Colour television “inescapable”

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32459, 20 November 1970, Page 2

Colour television “inescapable”

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, November 19.

Colour television was inescapable—the only question in New Zealand was when it would come, said Mr H. P. Wheldon, managing director of 8.8. C. Television at the Broadcasting Authority second-channel inquiry today. To invest in any new black-and-white equipment would be like investing in horsedrawn carriages in the 19205, he said.

He thought that given the finance the N.Z.B.C, could operate a second network and make it complementary to the present service. Over the years, the Public Service concept had shown that It could supply a type of broadcasting providing standards of truth and accuracy; hours of delight, pleasure, and contentment; and moments of insight and splendour, he said. To achieve this, Public Service broadcasting had had to fight off . two great enemies —one the Government and the other, commerce. “Governments want to get their hands on, the broadcasting apparatus . . . Commerce equally wants to get its hands on what it knows is a rich field, he said. “There are pickings there, and they know it. The result is always pap, in some degree.” “Fight never-ending”

“The fight is never-ending. It goes on every day—and it is being joined once more here in New Zealand,” Mr Wheldon said. Arranging a system of complementary programming was difficult enough even in a single organisation and impossible in two, Mr Wheldon said. “On those grounds alone, it seems to me that the Associated Network case simply does not stand up to examination,” he said. Competition had its points

and commercial television had done good work, he said. “But this is in profound terms a minor consideration in the context of television as a whole.” BBC 2 provided a choice of programmes for the viewer and broadened the spectrum of programme possibilities for 8.8. C. Television as a whole. “Exasperated” To Mr R. B. Cooke, Q.C., counsel for the N.Z.8.C., Mr Wheldon said he had been "exasperated” by a newspaper’s description of him as the corporation's “trump-card witness.” It was unfair to him, he said, as it implied that he had come to teach about broadcasting in New Zealand, or the countiy itself. It was unfair to the 8.8. C., because though it believed Public Service broadcasting was best it did not want to throw its weight around—which the statement also implied. It was “awfully unfair” to the N.Z.8.C., because the corpora-; tion’s own submission was the “star case.” To Mr I. L. McKay (for

the Network group) he said that in the short term competition had added an edge to television in the United Kingdom. But in the long term it would not have been beneficial if the 8.8. C. had had to continue with one channel in competition with another. Had 8.8. C. 2 not entered the arena it would have certainly resulted in lower standards, if only in reducing the spectrum of programmes, Mr Weldon said.

Commercial television He had never suggested that commercial television in Britain was bad in itself but it was “just not in the same league” as Public Service television.

He did not favour panel selection of programmes, as this would amount to bureaucracy. He denied that he spoke with great extravagance. “I speak my mind,” he said. If commercial broadcasting started in New Zealand, then competition was inevitable. He saw no possibility of a third New Zealand network. “Given then straight competition, the N.Z.B.C. will either go to the wall or in the long run will have to change tune. In either case, it will diminish something which is rarer than people think, and which we simply take for granted—and this at a time when what is, in fact, needed is to bring the best method of broadcasting so far invented in the world to full fruition,” Mr Wheldon said. “Eyewash” Proposals by the Associated Network group to provide complementary programming on a second television channel had been earlier descri-

bed by Mr Wheldon as "eyewash." On purely practical and technical grounds one could not, in fact, both compete and not compete. Arranging a system of complementary programming was difficult enough even in a single organisation and impossible in two, he said. "On those grounds alone,’ it seems to me that the Associated Network case simply does not stand up to examination,” he said.

“All this is on the ground of simple practicality, and recognising eyewash for what it is. It equally seems to me that the N.Z.B.C. could, in fact, operate a second network and could make it complemetary. That too, is on simple, practical grounds. Given the finance, there seems to be no problem.” Mr Wheldon, who joined the 8.8. C. in 1952 and has been managing-director of 8.8. C. Television since January, 1969, said' that he had read carefully the formal submission of the N.Z.8.C., and, from his experience, would stand, in general terms, by that submission.

The inquiry will continue tomorrow with further crossexamination of Mr Wheldon.