Drinnan – Treatment of state-funded broadcasters smacks of political expediency

35 comments on “Drinnan – Treatment of state-funded broadcasters smacks of political expediency ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Anne 1

   3 June 2016 at 10:06 am

   The name of the game is spite and vitriol towards any kind of quality media outlet. RNZ is not Labour sympathetic, but rather they make an attempt to be balanced and give all sides a fair go. Any perception to the contrary is based on this govt.s own dismal performance in so many areas, and the fact RNZ staff are not afraid to report them as a good public broadcaster should. If it was a Labour led govt, behaving so badly they would get the same treatment.

   I hope they can struggle on for another 15-18 months when there is likely to be a change of government – thank God.
   • BM 1.1

     3 June 2016 at 12:56 pm

     Just had a quick browse through the Radio NZ website.
     I see a lot of stories about the greens and Labour having a go at National.

     Struggling to find any stories that are even remotely critical of the greens or labour.
     • Anne 1.1.1

       3 June 2016 at 1:12 pm

       I see a lot of stories about the greens and Labour having a go at National.

       Well of course you would at the present time. In the past few weeks this government has been found so badly wanting in many areas. There’s been a hell of a lot to criticise. You’re being your usual twattish, selective self…
       • BM 1.1.1.1

         3 June 2016 at 1:35 pm

         You’re a raving left winger so I’d expect you to say that.

         As a National voter I see absolutely no appeal in listening to radio NZ, seriously why would you?.

         So straight away Radio NZ has cut it’s potential audience in half, maybe if the place got a bit more balance to it, instead of pitching solely at the left they wouldn’t struggle so hard for funding.

         From my perspective radio NZ funding problems do look rather self inflicted.
         • Matthew Whitehead 1.1.1.1.1

           3 June 2016 at 1:55 pm

           Shouldn’t media cover political arguments between the government and the opposition? Is there some fact checking that needs to be done that isn’t? Because usually RNZ is pretty good about that.

           I suspect your real objection is that RNZ is not in bed with the National Party like most other professional media that covers politics is.
           • BM 1.1.1.1.1.1

             3 June 2016 at 2:06 pm

             How often do you hear anything good about National on Radio NZ.?

             To me Radio NZ just looks like a tax payer funded platform for the greens and labour to launch attacks on the government.

             That is not be the role of RNZ and as a tax payer I resent my taxes going towards a organisation that’s actively trying to undermine the party I voted for.
             • Matthew Whitehead …

               3 June 2016 at 2:25 pm

               RNZ doesn’t pan National to pan National. They walk the balance between being objective where possible, and making the reporter’s or commenter’s biases obvious where not.

               The fact that the Government doesn’t stand up to fact-based criticism is not RNZ’s fault, it’s the Government’s fault.

               The role of RNZ is to be a media platform that is independent of politics and corporate influence. The fact that they can objectively criticise the government that funds them shows that they are doing their job effectively.

               The role of RNZ is to go where the facts take them, nothing more and nothing less, and they’re only outside that role when you can point to evidence they’re not being supported by the facts, or not wearing the fact that something is opinion on their sleeves.
               • Matthew Whitehead …

                 3 June 2016 at 2:48 pm

                 I should also add that RNZ gives fair representation to right-wing voices and is not exactly left-wing media, (for that, see Bomber, which is what the closest thing to left-wing media is in NZ, and yes, I would object if he got state funding) it’s simply that it merely fact-checks them, is not influenced by advertisers, and doesn’t generally employ people willing to shill for access.
             • Wensleydale …

               3 June 2016 at 2:35 pm

               “I resent my taxes going towards an organisation that’s actively trying to undermine the party I voted for.”

               Despite the fact that the party you voted for is infested with liars, con-men, corporate shills and sadists? I mean, seriously, if your party is engaged is activities that are blatantly at odds with the general welfare of the populace, then surely you’d be grateful that an organisation like RNZ has brought these dubious practices to light? That is, unless you’re passively accepting of corruption, negligence, dishonesty and a callous disregard for your fellow man.
               • BM …

                 3 June 2016 at 3:01 pm

                 That’s just your opinion and not one shared by close to 50% of the voters at the last election.
                 • McFlock …

                   3 June 2016 at 3:13 pm

                   I dunno – I reckon it’s possible that a whole chunk of tories willingly voted for the liars and the conmen on the grounds that it would serve their personal greed. 50% of voters who weren’t repulsed by national or the futility of the entire system, mind you as well. Only a third or so of registered voters supported those bastards.

                   But your opinion that RNZ is “actively trying to undermine the party I voted for” says it all, really. When is reporting facts undermining anoyone other than liars?
                 • Matthew Whitehead …

                   4 June 2016 at 5:49 am

                   Of voters that turned out, 1,131,501 voted for National, or 47%. Those voters, however, only represent 36% of the enrolled electorate, so it’s a little misleading to imply that about 50% of voters means half the country. In reality it means about a third of eligible voters, which is an even smaller fraction of the country. Even a government with a landslide win (which hasn’t happened since MMP anyway) needs to be held accountable for all those people who didn’t or can’t vote.
             • Incognito …

               3 June 2016 at 10:40 pm

               @ BM comment 1.1.1.1.1.1 3 June 2016 at 2:06 pm:

               But National is so much more than (just) a party that you voted for, isn’t it?

               You have invested a lot of yourself in it, you’ve made (it) a personal connection, and you identify with National at a deeply personal level, right? National has become part of how you view the world and yourself, it is part of your identity and not just a political level, correct?

               Have you heard of in-group~out-group bias? Like being sports-obsessed and anti-intellectual with all its other consequences.

               You’re not alone in this behaviour, far from it. Most if not all people make these connections with other groupings if you like and they become intertwined and mutually-dependent on each other. Perhaps this makes evolutionary sense to improve the chances of survival and/or procreate with the ‘right’ mate(s) to pass on the ‘right’ genes. Hard to understand the choice of some mates in this day and age but I dangerously digress.

               You see it with sports fans, some quite fanatical. They won’t tolerate any criticism of their team or club. They become literally depressed when their team loses. Their loyalty is often misplaced and misguided – you root for your team. Same is true for political parties and their ‘supporters’, especially when politics is highly polarised as it currently is in NZ.

               John Key and TC understand this well and successfully tap into this human psychology, which is also one reason why Key was rubbing shoulders (literally?) with the ABs.
         • Steve Reeves 1.1.1.1.2

           3 June 2016 at 1:55 pm

           I’d hope that there are National voters who, nevertheless, want to know how the world actually is, even if it challenges them.

           Surely that’s an intelligent way to behave? Being able to adapt to circumstances is basically what being intelligent means.
           • BM 1.1.1.1.2.1

             3 June 2016 at 2:10 pm

             How the world actually is?, Lol such typical delusional lefty arrogance, no wonder you guys can’t win shit.
         • marty mars 1.1.1.1.3

           3 June 2016 at 2:18 pm

           wot? bm you don’t listen to radionz??? what do you listen to on the radio that gives you the balance you are stating you crave?
           • BM 1.1.1.1.3.1

             3 June 2016 at 2:21 pm

             I don’t listen to the radio, nothing appeals.
             • Mosa …

               3 June 2016 at 3:21 pm

               RNZ has become more blue if you listen to the treatment Little gets and other lefties Espineer was always kicking Labour as political commentator on TV NZ when Helen was PM
               • Johan …

                 5 June 2016 at 5:34 pm

                 You can count BM as a typical Tory cry baby. All he is interested in is seeing Hosking or Henry bullshit their right wing propaganda. As you mentioned RNZ does ask the tough questions, whether from Labour or National. Little will try to answer these questions to the best of his abilities, while John Key takes a hissy fit and walks away. MSM is hardly a politically balanced organization.
             • Wonderpup …

               3 June 2016 at 3:36 pm

               So you don’t listen to RNZ, but you know they are biased.

               I stopped paying attention to srylands when he suggested poor people should live in tent ghettos, and this is my last straw for you. I honestly try to understand the positions of those who differ from me politically, and I’ll even forgive cheap shots fired off in haste and anger, but foolishness, in your case, and cruelty in sryland’s, I can’t ignore.

               Media is there to question the powerful. If they didn’t concentrate on the government they wouldn’t be doing their job. In the words of a recent reporter asking Donald Trump, “is a question an attack?” And in case you were thinking that question wasn’t rhetorical, of course it isn’t.

               Back to lurking.
         • Jack Ramaka 1.1.1.1.4

           3 June 2016 at 8:11 pm

           Tune in to Mikey Hoskings at 7 Sharp he is right up your alley
     • Dialaey 1.1.2

       3 June 2016 at 1:24 pm

       there was long interview with Steven Joyce on Morning report
     • Mosa 1.1.3

       3 June 2016 at 3:13 pm

       That’s what the mainstream media is for !
2. Enviro Gal 2

   3 June 2016 at 10:07 am

   The National Governments treatment of Radio NZ
   is my selfish reason to say NO to National in 2017
   [there are of course plenty of other reasons to vote for progress] .
3. shorts 3

   3 June 2016 at 10:24 am

   its not just in broadcasting this is happening, e.g. arts funding… and lets not even start on the environment…

   http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/06/02/arts-funding-crisis-we-need-to-grow-the-pie-not-fight-over-scraps-equity-nz

   Do you think Drinnan will rage against bloggers on his Blog?
4. M. Gray 4

   3 June 2016 at 11:03 am

   They left out RNZ because they are the only ones that critique the government policies properly and consistently this government is controlling and authoritative you challenge them too much then you get no funding that how it rolls with the Tories. Bite my hand and no money.
5. ianmac 5

   3 June 2016 at 11:29 am

   It fits with previous cases where either organisations have spoken out and lost their funding, or others who have avoided speaking out for fear of loosing funding.
   I listen to RNZ constantly and marvel that they can continue to exist. Hopefully a Labour/Green Government would see the light and fund them properly. Of course there is the Joyce intent to bring in Advertising for RNZ. Horror!
6. McFlock 6

   3 June 2016 at 12:13 pm

   There’s a petition to increase RNZ funding some folk might be interested in.
   • ianmac 6.1

     3 June 2016 at 1:05 pm

     Thanks McFlock. Signed today but didn’t know it existed.
7. Mrs Brillo 7

   3 June 2016 at 12:36 pm

   A RadioNZ friend of mine reckons Griffin was put there to pare down/run down the system and render it shipshape for privatising. It’s an old technique.

   How’s he doing so far?
8. joe90 8

   3 June 2016 at 12:45 pm

   Last month Standardinista Macro reminded us how Nactional control the message.

   Macro 9.2.1
   14 May 2016 at 1:59 pm

   This from The erstwhile Frank Macskasy makes an interesting comparison.

   Budget data showing increases to the Prime Minister’s Department makes for sobering reading.

   Michael Cullen’s last budget, 2008/09, allocated $25,470,000 to Vote Prime Minister and Cabinet.
   In the same 2008/2009 Budget, Radio NZ was allocated $31,718,000 through NZ on Air, an increase of $2,644,000 (approx 8%) from the previous year.
   In National’s first Budget, 2009/10, Vote Prime Minister and Cabinet was allocated $33,021,000 – an increase of $7,551,000 – or just under 25%!
   In the same 2009/2010 Budget, Radio NZ’s allocation went up by $98,000 to $31,816,000 – not even a 1% increase.

   For the first time, the Prime Minister’s Departmental budget exceeded that of Radio NZ. Furthermore;

   Since 2009/10, Radio NZ’s allocation has stayed the same; $31,816,000.
   By contrast, the amounts allocated to the Prime Minister’s Department has increased, and in the 2015/16 Budget was allocated $49,298,000 – an increase of $24,476,000 since 2008 and a near-doubling of John Key’s department and Cabinet expenditure since Michael Cullen’s last budget, seven years ago.
   In the 2015/16 Budget, Radio NZ was allocated $31,816,000 – a nil increase.

   Framed another way, a news media organisation – dedicated to informing the public about government activities – has had no increase in resourcing since John Key’s administration came to power in late 2008.

   By contrast, the Prime Minister’s Department – dedicated to promoting the power of the Government and more specifically, pursuing National’s political agenda – has had a doubling of taxpayer funding.

   My Bold.
   And we wonder why that man-child remains as PM?

   http://thestandard.org.nz/competition-lapdog-a-cert-to-approve-newspaper-monopoly/#comment-1173881
9. marty mars 9

   3 June 2016 at 2:32 pm

   I struggle with this post a little.

   Funding given to Māori (I know I managed to find the macron unlike some) TV is stated as political payback for the MP – and whilst I have a lot of discord around Māori TV and the MP – is that the real reason or perhaps a better question – does it matter? And the dick-its-our-money argument is false – it is NOT your money, it is government money – you gave it up in taxes and the government decides where it is spent.

   secondly Radionz seems pretty good at the moment – johnny is there, the morning report bit, kathryn in the later-morn and jesse avoed, Kim on Sat – most of the regular programs with quality presenters – I know it is a silly question but do they need any more money?

   and thirdly to tie it all together

   if MāoriTV get money and RadioNZ don’t – how are these tired together? One bucket of money? Priorities? See if I was a scumsuckergnat I’d put more money into RadioNZ to get more of what I want on there.
   • riffer 9.1

     3 June 2016 at 2:51 pm

     Yes, I wondered about that too.

     While it’s depressing to see National Radio languishing, I believe it’s a false equivalence to compare it to Maori TV. TV costs seem to be increasing at a faster rate than Radio costs.

     On the other hand, no-one’s mentioned John Campbell…
10. tc 10

    3 June 2016 at 8:09 pm

    Thought drinnan was shown the door awhile back with a few others.

    Nice intent but bit of a journalism fail there but then he’s done that before using press release content rather than checking the facts.
11. NixSaved 11

    4 June 2016 at 1:57 pm

    I stand to be corrected: But wasn’t RNZ the most listened-to radio station in NZ-according to some survey? (Not the recent one. I think that was more towards commercial radio stations.) If that is the case, then they did well-despite the funding freeze. Is RNZ allowed to advertise? IE: Billboards.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS