should be fully supported.

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

richms:

 

I think that there needs to be a complete divide between entertainment broadcasters which the govt should let fail and public broadcasters which should be fully supported.

 

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

 

Literally NZ On Air would like a word.

Entertainment is a public good, too. Not everyone can afford to pay for it. There's a legitimate social/welfare aspect to providing both informative and entertaining content, and 'certain communities' means... what... for you?

It's important to recognise the distinction between broadcasters and content providers. 

The screen industry is struggling and needs ongoing government support, which is commonplace around the world. Whether NZ on Air is still the right model is a live debate, but most of us are going to want to continue to see at least some local content when our only viewing platforms are overseas based streaming services.

On the broadcasting side of things, RNZ plays an essential role as a public service broadcaster but TVNZ is not a public service broadcaster and has rapidly declining commercial value for the taxpayer. Its golden years are over and it's time to shut it down or at least significantly scale it back. 

deepred:

 

Late to the discussion, but the Better Public Media Trust had its AGM several weeks back. They continue to call for a media levy on broadcasting & Internet infrastructure, as a way of keeping partisan politics out of public broadcasting funding.The "Google tax" is worthy of consideration, but probably won't be as effective as a levy.

 

Personally I don't pretend to have solutions, but I can safely say that the likes of Fox News, Russia Today & El*n M*sk's takeover of the former Twitter are a big part of the problem.

 

Full video of AGM here:

 

The Youtube link got munched, so here it is again.

Some further useful notes: the Royal Commission on Broadcasting & Related Telecommunications reported back in 1986, but its findings were ignored in favour of a Treasury-driven deregulatory approach, which still dominates today. There needs to be a follow-up Commission in this day & age of Big Tech, Fox News, Russia Today, & AI deepfakes.

richms:

 

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

 

Bit of an odd comment. Communities in general or specific communities?

openmedia:

 

richms:

 

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

 

 

Bit of an odd comment. Communities in general or specific communities?

 

I thought it was pretty evident, but when they make things that are not going to be of general interest and have only a tiny group interested in them, so are not profitable.

richms:

 

openmedia:

 

richms:

 

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

 

 

Bit of an odd comment. Communities in general or specific communities?

 

 

I thought it was pretty evident, but when they make things that are not going to be of general interest and have only a tiny group interested in them, so are not profitable.

 

I think it's understood that not everything is broadcast for profit. There's that 'public good' thing again.

But i'd love an example of something you think that's been broadcast for a 'tiny, unprofitable group' to see what i've missed in interpreting your comment.

BlakJak:

 

richms:

 

 openmedia:

 

richms:

 

Making entertainment products for representation of certain communities etc is not something I want to see taxpayer money go towards.

 

Bit of an odd comment. Communities in general or specific communities?

 

I thought it was pretty evident, but when they make things that are not going to be of general interest and have only a tiny group interested in them, so are not profitable.

 

I think it's understood that not everything is broadcast for profit. There's that 'public good' thing again.

 

But i'd love an example of something you think that's been broadcast for a 'tiny, unprofitable group' to see what i've missed in interpreting your comment.

 

SBS in Australia seems to get it right.

If we still don't know what structure TVNZ should have, we know what it shouldn't have.

When the hyperclasses corner a market segment, enshittification happens. And media is no exception.

Uh Oh! Conservative Brits Take EIC Roles at Two Major US News Orgs

On the other extreme, Russia Today & Korean Central News Agency are textbook state propaganda outlets.