Reinventing TVNZ

Kill your TV?

2005-05-04T10:15:00.000+12:00

Why Bill Ralston is a clever man.

2005-03-21T07:00:00.000+12:00

The media has flourished in the last 24 hours. Bill Ralston, TVNZ's head of news, came out swinging viciously about his 7pm time slot rivals suggesting suicide for Prime's Chief Executive Chris Taylor and that TV3 had made "a major cock-up" in replacing John Campbell as news reader prior to the launch of Campbell Live, which starts tonight. While Prime and TV3 cried foul over Ralston's comments in Sunday's papers, talkback radio was been full of opinionated callers who were also unimpressed with his outburst. Meantime, Bill Ralston must be rubbing his hands together with glee.

While Paul Holmes on Prime has not drawn the initial numbers it had hoped for, TVNZ's Close Up at 7's numbers haven't been anything to cheer about either and after the weekend press, those who haven't been watching may certainly be wondering what all the fuss is about. And if Ralston has his way, they'll all be tuning in tonight to find out.

With this 7pm current affairs slot being so hotly contested, each of the networks is going to have to start implementing some creative tactics in order to stay ahead of the field. While Ralston's comments are certainly less than endearing on his character, he must take round one for drawing such fervent attention to his show. Whether it pays off in the long term is another story but the war is on.

Via email

It's war

2005-03-20T11:05:00.000+12:00

Bill Ralston has come out with the following personal attacks just before John Campbell's current affairs show is launched:

On Prime:

"If I were [Chris Taylor], I'd be shooting myself. I'd be pouring petrol over myself and throwing myself off Auckland's tallest building."

Mr Ralston said Prime had waltzed in "talking big", but had failed dismally to register with viewers. Prime was desperate and "dumb".

He also claimed Holmes and his team of "no reporters" rarely broke stories and Close Up showed them up every night. "Night after night after night we break stories and we treat them originally."

On Prime's exclusive Cave Creek interview last week, Mr Ralston said: "Yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn."

He criticised Holmes' Suzanne Paul exclusive before going on to say: "It's crap. You know it's crap, I know it's crap and the viewers know it's crap."

On TV3:

He was critical of the decision to change TV3's 6pm newsreading team. "It's a major cock-up... it's a strategic blunder they will live to regret. It is going to cost them money." The network has lost about a 10% share in the Auckland market in its target 18-49-year-old bracket. Mr Ralston claimed TV3 would be "wetting themselves" over the figures.

"TV3 are saying they can create an entirely new current affairs slot. They would need to take more than half the audience of Close Up, and half of Paul Holmes - which admittedly isn't hard because they have only got one or two watching. That is not going to happen. I don't believe that Campbell can do better than The Simpsons or better than TV3 news is delivering... They will not make it."

Prime's response:

"Bill Ralston holds a very senior position in a government-owned entity as head of news and current affairs for this country's state broad-caster. It saddens and surprises me greatly that anyone in this business in his position would stoop to that level of talk. That's a sad day. We're not down, we're not out. And we're not going to give up." Chris Taylor.

"When you look at the Close Up product and their resources, where are their stories? That's what Bill ought to be talking about. But I notice, gosh, he's still talking about me." Holmes said Mr Ralston must be "very worried" and he recommended he continue "taking his medicine".

Chris Taylor cannot believe the tirade, and says anyone who makes recommendations of suicide is completely reckless and he is lost for words.

TV3's response:

Mark Jennings dismissed the comments as "reckless". "In two years we won't have puddles of water under our desks. We're certainly not wetting ourselves."

From the Herald on Sunday

Patronising?

2005-03-20T10:20:00.000+12:00

Via email:

A while ago on your blog you posted about the Close Up Gay Poll being misleading. Not sure if you noticed, but TVNZ have now responded to the complaint:

TVNZ has washed its hands of responsibility for the misleading 'ripple effect' created by its 'Close Up @ 7' phone poll on the Civil Union Bill last year, which the network implied showed public opinion overwhelmingly against recognising gay relationships.

In responding to a complaint made by media watchdog group GayWatch and GayNZ.com to the Broadcasting Standards Authority, TVNZ's programme standards manager David Edmunds again acknowledged that the poll was unscientific, but thought it 'patronising' that GayWatch and GayNZ.com could suggest that the general public were unaware of this. 'It is our belief that viewers understand that by their nature they are not scientifc polls,' he wrote. 'We do not feel the necessity to spell out their unscientifc nature each time one is conducted.'

Edmunds also dismissed evidence presented in the complaint to show the 'ripple effect' created in other media by TVNZ's reporting of the poll, which was presented on TVNZ's website as indicative of how the population was feeling rather than how many calls were received. 'What news media outlets elsewhere made of the telephone poll is of no relevance to a formal complaint investigation about a programme broadcast on 2nd December.'

As a final barb, Edmunds called into question the integrity of the complainants. 'We venture the view that this complaint would not be before the Authority (nor even lodged with TVNZ) if the final numbers in the poll had been reversed.'

The BSA has requested a final response from GayWatch and GayNZ.com before it makes its ruling.
Is it patronising to make plain the limitations of poll results to viewers? Each time a scientific political poll is mentioned on the news, they correctly mention the margin of error in the poll. Each time a nonscientific poll is mentioned, they should also mention the limitations of it.

There's huge problems with phone in polls, as mentioned on your website earlier. I don't think it is patronising to assume that people in the general public don't know these problems.

Talking about local productions...

2005-03-09T10:14:00.000+13:00

Via the comments:

Geoff Steven, the former TVNZ executive has now left the building and is trying to resurrect his photography career.

http://www.geoffstevenphotos.co.nz/

His bio page on the site says:

"As a television executive he has Executive Produced many of New Zealand's most successful and innovative programmes and series. These included launching the first international broadcast of the New Zealand created 'Popstars' TV phenomenon. He commissioned 'Once Were Warriors', the highly praised New Zealand feature film and the feature films, 'Scarfies' and'Stickmen'. He recently received an Industry award in recognition of his work in Executive Producing and promoting the documentary in New Zealand television culture."

Question - if he was so great, why isn’t he still working at TVNZ?

TVAuckland

2005-02-15T15:17:00.000+13:00

In the interests of accuracy I feel that TVNZ should be renamed TVAuckland. I live in Dunedin and am disgusted by the lack of coverage of significant local events in my city and province.

Last Monday (Feb 7) Dunedin suffered a cloudburst which caused major flooding and many millions of dollars worth of damage. The storm was at its height during the 6.00pm news hour. Despite the broadcaster's much-vaunted capabilities there was no 'breaking news' live coverage. The big storm barely rated a mention.

To cap it off, Judy Bailley often turns to the weather presenter and says things like: 'When's it going to stop raining?" It might be raining in Auckland while the weather is fine and sunny in Dunedin. Thanks, TVAuckland.

The irony is Dunedin has a regional television station which, every weeknight, puts to air a half hour news bulletin. I think it is a miracle the way the small team at Channel 9, with a fraction of the resources of TVAuckland, is able to cobble together a very professional bulletin of local news.

Sadly, the Clark government insists on throwing taxpayer money at big TVAuckland despite its massive annual revenue, in excess of 300 million dollars. While little Channel 9 Dunedin receives not one cent.

Steve Draper
Dunedin

Holmes vs Wood

2005-02-07T09:22:00.000+13:00

Via email

Tonight, the current affairs war begins between Prime TV and TVNZ as Paul Holmes launches his new show in the 7:00pm slot opposite his protege, Susan Wood. The numbers are on the up for Prime and before Paul Holmes returns to prime time telly, TVNZ's Close Up @ 7 has plummeted 31 per cent in the desired 25-54 age group compared with 2004, while Prime's ratings at 7 have lifted. In an interview in the Weekend Herald Paul Holmes said "Hogan's Heroes is doing about 80,000 viewers a night" and "You'd have to hope that you could score better than Hogan's Heroes, don't you?".

To make matters worse for TVNZ, long-time TVNZ employee Hunter Wells confirmed he had resigned on Friday as executive producer for personal reasons. According to the NZ Herald, industry sources suggested Mr Wells was forced to resign because of poor ratings - an allegation he denied - and that he was suffering from stress.

Furthermore, the Weekend Herald interview asks about not feeling "appreciated" by TVNZ.

'For some time before he left, he says, he had not felt appreciated at what the new Prime duo of Holmes and Alison Mau call the Deathstar. As he says, "in our game you might have to operate on the edge, take risks and put yourself there for scrutiny, you need 100 per cent loyalty behind you. I certainly did not feel that - and hadn't had for two years". '

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10009543
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=10009718

Quote from Online magazine

2005-02-01T13:08:00.000+13:00

"While it's welcome news that there is some television drama being commissioned at last, we're reminded about the bizarre agreement with Australia that allows TVNZ's head of commissioning Tony Holden to claim the Australian programme Last Man Standing qualifies as 'local' drama. As Onfilm magazine notes, since there's one Kiwi actor (along with the six or seven core Australian cast), and a whole two NZ actors are involved in the NZ scenes, and of the total 130 day shoot seven will be in NZ, it qualifies. South Pacific Pictures head of drama Simon Bennett points out that: "Both governments on either side of the Tasman count this show as local content because of the treaty that considers New Zealand content to be Australian and vice versa."

Cleanout at CBS

2005-01-17T22:11:00.000+13:00

There’s more accountability in the private sector of course, as the recent clean out at CBS proves. Four CBS News employees, including three executives, have been ousted for their role in preparing and reporting a disputed story about President Bush’s National Guard service.

The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. The panel also said CBS News had compounded that failure with a “rigid and blind” defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report.

Asked to resign were Senior Vice President Betsy West, who supervised CBS News primetime programs; 60 Minutes Wednesday Executive Producer Josh Howard; and Howard’s deputy, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy. The producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated. “We deeply regret the disservice this flawed 60 Minutes
Wednesday report did to the American public, which has a right to count on CBS News for fairness and accuracy,” said CBS President Leslie Moonves.

Even though CBS denies claims of political bias, the idea of course was to affect the outcome of the Presidential election. Which brings us to TVNZ, arguably the most influential news source in NZ, and with not a conservative to be seen in the ranks of its news staff. What little CBS like bombshell could they have lined up for Dr. Brash for example? Brownlee has already suffered an intolerable smear at the hands of the TVNZ newsroom, when Judy Bailey claimed that he had “today in parliament, called John Tamihere a black fellow”, when this is not what occurred at all. Does the Brash faction have a contingency plan to deal with a CBS like attack on the National party just prior to the elections? Given their lame response to the story on Brownlee, probably not.

So then, what are the odds of some hit on the Nationals in the run up to the election? TVNZ have had plenty of practice with their unbelievably one sided reporting on George Bush and the Iraq war. What’s the bet the Nationals, apparently so cowed by the liberal media they’re afraid to raise their heads, aren’t ready for it, and when it comes, will be lost for a way to fight back? Its going to be up to the net and the conservative bloggers again, the same people that deserve the credit for the changes at CBS. Trouble with NZ of course is there’s nobody ready to back up the bloggers the way FOX backed them up in the States. Unless a revamped Prime will do it, but given they’ve just taken on one of the country’s most bleeding heart left liberals as their main attraction, I wouldn’t count on it.

John Darkin: Public programming bosses need to listen to the public

2005-01-12T13:55:00.000+13:00

Will TVNZ rise to [the] challenge when, according to the Herald-Digipoll survey, 80 per cent of 40 to 59-year-olds say that there is too much reality TV.

TVNZ, especially, has a responsibility to contribute to this country's cultural and national identity, and that shouldn't include dumbing down. Leave that to others. When reality TV and similar programming is offered by the national broadcaster, the image of this country is all the poorer.

National television should be a beacon of light reflecting the intellectual soul of the nation by providing the highest quality, with absolute impartiality. It is unfortunate that in New Zealand these goals must be achieved in a commercial environment.

But why should TVNZ executives and the Government care about the public? They can point to high viewer ratings for a few of their programmes and claim success. But they shouldn't be fooled; for many people television is their only entertainment and they are suckered into watching even banalities.

For national TV bosses, tied to measuring their performance within the constraints of the charter, cheap, rubbishy and piffling programming is a false success.

Surely it is not beyond the Government and TVNZ to implement changes that will protect the broadcaster from the pressures of commercial interest and allow at least TV One to go upmarket. Let TVNZ become yet another great force for cultural good.

Breaking out of its mould will take some lateral thinking by TVNZ and the Government, plus the co-operation of the public. But ask the public at the next poll if they will back quality against cheap, rubbishy and piffling programming and they just might.

The New Zealand Herald

TVNZ unit produces five minutes in five months

2005-01-05T14:16:00.000+13:00

Dom Post:

Television New Zealand has spent more than $200,000 on its news and current affairs investigation unit, which has screened just one five-minute item since it launched last July.

But, so far only one story produced by the unit, about an alleged Gisborne pornographer, has aired on One News.

Television New Zealand has told Parliament's finance and expenditure select committee that the unit had also completed two longer stories – one half-hour item, and one of an hour – and these were waiting for "an opportune time" to screen.

Seven other stories were being investigated and filmed and should air in the first three months of this year.

The unit is headed by executive producer Chris Harrington. Reporters Phil Kitchin, Jodi Ihaka and Brent Fraser, and two part-time researchers, work on material for One News, Close Up @ 7, and documentary specials.

When it was first set up, TVNZ news boss Bill Ralston said the unit would uncover secrets and take a watchdog role on behalf of the public.

TVNZ spokeswoman Avon Adams said the broadcaster had no concerns about the productivity or cost of the investigative unit, which had completed five stories.

"The whole point of the unit is to take time to investigate, to dig deeper, and to break new stories about new issues. Some stories may take three weeks to produce, others may take over a year to research and complete.

Full story

News

2004-12-31T13:19:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Why isn't it that at the time we look for news on our tv there is none? At the time we are all on holiday, we have no paper, we can listen to the radio or wait till the news at 6 as there are no news updates.

At our great tv station everyone is on holiday. We get all the repeats from the last ten years and any rubbish that can be found.

Reinvention Starts at The Top

2004-12-29T08:26:00.000+13:00

Why does TVNZ need to be reinvented? Because it has become everything it once held in disdain. Think back to the sixties, that time I'll call the halcyon days, and reflect on what was the key element that made TVNZ such a vibrant group. It challenged the establishment. In a good humoured and enthusiastic and naive way, it took on the conservative forces that represented in those days the social hierarchy. Through pop music shows and political commentary and comedy it confronted the social orthodoxy and through its freshness and its openness and its enthusiasm, it won the support of New Zealanders, who watched it because they new they were watching something different, that something was going down, that something was happening, and by watching it and laughing and applauding and singing along they were a part of that gentle and witty revolution.

Fast forward to the new century. 2004 and TVNZ is sludgy moribund mess, the antithesis of what it was in the sixties. There are two basic reasons for this changed condition. One is that TVNZ is now the establishment it once challenged, and two is that the people running TVNZ don't know or realise they're now the establishment.

Media has to challenge the status quo. The most basic element of journalism to my mind has always been the newspaper editor of the those old American movies wearing the green eyeshade and working at his presses deep into the night to take on city hall and tell the public what is really happening. Stripping away the self serving veneer of politician’s speeches and government press releases and showing people the truth.

TVNZ today has never been further from this scenario. Its paid money by the government to present this thing called the "Charter", a device to promote the government’s policies. The people running TVNZ are by and large people who think like the government, and if they don't support every little thing the government does, they basically agree on political philosophies. This political philosophy is shared by the establishment, the same nebulous body that TVNZ challenged so vigorously and so successfully in the sixties. Where is the challenge today? Where is the freshness, the vibrancy of the sixties?

It’s not with TVNZ, but it is with FOX News, in the US the fastest growing cable television service. Why is that? Politics aside, it’s because FOX is doing today what TVNZ did in the sixties. It’s challenging the establishment. The wheel has turned the full circle. TVNZ journalists who once challenged the politicians of the day, now runs the organisation and reports to parliament when ordered to. Helen Clark, who in her youth challenged the political orthodoxy of the day, is now the Prime Minister. Here's the question that TVNZ needs to answer. Where is the challenge to today's social and political hierarchy?

If reinvention is really the idea, then the first thing TVNZ has to do is reject the Charter. It must tell the government to drop dead with its $30 million. Second thing it has to do is rid itself of staff that are happy with the Miloslevecian status quo. Third thing it has to do is stop producing programs that echo and support the status quo, and START PRODUCING PROGRAMS THAT CHALLENGE IT.

For one thing, let’s get rid of the surfeit of political commentators soaked in the attitudes of the sixties and seventies. TVNZ’s leading political commentator for example doesn't challenge any political hierarchy. She's part of the political hierarchy. Like so many other TVNZ personnel, she thinks and speaks and holds the same political views as Helen Clark, the government and the social hierarchy. These people are not the green eye shade wearing challengers. They're the panderers and the promoters of the government’s charter. Where are the Sean Hannitys, the E.D. Hills, and the Bill O'Reilly's of TVNZ? They don’t exist.

Now the management at TVNZ may not like Bill or Sean or ED, but that of course just proves my point concerning their confusion over who the TVNZ management really is. They're the establishment, and they're running a TV network that supports the establishment. NZers don't want this kind of Miloslevecian broadcasting, this sickening obeisance to the status quo. They want the vibrancy of the sixties. They won't get it from the tired old lefties running TVNZ today, who have unwittingly become the very establishment they railed against in the sixties. Reinvention must start at the top.

Fortune Cookie

Re Drug Testing

2004-12-28T08:23:00.000+13:00

In response to this post came an email:

The Question: "Drug testing - apparently this was going to be on the cards. What's the truth on that?"

Ian Fraser's Answer: "Well, I saw that that was on the, ah, infamous blog site. All I can say is that TVNZ takes the view that the people who work here are grown-ups. And what that means is that what people do in their own time is their own affair. The only concern that we would have is behaviour that brings the company into disrepute, or behaviour that ends ups having an adverse effect on the performance, on the work of a particular member of the staff. And that's not a matter that will be solved by drug testing. That's a matter that we expect managers to manage. And I think every member of the staff here would expect the situation to be managed in that way."

Merry Christmas.

No Creative Talent in NZ? TVNZ Thinks So.

2004-12-24T08:20:00.000+13:00

Via email:

My source inside TVNZ has heard mention of a research report commissioned by Tony Holden.

The report is apparently seeking to prove that New Zealand doesn't have enough creative talent to provide the quality product TVNZ needs to fulfil its Charter. In other words Ian Fraser is looking for some muscle to drop-kick TVNZ's Charter obligations and Mr Holden wants 'proof' to defend his preference for hiring Australians over New Zealanders wherever possible. If true, this report is the most scurrilous betrayal by TVNZ management towards the industry yet.

Anybody heard more talk about this report?

Why do the Ads Sometimes Sound Louder Than the Programmes?

2004-12-22T14:00:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Obviously enough people have asked TVNZ about this, as they've got an official reply to this query on their website.

So should there be tougher limits on advertisement audio compression? According to this article, the Australian Broadcasting Authority has been looking into the issue over there.

During prime-time (until 10.30pm every evening), programmes have 'break titles', which help a little - when a commercial break is coming up, there's roughly 5 seconds of theme music and the show's titles and imagery is shown. Helps both to 'warn' the viewer that the ads are coming up, and raises the sound in cases where the programme has softer audio levels.

But at other times the volume change is very noticeable. It's in everyone's best interests to maintain audio levels since viewers would be more likely to change channels if the ads are too loud, surely?

I'm not one to gossip but…

2004-12-21T10:10:00.000+13:00

Via the comments:

A scurrilous little rumour fairly racing around the corridors of the starship Network Centre is that the divine Ms Judy is actually being paid a lot more than $800,000 a year.
Does a million a year seem credible?
Surely not.
I’d like to tell you more, but…
My lips are sealed!

Phone Polls on 'Close up at 7'

2004-12-18T11:35:00.000+13:00

GayNZ.com and GayWatch have made a formal complaint to TVNZ under the Broadcasting Code over phone polls on 'Close up at 7', specifically the question "should gay relationships be legally recognised?" on December 2nd. The results showed 76% of the 17,000 calls said "no".

"Viewers and the public were clearly misled into believing the poll was an accurate reflection of public feeling.

For TVNZ to get away with misleading viewers throughout the country on its flagship current affairs programme sets an unbelievable and disturbing precedent for other media."

The article quotes Leila Boyle from Auckland University who explains the biases with 0900 telephone polls:

The method is unscientific.

People are not selected randomly - they only canvass the relative minority of New Zealanders watching the programme at the time, and then only the number that feel strongly enough to vote and pay for the privilege of doing so. No allowance is made for repeat voting.

The questions may be worded unfairly.

The results are unlikely to be representative of opinions of New Zealanders in general, yet they are interpreted by the media as if they are.

“A lot of people have called in,” Wood reported, ignoring the probability of multiple calls. She described the number of people against gay relationships “overwhelming”, concluding the programme with the comment, that it “makes you wonder which polls the government is relying on to say that this Bill has support”.

On TV One’s “Tonight” news programme Lindsay Perigo was suggesting the Close Up At 7 poll may even affect the way politicians voted at the final reading of the Bill:

“I didn’t get that from the Close Up At 7 poll. Now you see that’s interesting because that margin was so decisive against the Bill...that that could actually spook another couple of politicians into the other camp, if I may use that expression, and so then we do have a really tight race. And the politicians are really really sensitive to public opinion on this matter, so that could be a last minute complicating factor.”

In at least two news items posted on TVNZ’s website, the poll was presented as an accurate representation of public feeling, referring to “people” rather than “calls”. One item included: “A recent Close Up at 7 poll found New Zealanders strongly opposed to legally recognising gay relationships.”

GayNZ.com goes on to talk about the ripple effect of this poll, and its incorrect interpretation, into other forms of media.

GayNZ.com and GayWatch have identified five codes which they believe TVNZ breached (see their article for full reasoning):

4a: Programmes which deal with political matters, current affairs, and questions of a controversial nature, must show balance and impartiality.

5a: Significant errors of fact should be corrected at the earliest opportunity.

5b: Broadcasters should refrain from broadcasting material which is misleading or unnecessarily alarms viewers.

5d: Factual reports on the one hand, and opinion, analysis and comment on the other, should be clearly distinguishable.

5e: Broadcasters must take all reasonable steps to ensure at all times that the information sources for news, current affairs and documentaries are reliable.

Source

Talking of silly money...

2004-12-17T10:27:00.000+13:00

Via the comments:

A report by Parliament's finance and expenditure select committee – issued Thursday 16th Dec, revealed Ian Fraser and Bill Ralston's "Talk Television" tour to discuss broadcasting with members of the public in Napier, Dunedin and Hamilton (???) cost an estimated $173,342, including $28,166 in travel and accommodation.

I’m sure those gentlemen would like to provide the public with a more complete breakdown of actual costs. Considering both of them could have travelled around the globe a couple of times First Class for that outlay…

How long was the tour?
How much did they pay for the private jet which ferried them? (At those prices, it had to be private and luxurious.)
How many gold plated limousines did they hire?
How many hotel suites did each of them occupy?
(Do any of those towns even have decent hotels?)
How much did they actually spend on the meals?
How much on average did they pay for each bottle of wine consumed?
How many hookers/call girls/boys etc did they hire for themselves or clients on the trip?

(The last may be unkind, but I’m desperately trying to think of ways to pad out the cost of a three town trip by two people and it’s difficult without that sort of excess.)

Oh, and did they get reimbursed for actual and receipted expenses, or did they just get a very large dollop of cash in hand and told to go spend it?

Or did they just take a cash advance based on a first class trip, do it on the cheap, and then pocket the difference?

In this case, and doing the maths, what could be a considerable difference.

Blog feedback

2004-12-15T14:20:00.000+13:00

Via email:

I'm all for people putting constructive ideas forward, but for those people who can only find things to complain about, pack up your bags and go to Canwest or somewhere else ... nobody is forcing you to work at TVNZ.

That's the point of this blog: reinvention - talking about issues in the hope that things will improve. If we had no hope, we'd leave.

More on Judy

2004-12-15T11:00:00.000+13:00

In the comments:

I’d like to suggest a new dictionary definition.
Bailey. (Verb) To over-inflate one’s value to achieve an immoral or obscene result. As in...‘That Hawksby sure pulled a bailey getting six million bucks out of TVNZ.’

Via email:

First the senile and incompetent Holmes earning $60,000 p.m. and now this.

As a Brit, I consider Judy and almost all of her colleagues as amateurs, compared to the BBC etc equivalent professionals who almost always have a journalistic background and in relative terms earn nothing like this!

Look forward to hearing how this is justified?

What an utter disgrace and insult to everyday workers in NZ! Teachers, nurses and similar professionals are lucky to attain $50,000 p.a.

Just how is it justified ?

I am a UK trained nurse living in NZ and see many examples of this detrimental behaviour where Kiwis measure themselves by their own standards and somehow ignore the real world!

The "celebrity" culture wins again at the expense of real people!

Russell Brown says that "the most surreal element of the whole business so far has surely been Bailey herself having to introduce an item about it all on One News".

Stuff And Nonsense

2004-12-14T22:00:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Wouldn't it be nice if Judy and the rest of those earning over 6 figures could scrape by on a little less, so the poor little workers at the bottom of the TVNZ food chain could have a little more!

Most people given the chance would be very happy to accept $800K from anyone dumb enough to pay it, so good on Judy for seeing her chance and taking it. It will probably last only one more year, and could be seen as a 'working golden handshake'.

Has anyone asked why women from Marketing are now running almost everything in the Television Centre?

And when will the weekend papers pot the head of Human Resources - the department supposedly skilled in hiring people for all facets of Television - for not only not having a TV set, but taking pride in telling people she never watches TV? Could that be a clue to why so much bitterness in the building is generated by her department? Almost the entire HR team are snooty graduates with no useful skills other than ensuring their own survival.

Judy almost doubles her salary?

2004-12-14T09:00:00.000+13:00

Via email:

I read with shock this morning (online story) that Judy Bailey has almost doubed her salary to $800,000:

"Bailey is understood to have asked for and been given the huge pay rise as television broadcasting's "presenter wars" heat up...more than Holmes' salary of about $740,000 before he quit...ahead of chief executive Ian Fraser...Helen Clark is paid a salary of $317,000."

God she just reads an autocute, she doesn't run a business, or the country. It's obscene!

The destiny of Destiny TV

2004-12-13T19:15:00.000+13:00

Via email:

TVNZ is finally getting rid of Brian Tamaki and Destiny's Church on channel two. Altogether now: "AMEN, PRAISE THE LORD!"

Update: a link to GayNZ.com which has up the following article:

Brian Tamaki's television church has had its cathode ray tube zapped - "Destiny Television" has been dumped by TVNZ in favour of an animated series for kids about the adventures of a pair of huhu grubs.

A spokeswoman for the Destiny Church says they were told the programme did not fit TVNZ's charter, and Tamaki claimed it was because of the "Enough is Enough" march. However, a spokeswoman for TVNZ said it was because the network wished to provide more children's programming.

"Destiny Television" has in the past been a vehicle for extended homophobic rants from Tamaki, including a now-infamous six part series entitled "Homosexuality, Religion & God" which the Broadcasting Standards Authority ruled last year had breached codes of fairness.

In this programme, Tamaki said the homosexual spirit was sent by Satan "to actually take out and pervert a whole nation". Tamaki revelled in the publicity created by complaints over the broadcast, and used it to promote sales of the video through the Destiny Church website, now the only place eager members of the viewing public will be able to get their evangelical fix for the moment.

Ref: Sunday Star-Times, NZPA, GayNZ.com

TVNZ - the worst of 2004

2004-12-13T09:05:00.000+13:00

Add your worst of moments from 2004 here.

TVNZ - the best of 2004

2004-12-13T09:00:00.000+13:00

Add your best of moments from 2004 here.

TVNZ Soap

2004-12-12T09:00:00.000+13:00

The broadcaster has confirmed former Grundy "soap specialist" Jason Daniels, who helped create Shortland Street has been contracted to TVNZ to develop ideas.

Tony Holden is also understood to have hired other staff to work on a new home-grown show. Holden has spoken openly about his desire for another Kiwi soap.

TV2 publicist Nicole Wood said it was too early to comment. "There are ideas being talked about, but there is no plan about making anything at the moment."

Insiders said the show would be unlikely to replace Shortland Street, which has increased its ratings over the past year.

Sunday Star Times

It'll all end in tears, Mr Ralston

2004-12-11T11:15:00.000+13:00

From The Dominion Post:

What is Bill Ralston head of current affairs and news at TVNZ thinking of, giving Paul Holmes' old job to Susan Wood?

Okay, so the ratings for the imaginatively named Close up at 7 were holding but come January next year when viewers have a choice between Paul Holmes, John Campbell or Susan Wood, they won't be tuning in to TV One.

Mark Sainsbury who has been appointed as Wood's stand-in would have been a far better choice for he has the common touch and doesn't take himself too seriously.

The full article

TVNZ to instigate drug testing

2004-12-09T21:20:00.000+13:00

God bless anonymous faxes!

Freshly leaked news has it that TVNZ is planning to introduce
workplace drug testing early in the New Year,
which should go down well with the troops, especially at this time of year....

(word has it that TV3 sacrifical P-head Darren MacDonald
may well have a bit of company at his support group meetings)

The question remains unanswered as to whether the growth hormones
Tony Holden takes in the hope of one day reaching 5 foot,
will be categorised as performance impairing...
The anonymous faxer did ask if anyone knows of any legal
personality enhancing drugs please forward info to Tony c/o TVNZ

Alison jumps ship

2004-12-07T11:07:00.000+13:00

A comment on an earlier post:

Neil Waka, on his Auckland radio slot this morning, got into a discussion with the other hosts about Alison Mau's coming departure for Prime TV.

Would Kate Hawkesby be slotted back into TVNZ's Breakfast show to fill the gap?
'No way,' said the jovial Neil. 'Kate leave the highly rated Late News? She's not stupid. No one watches Breakfast!!'

Uhmmm... Check the figures, Neil. No one watches the Late News, either. And as for Kate H’s IQ…?

However, Neal, an A+ for being brave. Such attempts at honesty - even if a tad unwise - should be encouraged. Honesty is in short supply around the hallowed halls of the Network Centre.

Just don’t tell Barking Bill Ralston what you said.
He might forget it’s the season of goodwill if he realises you've been biting the hand that feeds you.

Comedy or Tragedy?

2004-12-06T19:53:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Watching "Frontseat" last night and listening to the comedians and the Network Executive was a little bit funny and a little bit sad.

Apparently 'Flight of the Conchords' could have been seen on our screens if only NZOnAir had fronted up with the money.

But I thought TVNZ was sitting on a big pile of Charter Funding? And wasn't that money given to them to enable them to take risks and provide the viewer with edgier and diverse programming like Conchords?

Headliners

2004-12-04T10:20:00.000+13:00

Via email:

I've just watched yet another awful review given by the film guy on Headliners (Renee refers to him as Dom).

I thought Headlners attracted a young, hip audience, yet they have this pompus guy that talks like he has carrot stuck up you know where.

The film guy on the Good Morning show (Steve....I think) is a much better choice. He's funny, seems to relate to a broad audience, and is more bearable to watch.

Just as they got rid of Holmes, maybe Dom should think about moving to Prime also.

Signature TV

2004-12-03T22:00:00.000+13:00

Via email:

A friend who attended the recent SPADA conference was at a roundtable with Tony Holden - who was discussing the new 'Signature TV' Charter initiative. He apparently explained that it would never play on a Sunday night because they could buy 'British unwatchable crap' that had a screen value of $8million per hour for that slot - and therefore the local budget could never compete.

Close Up at 7

2004-12-03T13:48:00.000+13:00

So the news is finally out - no surprises: Susan keeps her job.

Television Debates

2004-12-02T14:05:00.000+13:00

Via email:

I must say, I really enjoyed the debate on TV1 last night about teenage drinking - while these debates never solve anything, it's fascinating to hear others' points of views (I'm not a big fan of talkback radio so don't normally here their debates). The frustrations I experienced last night reminded me of the last big debate I watched on TV1 (about the foreshore and seabed saga): there's just too many ad breaks which break the flow of conversation (if one can truely call it a conversation). For these types of shows, could not the advertising formats be reshuffled?

More on "that soap"

2004-12-02T11:16:00.000+13:00

From Russell Brown at Public Address yesterday:

The Rasputin of Hobson Street, TVNZ commissioning chief Tony Holden, has brought in Jason Daniels - the Grundy soap specialist who helped develop Shortland Street - to work on a new, in-house soap at state TV. Some other people have been recruited, but anyone deemed to have been too well-connected to Shortland Street's producer, South Pacific Pictures, has not, it appears, been welcome.

So why is TVNZ trying to work up a new soap when it has previously said it wouldn't be producing drama in-house, and when it already has a well-established and popular nightly soap?

Because Holden (who had a very bitter separation with SPP) wants to "break up the big production companies", and SPP in particular, as he seems to have been happy to say to a few people? Why would that be a good idea? Where does strategy stop and personal agenda begin?

There is a long and undistinguished history at TVNZ of successive generations of management having to climb out from underneath the agendas of their predecessors. It would seem to be going strong.

Eating Media Lunch - Unoriginal?

2004-11-30T11:37:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Everyone seems to be raving about EATING MEDIA LUNCH, but it is seeming to be more and more a direct Rip-off of BRASS-EYE, the Channel 4 show from ages
ago. Things like the 'Celebrity Sharemarket' and Newsboy doing absurd things
as the camera pulls out in his final signoff.....
How #%!% dumb do they think we are?

Promoting homosexuality!

2004-11-29T08:11:00.000+13:00

Via email:

Tonight, for the first time, I started to watch the program Angels in America, only to be confronted by two men in a whopping great snogging session, ending up with one licking the others sperm off his fingers. Whilst this may be entertaing to those who indulge in such practices, I found it unwatchable. I read in the magazine North & South, how Helen Clark is a well known Gay Icon and will neither confirm or deny she is gay. The magazine also stated that homosexual television program directors have been appointed to TVNZ. It would seem that TVNZ is more and more, actively promoting programs involving homosexualality and I am beginning to think there is a hidden agenda here to convince us all that homosexuality is somehow normal. Our political process has been captured by Gays and feminists and hence I take it, the pressure from above to promote the gay scene.

More in the family

2004-11-27T14:39:00.000+13:00

A reader speculates:

TVNZ recently invited 4 companies to pitch for a new farming programme:

* Screentime who were already making the TV One show, 'Grass Roots Business'
* Gibsons who have made the successful 'No8Wired' for TV3 for the past four years
* TVNZ's own Avalon Productions, makers of 'Country Calendar' the longest
running show on NZ tv in its 39th year and
* new company Showdown Productions Ltd, producers of 'City Girls' for TV2 (OK it was set on a farm)

Commissioning Head Tony Holden is fond of espousing two contradictory philosophies. He has stated that he wants to break the big companies, but he also demands that he has control over the appointment of programme exec producers and producers as he doesn't trust inexperienced personnel.

So, it must have been a bit of surprise to the three companies with farming programme experience, to find that newcomer Showdown Productions won the pitch.

But there was no doubt that Showdown's Exec Producer would be approved. We understand that this role will be filled by Kirsty Cooper, also rumoured to be developing TV One's soap and of course wife of Commissioning Boss Tony Holden.

All in the Family?

2004-11-26T14:05:00.000+13:00

Via email:

About the traps we hear that TVNZ are developing a new soap for TV1. This despite assurances to a suspicious independent production sector, (and the Minister in charge of TVNZ, also the Minister of Broadcasting) that they have no plans to undertake in house Drama production.

Our sources tell us the soap is being developed by a team involving an offshore 'soap specialist' and local writers Kirsty Cooper and Sarah Mayberry.

For the conspiracy theorists, Kirsty Cooper is the wife of TVNZ Head of Commissioning Tony Holden and Sarah Mayberry is the wife of TVNZ Drama Commissioner Chris Gist.

TVNZ whitewash

2004-11-25T15:55:00.000+13:00

Via email:

From this morning's Herald:

Claims that a TVNZ manager was dismissed from television production company South Pacific Pictures after allegations of financial mismanagement had no substance, Mr Fraser told the committee.

Act MP Deborah Coddington had made the claim about the head of commissioning and production Tony Holden.

Mr Fraser said TVNZ knew there had been a dispute over "money and content rights" between Mr Holden and the company, but it had been rapidly settled.

Mr Fraser said TVNZ had a robust recruitment process for checking prospective employees, and an enormous amount of checking had been done on Mr Holden.

"No one was charged, there was no conviction for any crime."
This is a TVNZ whitewash. Expect more to be uncovered.

In his TVNZ position Mr Holden is responsible for tens of millions of dollars of public money.

Collusion? Part Deux

2004-11-25T15:43:00.000+13:00

Mr McCully: "Can you assure me that you're not competing against others, jointly with TV3, in relation to sporting programming, in this case rugby."

Mr Fraser: "I can give you no such assurance.

"The assurance I am giving you is that anything that we do will be governed by a sensitivity to what the Commerce Act has to say about such arrangements."

Mr McCully: "So it's quite possible, then, within the framework that you operate at TVNZ, that TVNZ and TV3-Can West might jointly acquire, for example, rugby programming rights and share them and the coverage."

Mr Fraser: "I think it's possible that such a thing could happen but it's hypothetical."

"As far as we're concerned, the implication that we would be involved in something like collusion against Prime is defamatory and for which we will take legal (action) should that situation arise," he said.

Mr McCully's allegations were covered by parliamentary privilege.

Read more »

TVNZ's website

2004-11-24T19:57:00.000+13:00

Via email:

I'm so frustrated, I'm trying to view pages on the TVNZ site but have been getting this error today:

Internal Server Error
Message: null

Description: No details available.

Sender: org.apache.cocoon.servlet.CocoonServlet

Source: Cocoon Servlet

Request URI

view-preempt/tvnz_epg_skin/

cause

The entity name must immediately follow the '&' in the entity reference.

request-uri

/view-preempt/tvnz_epg_skin/

I hope the problem is fixed soon on the TV listings page.

TVNZ today

2004-11-24T18:43:00.000+13:00

Winston Peters has suggested that TVNZ and TV3 were colluding to wipe out Prime TV. CEO Ian Fraser admitted lunching with TV3 bosses recently but, of course, declined to disclose the subject matter of their talks and denied collusion claims. (Source).

Cringe moment today: "Yo brothers, I'm down with it" - Judy Bailey, 6pm News.

As long as it's sensational...

2004-11-22T15:31:00.000+13:00

Via email:

"I thought it was disgusting of TVNZ News to play extracts of the Nelson man making his statement to the police about how and why he killed his baby.

Sure his face was obscured but is there anyone in Nelson by now who doesn't now who the family is? Here was a man in the depths of despair going through sheer hell; this is not stuff that should be broadcast to the public.

And how dare the Police allow such material out for general viewing! (For that matter I also hate the televising of people in the dock as they are about to receive their sentence.) But hey, as long as it's sensational, they'll screen it and to hell with people's privacy and feelings. If you want to be informed, listen to radio."

I feel that a lot of the problem with TVNZ is...

2004-11-22T15:07:00.000+13:00

I feel that a lot of the problem with TVNZ is that they put good programmes that people would watch on at stupid times - take Agenda for example. If that were on at a similar time to Kim Hill, instead of late on Saturday night/Sunday morning then more people would watch it. And less reality TV! Everyone knows it's crap but people still watch it because it's on prime time.
Also, reruns of successful one off shows don't work, the classic example of this is the IQ show. It was very successful the first time round in 2003, but less so in 2004. These things only work once.
More local programming could come from actual funny comedy too - Brotown, Havoc and Newsboy and back of the Y are funny but Mike King is not. I can't say I've met anyone who actually thinks he is. Perhaps he is funny because we are told that he's funny. Next year being election year I imagine that there will be a lot more local programming anyway, with election programmes and debates etc.
The time some of us spend watching TV we could spend doing something else, and much of the time we do. And the time I do watch TV I spend watching TV3 because their news is better.
PS It was stupid for TVNZ to give up the Simpsons, now nobody watches TV2 on Wednesdays after 7:30. And just wait till Holmesey starts his cheeky new show on Prime.
Might have more later.

TVNZ wants to listen to us

2004-11-22T14:22:00.000+13:00

On Newstalk ZB today Ian Fraser said that TVNZ

"wants to know what its viewers think about what it is doing and what it is not doing...they want to listen, not to talk or defend...they will not be there to get into lengthy debate, trying to justify what TVNZ is doing...it is more important for them to find out how people actually think [TVNZ] are doing.

Now is the perfect opportunity for this blog to get people discussing openly about TVNZ's practices. Thank you for your emails. It's time we started talking!

Did they really say that?

2004-11-22T14:12:00.000+13:00

A reader commented:

"I'd like to see a section where we could post some of the gems they come out with on the news. Sometimes I wonder if they understand what they're saying - like the time they covered a kiwi medical advance that would "speed up the probability of recovery"? Who writes this crap?"

We think this is a great idea and would love your contributions to the "did they really say that files".

The number of statistically unjustified, unfound and wild conclusions on the news is disturbing.

In brief

2004-11-21T11:16:00.000+13:00

Thanks to the other bloggers who have linked up to us and helped to start spread the word. More of us will start speaking out very soon on this blog.

In the meantime, a quote from the Sunday Star Times today:

"Why would I work [at TV3]? I've just been offered a job at TVNZ." - Mark Jennings
"Because it would be a lot more bloody fun than working there." - Rod Pedersen.

On a more serious note, we're utterly appalled that TVNZ will screen footage of murdered man, Shannon McComb, despite his mother's pleas:

"Has the world lost its compassion? My son was brutally murdered at the hands of callous murderers - now I feel like we are suffering even more at the callous hands of TVNZ. They have been absolutely bullying us. I don't know how much more I can take."

To cut the documentary would set a "terrible precedent", says TVNZ chief executive Ian Fraser. "It is a terribly difficult issue for us. It will sound hypocritical for me to say my heart bleeds for (McComb's mother) and also say that I will still screen the documentary. Finding the balance has been a hideous issue for us."

McComb's mother said the documentary was sullying her son's memory for commercial gain. TVNZ refused to meet the family or show them the documentary before it screened, despite intervention by the ombudsman. She said her son phoned her five days before he died and told her he had taken part in the documentary and regretted it. She said he had been in no state to give consent because of his addiction to glue sniffing.

Since when has TVNZ been known for its compassion? For listening to the people? This kind of thing cannot go on. Are there no ethics left in the world of television? We wonder.

Reinvention

2004-11-20T11:34:00.000+13:00

The name of this group blog was deliberate: we're tired of the way things are with TVNZ currently but we also hope and long for positive changes. We believe that things could be so much better than they are currently.

We're sick of the politics. The money. The ratings games.

To reinvent means to make over completely, to do something again - from the beginning - to recast something familiar or old into a different form (and no, this is not about rebranding).

For change to happen requires people to speak out. To share their frustrations, their experiences and most importantly - their dreams. If enough of us get together, change is not only possible but inevitable. It won't be talked about in hushed voices behind closed doors anymore.

To begin with, we encourage the corporates and the visionaries to read The Cluetrain Manifesto. It's free. Here's an excerpt:

A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies.

These markets are conversations. Their members communicate in language that is natural, open, honest, direct, funny and often shocking. Whether explaining or complaining, joking or serious, the human voice is unmistakably genuine. It can't be faked.

Most corporations, on the other hand, only know how to talk in the soothing, humorless monotone of the mission statement, marketing brochure, and your-call-is-important-to-us busy signal. Same old tone, same old lies. No wonder networked markets have no respect for companies unable or unwilling to speak as they do.

But learning to speak in a human voice is not some trick, nor will corporations convince us they are human with lip service about "listening to customers." They will only sound human when they empower real human beings to speak on their behalf.

While many such people already work for companies today, most companies ignore their ability to deliver genuine knowledge, opting instead to crank out sterile happytalk that insults the intelligence of markets literally too smart to buy it.

However, employees are getting hyperlinked even as markets are. Companies need to listen carefully to both. Mostly, they need to get out of the way so intranetworked employees can converse directly with internetworked markets.

Corporate firewalls have kept smart employees in and smart markets out. It's going to cause real pain to tear those walls down. But the result will be a new kind of conversation. And it will be the most exciting conversation business has ever engaged in.

Where's the local drama?

2004-11-18T11:40:00.000+13:00

Fiona Rae of Public Address writes about TVNZ's launch of its 2005 season:

"Sure, there's a couple of things: major series Frontier of Dreams is a history of New Zealand... But really, would you watch something called How Clean Is Your House? or Is It Safe to Eat?; the producers apparently so unsure of their programmes that they had to use a question for their titles.

And there's no polite way of saying this: where the f**k is the local drama? There was virtually none mentioned, just a kids' series called Holly's Heroes, and an Australian co-production called Last Man Standing that has, like, oh at least one Kiwi in it. Honourable mention goes to the new series of Mataku, but there was no mention on Tuesday of the reported Insiders Guide spin-off The Insiders Guide to Love.

Having canned Mercy Peak and decided against a second series of Serial Killers, shouldn't TVNZ have commissioned something new? Why isn't some of the extra Charter money being used for drama? TVNZ also has another $11 million to play with. What the f**k is going on?"

TVNZ axes Flipside

2004-11-14T13:45:00.000+13:00

TV2's Flipside - a youth news programme, widely regarded as a "charter flag flier" - has also performed poorly in the ratings, pulling an average of 19,900 viewers this year in its 18-39 target demographic.

Camilleri said TVNZ had no replacement show yet, and was still in negotiations with the show's 11 staff, including presenters Mike Puru and Sonia Gray, about their future.

NZ Writers' Guild questions TVNZ 'Local' Drama

2004-10-11T13:36:00.000+13:00

"We believe it is misleading to call Last Man Standing a 'local' drama. TVNZ may very well have co-financed the show but it was produced in Melbourne with apparently overwhelming Australian creative contributions. The programme was made in conjunction with Australia's Channel 7 which is also heralding the programme as Australian 'local' content. How can the same show be 'local' in both territories?

TVNZ need to stop the spin and admit that their upcoming schedule suffers from a dearth of homegrown drama and, indeed, comedy. It's not enough for TVNZ's general manager of programming Annemarie Duff to say that local shows are 'still in development'. This is the same excuse TVNZ have been giving us for over a year now. TVNZ's inability to move shows from development into production has decimated our local television industry. In the last twelve months there has been almost no work for local writers and once writers stop working the flow on effects impact on directors, producers, technicians and actors.

TVNZ's Charter requires them to 'support and promote the talents and creative resources of New Zealanders and of the independent New Zealand film and television industry.' We believe the network is woefully failing to live up to this objective."

Quote from Guild Executive Director Dominic Sheehan.
Source: Scoop.

Hello world

2004-10-10T11:00:00.000+13:00

It's about time New Zealanders had a place to discuss their thoughts and provide feedback on Television New Zealand. Their frustrations, experiences, problems and suggestions.

This is a group blog, meaning anyone can add their own articles. Everyone is responsible for their own posts and comments and please do not defame TVNZ in the process: we want this site to be informative and honest.

It's time our voices were heard!