Commercial TV ‘Graveyard Of Broken Promises’

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32392, 3 September 1970, Page 22

Commercial TV ‘Graveyard Of Broken Promises’

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, September 2.

After bright predictions, commercial television in Australia and the United States had ended up a graveyard of broken promises, the New Zealand Broadcasting Authority was told today.

A witness for the Associated Network Group, Mr A. Martin, agreed during examination by Mr R. B. Cooke, Q.C., representing the N.Z. 8.C., that this was a fairly accurate summary.

to broadcasting in the United Kingdom since the early twenties the first three had recommended continuance of the 8.8. C. monopoly. The terms of reference of the last one, in 1960, had precluded it from recommending that the 8.8. C. monopoly be restored.

two of the reports, but had read only the last one. He did not agree that in its monopoly years the 8.8. C. was in the forefront of community thought He considered it had been behind the times and had benefited from commercial competition. During examination by Mr D. S. G. Deacon, representing the Television Producers’ and Directors’ Association, Mr Martin said private enterprise tended to give greater responsibility to producers and directors, and this greater freedom could result in improved programme standards. Controls as outlined by the group were particularly good and would provide a system which was probably unique in the world. He would not hold up the Australian and United States systems of control as examples, he said.

Mr Martin said he knew of

The group is one of 45 organisations making submissions at the inquiry into the need for an extension of television services.

It is sponsored by four major companies U.E.8., Kerridge Odeon, Wattle’s and Wright Stephenson’s—interested in forming a consortium to run a second television channel.

Today, the authority beard examination of Mr Martin, a producer with the Australian Broadcasting Commission, and Mr R. Thyer, director of engineering and operations for Channel 10, Sydney, also a witness for the group. Tomorrow, examination of the group’s main witness, Mr G. W. J. Dryden, will continue.

During Mr Cooke’s crossexamination Mr Martin agreed that television programmes could be obtained more cheaply from overseas if the corporation was the only television operator In New Zealand.

He also agreed that no commercial network in Australia produced current affairs programmes comparable with those produced by the Australian Broadcasting Commission.

Mr Martin said there should be the maximum choice of programmes, but he felt equally strongly about monopoly broadcasting, which did not provide the best atmosphere for local production. On political grounds the independence of the organisation was fragile and the danger of political take-over very real. Monopoly broadcasting also bred conformity, Mr Martin said.

Questioned about the position in the United Kingdom, he said he did not think the 8.8. C. was any more free than the I.T.A. in news and current affairs programmes. Mr Cooke said that of the four committees of inquiry in-