Lamenting that TVNZ should become a BBC/ABC is misplaced, it let the talented program makers go in the 90′s and has a commercial management/culture so it’s not achievable.

TV’s a yesterday industry with most of its regular viewers now ageing or habitual viewers…..good broadband/technology sees it attracting very few new viewers to replace old.

It’s a content game and TVNZ produces little or no desired content. Charter was a nice idea but decades too late as it should have been there from the start.

The only saving grace would be a solid news/current affairs section but TVNZ doesn’t have that just kids running around and personality focused egos like Paul henry and Mark Sainsbury who as the flag bearers are shocking examples of it’s top talent.

Sell sell sell……unlike Water/power TV’s not essential, in fact TVNZ are self serving and irrelevant and their election coverage in 2008 was embarrassing, as an example ot an area the nations voice should excel at. So flog it before Recycling Rick devalues it even more…..tis the national way after all.

Why even bother debating it?

…the UK has a unique system of mixed public and private broadcasting…

he’s referring to the BBC standing alongside ITV etc, surely? Not that the BBC has had forced upon it some dual personality as a (supposedly) quality programme maker and broacaster on the one hand and a voracious money- and ratings-grabber on the other?

The ABC, for instance, has plenty of commercial operations, from it’s “ABC Shops” in shopping centres and online to various internet ventures to the provision of technology to other broadcasters. But these stand separate to their TV and radio programme making and broadcast operations, which have no commercial imperatives at all.

I’m sure many people would be more than happy if TVNZ were to dump its advertising, start producing quality programming, and make it’s money selling Paul Henry bobble head dolls at the local Westfield because the commercial imperatives wouldn’t impact upon the on-air ones.

And as for your argument that “SOEs can manage it”… well… it was the left which decried the SOE model when it was introduced and is still occasionally critical of it today, so it’s a little disingenuous to fall back on them as an example of supposed success in balancing conflicting obligations now.

It’s an excellent model for some activities, not so much for others, as was proven with the entire Folole Muliaga debacle. Mercury Energy can’t be highly profitable as an energy supplier and worry whether people can afford their bills. It’s as daft as asking The Warehouse to discount Christmas toys for poor families. TVNZ can’t be profitable (or at least as profitable as it’s expected to be) while producing quality progamming.

Anyway, it’s an apples-with-oranges argument. DHBs, for instance, ration government money. They’re not out there trying to get sponsorship from the local car dealer to fund the next hip replacement (though that surely can’t be far away).

there never was truly public service television in New Zealand

Ms Callinghan seems to have forgotten the NZBC, or the short lived BCNZ, let alone the NZBS.

L

The BBC’s stated mission is “To enrich people’s lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain.” The moment TV starts PROMULGATING anything it steps beyond that remit and becomes a tool of mass persuasion, and that should never be allowed.

captcha: cumming (lol)