Labour to support public broadcasting service

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Labour to support public broadcasting service

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18664 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#223089 12-Sep-2017 12:22

The need and desirability of some kind of quality public broadcasting along the lines of TV 7 has been discussed in other threads, but I'm no longer sure which ones and I think this announcement justifies starting a new one.

According to RNZ, Labour is pledging $38 million to launch such a system, based around RNZ. I think this is a terrific idea, long overdue and I have nothing but praise for it. If I hadn't already decided to vote Green, I would definitely be voting Labour for the first time in my life.

Over the past nine years I have increasingly come to see the National-led government as cultural barbarians incapable of appreciating anything other than the almighty dollar. They have consistently starved RNZ and they allowed TVNZ 7 to die because the singularly useless Minister of Broadcasting at the time, Craig Foss (even National found him useless) refused to spend the paltry five million dollars required to keep it alive. Along with other National Neanderthals, he thought a pointless flag referendum was a better use of the money.

I hope Labour wins. I am so tired of the money money money matters more than anything else mob. It doesn't trickle down and it is way past time that we had some regard for more enlightened values in this society. Go Jacinda!

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1862763 12-Sep-2017 12:47

As well as that hasn't somebody floated the idea of TV1 going ad-free and being subsidised by the Government?

I think I read that somewhere recently.

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#1862812 12-Sep-2017 13:46

Surely that money could be better put towards piggybacking off platforms already available. Put the money into programming and buying space on TVNZ on demand. Streaming what you want when you want seems the way forward, choosing to watch then something that is then relevant to the viewer, not just another channel dedicated to programs competing for peoples time.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1862846 12-Sep-2017 14:20

Don't quite see the sense of radio having a tv space for so many millions of dollars.

Money would be better spent making key sports free to air or even reducing taxation. This looks like spending for the sake of spending.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18664 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1862875 12-Sep-2017 15:15

sen8or:

Surely that money could be better put towards piggybacking off platforms already available. Put the money into programming and buying space on TVNZ on demand. Streaming what you want when you want seems the way forward, choosing to watch then something that is then relevant to the viewer, not just another channel dedicated to programs competing for peoples time.

An argument can be made for that and streaming is certainly changing the nature of television, but I believe there is still a place for distinct public broadcasting TV. This is what the BBC does, and the world is beating down their door to get at it. Australia has it. America has it. Every country in the western world has it. Except New Zealand. It will still be a few years before a significant part of the population is able to access streaming TV, either because of location or because some people simply can't cope with it yet.

There is also such a thing as identity and critical mass. This was happening with TV 7 before it got cut off at the knees. It was growing into a genuine public service broadcaster. TVNZ has abandoned its original purpose in order to become a commercial wh0re. Piggybacking on it would undermine the very intent of public broadcasting. That is just like the current situation with NZ On Air that funds occasionally worthwhile public service programming that TV1 jams into its Sunday morning ghetto where only the most dedicated ever see it. A single public service broadcaster is able to ignore commercial concerns and focus all of its efforts on programming, achieving synergy effects along the way. This is how it should have been done before TV1 was forced to sell out.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18664 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1862879 12-Sep-2017 15:19

Pumpedd:

Don't quite see the sense of radio having a tv space for so many millions of dollars.

Money would be better spent making key sports free to air or even reducing taxation. This looks like spending for the sake of spending.

Some people want to watch other things than sports. If you want reduced taxation, vote National. Oh wait, we have already had nine years of National. With all that reduced taxation, maybe it is time for a little spending.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

amiga500

1484 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1862985 12-Sep-2017 17:55

Radio NZ deserve at the very least a boost to their budget. It is such a joy to go to a website that is totally free of advertising. And National Radio is a treasure.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1862998 12-Sep-2017 18:37

They will need a lot more than 38 mill to create a sustainable TV channel.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Journeyman

1187 posts

Uber Geek

#1863041 12-Sep-2017 20:42

SJB:

As well as that hasn't somebody floated the idea of TV1 going ad-free and being subsidised by the Government?

I think I read that somewhere recently.

That makes a lot more sense than funding RNZ to duplicate the infrastructure that the govt already owns by way of TVNZ. A Labour govt could fully fund TV1 as a public service broadcaster and TV2 remain commercially focused.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1863080 12-Sep-2017 22:06

TVNZ's ad income is around $380 million a year so presumably to fund an ad free TV1 the government would have to come up with anything up to half of that.

Anyway, a lot more than $38 million.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1863115 12-Sep-2017 23:53

I agree with a modest increase to RNZ funding, assuming it is only used to expand their news and other radio services. Partly as RNZ also broadcasts on shortwave, which is received all over the Pacific. And in some of the very tiny Pacific countries, shortwave radio is the only real time access to international news and information. So part of the RNZ budget actually gives international aid and foreign policy benefits to NZ. It was also nice while on holiday in Samoa, being able to listen to RNZ news over there. As the local Samoan radio stations rebroadcast RNZ news bulletins.

A documentary or public service type channel that only broadcasts in NZ doesn't give any international aid or foreign policy benefits. And would simply compete against Youtube, Netflix, and lots of other online sources of documentary type content. And when the current announced UFB and RBI network builds are complete, access to online only services in rural areas will be much less of an issue.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18664 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1863192 13-Sep-2017 08:40

There is great documentary content on-line, but not a lot that is dedicated to New Zealand issues. I would love to have a channel for that, free of all the commercial crap and the dumbed-down content driven by ratings.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1863257 13-Sep-2017 09:20

I would love less advertisements,I was watching a show last night while eating my dinner alone aaawwww. I swear it was like 3 minutes of show 8 minutes of advs, 3 minutes of show 8 minutes of advs........

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1863298 13-Sep-2017 09:39

Any TV1 programmes we want to watch we record so we can skip the ads. In any one hour there are over 15 minutes of ads.

If it was ad free programmes like the news could cover articles in a lot more depth (assuming they have reporters capable of that of course).

And TV1 is streamed now, not just OTA or on-demand.

Journeyman

1187 posts

Uber Geek

#1864600 13-Sep-2017 16:13

SJB:

TVNZ's ad income is around $380 million a year so presumably to fund an ad free TV1 the government would have to come up with anything up to half of that.

Anyway, a lot more than $38 million.

Indeed, $38m is a pittance. If RNZ was given that to make some public service television, I wouldn't get my hopes up too high in terms of the quality.

Assuming that TVNZ needs half of its revenue to operate one channel seems like an oversimplification to me.

TVNZ earned $326m in revenue last year, with a profit it of $12.7m. The govt took $13.4m as a dividend.

You'd want to look at programme costs and operating costs. I'd assume that if you're operating as a public service channel, programme costs would go down quite a bit.

So, yeah... $38m isn't enough to fund TV1 as a public broadcaster, but then - do you want a proper public broadcast channel or not? If yes, the govt needs to be prepared to pay for it.

networkn

Networkn
32358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1864670 13-Sep-2017 18:31

$38M shows that Labour has as much idea on Broadcasting costs as they do on pretty much everything else financial, next to none. You wouldn't even get the infrastructure for a TV channel like this for that kind of money let alone salaries of decent qualified presenters, researchers, producers.

It will be $38M and then it will be 10x that. They will surely want to tax someone to pay for it.

I don't have an issue per se with the idea (though I do if it's $380M for what is hopefully obvious reasons even to the OP).

1 | 2