The process, like most submission processes is a scam. It’s a nod to some sort of democracy, but in reality, the Government of the day pretend they are listening and carry on anyway.
This Government is no better or worse than other governments. They all do it and they would be way better saving the time and money and avoiding the whole process.
Occasionally you will get a half decent idea and it will lead to an amendment or adjustment that you hadn't thought of.
But this is a government of ideology and no matter what you tell them, you must always remember that you are wrong, and they aren't.
Willie Jackson is probably their best example of that. No one knows broadcasting like Willie Jackson, so if we could all just shut up and let him get on with it that would be awesome. The fact the entire industry has a laundry list of cogent, cohesive, and insightful points as to why his plan is madness doesn’t really matter.
We heard some of those last week and we will hear more today. Mark Mitchell put it nicely yesterday; it's a solution looking for a problem.
The problem has been made worse in the last week by Jackson's outburst over TVNZ, who he very clearly stated was the organisation who needed to change, as opposed to RNZ, who didn’t.
Most people thought the opposite. Because at least TVNZ makes money, knows how to chase an audience, and as such would be more agile and open to delivering the Government's dream under the new structure. RNZ is a government department that has fallen on tough times in recent years as they watched their audience slide significantly.
The reality that Jackson fails to understand, despite his years of brilliance in all aspects of the industry, is that unless you have an audience, whatever it is you want to achieve is wasted.
What's the point of funding a programme if no one hears it, sees it, or reads it?
What's the point of the money and time if it plays to an audience of no one or one that barely registers? How much time and money do you want to spend on stuff people don't use, want, or absorb? And how much damage do you want to do to the other players in the industry as you pump up your own little fiefdom with money that isn't yours anyway?
The biggest issue with this issue is unlike Three Waters or co-governance it's not a political hot potato. They won't win or lose votes by doing it hence they’ll probably get away with it. Plus, they seem desperate to get it up by next year.
It's only years down the track once they’ve been booted out of office that the damage will be done, and the folly exposed.
But this is a government of ideology and no matter what you tell them, you must always remember that you are wrong, and they aren't.
Willie Jackson is probably their best example of that. No one knows broadcasting like Willie Jackson, so if we could all just shut up and let him get on with it that would be awesome. The fact the entire industry has a laundry list of cogent, cohesive, and insightful points as to why his plan is madness doesn’t really matter.
We heard some of those last week and we will hear more today. Mark Mitchell put it nicely yesterday; it's a solution looking for a problem.
The problem has been made worse in the last week by Jackson's outburst over TVNZ, who he very clearly stated was the organisation who needed to change, as opposed to RNZ, who didn’t.
Most people thought the opposite. Because at least TVNZ makes money, knows how to chase an audience, and as such would be more agile and open to delivering the Government's dream under the new structure. RNZ is a government department that has fallen on tough times in recent years as they watched their audience slide significantly.
The reality that Jackson fails to understand, despite his years of brilliance in all aspects of the industry, is that unless you have an audience, whatever it is you want to achieve is wasted.
What's the point of funding a programme if no one hears it, sees it, or reads it?
What's the point of the money and time if it plays to an audience of no one or one that barely registers? How much time and money do you want to spend on stuff people don't use, want, or absorb? And how much damage do you want to do to the other players in the industry as you pump up your own little fiefdom with money that isn't yours anyway?
The biggest issue with this issue is unlike Three Waters or co-governance it's not a political hot potato. They won't win or lose votes by doing it hence they’ll probably get away with it. Plus, they seem desperate to get it up by next year.
It's only years down the track once they’ve been booted out of office that the damage will be done, and the folly exposed.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings.
2 comments:
RNZ listener numbers have declined because of the amount of te reo and endless simpering sycophantic, pandering, unquestioning soft "interviews" of revolving maori activists. Also announcers with unrefined street manner. And a general down grading of the programme level. The likes of Peter Fry's Saturday night programme has been replaced by a request programme where undemanding souls have the plebian pop music of their youth endlessly replayed. Wily Willie wants even more maori twaddle, plus presumed appeal to the simple masses, a sure recipe for demise.
It's like watching a child............
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.