TVNZ Proves BBC Model Can Be Boring - Even when No One’s Watching.

TVNZ Proves BBC Model Can Be Boring – Even when No One’s Watching.

The BBC-esque model is in full-swing over on the Platform of Death (Freeview).
Never more so than on TVNZ’s New News Missive ‘TVNZ7′.
The BBC’s objectives to Inform, Educate & Entertain are destined to govern the Channel.
So, with former Shorty St non-english speaking Actors like this Knox in place of seasoned journalists, and Programmes like ‘Alien Investigation’, or (for those with a strong stomach) ‘Afternoon Breakfast with Paul Henry’ one wonders, how can it fail?

Indeed, during prime time 3 of the 4 Freeview exclusive channels present Maori-only content.
Given less than 4% of the population speak Maori and only 100,000 Freeview boxes exist, it’d be conservative to assume a turnout of roughly, nobody per channel.

Regardless, Informing? No.
Educating? Well probably not.
Entertaining? What are you kidding me – I could watch this for hours.
There’s just something I have to do first

- Everything else in my life.

More @ www.politico.co.nz

About the author

More from this author »

  • DanielM

    Wow, this is the most ill-informed post on Throng ever.

    Congrats!

  • MrCynical

    No, no one is interested in going to see your ranting blog, go advertsie in investigate magazine or something

  • I

    too much sh’t on TV has done it

  • teetee

    i think i agree with you for a change MrCynical. Did TVNZ turn you down for a job TV-Blogger? Stop advertising your blog here. Good grief your last site giggi or whatever it was was a monstrosity, possibly worse than the movie gigli, why would we want to check out the next destined-to-fail site produced by TV-Blogger if we’d have to endure such crap as you spurt out in your posts? I can now see why you probably did get turned down for a job at TVNZ

  • politico.co.nz

    Wow – show me hateful.
    Given that 2 of the 4 comments here came from TVNZ AKL (IP Addy 202.36.33.100)
    I’m not in the least bit surprised about the tone.

    Still, perhaps you can clear something up for me.

    Q. Is Geraline Knox an X-Shortland Street Actor?
    Answer: YES

    Does ‘TVNZ6′, ‘TVNZ7′, ‘Maori Television’ & ‘Te Reo’ All Screen Maori Programming Simultaneously?
    Answer: YES

    Q. Are Freeview sales slumming it at around the 100,000 mark?
    Answer: YES

    Q. Does approx. 4% of the population speak Maori?
    Answer: YES

    Here’s the thing – You guys(incl. TVNZ Employees) love pushing and supporting people’s rights to free speech – assuming of course their opinions are exactly the same as yours.

    As for the personal attacks – you want to prove me wrong CHECK YOUR FACTS AND THEN ATTACK ME: I’ll take you on any day of the week!

    Throng has a place to put Rants – which is exactly where this was posted (not in news – but in rants).
    Secondly – I post the entire rant on throng so people can read it without having to go near politico.co.nz. If they feel like dropping by Politico THAT IS THEIR CHOICE!

    Finally – given ‘Mr Cynical’ and ‘teetee’ seem to have such a vested interest in my employment history get your facts straight!
    I worked at TVNZ as a contractor for 7 months in 2003, it was a fluke move after an employee took sick leave!
    I HAVE NEVER APPLIED FOR A JOB AT TVNZ – EVER!

    Ultimately if Tax payers are comfortable with the $80,000,000+ dollars poured in to Freeview THAT IS THEIR CHOICE, why not let them make it!

  • toma

    should having a background in acting hinder you in being good enough to report/anchor/produce news? i wouldn’t think so. i also wouldn’t consider ms knox as non-english speaking when clearly she is speaking english in the bulletins. plus you might want to fix up the second link you’ve provided. sure maori may be on three of the exclusive freeview channels during prime time at one time, but i’d like to know how often does that happen? frankly i’m surprised you have freeview at all.

  • politico.co.nz

    @toma – Short answer – No, it shouldn’t.
    I actually agree to a certain extent. BUT welcome to the realities of News broadcasting. Every contract I have ever signed with a News Network (a couple now) has clauses involving the integrity of the network.

    Geraline shouldn’t be presenting on TVNZ7 for the same reason Nicole Richie & Paris Hilton won’t be getting a spot on CNN anytime soon.
    WE’VE SEEN ALL OF THEM SPORTING A NURSE’S UNIFORM – WITHOUT THE DEGREE.
    In a more local sense – Louise Wallace took a hammering after she took part in ‘Celebrity Treasure Dancing With The Stars’s Weakest Link’

    Regardless- when you have a history in Fashion, Acting & Comm. Law and then get a job presenting on a PSB Network.
    Perhaps it’s time to shell out on some voice coaching to teach you how to pronounce ‘Violin’.

  • stanley pointen

    Ouch! If Freeview is a failure, with 100,000 housholds having set top boxes after a few months in operation, then what does that say about Sky TV? According to media reports, after their ‘billion dollar’ investment and having the marketplace to themselves for years, they reach around half of households. I have both, and like the TVNZ7 offerings, and think it will only get better over time. At least it is New Zealand news and current affairs content, produced by Kiwis for Kiwis. And no, I don’t have a job at TVNZ, nor have I ever applied for one.

  • MrCynical

    *cough* katie couric *cough*

    I don’t give a crap where you work, it is obvious all you are doing is trying to get people to go look at your whinge-ass blog site so that you can achieve that notoriety you so desperately want.

    Freeview is no different thank sky in that they just fill in the majority of their channels with repeats and “filler”

    It is no different from any tv station in any western country.

    But I do feel sorry for you, being FORCED to watch a channel where you don’t like the presenter.

    Is it at gunpoint?

  • DanielM

    I would say that the 100,000 Freeview boxes sold are the _official_ _certified_ boxes.

    Because Freeview is, well, *free*, you can use any set top box that supports DVB-S (or DVB-T with MPEG4 decoder). Everyone I know (including myself) uses an uncertified STB. There were probably already a huge pool of uncertified STBs long before Freeview came out and are now tuned to it. As far as I’m aware, sales figures of the Freeview STBs don’t mean jack due to the nature of the platform.

    Secondly, Geraldine does at least have experience as a news anchor, which is more than can be said for some of the current news anchors (eg. Simon Dallow who was a lawyer/tourist guide when TVNZ picked him up). Just because they acted before, doesn’t mean they can’t anchor.

    Thirdly, Maori TV and Te Reo aren’t “Freeview exclusive” channels as you said.

    Fourthly, TVNZ7 has, erm, Te Karere at 6pm? Is that all that you are complaining about?

    For once I agree with Mr Cynical. You are just trying to get readers for your rant blog.

  • politico.co.nz

    @stanley pointen: Yes, but the difference is SKY IS A PRIVATELY HELD COMPANY!
    YOU CHOOSE if you want to pay for its Billion Dollar Investment or not.

    @MrCynical: You just proved my point FOOL
    Do your damn homework before you post
    CBS evening blues: Can Katie Couric survive as anchor?

    In fairness to ‘MrCynical’ I don’t know you – but you sound like an idiot.
    You wanna get personal- given how much time you spend whining your ass off on throng and how clear it is just what a true patriotic following you have.

    “And fracking morons like you Mr Cynical, like to argue for the sake of arguing!!!!!!!!!! Right?????????”

    “So… ‘Mr Cynical’… u need to open up your ‘f**ckn eyes and stop living in a square box. ”

    “It’s clear that MrCynical perhaps needs to learn when to let an argument rest..”

    If only I could figure out how to write intriguing content like you, then people might read my Blog *sigh* – you seem out of a job- maybe we could work together some day?

    Who am I kidding I’d rather do PR for the NZLabour party than jump on your sinking ship – then again, one wonders if there’s a difference?

    Still, I’ve generated about 250 hits for Throng in the last 24 hrs – So I’m pretty comfortable.
    Please, Please keep commenting – I wanna beat this dead horse till the cows come home.

  • stanley pointen

    Politico, I take your point, and that is precisely why Sky TV needs to be regulated. Just as the privately owned Telecom had to be broken up to allow free and fair competition. Or maybe the alternative is for the state to invest a billion dollars too, in Freeview, to level the playing field?

  • politico.co.nz

    @stanley pointen: Your argument’s definitely a valid one, I even agree with it to a certain extent.
    Here’s the issue as I see it.
    When Sky bought Prime for $30 mill in late ’05 there was already regulation in place to prevent it from happening – it needed Commerce Commission Approval.
    Sky got the approval. Why? Because the Comm. Comish knew if Sky didn’t buy it no-one else would. James Packer had said they wouldn’t get any more help from PBL (other than programming) and Prime was hemorrhaging Money.
    30 Mill for a TV network? If that were the case then Prime gave roughly 10% of the Network’s worth to Paul Holmes when they signed him.

    The 30 mill was symbolic. Symbolic of the debt Sky would be taking off the books of Prime AUS (Who at the stage were bleeding more than the first 5 minutes of ‘Saving Private Ryan’.)

    My point is this. It will take either a very courageous, or very stupid Company/Person to take on Prime, especially at this time.
    Broadcast TV is being smashed by the Web, the economy has Ad Revenue in the dumps and Prime needs huge cash to join Freeview.
    My worry is – what happens if Prime is split-up… and closed up.
    History’s testament to it.
    TV3 had a hugely rough time (was bankrupt till Canwest stepped in) and it started up in the golden years of broadcast TV.
    Then, even when it was successful C4 (as its previous TV4 incarnation) was like an STI – even if you could pick it up, you didn’t want it.
    Let’s not forget Prime’s rolling picture is on the UHF Band :-S

    I’m guessing most Throng contributors would agree (except for ‘Mr Cynical’ who’s apparently so superior he doesn’t even watch TV… which makes me wonder why he’s even joined this debate?!?)
    I digress.
    With the exception of the Today Show fiasco. Prime’s got a whole lot better under Sky.

    Here’s my question:
    In New Zealand’s small (and getting smaller) TV market. What chance does Prime have in staying alive, without support from another Network?

  • stanley pointen

    Politico, I’m also interesting in your views around issues I have read in the media lately about convergence (think that’s the correct term). With TV content being, or soon to be, available through a myriad of devices, should the regulatory emphasis be on the content, with consistent rules, regardless of whether it is viewed on TV, internet, satellite, mobile phone, whatever?

  • Ben Dover

    Oh!!! politico.co.nz what are you going to do to the TV with your finger and the middle one too?
    I know you think the TV needs a [BUZZ] up the old [BUZZ], its not any good for anything else.
    Please dont do it, you will hurt yourself!

  • politico.co.nz

    @Bendover: I find you deeply troubling.
    Thanks very much for taking this comment stream to an all-new low.
    If you’ll excuse me, I’m now going to try and retrieve it from the depths of hell by answering Stan’s question.

    I think your query’s really relevant, with the impending reshuffle of NZ Broadcasting laws. As with any legislative change comes the ability to make submissions to the various select committees and Ministry of Culture and Heritage. You can see them here . The reason I point this out is actually because of who filed submissions, more than their actual content (you could be reading for hours). Companies like Google (Web), Vodafone (Mobile) and the traditional Media outlets like TVNZ, TRN & Mediaworks all weighed in.

    I guess that sort of sums it up right there. Everyone who plays a part in the different types of Platforms (you mentioned) have pre-empted the fact that the government is recognizing the intermediary nature of the new mediums – in other words ‘TV is TV’ no matter whether you get it off FTA/Sky/Mobile/Internet or anywhere else. As the medium changes, the messages are still the same.

    I’ve no doubt the government will want to regulate all the mediums in equal measure. But, the internet presents a real challenge – Firstly, how the hell do you moderate a medium which has content hosted in other legal jurisdictions?
    Also, how do you control such a huge amount of content without a massive injection of capital to fund such a ‘Big Brother’ typed operation?
    Personally, I think the answer is “don’t”. When it comes to illegal activities like child exploitation etc – of course they need to be monitored, they are criminal activities and we have international treaties etc to catch violators and bring criminal prosecutions.
    But what about in situations like the Mike Hosking Kids Photos case, or the Corngate IV – what if they were on the web, or a mobile instead of print and TV (respectively). Well the precedent already exists to bring Civil cases on the perpetrators who violate laws (I’m talking defamation etc).

    The reason I take this sort of ‘print whatever you want –face the consequences if you lie’ approach is because I get a little tense about New Zealand’s Free Speech & Freedom of Expression laws.
    We don’t have a ‘Magna Carta’ like the UK, or a constitution like the U.S. that protects our Human Rights.

    New Zealand’s Bill Of Rights Act (1990) IS NOT supreme. Which basically means parliament can overrule it whenever they like (which to me is a little eeepy cray).
    The very idea that a government department could send me an e-mail and instruct me to take down a blog posting simply because they don’t like it, is plain geee-roase.

    Sorry, I’ve gone way too far off-track.
    Here’s the deal. As it is now the Broadcasting Act ’89 breaks down its Codes and Standards into Radio, FTA TV, Pay TV, elections etc.
    If parliament were to enforce the FTA TV Code on my Blog for example I’d have to present what the BSA considers a Fair and balanced argument, or they could prosecute me. That’s just crazy.
    I should be allowed to say whatever I like (however wrong it might be). The phrase “I totally disrespect what you say, but absolutely respect your right to say it” springs to mind.
    I’d like to see one small revision to the broadcasting act – a clause for digital platforms, which basically commits transmitters of content to:
    A) the maintenance of law and order
    B) the privacy of the individual
    Trevor Mallard’s ‘Broadcasting Amendment Bill 2007’ basically did this, however including the clause “opportunities are given, to present significant points of view either in the same programme or in other programmes within the period of current interest;” is not cool, and there’s loads of other problems too.

    As for Media Ownership – parliament is seriously deranged if it thinks it’s going to regulate Globalization of Media Ownership, and the arm of Trans-national Media outlets in a tiny little country at the bottom of the world.

    Secondly, can you imagine what Google would say if Parliament told them they were to enforce the ‘Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993’ (as proposed by Mallard) on YouTube. That $#it might fly in a massive (financially viable) country like China, but in NZ – I doubt it.

    What is a scary (but perhaps unrealistic idea) is if Parliament were to force ISPs and Wireless Providers to Censor/Filter content like what just happened in France. To me that seems a slippery slope.

    If you’ve read this far Congrats! It’s just a really complex issue. I hope in this massive rant I’ve answered your question – somewhat. It probably belonged in a separate posting- but I was afraid of putting it up on Politico- given I might be accused of committing the cardinal sin of ‘earning money from something I write ;-P.

    My guess is this one is gonna go down like ‘ Mr Cynical’ in a gay-bar fight. But for what it’s worth, it’s my 2 cents (perhaps I should be asking for change?) ;-)

  • stanley pointen

    Thanks, Politico. I’ve come to the view that a voluntary code across all platforms that deals with content might be best, with a single regulator to handle complaints. That way, as new technologies come along, the regime is kind-of future proofed. Take your point on internet content. Maybe the code would only apply to locally posted content, with individual comment, ‘not for profit’ stuff, like blogs, exempted?

  • MrCynical

    I see you have also joined the list of people who are utterly obssessd with me. Get to the back of the line.

    But I see you are now in full on rant mode, and the stalking is more than a little creeepy.

    Done with you.

  • Marty Collis

    politico.co.nz you seem to be quite clued up on the changes to the broadcasting act. Have you made a submisssion or will you be appearing at the select committee?