logo
NZOA has saved reality TV and soaps – what about all the shows left to die?

NZOA has saved reality TV and soaps – what about all the shows left to die?

The Spinoffa day ago
NZ on Air is confronting a very uncomfortable question: what to save, and what to leave behind.
Funding announcements from NZ on Air are not typically newsworthy in and of themselves. The agency functions as a local version of the BBC, but instead of existing as a non-commercial umbrella brand, it funds a variety of media which runs across a wide range of largely commercial mediums and platforms. Funded work often consists of a mix of returning shows and new projects, which are either predictable (another season of Q+A, or a fresh David Lomas project) or largely unknown (another murder in rural New Zealand, cast tbc).
The most recent round was strikingly different, making news in a way which reveals challenges to the agency's model, and shows just how bad the choices are for NZ on Air now. Three very familiar shows collectively received more than $5m in funding. They are Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island and The Traitors NZ. All are broad in their appeal and comparatively popular. Yet none would have been considered good candidates for funding until very recently.
That's because NZ on Air was set up to address a market failure. Due to our small population, some forms of 'programming reflecting New Zealand identity and culture' (according to its legislation) are not commercially viable. The legislation makes specific reference to 'drama and documentary', with everything else somewhat in the eye of the beholder.
For decades that meant scripted shows (such as comedy and drama) were NZ on Air's core business, while most other formats (from current affairs to breakfast TV) were commercially funded, due to TV networks being able to sell enough ads to make them on their own terms. That didn't mean it lacked value, just that it didn't need the support. News is the canonical example of a commercially funded genre – TVNZ's 6pm bulletin remains among the highest-rated shows on television, despite costing a bomb to make.
Reality TV wasn't even a genre when NZ on Air was founded, and the agency has tended to be fairly circumspect in its funding of it over the years, only getting involved when, as with Match Fit, or Popstars, it fulfilled another worthy goal. Shortland Street, our only true soap, was briefly funded as a kind of TV startup, but cranked along under its own steam for decades afterwards. This was helpful because reality TV and soaps are considered less intellectually nutritious by the kind of people who care about the culture we fund.
The end of that era
This has not been an uncontested idea. Critics, including those at The Spinoff, and the makers of reality TV have long felt that NZ on Air was too prescriptive in its definition of 'reflecting New Zealand identity and culture'. They believe that reality TV and soaps are popular, show a diverse range of New Zealanders and bring voices, vernacular and perspectives to our screens, just as scripted comedy and drama do.
This past week, they won the argument. Shortland Street has returned for a second funded season, after last year accessing two different strands of public funding to stay on air. More striking was the return of The Traitors NZ and Celebrity Treasure Island, two shows which had previously been commercially funded. Celebrity Treasure Island is a revival of an '00s-era format, and has drawn praise for its use of Te Reo Māori and addressing 'complex issues like ageism, sexism and queer politics, all on primetime mainstream television', according to my colleague Tara Ward. The Traitors NZ is a hit local version of a smash international format, with a diverse cast and a strong strain of New Zealand-specific humour.
In addition to the cultural arguments, there's also a broader systems-level case for their funding. The shows have consistently rated strongly, particularly with the kind of middle-aged audiences which have abandoned linear television over the past decade. The thinking goes that by keeping these tentpole shows on our screens, you also help keep our networks and production companies viable.
The path not taken
Despite the solid arguments in favour, there remains a case against, too. To contemplate it, you only need to cast your mind back to a little over a year ago. It was a bonfire of the journalists. We lost longform current affairs stalwart Sunday, the venerable consumer rights show Fair Go, the magazine-style 7pm staple The Project and, most wrenchingly, the whole Newshub operation, all in the space of a few harrowing months.
The death of those shows was attributed to the awful financial equation facing TV networks. That despite all rating very strongly, at least by comparison to the rest of the schedule, none could justify the investment required to keep them running. It was a shocking, visceral event, one which made New Zealand a cautionary tale across the Tasman – the country you need to look hard at to figure out how to avoid its fate.
Now, a year on, and NZ on Air has been persuaded by the arguments of TVNZ and Three, that these reality TV and soap formats are too important to be allowed to die. To be clear, none of Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island or The Traitors NZ is fully funded. The budgets aren't public, but production industry sources suggest the agency's investment would cover no more than 50% of the associated costs, and perhaps considerably less.
Still, the risk of moral hazard is clear. The networks and production companies have established that no show is beyond help, and as audiences decline, there is a manifest case for continually topping up the public funding component of budgets. The implication is that paradoxically, as they get less popular and ad revenue declines, they should receive more help.
None of which is to say these decisions are wrong in isolation. But looking at the slate of what we publicly fund now, we seem a long way from home. Pulpy true crime documentaries, reality TV shows with large chunks devoted to selling McDonalds, regularly re-named shows built around the interests of a single comedian.
Still, what else can we do? Linear TV audience decline is a global phenomenon, and no public or private broadcaster has successfully ported their audiences across to digital at the same scale as they once had, let alone been able to defend the same advertising revenues. NZ on Air faces bad choices everywhere as it seeks to fulfil its mission and defend its model. It may not have even been given the chance to save the news.
But as we slip gently into a new era, where everything which can be argued can be funded, it's important to remember the shows we didn't save too. And ask whether the foundational mission of NZ on Air is better served by what we kept, or what we threw away.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A Poser For Labour Party: Tax Wealth Or Tax Capital Gains
A Poser For Labour Party: Tax Wealth Or Tax Capital Gains

Scoop

time2 minutes ago

  • Scoop

A Poser For Labour Party: Tax Wealth Or Tax Capital Gains

Veteran political journalist Vernon Small's latest regular paywalled column in Stuff's Sunday Star Times (3 August) has brought to life a subject that by its very nature can put many people to sleep – tax wealth or tax capital gains: A choice Labour may come to regret. Small was previously an advisor to the former Labour government. Both taxes seek to address tax avoidance. Avoidance involves exploiting or dodging (if there is a difference) the taxation system in order to reduce the amount of tax one might otherwise have to pay. Tax avoidance can be ethically grey This is in contrast to tax evasion which involves concealing income or other relevant information. The latter is illegal and punishable. Wealth taxes involve annually taxing valuable assets such as land, shares, art works, or other valuable collectables. Some prominent economists, such as France's Thomas Piketty, argue that wealth taxes are both necessary and practicable. Drawing upon empirical research Piketty has a particular focus on inherited wealth (think Donald Trump for example). Interestingly Labour leader Chris Hipkins cites Piketty among his reading material. Capital gains taxes (CGT) also tax wealth. However, they tax the gain in value of an asset. Consequently they apply when the asset is sold. CGT is therefore usually paid only once per asset gain unlike an annual wealth tax. Shifting the dial on tax avoidance Former Labour MP and cabinet minister David Parker has for many years been a strong advocate of achieving taxation fairness by addressing tax avoidance. In his recent valedictory speech to Parliament he described his advocacy as 'shifting the dial' over this issue as his most significant achievement. On 26 April 2023, as Minister of Revenue, Parker gave a major speech advocating a wealth tax: David Parker's wealth tax. His proposed wealth tax, supported by Finance Minister Grant Robertson, was not as broad as discussed above. It was based on research undertaken by Inland Revenue that provided 'hard data confirming fundamental unfairness in our tax system.' The study revealed that 311 people had collective wealth of $85 billion. Further, the effective tax rate of middle-income New Zealanders was at least double that of the wealthiest. Subsequently then Labour Prime Minister Chris Hipkins pulled the plug on the Parker-Robertson initiative; a decision which shocked many and helped contribute to Labour's heavy defeat in the general election later that year. Insightful column Vernon Small's above-mentioned insightful column needs to be read in the above context. He reports that the Labour Party's Policy Council has narrowly endorsed a CGT as the centre piece of its tax reform for next year's election. This reportedly is also Hipkins' preferred position. However, this is not the end of Labour's internal decision-making process. Taxing wealth preferred to taxing capital works (Vernon Small) Small described this choice as one that 'it may come to regret.' Small's argument for this conclusion is as follows: CGT would deliver much less revenue initially and takes a long time to build revenue, if applied only to realised gains. CGT requires a 'difficult sales job' as National and its rightwing allies '…whip up a smorgasbord of concerns over the devilish details with a side salad of misinformation.' By comparison, a wealth tax targeted at the very wealthiest '…should be an easier sell.' The claim, which apparently influenced Hipkins' position, that a wealth tax would lead to fear of capital flight is 'over-wrought' and debunked by Treasury There is political advantage of a wealth tax also being the preferred option of Labour's potential coalition allies, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. It would be easier for a future rightwing government to reverse a CGT because it is slow to accumulate. Widening the thinking beyond either/or It is hard to argue with Vernon Small's logic; it certainly resonates with me. However, while not critical of his column, the debate should be widened including not constraining it to either/or options. The starting point should be recognising the need to address both the unfairness of tax rate inequity favouring the wealthy at the expense of the rest and untaxed income derived in various ways from speculation. It should also differentiate between getting early 'runs on the board' (I'm a cricket addict, just saying) and longer term measures and longer term benefits. Logically this favours a wealth tax for the reasons discussed. Beginning with something like the Parker-Robertson proposal would produce quicker tangible and identifiable fiscal returns. This would be more likely to be sufficiently bedded in to make it more difficult for a subsequent rightwing government to overturn. While this implementation is underway, work should be undertaken on broadening the range of wealth taxation taking the lead from economists such at Thomas Piketty. This does not mean waving goodbye to a capital gains tax. But it is politically savvy to recognise the longer time required to 'reap the benefits' . Taking advantage of the report from the Michael Cullen led working group, further work should be undertaken in order to develop a practical CGT without unintended consequences. The importance of messaging a good narrative Vernon Small correctly observes that the rightwing government parties will quickly get into attack mode once Labour announces its taxation policy. They know full well Labour's past inability to counter such an attack and to look like a possum in a car's headlights. Expect Finance Minister Nicola Willis to lead the charge. The political right are experts in messaging. My way of describing this politically is as follows: the far right communicates in gestures and soundbites (and sometimes violent threats); the political right communicates in sentences reinforced by soundbites; the political left communicates in paragraphs (social liberals in longer paragraphs); and the far left communicates in footnotes. Labour in my view is more technocratic social liberal than leftwing. I have discussed this previously in Political Bytes (30 April 2023): What leftwing really means. Regardless, however, Labour needs to deliver a good narrative on the unfairness of tax avoidance by taking a lead from the political right. Show more spine and do it in crisp succinct sentences further enabled by smart soundbites.

Nicola Willis bemoans 'glass half-empty' view of unemployment figures
Nicola Willis bemoans 'glass half-empty' view of unemployment figures

1News

timean hour ago

  • 1News

Nicola Willis bemoans 'glass half-empty' view of unemployment figures

The Finance Minister is bemoaning those who take a glass-half-empty view of the unemployment figures, saying they were still better than forecast. The unemployment rate has risen to 5.2% in the three months ended June, up from 5.1% in the previous quarter. Stats NZ figures show unemployment has risen 1.9 percentage points since the June 2022 quarter. Annual wage growth has slowed to 2.4%, compared to 4.3% in the June 2024 quarter. The economy shed about 2000 jobs during the quarter and 16,000 jobs over the past 12 months. There was also an increase in the number of people aged 15 to 24 in education, which Stats NZ said could be due to the current labour market conditions. Speaking to the figures, Nicola Willis said the "positive news" was a lower rate of unemployment than what was expected. "Some New Zealanders, particularly in the commentariat, have got themselves into the habit of what I call glass half-empty economics," she said. "Today, on the plain facts of the data, is a lower unemployment rate than was being forecast by Treasury at the Budget, that was being forecast by commercial banks, that was being forecast prior to the election." Willis said the 16,000 people who had lost their jobs "shouldn't take it personally" and blamed the previous government. "What we have inherited is the horrible human aftershock of poor economic management. "What happens when you let interest rates and inflation get out of control is that it strangles an economy and it strangles job creation." She said there were promising signs in the agriculture and tech sectors, and construction would bounce back once the Government's infrastructure projects got underway. Labour leader Chris Hipkins said it was the Government's fault for letting construction jobs fall in the first place. "The current Government got elected on a platform that they were going to fix the economy, and clearly they've made things significantly worse." Hipkins said there were 18,000 fewer people working in building and construction than there were at the time of the 2023 election. "When thousands of people are employed building new state houses, and you stop building state houses, is it any surprise that the number of people working in building and construction goes down?" Willis rejected that, saying the Government was continuing to build state and social housing. The Green Party said the Government was forcing people further into hardship and poverty, and then punishing them with benefit sanctions. "Increasing unemployment to tackle high inflation is a political choice not new to National governments, but this one has shown little concern at throwing tens of thousands of people out of work," Greens' employment and social development spokesperson Ricardo Menéndez March said. On Breakfast, BNZ chief economist Mike Jones gave his thoughts on what was driving unemployment, and when it could get better. (Source: 1News) "People want to work and there are masses of important projects for people to work on – housing, climate protection, nature regeneration and others. "The main barrier to people finding work is this Government." The tariffs imposed by the United States were likely to have an effect on the economy, Willis said, but Treasury was still forecasting unemployment to fall in the latter part of the year.

No Good News For Consumers In Grocery Report
No Good News For Consumers In Grocery Report

Scoop

timean hour ago

  • Scoop

No Good News For Consumers In Grocery Report

The $27 billion grocery market needs big, bold and progressive moves by the Government if we are to see healthy competition and lower grocery prices, the Grocery Action Group said today. The Grocery Commissioner's second annual report showed once again Kiwi consumers were paying way over the odds for their groceries, Grocery Action Group chair Sue Chetwin said. 'It was devoid of any good news for consumers,' she said. 'On top of the 4.6% increase in grocery prices in the 12 months to May this year, there are other findings in the report that are alarming. 'For instance it notes we are paying higher than the OECD average for groceries even though we earn well below the average OECD wage. 'Another disturbing fact is the 'prices (that the supermarket chains) pay their suppliers are subsidised by around $5 billion in rebates, discounts and promotional payments paid by (the) suppliers',' she said. 'The lack of competition is the key reason why New Zealanders are paying too much for their groceries, and in places where there is no competition the markups are even higher though overheads such as rent are often lower. 'In rural areas and smaller towns where New Zealand's supermarket choices are narrow or non-existent, the report confirms what those living there already know – that consumers pay a premium for the lack of competition. 'In places like TeAnau, where there is only one large supermarket alongside a Four Square, consumers are paying 33% more for grapes, 15% more for Woolworths brand flour, and Nescafe coffee which is on special in both Te Anau and nationwide, is 14.8% more. 'This kind of geographic price gap is unacceptable. Fair prices shouldn't depend on your postcode. 'We are eagerly waiting on hearing from the Minister for Economic Growth, Nicola Willis, on how she proposes to restore our broken grocery market.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store