Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
13728 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6448

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1680940 1-Dec-2016 21:56
2 people support this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

networkn:


Ok. So let's look at this from a different perspective. You *seem* to be putting the poor state of journalism firmly at the feet of media companies who employ these "poor held to hostage journalists".


 


You understand these media companies are businesses first right? They have shareholders, and staff, and costs like other businesses, and the CONSUMER dictates what they want. If the media company doesn't offer that, the consumer doesn't "pay" and everyone employed or involved in the media company loses. 


I despise most reality TV shows (the occasional cooking show being the exception), but I know a LOT of people (seemingly otherwise intelligent humans in my experience) who LOVE them. THIS is why there is so much RTV On screen. 


Newsroom was a very interesting series. They went against the grain and produced different material, but to do this you need a benefactor or share-holder with DEEP pockets. NZ doesn't have any media companies that fit that bill. 


Even our beloved Fair Go is now not so much investigative journalism as individual crusades against businesses. 



My argument is twofold: First, I think it is utterly shameful that we are the only western country without public service television. I think this is a responsibility of government and I think we have been badly let down. It would also provide a much-needed platform for some of that essential quality journalism.


Second, I think those responsible for programming decisions on commercial media should be taken out and shot. It is a race to the bottom. TV One may be doing better in ratings, not that it means much when there is no effective competition, but it has achieved this by selling its soul and dragging the rest of the country down with it.


TV 3 had for a long time the core of an excellent news and current events service with programs like Campbell Live, The Vote, 3D, The Nation, and others. But it decided to compete with TV One by trying to be exactly like TV One so it dumped the news organisation and people built up over the years and now it is falling apart, with even worse ratings than it had before. My argument here is that they didn't have to beat TV One at brain-dead television, they could have done fine as a quality niche broadcaster and now the idiots in control have thrown all that away. 


Did dumbing down save TV 3's bacon? No, it just accelerated the death process. If they had gone the other way and continued to build on what they already had, they would have been providing a unique service that would have drawn sufficient viewers to also draw sufficient advertising revenue and eventually other income streams to keep it going. You don't always have to have the biggest dong in the pool to be successful.


 



It is not the role of government to run television services. The NZ Government should sell off TVNZ etc and concentrate on core government services.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

A Tiger in Africa, probably escaped from the Zoo.

 

 


14884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2804

Trusted

  Reply # 1681012 2-Dec-2016 07:31
Send private message

Fred99:

 

tdgeek:

 

There are many outlets for news, lots of choice, pick what suits. (Fox excluded)

 

 

 

 

Why exclude Fox?

 

 

 

 

Too little news and too much fun stuff, plus its very biased as the election shows. Its a very infotainment based service. Fun, loud, brash.


 
 
 
 


3310 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 834


  Reply # 1681029 2-Dec-2016 09:03
3 people support this post
Send private message

MikeB4:  It is not the role of government to run television services. The NZ Government should sell off TVNZ etc and concentrate on core government services.

 

Whether the govt should or should not own media services is more an ideological position re the role of the state - many people (including myself) would disagree with what you've seemingly presented as fact.

 

Based on your position, though, I assume you'd support a sell-off of Radio New Zealand? That the UK Govt should sell off the BBC?

 

TVNZ is now a different kettle of fish to these public broadcasting entities: the reality is the current govt has ensured there is no longer any point it continuing to owe TVNZ in its current form, having stripped it of any public service aspects, abolished the charter, failed to extend funding for TVNZ6 and 7 etc. Selling it off, however, would basically ensure your ideological position was turned into reality.

 

That said, given how far TVNZ has been stripped, perhaps the answer sell off TVNZ, invest the money in RNZ to expand its online (particularly video) presence. Given what they've managed to do with no budget increases in eight years, imagine what they could do with a decent budget? Perhaps, to keep John Campell's haters out there happy, they'd could clone JC (the second coming?) and have him on 24/7?!

 

 

 

 

 

 


7776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1681030 2-Dec-2016 09:05
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Fred99:

 

tdgeek:

 

There are many outlets for news, lots of choice, pick what suits. (Fox excluded)

 

 

Why exclude Fox?

 

 

Too little news and too much fun stuff, plus its very biased as the election shows. Its a very infotainment based service. Fun, loud, brash.

 

 

I agree about the infotainment, and the news tends to have a populist and right-wing bias, but it's popular.  If you don't read it, then you don't get to see how people get strange ideas.
There's plenty worse though, propagating strange ideas that helped get a lunatic democratically elected as POTUS. 


13728 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6448

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1681059 2-Dec-2016 09:18
Send private message

jonathan18:

 

MikeB4:  It is not the role of government to run television services. The NZ Government should sell off TVNZ etc and concentrate on core government services.

 

Whether the govt should or should not own media services is more an ideological position re the role of the state - many people (including myself) would disagree with what you've seemingly presented as fact.

 

Based on your position, though, I assume you'd support a sell-off of Radio New Zealand? That the UK Govt should sell off the BBC?

 

TVNZ is now a different kettle of fish to these public broadcasting entities: the reality is the current govt has ensured there is no longer any point it continuing to owe TVNZ in its current form, having stripped it of any public service aspects, abolished the charter, failed to extend funding for TVNZ6 and 7 etc. Selling it off, however, would basically ensure your ideological position was turned into reality.

 

That said, given how far TVNZ has been stripped, perhaps the answer sell off TVNZ, invest the money in RNZ to expand its online (particularly video) presence. Given what they've managed to do with no budget increases in eight years, imagine what they could do with a decent budget? Perhaps, to keep John Campell's haters out there happy, they'd could clone JC (the second coming?) and have him on 24/7?!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I cant speak about the UK position as it is a different set of circumstances. Here in NZ governments do not run businesses well. History is littered with messes and failures. Media is not a core function of government. If funding for artistic purpose is needed that can be done without ownership.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

A Tiger in Africa, probably escaped from the Zoo.

 

 


7946 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 813

Subscriber

  Reply # 1681072 2-Dec-2016 09:39
Send private message

MikeB4:
Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

Ok. So let's look at this from a different perspective. You *seem* to be putting the poor state of journalism firmly at the feet of media companies who employ these "poor held to hostage journalists".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You understand these media companies are businesses first right? They have shareholders, and staff, and costs like other businesses, and the CONSUMER dictates what they want. If the media company doesn't offer that, the consumer doesn't "pay" and everyone employed or involved in the media company loses. 

 

 

 

I despise most reality TV shows (the occasional cooking show being the exception), but I know a LOT of people (seemingly otherwise intelligent humans in my experience) who LOVE them. THIS is why there is so much RTV On screen. 

 

 

 

Newsroom was a very interesting series. They went against the grain and produced different material, but to do this you need a benefactor or share-holder with DEEP pockets. NZ doesn't have any media companies that fit that bill. 

 

 

 

Even our beloved Fair Go is now not so much investigative journalism as individual crusades against businesses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My argument is twofold: First, I think it is utterly shameful that we are the only western country without public service television. I think this is a responsibility of government and I think we have been badly let down. It would also provide a much-needed platform for some of that essential quality journalism.

 

 

 

Second, I think those responsible for programming decisions on commercial media should be taken out and shot. It is a race to the bottom. TV One may be doing better in ratings, not that it means much when there is no effective competition, but it has achieved this by selling its soul and dragging the rest of the country down with it.

 

 

 

TV 3 had for a long time the core of an excellent news and current events service with programs like Campbell Live, The Vote, 3D, The Nation, and others. But it decided to compete with TV One by trying to be exactly like TV One so it dumped the news organisation and people built up over the years and now it is falling apart, with even worse ratings than it had before. My argument here is that they didn't have to beat TV One at brain-dead television, they could have done fine as a quality niche broadcaster and now the idiots in control have thrown all that away. 

 

 

 

Did dumbing down save TV 3's bacon? No, it just accelerated the death process. If they had gone the other way and continued to build on what they already had, they would have been providing a unique service that would have drawn sufficient viewers to also draw sufficient advertising revenue and eventually other income streams to keep it going. You don't always have to have the biggest dong in the pool to be successful.

 

 

 

 

 



It is not the role of government to run television services. The NZ Government should sell off TVNZ etc and concentrate on core government services.

 

And cut funding to Maori TV as well as it is a commercial channel .





Regards,

Old3eyes


3310 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 834


  Reply # 1681079 2-Dec-2016 10:00
One person supports this post
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

I cant speak about the UK position as it is a different set of circumstances. Here in NZ governments do not run businesses well. History is littered with messes and failures. Media is not a core function of government. If funding for artistic purpose is needed that can be done without ownership.

 

 

So you would indeed support the sale of RNZ as well then?

 

 


13728 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6448

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1681089 2-Dec-2016 10:32
Send private message

old3eyes:

 

 

 

And cut funding to Maori TV as well as it is a commercial channel .

 

 

 

 

I said in a post "If funding for artistic purpose is needed that can be done without ownership. " I believe that Government should sell their stake to Iwi interest and can still provide artistic funding as it does to other private media. Maori TV is an example of doing media right.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

A Tiger in Africa, probably escaped from the Zoo.

 

 


13728 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6448

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1681093 2-Dec-2016 10:34
Send private message

jonathan18:

 

MikeB4:

 

I cant speak about the UK position as it is a different set of circumstances. Here in NZ governments do not run businesses well. History is littered with messes and failures. Media is not a core function of government. If funding for artistic purpose is needed that can be done without ownership.

 

 

So you would indeed support the sale of RNZ as well then?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, and it may even improve it and TVNZ without the need to give post of the net revenue to the crown and be able to reinvest to improve services and provide what they key demographic wnt.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

A Tiger in Africa, probably escaped from the Zoo.

 

 


7776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1681097 2-Dec-2016 10:40
2 people support this post
Send private message

Sale of RNZ is a very dumb idea.

 

It's the only commercial free (hence free from conflict of commercial interest) broadcast media left in NZ.

 

If it's subject to pro-government bias through ownership by the state, then there are plenty of screeching hysterical populist shock-jocks on commercial radio to provide "balance", in between advertisements for magnetic underlays and magic extracts from shark cartilage to sell to the post-truth generation.

 

 


4218 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 789

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1681724 3-Dec-2016 14:08
One person supports this post
Send private message

There is no way RNZ would be viable as a commercial station. Talk radio is too expensive to produce and too difficult to monetise.

 

RadioLive has always struggled for audience since its inception and although the equivalent NZME station appears to be rating well its audience is mostly older people and the quality of the content is atrocious.


14884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2804

Trusted

  Reply # 1681828 3-Dec-2016 19:02
One person supports this post
Send private message

alasta:

There is no way RNZ would be viable as a commercial station. Talk radio is too expensive to produce and too difficult to monetise.


RadioLive has always struggled for audience since its inception and although the equivalent NZME station appears to be rating well its audience is mostly older people and the quality of the content is atrocious.



Atrocious to who? I'm tired of some pays where an opinion is stated as fact.

If you want a service that caters to your needs , pay for it. It might be $2-50 per month or $35 per month, support it

7776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1681877 3-Dec-2016 20:14
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:
alasta:

 

There is no way RNZ would be viable as a commercial station. Talk radio is too expensive to produce and too difficult to monetise.

 

 

 

RadioLive has always struggled for audience since its inception and although the equivalent NZME station appears to be rating well its audience is mostly older people and the quality of the content is atrocious.

 



Atrocious to who? I'm tired of some pays where an opinion is stated as fact.

If you want a service that caters to your needs , pay for it. It might be $2-50 per month or $35 per month, support it

 

 

 

Oh dear. 

 

I agree totally with alasta - the content is atrocious.

 

Would you like every statement obviously of opinion and not referenced to a peer reviewed paper to contain the words in my opinion?

 

 

 

 


14884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2804

Trusted

  Reply # 1681926 3-Dec-2016 22:51
Send private message

Fred99:

 

tdgeek:
alasta:

 

There is no way RNZ would be viable as a commercial station. Talk radio is too expensive to produce and too difficult to monetise.

 

 

 

RadioLive has always struggled for audience since its inception and although the equivalent NZME station appears to be rating well its audience is mostly older people and the quality of the content is atrocious.

 



Atrocious to who? I'm tired of some pays where an opinion is stated as fact.

If you want a service that caters to your needs , pay for it. It might be $2-50 per month or $35 per month, support it

 

 

 

Oh dear. 

 

I agree totally with alasta - the content is atrocious.

 

Would you like every statement obviously of opinion and not referenced to a peer reviewed paper to contain the words in my opinion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Oh Dear"  Thats a bit trite, IMHO, childish

 

If the content is atrocious, its atrocious, thats a fact. its not a fact, its your opinion. 

 

Do you read this forum? The statement of opinions as fact is everywhere. An opinion is just that, an opinion. A fact is a fact. If you prefer to state opinions as facts, what does that do to me? Just rolls my eyes as usual. What does it do to another subscriber who has an interest in a topic but not a lot of knowledge, and all they see is fact after fact after fact. That are opinions.  No, it's not obvious when you state X is Y

 

If its about being on top and winning, I get it. I can easily subscribe to an interesting topic then unsubscribe when it is BS, as another poster often states. Even Xmas is BS I read. Preferring normal posts, Scott me up Beam me.


7776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1681929 3-Dec-2016 23:05
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Fred99:

 

 

 

Oh dear. 

 

I agree totally with alasta - the content is atrocious.

 

Would you like every statement obviously of opinion and not referenced to a peer reviewed paper to contain the words in my opinion?

 

 

"Oh Dear"  Thats a bit trite, IMHO, childish

 

If the content is atrocious, its atrocious, thats a fact. its not a fact, its your opinion. 

 

Do you read this forum? The statement of opinions as fact is everywhere. An opinion is just that, an opinion. A fact is a fact. If you prefer to state opinions as facts, what does that do to me? Just rolls my eyes as usual. What does it do to another subscriber who has an interest in a topic but not a lot of knowledge, and all they see is fact after fact after fact. That are opinions.  No, it's not obvious when you state X is Y

 

If its about being on top and winning, I get it. I can easily subscribe to an interesting topic then unsubscribe when it is BS, as another poster often states. Even Xmas is BS I read. Preferring normal posts, Scott me up Beam me.

 

 

Oh dear again.  I'm sorry if you find that "trite".

 

Any comment that something is "atrocious" surely isn't being presented as fact - but clearly subjective opinion by the person making the comment.

 

I have no idea where you're coming from suggesting that anybody is presenting that as irrefutable fact. Curiously, you've neglected to offer an opinion.  Do you think that it's not atrocious, but good in some way?  

 

 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.