I'm still amazed anyone still relies on TV news these days.

Seems very outdated, both the news and the presentation of it.

geoffwnz:

 

I'm still amazed anyone still relies on TV news these days.

 

Seems very outdated, both the news and the presentation of it.

 

 

 

Some news is more up to date than online. Such as crossing live to a reporter on the spot. Also it doesn't bombard me with videos playing by themselves, and when I go to pause that interference, I have to hover the cursor to create a pause option. I also don't get half the screen taken over by an ad that I have to close. I find online often very intrusive on some sites

Spyware:

 

1983 was the last time.

 

Years ago Sky was down for 2 days or so. I could not care less as it had been 100% reliable for me. Im fine with an outage on any really reliable service

tdgeek:

 

geoffwnz:

 

I'm still amazed anyone still relies on TV news these days.

 

Seems very outdated, both the news and the presentation of it.

 

 

Some news is more up to date than online. Such as crossing live to a reporter on the spot. Also it doesn't bombard me with videos playing by themselves, and when I go to pause that interference, I have to hover the cursor to create a pause option. I also don't get half the screen taken over by an ad that I have to close. I find online often very intrusive on some sites

 

Some good points indeed.
I do prefer to be able to pick and choose which news topics I look into though, so I can follow news that is interesting to me.  Not sure that's an option on the nightly TV news yet though.  :-)

The "crossing live" thing is a bit hit or miss.  Seems to be trending towards having someone live regardless of the actual need to do so.  What benefit is there for having a reporter standing outside a building (courthouse for example) in the evening reporting on something that may have happened in that building during the day. 

There's a lot of personal preference in our media consumption though.

geoffwnz:

 

I'm still amazed anyone still relies on TV news these days.

 

Seems very outdated, both the news and the presentation of it.

 

Yes and no.. From a EM point of view actual TV news gives us better situational awareness when teams are not on the ground or are in a diff area then the media.

There is an important part for all aspects of media in peoples lives, take people that don't have the internet or live in the whoops.

It never ceases to amaze me that people still watch A: Broadcast TV in general B: TVNZ

The sooner TVNZ is scrapped the better, utter waste of taxpayers money.

Speaking of Automation Failure - they no longer have cameras driven around the floor by a person - during the weather one night last week, two of the computer controlled cameras ran into each other - obviously quite hard.

The weather man (Dan) just kept going. Obviously quite a malarky - it made quite a loud noise.

tdgeek:

 

How often dos this happen? Weekly or fortnightly?

 

There was an outage (about 20 minutes) of 1 News earlier this year, but that was caused by an fire alarm being set off. As others have mentioned, TVNZ can broadcast from studios in Wellington and Chch in event of an emergency that knocked out Hobson Street, but do need time to prepare those studios.

Seems automation is going a little wonky at 1 News over the past week. When Dan presented the last weather segment, a camera fell over. Can't remember the exact date, but it was in the last fortnight or so.

Lias:

 

It never ceases to amaze me that people still watch A: Broadcast TV in general B: TVNZ

 

The sooner TVNZ is scrapped the better, utter waste of taxpayers money.

 

TVNZ gets no direct funding from the government, so not a waste of taxpayers money. Some locally made shows receive funding from NZ on Air, but that goes to the production company, and is contestable between all networks. Of course TVNZ do produce some of these programs (for example Q&A). However, 1 News is not funded by NZ on Air.

Lias:

It never ceases to amaze me that people still watch A: Broadcast TV in general B: TVNZ

The sooner TVNZ is scrapped the better, utter waste of taxpayers money.

stinger:

 

Lias:

 

It never ceases to amaze me that people still watch A: Broadcast TV in general B: TVNZ

 

The sooner TVNZ is scrapped the better, utter waste of taxpayers money.

 

 

TVNZ gets no direct funding from the government, so not a waste of taxpayers money. Some locally made shows receive funding from NZ on Air, but that goes to the production company, and is contestable between all networks. Of course TVNZ do produce some of these programs (for example Q&A). However, 1 News is not funded by NZ on Air.

 

You have to wonder for how much longer it will be able to sustain itself commercially. It's only a matter of time before it becomes like Kiwirail and starts requiring capital injections from the taxpayer.

alasta:

 

You have to wonder for how much longer it will be able to sustain itself commercially. It's only a matter of time before it becomes like Kiwirail and starts requiring capital injections from the taxpayer.

 

I'd say for at least the next 20 years at least. Yes, viewership is down, but that has happened in all countries with the rise in SVoD and new channels. Yes, people are second-screening while they watch tv. It was only ten years ago we only had 6 FTA (analog) channels, now we have 5 times that, But for the majority of people, broadcast television is the major form of media consumption in a household (only 39% of tv sets were smart or had a Internet connected devices, e.g. chromecast, apple tv, etc).

While the largely tech focused community (geekzone :) have moved away from broadcast tv, I don't see commercial tv falling on its knees any time soon.

TVNZ would almost certainly fold without NZ on Air, but if you wan't to get technical I'll be more explicit. NZ on Air, TVNZ, Radio NZ, Maori TV, Parliamentary TV, Access/community radio, NZ Film commission, etc should all either not exist or not receive a cent of taxpayer money. Public broadcasting should not be a thing, it's a waste of taxpayers money. 

Lias:

 

TVNZ would almost certainly fold without NZ on Air, but if you wan't to get technical I'll be more explicit. NZ on Air, TVNZ, Radio NZ, Maori TV, Parliamentary TV, Access/community radio, NZ Film commission, etc should all either not exist or not receive a cent of taxpayer money. Public broadcasting should not be a thing, it's a waste of taxpayers money. 

 

I couldn't disagree more. As a country, it is important that our voices are heard. If it wasn't for NZ on Air, there would be a lot less of NZ content on the screens (especially dramas, which aren't cheap). And without RNZ, we wouldn't have any public broadcasting or quality non-print journalism. Māori TV has some of the best content on broadcast TV. And while I don't listen to any community radio, it also plays a very important part in minority representation on the airwaves that otherwise wouldn't happen.

stinger:

 

Lias:

 

TVNZ would almost certainly fold without NZ on Air, but if you wan't to get technical I'll be more explicit. NZ on Air, TVNZ, Radio NZ, Maori TV, Parliamentary TV, Access/community radio, NZ Film commission, etc should all either not exist or not receive a cent of taxpayer money. Public broadcasting should not be a thing, it's a waste of taxpayers money. 

 

 

I couldn't disagree more. As a country, it is important that our voices are heard. If it wasn't for NZ on Air, there would be a lot less of NZ content on the screens (especially dramas, which aren't cheap). And without RNZ, we wouldn't have any public broadcasting or quality non-print journalism. Māori TV has some of the best content on broadcast TV. And while I don't listen to any community radio, it also plays a very important part in minority representation on the airwaves that otherwise wouldn't happen.

 

Content should only exist if its commercially viable. If NZ content isn't commercially viable, the taxpayer should not be wasting money propping it up.

Lias:

 

TVNZ would almost certainly fold without NZ on Air

 

You say that based on... what?