Over the past five years, Radio New Zealand’s hitherto ferociously loyal listeners have lost almost all their passion for public radio. Some, aggrieved by the “Maorification” of National Radio, have simply stopped listening. Others, aware that there is nothing better on offer from the private stations, have continued to tune-in – albeit in a mood of sullen resignation. That the station’s programming is uninterrupted by advertisements offers some small consolation.
These listeners skew decisively towards well-educated members of the Pakeha middle-class, 55 years and over. Given the average New Zealander’s longevity, these listeners have another twenty years of “loyalty” in them before they, and Radio New Zealand’s core audience, give up the ghost. The key challenge facing ANZPM, therefore, is to formulate a schedule that will attract and hold the ears and eyes of the post-Baby Boomer generations.
This is not going to be easy. Historically-speaking, the whole point of public broadcasting – both here in New Zealand and across the Western World – has been to mold the political consciousness and cultural tastes of the middle-class in such a way that they become the state’s most reliable reservoir of “common sense”. Though values and tastes change, the existence of this group – the prime generators of reliable “public opinion” – has, until relatively recently, constituted public broadcasting’s greatest achievement.
At the heart of their success lies the public broadcasters’ preservation, and occasional renovation, of the nation’s core narrative. Or, to cast them in a slightly more heroic light, they have acted as “nation builders”. Their mission: to promote their country’s diversity without sacrificing its unity. Capturing many reflections, but all within a single mirror. Until recently, New Zealand public broadcasters were doing this pretty well.
Perhaps attributable to our post-modern era’s obsession with deconstruction: its determination to put an end to all “grand narratives” in favour of relativism and subjectivism; the West’s broadcasters’ drive for unity has, of late, appeared to weaken. In New Zealand, the post-modernists’ deconstructivist urges have gone hand-in-hand with the rise of Māori nationalism. The latter’s determination to “decolonise” the Pakeha settler state and “indigenise” New Zealand society, has seized at least some of our public broadcasters’ imaginations as a mission worthy of the new ANZPM.
Certainly, the ANZPM’s Charter will set down “clear expectations” for the new broadcaster’s relationship with tangata whenua. It will be te Tiriti affirming and at least two out of ANZPM’s nine-member board will have to be fully conversant with the language, values and practices of te Ao Māori. In light of the stipulations of New Zealand On Air’s Public Interest Journalism Fund, the new public broadcaster is likely to operate under an exhaustive set of “partnership” protocols.
One can only speculate as to how the initial radio broadcasts of ANZPM will strike the ears of Radio New Zealand’s present audience. If the enthusiasm of the current Broadcasting Minister, Willie Jackson, for enhancing the Māori and Pasifika output of the new public broadcaster and “combatting misinformation” is any indication of its future content, then further defections can be expected. Not all of those switching-off will do so sadly and privately. With ANZPM due to hit the airwaves at the beginning of March in an election year, it is hard to imagine the opposition parties not being invited to weaponise its allegedly “woke” programme schedule.
Regardless of partisan loyalties, there will be those who look at the new structure with a certain measure of apprehension. ANZPM is going to be a mighty big beast, with more than enough muscle to dominate New Zealand’s media space.
Relieved of the obligation to return a dividend to the state, the television arm of ANZPM will be able to sell advertising at cost – to the obvious disadvantage of its private sector competition. In its outreach to the young and the ethnically diverse, the new public media entity will find it hard not to step very heavily on the toes of private radio. While printing presses form no part of its remit, ANZPM will be up there online with NZME and Stuff.
Pledged to “meeting its audience where they are” the ANZPM board might think it wise to equip itself with a truly nationwide news-gathering service. With over $100 million for capital investment, how long will it be before ANZPM ’s newsrooms, video and radio production facilities, and live broadcasts become the “places to be” for every talented journalist in the country?
The problems confronting the private sector media would not be limited to ANZPM’s scale and scope, and the competitive challenges they represent. The long-term risk must surely be that ANZPM’s public status, its editorial independence, and the creative freedoms thus conferred, will eventually eclipse the efforts of all media operations encumbered with less generous shareholders. How long will it be before these profit-driven enterprises cry “foul”?
And they might not be the only ones with a grievance. At least some of the voters might come to look upon ANZPM as a state-owned media behemoth stuffed choc-full with left-wingers of all kinds, and sufficiently resourced to dictate the terms of, and easily dominate, the media’s political coverage.
Inevitably, ANZPM’s need for an audience to replace the dwindling eyes and ears of the Baby Boomers must lead it towards the younger generations of New Zealanders. It is to their values and tastes that the cultural production of the big public broadcaster will inevitably be attuned.
The political consequences of such an orientation are equally inevitable. The material aspirations of younger New Zealanders, their easy-going acceptance of co-governance and other Boomer bogeymen, plus their rock-solid determination to take climate change seriously, make it unlikely that the neoliberal economic and political axioms of their elders will be tolerated for very much longer.
The fear of those same elders is that the material broadcast by the new ANZPM will only hasten the day when their cherished values and tastes are rudely overwhelmed. A hard core of them are already convinced that Radio New Zealand has successfully unleashed its own version of the Cultural Revolution. Hence their unwillingness to get too excited about Radio New Zealand’s imminent demise.
No matter how unkind, it is tempting to further discombobulate these grumpy old-timers by shouting: “Comrades, you ain’t seen nothing yet!”
Chris Trotter is a political commentator who blogs at bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz.
These listeners skew decisively towards well-educated members of the Pakeha middle-class, 55 years and over. Given the average New Zealander’s longevity, these listeners have another twenty years of “loyalty” in them before they, and Radio New Zealand’s core audience, give up the ghost. The key challenge facing ANZPM, therefore, is to formulate a schedule that will attract and hold the ears and eyes of the post-Baby Boomer generations.
This is not going to be easy. Historically-speaking, the whole point of public broadcasting – both here in New Zealand and across the Western World – has been to mold the political consciousness and cultural tastes of the middle-class in such a way that they become the state’s most reliable reservoir of “common sense”. Though values and tastes change, the existence of this group – the prime generators of reliable “public opinion” – has, until relatively recently, constituted public broadcasting’s greatest achievement.
At the heart of their success lies the public broadcasters’ preservation, and occasional renovation, of the nation’s core narrative. Or, to cast them in a slightly more heroic light, they have acted as “nation builders”. Their mission: to promote their country’s diversity without sacrificing its unity. Capturing many reflections, but all within a single mirror. Until recently, New Zealand public broadcasters were doing this pretty well.
Perhaps attributable to our post-modern era’s obsession with deconstruction: its determination to put an end to all “grand narratives” in favour of relativism and subjectivism; the West’s broadcasters’ drive for unity has, of late, appeared to weaken. In New Zealand, the post-modernists’ deconstructivist urges have gone hand-in-hand with the rise of Māori nationalism. The latter’s determination to “decolonise” the Pakeha settler state and “indigenise” New Zealand society, has seized at least some of our public broadcasters’ imaginations as a mission worthy of the new ANZPM.
Certainly, the ANZPM’s Charter will set down “clear expectations” for the new broadcaster’s relationship with tangata whenua. It will be te Tiriti affirming and at least two out of ANZPM’s nine-member board will have to be fully conversant with the language, values and practices of te Ao Māori. In light of the stipulations of New Zealand On Air’s Public Interest Journalism Fund, the new public broadcaster is likely to operate under an exhaustive set of “partnership” protocols.
One can only speculate as to how the initial radio broadcasts of ANZPM will strike the ears of Radio New Zealand’s present audience. If the enthusiasm of the current Broadcasting Minister, Willie Jackson, for enhancing the Māori and Pasifika output of the new public broadcaster and “combatting misinformation” is any indication of its future content, then further defections can be expected. Not all of those switching-off will do so sadly and privately. With ANZPM due to hit the airwaves at the beginning of March in an election year, it is hard to imagine the opposition parties not being invited to weaponise its allegedly “woke” programme schedule.
Regardless of partisan loyalties, there will be those who look at the new structure with a certain measure of apprehension. ANZPM is going to be a mighty big beast, with more than enough muscle to dominate New Zealand’s media space.
Relieved of the obligation to return a dividend to the state, the television arm of ANZPM will be able to sell advertising at cost – to the obvious disadvantage of its private sector competition. In its outreach to the young and the ethnically diverse, the new public media entity will find it hard not to step very heavily on the toes of private radio. While printing presses form no part of its remit, ANZPM will be up there online with NZME and Stuff.
Pledged to “meeting its audience where they are” the ANZPM board might think it wise to equip itself with a truly nationwide news-gathering service. With over $100 million for capital investment, how long will it be before ANZPM ’s newsrooms, video and radio production facilities, and live broadcasts become the “places to be” for every talented journalist in the country?
The problems confronting the private sector media would not be limited to ANZPM’s scale and scope, and the competitive challenges they represent. The long-term risk must surely be that ANZPM’s public status, its editorial independence, and the creative freedoms thus conferred, will eventually eclipse the efforts of all media operations encumbered with less generous shareholders. How long will it be before these profit-driven enterprises cry “foul”?
And they might not be the only ones with a grievance. At least some of the voters might come to look upon ANZPM as a state-owned media behemoth stuffed choc-full with left-wingers of all kinds, and sufficiently resourced to dictate the terms of, and easily dominate, the media’s political coverage.
Inevitably, ANZPM’s need for an audience to replace the dwindling eyes and ears of the Baby Boomers must lead it towards the younger generations of New Zealanders. It is to their values and tastes that the cultural production of the big public broadcaster will inevitably be attuned.
The political consequences of such an orientation are equally inevitable. The material aspirations of younger New Zealanders, their easy-going acceptance of co-governance and other Boomer bogeymen, plus their rock-solid determination to take climate change seriously, make it unlikely that the neoliberal economic and political axioms of their elders will be tolerated for very much longer.
The fear of those same elders is that the material broadcast by the new ANZPM will only hasten the day when their cherished values and tastes are rudely overwhelmed. A hard core of them are already convinced that Radio New Zealand has successfully unleashed its own version of the Cultural Revolution. Hence their unwillingness to get too excited about Radio New Zealand’s imminent demise.
No matter how unkind, it is tempting to further discombobulate these grumpy old-timers by shouting: “Comrades, you ain’t seen nothing yet!”
Chris Trotter is a political commentator who blogs at bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz.
9 comments:
Mr. Trotter.
The point of conjoining the broadcasting behemouths is too create a media organisation that like the PJIF can manipulate the politics of the government (either way). In this instance however Mr. Jackson and his cohorts intend to utilise it as a political weapon and that is wrong in so many ways as to speak to a form or politicised corruption of the media voice.
It is firstly unnecessary, secondly not on any level economically competent and last a vile attack on broadcasting individuality and independence.
Make no mistake Labour will use it as their weapon of choice to disparage the opposition and no doubt at personality levels too.
As Margaret Thatcher said (and I paraphrase)..when they attack you at a personal level they have no politcal arguemt left.
Labour are bereft of sensible, reasoned, sound and actionable political policy that benefits ALL New Zealanders so be ready for the broadside of broadcasts from this politcal weapon in the making.
In the end it will not be politics it will be a venal character assassinationist bully boys schoolground beat up.
I agree with every word. The youngies are quite thoroughly indoctrinated as their brain training started at kindergarten and has continued unabated through to what is known as university.
There is no way to change that although there are a few critical thinkers among them.
So I can only wish them well with their new future and hope I will be around to witness how that goes for them.
MC
With you all the way - I've already written 'thank you and goodbye' to those interesting intelligent RNZ broadcasters I've listened to for years, telling them "It's not so much what you say, as what you don't say." Poor them!
I still have you though - and Karl and Sean - and many other intelligent interesting bloggers and commentators - and Douglas Murray, Jordan Peterson Thomas Sowell, the New Culture Forum et al. People are still thinking and needing to communicate. I am struggling with the age thing though - surely we can't just accept that the new generation don't need to think for themselves - Willie Jackson is limited - always has been and always will be. I guess he will just waste money and people won't tune in. The tragedy for this country is that this may come to be who we are.
Another step on the glorious socialist, co-governing woke highway to ...where exactly, I wonder.
I suggest a much lower standard of living, far less choice, far more intolerance, a two-class level of citizenship, and people like the current Labour Party pretending they're competent to run anything more complicated than a lemonade stall.
All done with a bought-and-paid for media who trot out the same propaganda.
NZ will become a basket case, economically and socially, and the least of it's worries will be whether you want to listen to RNZ aka Maori Radio. Because almost no one does anyway!
Anyone who values freedom of speech and cares about their health, wealth and wellbeing will have upped sticks for some other place leaving all the no-hopers and beneficiaries, who may find their standard of support dropping as the poor taxpayers bail.
Is that really what the next generation wants? I don't think so.
Will they get off their arses and do something about it? Now that's the $1 trillion question and is certainly open to debate.
As a life long RNZ listener I was one of the few who made submissions on the recent Inquiry into RNZ Charter. I was critical of the downgrading of announcer standards, the extent of te reo, the many simpering "interviews " of maori, the persistent decolonisation message, the absence of quality music etc. I also noted that this despite the Charter not specifically encouraging maori twaddle. I have detected no change in the programming. But the Select Committee did recommend one change...that the Charter be amended....to support more maori twaddle!! If RNZ could inflict so much maori twaddle with it not in the Charter imagine what the Public Media Bill will achieve with it very firmly in. Willie in an RNZ interview 3 July made it very clear he intends to pitch RNZ primarily to maori and audiences not currently reached. So for the likes of me and tens of thousands of other mature listeners it will be effectively the end of a great era. In trying to be all things to all groups and especially with a huge maori overlay it will fail, unless new separate channels are opened. As for TV, I will be surprised if colonist descendant dominated Country Calendar survives.
I was a lifetime RNZ listener. A few years ago I reached the limit of my ability to tolerate garbage when listening to "The Panel" unanimously agree there was nothing so absurd as to think you could determine the gender of a baby at birth. My 50+ years of observing sheep and cattle had led me to believe that my determination of mammal gender at birth tended to be extremely accurate, and that there is no reason to not apply this same physiological assumption to humans. When a State broadcaster insists we no longer trust empirical reality we have serious problems.
The worst thing is that this nonsense acts to polarise society further.
When I am confronted with maori anything, I simply choose another direction. I too am extremely concerned about the direction this country is heading but pleased to know I wont be around to see New Zealand as just another sh!t hole in the South Pacific.
As a loyal and lifelong listener to Concert, we have not yet had any indication within the broadcasting and TV shake-up as to where RNZ Concert fits, and what the future holds for our beloved Classical music station. We saved Concert once two or three years ago when the RNZ governing board decreed its demise for the use of its bandwidth for a youth channel, and the Board and then Minister of Broadcasting, Kris Fafoi were totally amazed and then humiliated to discover that Concert programme listeners were not just the handful of aging, fuddy-duddy listeners they imagined would die soon, but does, in fact, include a wide and fiercely loyal listening audience of all ages, including young folk. Concert is also a real flagship for playing and promoting New Zealand composers and instrumentalists - a job it does brilliantly. And what about the broadcasts of live concerts in cities other than our own? Where else could our fellow New Zealanders find that support and promotion of their abilities and talents? Spotify? Too impersonal, no announcers to educate us about the pieces we are listening to, and no music programmes compiled especially for the audiences Concert know and understand so well.
Does Willie Jackson or his government really care what happens by demolishing established and successful broadcasting enterprises in their own right, or is their prime consideration found in foisting on the people of New Zealand, a language most people neither desire nor want to learn?
Mary McNair
Thanks Chris for the information in your piece.
The Ardern government has been gerrymandering our democracy through divide-and-rule tactics including unpopular co-governance in local bodies and many state boards. Maori have long primarily voted for Labour and the Maori elite who will be enriched by co-governance will encourage their people to keep doing so. Then Labour changed the law to allow Maori to flip between the Maori and general roll much closer to an election, thereby making their vote more powerful than the rest of us because they can move to ensure election of a preferred candidate in which ever of their two electorates has the closest competition.
I have been predicting that Ardern has some more election cards up her sleeve in order to stay in power. Aside from even more borrowing during election year to give NZers a false feeling of economic buoyancy, her government is looking at lowering the voting age, ensuring many votes from naive, impressionable, woke socialists and climate alarmists. I now see that a major card is planned through these media changes that will, during election year, provide Labour with a huge state propaganda machine so full of socialist and woke journalists already that they wouldn't even have needed to be bribed economically to sign allegiance to Labour's fake interpretations of Te Tiriti.
That won't be last card though up the sleeve of the most corrupt and dangerous government this country has seen in living memory.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.