I dont think it should be anything to crow about. TVNZ are only interested in showing reality TV, no docos, no current affairs, no nothing. That a dividend is paid out by this broadcaster in the first place is a scandal, because every cent in dividend, means a cent less for programming and production. If I had my way, TVNZ woukdnt me making any profits or paying dividends, instead focusing on the countrys social and cultual wellbeing. And if that is evil socialism, Ill be singing The Internationale.
8 Likes
I agree, it should be more like the BBC or ABC. No wonder TV3 has been passed around like a disease over the years. They just canāt compete against TVNZ and its unfair advantage. Now itās owned by Sky which basically means a duopoly.
2 Likes
Youāre living in fantasy land.
6 Likes
I think the point @millsy is trying to make, clumsily worded as it may have been, is that TVNZ should be a public broadcaster that focuses on informing the populationā¦ but of course it isnāt. Itās essentially a private broadcaster that happens to be owned by the NZ government. Iād say the government ought to sell it, really, but I canāt think who would want to buy it?
2 Likes
Thatās fair.
I think theyāre stuck with it though - I wouldnāt want it falling into foreign hands at this point.
3 Likes
Yeah, well I would rather live there than have to deal with a TV network that just serves up reality garbage all the time. Imagine if the old BCNZ had to make a profit or pay a dividend? Most of the TV shows we grew up with would simply not have been made. Plain and simple.
1 Like
Most of them wouldnāt be made now because viewer habits adapt and change through the years.
1 Like
You wouldnt be a member of ACT, or a shareholder on one of the reality TV companies? Or One of Julie Christieās mates?
Yep, itās pretty dire. Even trawling through TVNZ+ (and you really do have to trawl through it), itās pretty hard to find something interesting to watch. But +HR=E now is worse!
Iāve watched more documentary style content on Maori+ this year than TVNZ, which kind-of reinforces your point, take away the commercial remit and you get more diverse programming.
3 Likes
Iāve no problem with your stance necessarily and believe there is a genuine conversation about better public broadcasting, but have a look at ABC/BBC etc.
They are a lot different to NZ, but there is still reality/factual TV on there. Importantly, they still have to create content people want to watch, even within a public broadcasting remit, itās not all documentaries and the like.
4 Likes
Take a look at TVNZ and tell me if that is contact that you are somehow comfortable with? I really dont know why you love MasterChef so much. It is absolute garbage. And people like you, who hold shares in reality TV companies, and vote NACT are to blame.
I worry a lot about the lack of news/current affairs that has been lost from TVNZ the last decade - and I miss strands like Documentary NZ. But at the same time, I wouldnāt want the whole schedule to be that.
Iāve never watched Masterchef in my life. (Thatās a BBC product too btw).
No and no.
4 Likes
The irony that the BBC a public broadcaster created MasterChef is quite amusing tbh.
1 Like
Why?
1 Like
Because apparently public broadcasters donāt create content for the masses and would only create high brow documentaries.
Pretty sure the two arenāt connected considering the NZ Rugby rights negotiations mostly occurred before Sky brought Three/WBD NZ.
1 Like
Okā¦?
Follow the thread mate. That comment wasnāt made in isolation.
1 Like
Ah sorry didnāt need to be rude.
2 Likes
Yeah, had the TVNZ-RNZ merger gone ahead TVNZ 1 would have to focus more of the former and end up resembling BBC Two and TVNZ 2 would have to be sold off and would focus more on the masses