Hard News: Bean-Counting the Beat
444 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 12 13 14 15 16 … 18 Newer→ Last
-
__Why does funding all have to revolve around radio ?__
it presently revolves around 'commercial' radio. An important distinction.
How so ? It's not like they fund artists for non commercial radio...
-
This thread is a great example of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory in action.
Is there any special reason some posters are allowed to shit the place up behind anonymous handles? The rest of us, after all, have to let everyone else know who we are when we act like cocks.
-
have to let everyone else know who we are when we act like cocks.
who are you? I googled rodgerd and go some porn site
-
How so ? It's not like they fund artists for non commercial radio...
well if it revolved around all radio equally then there wouldn't be the issues there are now. They canned the indie hit disc cos they didn't see the point in catering to that market which they saw as viable for bands to contact directly themselves.
The nz on air fund was set aside to deal with the issues of broadcasting.
if there are other issues like internet exposure that people need assistance with cos its too expensive to do off their own back then I suppose thats a different task to tackle. -
got
-
for future net etiquette it's better to break your posts up into smaller points
Sorry. Will do better next time ...
-
Sorry. Will do better next time ...
:) good one brendan, at least you have a sense of humor.
-
you mean like a quota?
There are plenty of other angles to the issue and its solution. Strengthening public radio, and existing supporters of local, and working for a quota are some of those routes
would a quota have given you leverage ... youth radio network was leverage
Just to clarify ...
Quotas or setting up our own radio station - a "Youth Radio Network" - are not tools in our toolbox and never have been. Those things are not within our power. Quotas and a YRN are matters of Government policy. NZ On Air is an instrument of Government policy; we carry out Government policy but we do not make Government policy. Ministers and the Minstry for Culture & Heritage have that prerogative and they will guard that prerogative and tell us where to get off, in no uncertain terms, if we cross the make/carry out line.
When NZ On Air was set up, quotas were not Government policy and for 10 years, until the 1999 Labour Government, quotas were off the agenda (this Labour Government was elected on a pledge to introduce a quota and negotiated the the NZ Music Code with radio). If quotas are not Government policy, then we cannot advocate quotas because that would be against Government policy. As I say, we implement Government policy, not make it. Same with a YRN - the Government pledged to investigate it (and did) but elected not to go there, for whatever reason. If the Government had decided yes to a YRN, then our job would be to do it, to implement that policy. Likewise, quotas.
-
But has radio really changed ... do they know much more past crowded house and split enz
That's unfair. If you look at the 40 most-played songs on New Zealand radio at the moment www.radioscope.co.nz, none is Crowded House or Split Enz.
-
quotas and youth radio network as an alternative to nz on air for dealing with the issue of radio play of local content.
ie as a replacement strategyinteresting point re labour coming in on a quota platform which they didn't install.
you are supposed to implement govt policy but you also appear to initiate it too, and interpret it in your own way.
-
We made a policy choice back in 1991 to tackle commercial radio ...
... who are you to go changing the rules ...
The Act doesn't say "commercial radio" or "public radio", it simply says "radio" ... which we interpret to mean "all radio". We have policies in place for dealing with the New Zealand music work of public radio and we have policies in place for dealing with commercial radio. Different policies. Horses for courses policies.
We could have said that our job is "public radio" and left it at that - got into a comfortable bed with National and Concert and access and Maori and b.net - "public good" radio - and ignored commercial radio and said "not our business" but that would mean 20% of radio would be addressed and 80% of radio - where the New Zealand music problem was most acute - would be ignored. Climb into the comfortable bed with our friends and allies and avoid the hard bed. That would be head-in-the-sand at best and ultra vires at worst.
-
If you look at the 40 most-played songs on New Zealand radio at the moment (www.radioscope.co.nz), none is Crowded House or Split Enz.
that link didn't work. are you talking top 40 across all music or top 40 nz songs on nz radio?
Its an exaggeration sure but you get the point. We're not much more educated as a nation about the music we make than we were 25 years ago, a generalisation but one with a foundation. -
yes, but do it with the directives of the act in mind. fund that which reflects our culture and identity ...
The point I was trying to make is that music made by New Zealanders is a reflection of our culture and identity; that culture includes popular music culture; that our culture is not prescriptive; that, in music terms, it is the sum total of the music that we as New Zealanders make.
All we ask is that we get a meaningful airplay result for our spending of airplay dollars. If we don't have regard for the airplay outcomes or ignore airplay outcomes, then we risk falling into the ultra vires void. We have to fund on the basis of airplay merit because we are in the broadcasting business.
-
what's the split in terms of resources devoted to each sector.
you said $800000 for national/bnet? leaving the rest of the budget to tackle comm radio? that's a lot of resources for an indifferent sector.so you decided to take the commercial radio course of action, devote 4/5ths of the resources to that goal for 9 years.
-
are you talking top 40 across all music or top 40 nz songs on nz radio?
The latter. The 40 most-played New Zealand songs on New Zealand radio.
-
I notice you avoided my question on the actual part nz on air played in the increase (of New Zealand music on the radio)
I have never said anywhere that NZ On Air can claim all the credit. That would be arrogant and well ... plain wrong. The transformation from 2% - 20% is the result of many things - not the least of which, great songs by great artists - and NZ On Air is just one of those things.
-
The point I was trying to make is that music made by New Zealander's is a reflection of our culture and identity;
that's pretty fuzzy.
if bands in nz started playing African tribal music would that be considered part of our identity and culture?
there are recognisable qualities to past new zealand music, and there are decernable differences in current music and overseas equivalents.
granted it is a difficult task to identify and focus on those features, but a new zealandness does exist. and if it didn't exist what exactly are we funding for. we don't need more artists in low paying work do we. surely retraining them as accountants with better employment prospects and importing all our music would serve just as well as funding indiscriminately based purely on the wants of an industry based on the sale of advertising
-
have you got that link please, "the 40 most played nz songs"
-
I have never said anywhere that NZ On Air can claim all the credit.
you don't normally if ever mention any other factors either.
-
what's the split in terms of resources devoted to each sector ... you said $800000 for national/bnet?
No ... the $800,000 is what we currently spend on the New Zealand music work of the b.nets and specialist radio shows on Kiwi. It doesn't include Radio New Zealand which is something like $28 million and access radio which is something like $2 million (not all of which can be attributed to playing New Zealand music, admittedly).
-
have you got that link please
Go to www.radioscope.co.nz and go to Charts and then NZ40 Airplay.
-
you don't normally if ever mention any other factors either
Unfair ... I do ... !
-
-
... I find that hard to believe. There were great tracks on indie hit discs that commercial radio would never have picked. Unless you mean you consulted b net programmers as well, who I have no issue with. Please elaborate on who actually did pick the indie hit disc tracks and the more alternative tracks?
Yes ... you're right. We got the student radio PDs to pick the Indie Hit Disc songs and commercial radio PDs to pick the Kiwi Hit Disc. That was when we considered the Kiwi to be a "mainstream" disc and Indie to be an "alt" disc. But we abandoned that approach a few years back and merged the more alt (which would have been Indie tracks) with the mainstream (what would have been Kiwi-only tracks) into one monthly Kiwi Hit Disc instead of six two-monthly Kiwis and Indies.
-
Unfair ... I do ... !
I've never read it in your interviews. perhaps the media edits it out.
I wouldn't expect to read it either as I'm sure you have to justify your performance and to undermine that with "we hardly did anything, it was all channel z and shihad" wouldn't be that smart.but in independently assessing the success of nz on air funding one would have to take other factors into account, its only fair, right?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.