TVNZ 7 gave us a glimpse of what a real public television service could be. Our last nationwide, non-commercial TV channel is off the air. Even Kim Dotcom turned out with the thousand Aucklanders who marched to mourn its passing last night. So what’s next?

Here’s a big declaration of interest for starters. I am now driving the formation of a new, not-for-profit trust to establish a nationwide, free-to-air, public television service.

It’s a move I’ve been delaying until the demise of non-commercial TVNZ 7 was finally determined. That happened as of midnight July 30, 2012. TVNZ 7 is off the air. One + 1 replaces it. Wow! I hope they haven’t got the transmissions synchronised so I can’t see all those wonderful ads on One a second time, an hour later, without the noxious 9 minute programme breaks. Yeah,right.

The disappearance of TVNZ 7 signals the completion of TVNZ’s transformation into TCTV – Totally Commercial Television.

For six years, as chairman of NZ On Air under both a National-led government and a Labour-led government, I confronted the difficulties of striking the balance between the commercially-driven interest of our major television networks and the public interest mission. It was tough enough in 1995-2001. It will be even tougher now.

All TVNZ’s public interest commitments have been extinguished. The pressure is on for more NZ On Air funding to support “commercially attractive” New Zealand programmes - like the UK-held franchise show “New Zealand’s Got Talent”, or “The GC”, the docu-drama produced by a New Zealand subsidiary of Amsterdam-based Eyeworks Holdings, or the Australian-inspired  production “Underbelly NZ”.

Commercially-attractive local content is very expensive. Last year, NZ On Air paid on average $577,000 an hour to produce New Zealand drama. You can buy a bucket-load of second-hand  drama and entertainment imports from Australia, America, and the UK for that kind of money. This is Totally Commercial Television’s big bargaining chip in their play for more funding from NZ On Air.

The impact of the TCTV game is painfully obvious. The proportion of NZ On Air funded first-run [original] local content on screen from  our six major TV channels fell to just 14% last year from 21% the year before. Advertisers funded around 86% of the New Zealand content you saw on the major nets last year.

The decline in NZ On Air funded content is expected to continue because of the funding freeze. The total hours of local content funded by NZ On Air are expected to fall from 981 hours last year to 878 hour this year, and are forecast to be 851.5 hours next year – down more than 16.6%. Over the same period, NZ On Air costs per hour of local content will escalate from $82,310 last year, to $88,875 this year, and jump to $93,275 next year – an increase of more than 13% over the three year period.

The main drivers of NZ On Air funding costs are two “commercially attractive” genre: NZ On Air’s drama and comedy costs per hour are expected to increase by more than 24% between 2010 and next year. At the same time, hours of NZ On Air funded hours of local drama and comedy on screen are expected to fall by more than 25%.

The explanation for the decline in NZ On Air’s influence on the level of local content you see on screen is obvious. It’s taking more and more NZ On Air money to fund commercially attractive New Zealand drama and comedy shows, while the rising NZ$ exchange rate drives the cost of imported content down and down. Consequently, Totally Commercial Television’s opportunity costs are rising.

You can buy a bucket-load of appealing second-hand drama imports from Australia, America, and the UK for the $647,000 it cost NZ On Air to fund Underbelly NZ or the $531,000 it contributed to an hour of The Almighty Johnsons.

Every “commercially attractive” programme NZ On Air funds de-risks the business of Totally Commercial TV when it puts original, untested, made-in-New Zealand content on the air instead of a low-cost, proven imported product. But de-risking TCTV, also diminishes NZ On Air’s ability to deliver its broader public broadcasting mission. We need to stop now and ask a question about NZ On Air’s real purpose.

Totally Commercial Television has a clear and simple mission: build audiences of active consumers who generate business for advertisers who generate profits for the shareholder.

The public broadcasting mission is much more complex: its purpose is to add value to all our lives – regardless of our age, gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status, geographic location, or our consumption habits. Real public broadcasting enhances education, promotes health, encourages participation in public life, builds understanding between majorities and minorities, and constantly engages with its audiences. We don’t see much of that on TCTV.

We need a dedicated, non-commercial, free-to-air, public broadcasting TV channel, to put some balance back into our TV diet, to take some of the commercial pressure off NZ On Air, and to secure important components of the broader public broadcasting service mission from the vagaries of the advertising market.

No other country in the developed world relies solely on the good will of advertising-funded, free-to-air commercial television broadcasters to deliver the public interest values that define the public broadcasting mission.

A UMR Research poll conducted at the end of May – before the Save TVNZ 7 campaign really hit its straps – found 51% of New Zealanders support the proposition that the government should provide $15 million a year to fund a channel providing a wide range of New Zealand and international programmes and minimal advertising. Support for the Save 7 petition and the turnouts at town meetings across the country show there’s a growing ground swell of support for change.

The challenge now is to show the government that it can be done – without adding to its total broadcasting and culture costs, and in ways that can add value to its spend on education, health and welfare.

Myles Thomas and his Save 7 campaigners and my hard-working colleagues at Auckland’s not-for-profit regional channel Triangle Television inspire me to get off my backside. Myles and his supporters are forming a new organisation to continue the campaign for better broadcasting. I’m establishing a not-for-profit Trust to raise the funds required to set up a bare-bones, non-commercial, nationwide channel to fill the public TV broadcasting role that TVNZ 7 has vacated. We’ll work together to keep the momentum for change growing.

 We’ll be looking for support from corporate sponsors, public interest charities, community organisations, individual philanthropists, education and health service providers, cultural institutions and community organisations, minority and special interest groups.  – people who can see the public benefits from a small, Kiwi adaption of the American Public Broadcasting Service [PBS]model.

And that’s enough of the advertising. For now...

Comments (14)

by Andrew Jones on July 01, 2012
Andrew Jones

David,  I canvassed Craig Foss, the Minister of Broadcasting regarding shared  trans-Tasman broadcasting of SBS1 and SBS2 and our Maori Channel and Te Reo Channel as a formal "swap". He expressed interest in the idea if there was suffiicient public demand. He wrote: "Such a proposal would need to be considered within the wider context of inter-governmental discussions around New Zealand's CER agreement with Australia and would need to take into account the regulatory environment regarding the productiion and broadcast of local content". This is the most affordable way to provide public service channels in NZ at little or no cost to the taxpayer.  SBS offers the finest public service TV with an international focus. We need to lobby decision makers to demonstrate that there is a demand for more  intelligent broadcasting.

by David Beatson on July 02, 2012
David Beatson

Andrew – that’s a really interesting development and certainly worth following up. It’s also worth noting that the Australian government received a digital media convergence review report in May, recommending an expanded local content quota for free-to-air television, and the introduction of a “converged content production fund … that supports traditional and innovative Australian content.” Australians seem far more conscious about the need for local content in their media diet than we are.  

by Philip Grimmett on July 02, 2012
Philip Grimmett
Previous comment disappeared into cyberspace. Just ask the Ozzies if we can receive their PBS. The Australian Government could easily find some resource from their foreign aid budget for third world nations. I am with you David. The broadcasting system is totally stuffed, just like ACC, along with many other Government departments. Kia Kaha and all power to you. A disgraceful affair of the state!
by David Beatson on July 02, 2012
David Beatson

Just to give everyone a better idea of what the Australian convergence review recommends, here's a more precise account of what they said:

"The Review proposes a ‘uniform content scheme’ to ensure that Australian content continues to be shown on our screens. The uniform content scheme will require qualifying content service enterprises, with significant revenues from television-like content, to invest a percentage of their revenue in Australian drama, documentary and children’s programs. Alternatively, a content service enterprise will be able to contribute a percentage of its revenue to a ‘converged content production fund’ for reinvestment in traditional and innovative Australian content."

Now there's an interesting way of making Totally Commercial TV - and pay TV - free up some of NZ On Air's funding for its other public duties.

by stuart munro on July 02, 2012
stuart munro

Are you looking for the televisual equivalent of the Hankyoreh, or something more like the US PBS?

by David Beatson on July 03, 2012
David Beatson

Stuart - I don't know enough about Hankyoreh to make a useful comment on that. But I'm talking about a channel running on the same public interest principles that guide content decisions at PBS, a mix of private and public sector operational funding, and using the New Zealand Stratos model as a starting point.

by Frank Sviatko on July 03, 2012
Frank Sviatko

A couple of us in the Hutt Valley are keen to be involved in seeing if a PBS type channel can be set up, but we don't know how to get in touch with you. Any chance of giving us your contact details - or contacting us?

by stuart munro on July 04, 2012
stuart munro

The Hankyoreh was created by citizens in the wake of the Kwangju uprising to be an independent newspaper and a determined enemy of abuses of public power. It had a very large number of small shareholders, and for several decades ran superior investigative stories uncolored by political interest. Recently it developed financial difficulties but was rescued by a large conglomerate. Oddly it no longer produces investigative articles critical of its sponsor. (but the current president,Lee Myung Bak doesn't like the Hankyoreh, and in fact promised to destroy it.)

It's done a pretty good job, but being a private though rather demotic organisation it has enjoyed an immunity to processes like privatisation, that might try to imperil your independent public interest broadcaster.

by David Beatson on July 04, 2012
David Beatson

Frank - I think I've tracked you to Hutt Radio.

Stuart - Thanks for the information on Hankyoreh. I'll try and steer clear of conglomorate control....  

 

by Robert Clarkson on July 04, 2012
Robert Clarkson

I was an executive member of the Friends of Public Broadcasting and spokesperson.

The Friends always maintained that NZOA should be disbanded,  that public money should not be contestable and that it should be used solely to fund a fully public broadcasting service. During that time we costed the establishment of a non-commercial channel at $100million this was a similiar amount to that for the one SBS channel then. I still firmly believe that NZOA is an aberation and the reason why we do not have a public broadcasting channel. The idea of a trust is a good one, but don't lose sight of the fact that the money NZOA now receives would fund a non-commercial channel, Radio New Zealand, and Maori TV.

by DeepRed on July 04, 2012
DeepRed

@Frank S: speaking of the Hutt, Avalon Studios might have some surplus capacity available, if a successor to TVNZ7 ends up being based in Wellington.

@Robert C: Also, NZoA has suffered a mild case of regulatory capture. Hell, the whole broadcasting industry is riddled with regulatory capture. And it's probably going to get worse now that the Telco Commissioner, Ross Patterson, has not had his contract renewed by Minister Adams. Given he had SKY-NET in his regulatory sights.

@David Beatson: I'd say the usual suspects do know about public broadcasting, but for them the philistine-industrial complex is too profitable and effective to disrupt.

I'm keen to help out, particularly with graphic design and Web site maintenance. And maybe even actual content, too.

by ChrisP on July 05, 2012
ChrisP

I am delighted to hear you're setting up an apolitical Trust. It may require support from politicians but needs to avoid being captured. 

The mix of programming on TVNZ7 was pretty good with homegrown material and foreign documentaries. For busy people, this avoided the need to search the internet for alternatives to adverts.

Keep us posted.

by David Beatson on July 05, 2012
David Beatson

Thanks for your suggestions and kind offers. They're much appreciated, and I will be keeping you posted.   

by Philip Grimmett on October 15, 2012
Philip Grimmett

I thought that TVNZ couldn't get any worse.  I was very wrong.  So I don't watch any TV now.  How many other people are acting the same way?  Is traditional TV watching dieing?  Probably. 

Post new comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.