90 axed at TVNZ

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 pm, March 16th, 2009 - 56 comments
Categories: Media, national, privatisation, same old national - Tags: ,

tvnz-logo-brokenIn what’s turning out to be the gift that just keeps on giving for National, the Recession Bogeyman is now being blamed for a need to axe 90 staff from TVNZ.

The Minister for Broadcasting reckons the cuts are necessary to make sure TVNZ keeps returing a fat dividend, even in these extraordinary times, even when media are chasing ever receding advertising revenue. Of course National don’t actually have to insist on TVNZ continuing to make the huge dividends it’s returned to Government as an SOE over the years.

So why insist on job losses to ensure better profits for the State (presumably to be spent of the effects of job losses)? It’s an entirely political decision, part of completing the unfinished business of selling TVNZ. What happens to a news organization when you cut out all the fat then keep cutting into its muscle is precisely what’s happened to our commercial print media – the quality drops and drops, and the audiences start moving elsewhere. From there advertising revenues drop, more cuts are made to revive profits, the quality drops even further, more audiences is shed, and so it goes…

Leaving TVNZ in a position where National can then say ‘well this asset just isn’t performing any more, better we sell it’.

One good thing that may come of all this is that we might finally start to see some tougher questioning of this Government if those who remain in front of the cameras at TVNZ have any respect for their departing colleagues.

A particularly brave leap backwards from National.

56 comments on “90 axed at TVNZ ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. John Dalley 1
    16 March 2009 at 6:12 pm

    No No sprout, it’s all to do with the previous post. JK & National want less people around so that they cannot dig into what Nationals “Secret Agenda” really is.

  2. Schwule 2
    16 March 2009 at 6:23 pm

    900 could be axed from TVNZ and you wouldn’t notice any difference.The idiot box is a sick joke.

    • Travellerev 2.1
      17 March 2009 at 7:58 am

      Schwule,

      Equals queer in German slang when it concerns the male gender or horny when it concerns the female gender. That together with the comment makes me wonder if we’ve got another d4j personae surfacing.

  3. IrishBill 3
    16 March 2009 at 6:51 pm

    TV journalists like Fran, Sprout? I must say most of the TVNZ journos I know, in fact most journos full stop, are pretty good at what they do in the face of deadlines and resource shortages. I have different feelings about some in the gallery but I think that’s got to do with capture.

    I want to say right now that I’m not at all comfortable with you slagging off people who are facing losing their jobs.

    sprout: thanks for pointing out the obvious need to clarify the post IB, I’ve edited the bits that may have created the confusion.

    I’m certainly not intending to slag those who may be fired, quite the contrary I think they shouldn’t be fired and doing so is bad for TVNZ’s long-term interests.

    I also like most of the journalists I know and recognize the quality deficits popularly attributed to them are really the product of media owners’ decisions to woefully under-resource their staff in the name of maintaining dividends. I also think however that the slagee (now removed) should take some responsibility for cheerleading National to victory, but I doubt the cheerleaders will be the ones fired.

  4. bobo 4
    16 March 2009 at 8:29 pm

    National is becoming groundhog day and I pity any who lose their jobs, its more likely to be the actual news gatherer’s and production crew who get the chop than the “presenter” “personalities” at tvnz.

    They started the cuts with John Rowles I see 🙂

  5. Johnty Rhodes 5
    16 March 2009 at 8:35 pm

    Probaby good idea to get rid of deadwood, thats’ what happens in recession. Under Labour TVNZ probably became too bloated, after all it is still a public service company paid by my taxes.

  6. justthefacts 6
    16 March 2009 at 9:00 pm

    Just 90 to get the sack?, I am sure they could find a few more than that if they really looked into it.

    Slim it down and sell it off, we do not need to own a TV station.

    Overall this is good news though, long may the purge of the public service continue.

    • BLiP 6.1
      17 March 2009 at 9:05 am

      Another National Party promise down the gurgler – so much for “capping” the public service. Do you like being lied to?

      Hahahaha – captcha, I never ceased to be amused: “10-cent savings”

  7. bobo 7
    16 March 2009 at 9:05 pm

    TVNZ new slogan “No News is Good News”

  8. Pat 8
    16 March 2009 at 10:04 pm

    I hope Mark Ellis and Lana Cocroft are included in the 90.

  9. the bean 9
    16 March 2009 at 10:29 pm

    well why don’t we start talking about why we do need to own a TV station? and actually why don’t we start talking about the fact that NZ forks out far less per head on public service broadcasting than pretty much ALL developed countries in the world?

    how can a country as small as new zealand ever assert an identity in a globalised world if we never see our own reflection? Core aspects of public broadcasting include reflecting a society- all aspects of a society, even those minority perspectives that might not appeal to mass audiences and hence advertisers. The aim is to educate others in society about difference, provide a Darwinian contest of ideas and help to strengthen identities.

    Also pbs is about informing citizen rather than treating people as consumers. We need a certain amount and quality of information to make informed decisions as citizens. the provision of this information is not often compatible with profit.

    also job creation is another benefit of pbs. Having content that has to be made locally creates a demand for all the writers, talent, designers, labourers, caterers, camera people etc involved in making television.

    i am sure there are many people on here much smarter than me who can think of all the other reasons but perhaps that will get things started…

    • BLiP 9.1
      17 March 2009 at 9:04 am

      You’re assuming the National government gives a single flying fuck about New Zealand’s identity. Sorry mate, too late and too erudite for this government. They’d rather use the concept of national identity to flummox the indolent MSM and get the talkback rabble boiled up about archaic titles.

  10. Redbaiter 10
    17 March 2009 at 1:19 am

    FOX is booming in the US because it provides a product the people want. TVNZ is dying in NZ because rather than meet the market, they choose to promote socialist ideology.

    Endlessly shove it down people’s throat, if not by politically correct programming, than by endless “public good’ commercials.

    So committed to collectivism, they’d rather go down flying the Red Flag than emulate FOX.

    I don’t like to see people lose their jobs either, but if anyone was ever begging for it, it has to be these socialist dupes at TVNZ.

    • Killinginthenameof 10.1
      17 March 2009 at 1:50 am

      Ah every ones favourite Fox news, in the interests of being fair and balanced Mr Baiter, could you please answer the following:

      What time of day can I catch the Con-ser-vat-ive translation?

      What the hell is a homicide bomber?

      And how on earth am I supposed to take a station seriously that refers to Obama as “the anointed one”, or are they just smarting from having a president who’s actually popular?

      • Redbaiter 10.1.1
        17 March 2009 at 2:45 am

        Stick to the subject you patronizing moron. Or is it causing you too much pain?

      • BLiP 10.1.2
        17 March 2009 at 9:15 am

        Ahh – FOX news – that bastion truth! Have a look at their record in terms of that: http://www.mediamatters.com – Please get back to me and llet me know if this is really the sort of example the rest of the media should follow.

  11. Redbaiter 11
    17 March 2009 at 1:21 am

    Jonty is right. TVNZ only shows a “profit” due to government financial support in program making and advertising.

    Its “dividend” is a shallow hoax.

  12. Redbaiter 12
    17 March 2009 at 2:39 am

    “are they just smarting from having a president who’s actually popular?”

    Jeez, your smugness is exceeded only by your mainstream media fed ignorance. Obama is less popular right now than Bush was at this stage of his presidency.

  13. Santi 13
    17 March 2009 at 8:29 am

    The whole of TVNZ should be sold to the highest bidder. We don’t need it.

  14. justthefacts 14
    17 March 2009 at 8:53 am

    “well why don’t we start talking about why we do need to own a TV station? and actually why don’t we start talking about the fact that NZ forks out far less per head on public service broadcasting than pretty much ALL developed countries in the world?”

    And???, that is hardly a justification for continuing the public funding of broadcasting.

    “how can a country as small as new zealand ever assert an identity in a globalised world if we never see our own reflection? Core aspects of public broadcasting include reflecting a society- all aspects of a society, even those minority perspectives that might not appeal to mass audiences and hence advertisers. The aim is to educate others in society about difference, provide a Darwinian contest of ideas and help to strengthen identities.”

    What a lot of socialist crap, the problem with public broadcasting is that it is often hijacked by the government of the time (as witnessed by the last Labour government) to push its biased message.
    There are NO “core aspects” when it comes to broadcasting, it is a business and should reflect what the viewers want to see.

    “Also pbs is about informing citizen rather than treating people as consumers. We need a certain amount and quality of information to make informed decisions as citizens. the provision of this information is not often compatible with profit.”

    Informing them of what?, informing them of the governments view or spin on things?, I think not, we already have enough sheep who make their voting choice based on sound bites and carefully controlled press releases, I want to see a robust analysis of government policy rather than have the public broadcaster trot our the Labour party line as we have had for the last nine years.

    “also job creation is another benefit of pbs. Having content that has to be made locally creates a demand for all the writers, talent, designers, labourers, caterers, camera people etc involved in making television.”

    Utter crap!, tax payer money should never be used for job creation, those of an artistic bent who seem to be of the opinion that I should fund their “art” or creative “talents” need to get real, if they are are good at what they do they will make a living, if not then the tax payer should not be asked to pay for their existence.

  15. the bean 15
    17 March 2009 at 9:54 am

    what I love about all the frothing from redbaiter et al about TVNZ is that they presume it is psb just because it is “state owned”. TVNZ has a commercial imperative, it is literally a croc.

    It doesn’t show quality NZ content in prime time and it has very loose restrictions on what counts as nz content. when we have true pbs (like aspects of the BBC) then you can froth on about a socialist TVNZ.

    otherwise your championing of FOX as a product worth emulating is very amusing…don’t let me stop you

  16. Redbaiter 16
    17 March 2009 at 10:22 am

    Hey left wing dummies- get the main message-

    A) FOX is commercially succesful.

    B) TVNZ is a commercial dud.

    Q. Why is FOX successful?

    A. It meets the market

    Q Why is TVNZ a dud?

    A. It chooses not to meet the market but to try and thrust socialist propaganda down people’s throats.

    Q. Why is TVNZ eventually going to go broke?

    A. Because it is controlled by socialists who put ideology before commercial success.

  17. Redbaiter 17
    17 March 2009 at 10:27 am

    “Please get back to me and llet me know if this is really the sort of example the rest of the media should follow.”

    Only a blinkered moron would produce stuff from the notoriously left wing Media Matters here and imagine that is proof of anything. What a laff you sneering ignorant leftists are. Ensconced in your narrow little worlds, feeding off each other’s partisan ignorance, shutting out any reality that intrudes upon your collectivist dream worlds,

    Media matters…???

    Pffft..

    Hopeless.

    You don’t have a fucken clue.

    • BLiP 17.1
      17 March 2009 at 10:38 am

      Can’t handle it when you’re jabberings are confronted with facts proving the opposite is true. Instead, you resort to scholyard insults rather than provide an alternative source or argue the point. Pathetic. You are obviously the sort of person who makes up for what they lack in charm and intelligence with a bottle of rohypnol.

  18. Killinginthenameof 18
    17 March 2009 at 10:44 am

    Redbaiter, public service broadcasting, why does the truth need to be commercially viable for it to be considered the truth. Entertainment channels aught to be commercially viable, but have you ever heard of the 4th estate?

  19. Redbaiter 19
    17 March 2009 at 10:53 am

    “rather than provide an alternative source”

    Why do you not seek out the alternative yourself???

    Are you not the least curious?

    Do you not feel the slightest need to check for yourself whether Media Matters is objective or biased??

    That’s what I’m talking about.

    You’re a sneering narrow minded brainwashed fool. You prove it every time you post.

    How am I to change that fact???? How am I to change the outcome of years of brainwashing?

    I cannot, so I do not try.

    I post here for readers and lurkers who may possess the ability to process fresh information.

    I do not think you will ever be capable of doing that.

    No matter what I write.

  20. Redbaiter 20
    17 March 2009 at 10:58 am

    “Redbaiter, public service broadcasting,”

    We don’t need it.

    All over the globe, “public service broadcasting” is a euphemism for leftists producing left wing propaganda.

    You want it, you pay for it.

    You want it, you organize a station and run it by subscription.

    Can’t you see the immorality of forcing myself and other citizens to contribute to an entity they despise??

  21. Killinginthenameof 21
    17 March 2009 at 11:04 am

    Really what I’m asking here is can you please explain why commercial viability is a good measure of how true something is.

  22. Redbaiter 22
    17 March 2009 at 11:09 am

    “Really what I’m asking here is can you please explain why commercial viability is a good measure of how true something is.”

    Here’s a couple of questions for you?

    Why should I need to answer a question that is based upon a premise I completely disagree with??

    Why should I need to answer a question that implies I said something I never said and claims something I do not agree with?

    I have never maintained that commercial viability is a measure of truth.

    Conversely, it is you that is claiming a monopoly on truth, even when the outlets you support are unaccountable entities funded by government and staffed almost entirely by leftists.

    Can’t you see your own incongruity??

    • the sprout 22.1
      17 March 2009 at 11:18 am

      You really are wasting our time and keystrokes here Redbaited.

      Maybe you should go play some place where the audience is a bit more naive,
      some place people believe Fox really is “Fair and Balanced” 🙂

  23. Killinginthenameof 23
    17 March 2009 at 11:16 am

    1. Your most welcome to decline to answer.

    2. It is certainly the implication that myself and many others got from reading your comments.

    Another question then, (which again your welcome to decline, but I would like a straight spoken answer.)

    You do think that a good news service with accurate reporting is important for the functioning of democracy?

  24. Redbaiter 24
    17 March 2009 at 11:18 am

    “Redbaiter pull out, you’ve slipped into an alternate reality”

    Check it moron. Obama has a lesser popularity rating then Bush did at this stage of his presidency. Its a fact.

    [lprent: calm down. ]

  25. Redbaiter 25
    17 March 2009 at 11:20 am

    “You really are wasting our time and keystrokes here Redbaited.”

    Not really. Seeing reality denying fascists like you get so agitated always makes it more than worthwhile.

  26. Redbaiter 26
    17 March 2009 at 11:21 am

    “You really are wasting our time and keystrokes here Redbaited.’

    Not really. Seeing reality denying f*sc*sts like you get so agitated always makes it more than worthwhile.

  27. Redbaiter 27
    17 March 2009 at 11:25 am

    “You do think that a good news service with accurate reporting is important for the functioning of democracy?”

    Such things will always be entirely subjective.

    Government needs to stay out of it for reasons that are obvious to anyone who looks objectively at public broadcasting all over the world. (Venezuela)

    It is constantly used to push a partisan political view, and therefore has thoroughly discredited itself. Once a good idea, it is now a criminal misuse of taxpayer money.

  28. justthefacts 28
    17 March 2009 at 11:25 am

    “You mean the truth hurts?”

    The truth as pre determined by left wing governments you mean?

  29. justthefacts 29
    17 March 2009 at 11:49 am

    “Or do I mean the truth as predetermined by the ideological position of the media company owners, and the advertisers on those channels?!”

    You have a problem with the left wing bias of TV3?

    Private companies have a right to do as they wish, I do not watch TV3 as I find their left wing bias offensive however I will fight to allow them to be as biased as they like.

    You are only defending TVNZ because they are a friend of the left, I can just imagine how quickly you would change your tune if they Key and the Nat’s began to exert the same influence and bias onto TVNZ that Clark and Labour managed to do over the last nine years.

    It is the job of the media to be fearless pursuers of the truth, you will not get that if they have to operate within guidelines set by the Government.

    Why are you so afraid of free speech?

    • Tane 29.1
      17 March 2009 at 11:57 am

      TVNZ’s is operationally independent of the government. All you’re doing is showing your ignorance if you think the government or the ‘Left’ tell them what to do.

      If anything, I think TVNZ’s political coverage tends to be more right-leaning than TV3’s but that could just be down to the political editors or my own prejudices.

      The reason the Left supports TVNZ not being cut down or privatised is that, apart from saving jobs, we want to see a proper public service broadcaster at some stage in the future. Labour failed us in that regard, but selling it is not the answer.

  30. justthefacts 30
    17 March 2009 at 11:50 am

    test

  31. the bean 31
    17 March 2009 at 12:06 pm

    and really, why are people so narrow minded they think pbs is just about political news? it is not about left or right bias in news reporting it is about quality nz drama, comedy, documentary…even sport arrrg. information comes in all forms (not in a post modern kinda way though..)

    and one good example of this was the documentary series that examined various ethnic groups that NZers claim ancestry from. so there were Dalmatians, Scottish, Chinese etc. it featured well known Nzers and not so well known, bit of history, bit of trivia and even some nz landmarks.

  32. Redbaiter 32
    17 March 2009 at 12:06 pm

    Tane- you’re submerged in it. That’s why you don’t see it. Visitors to NZ remark on it to me all the time.

  33. noleftie 33
    17 March 2009 at 12:23 pm

    From Wikipaedia April 2007….at the time I think we had a Labour government.

    “New Zealand’s state-owned broadcaster, TVNZ (Television New Zealand) announced yesterday its proposed redundancy cuts that will see jobs go from various sectors, the most going from their news and current affairs sector.

    At least 140 people will be told that they will be set to lose their job in the next six months, at least 50 of those are from the news sector.”

    So that’s 50 more than are being laid off at a time when we have a National Government. Maybe Labour was preparing TVNZ for sale by gutting it as well.

    • the sprout 33.1
      17 March 2009 at 1:19 pm

      it’s certainly true that like National, Labour also had a pretty short-sighted view of how to make the best use of TVNZ

  34. uroskin 34
    17 March 2009 at 5:28 pm

    I’m quite happy to be able to watch PBS and Aljazeera on Triangle TV and Stratos. Not much need for TVNZ really when you can make your own shows now.