"New Zealand television at a crossroads

Press, 31 August 1977, Page 38

"New Zealand television at a crossroads

By

KEN COATES

New Zealand television is a' the crossroads. So far, [viewers in this country have been denied the chance of 'watching the world’s best television service. This is in -pite of spending millions of dollars on two separate ■channels, colour equipment, ; access to the world’s programmes. satellite links, and a full range of news, current I affairs and home produced I programmes. ' The basic mistake was to make the two channels both commercial. This has meant TVI and South Pacific Television have been competing fiercely for the advertising dollar.

S.P.T.. especially. had little alternative. Born only two vears ago as the poor relation of TVI, with a lack [of facilities, staff and viewer ; coverage, it has gone all-out lon a viewers-in-front-of-set [policy. j So tn a sense, instead of (rhe viewer coming first, commercials come first. . Particularly in prime time, [between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m.

— when about one and a 1 half million people watch, ■television — the emphasis is I on mass audience pro-' grammes. All too frequently, these are series which appeal to [the lowest common denominators among viewers. I And we get a heavily-loaded ; offering of forgettable escap'ism — police and crime dramas, soap-opera, so-called light comedy and neverending variety programmes churned out by the production houses of the United States and Britain. Both television channels began life with optimistic plans for New Zealand production. And there have been no-1 table achievements — TVl’s) “The God Boy,” produced by] Murrav Reece, a Feltex) Award-winning production, was of a high standard, and, TV2’s “Hunter’s Gold.” while not in the same class, was an ambitious, commendable effort South Pacific Television is shortly to screen “The'

■Mackenzie Affair,” a drama, ( series based on the Legen-I jdary sheep-stealer, and TVI will in October present “The, Governor,” the $540,000) series based on the life of Sir George Grey. In addition, both channels looked beyond New Zealand bringing insights into the outside world to. viewers at home. lan Johnstone’s excellent TVI documentaries on South Africa were an example. News and current affairs,' expanded, with each channel doing its thing. Investigative television journalism was tried with varying results. Some notable results were (achieved in expanding infor- ( mation available to the pubIlie by the Auckland team of! TV2. ( But New Zealand tele-; [vision was attempting to go .too far, too fast. ' There was great en- ) thusiasm for trying anything. News teams set out to ( cover events both within 'New Zealand and outside the

, country, without reference [to what the other channel ■was doing. Interviewers short on experience ruffled the feathers of sensitive politicians. Some were plainly having trouble coping with the intense demands of the medium. Others were merely, for the first time, merely

doing their job — ensuring) that politicians were regu- I larly accountable for their I actions to the public they;serve. From its inception, TV2I was expected by viewers to; provide an alternative ser-j! vice, equal to that offered; by TVI. But the second channel is,' staggering along under heavy burdens One is the II huge' expense of duplicating!

!; basic transmission equip-1 jment all over New Zealand; (to ensure its programmes; Jean be received. > Even at the end of this . year, it will only be up to [‘covering 85 per cent of viewers. • Again, while TVl’s pro-! ,! duction was centred on the '‘lavish, well-equipped Avalon

i complex at Lower Hutt and; Dunedin, TV2 was landed I with production centred on 1 I Auckland and Christchurch. ; All this was tremendously! expensive, and much of the I cost was being borne by the (New’ Zealand taxpayer. Debt to the National 'Development Loans Account,: (not counting millions of dol-( lars interest each year, rose to 538.9 M I Thera had been a change

lin Government. This brought. ( stringent criticism of tele1 vision, particularly of dupl-I , ication in the channel’s news : services, and proposals for ' yet another change in administration. The Prime Minister (Mr ■Muldoon) last year declared ’that broadcasting was broke, and the Government proceeded to wipe out the

;$38.9M debt, and its cnppl- | ing interest repayments, ; with a convenient stroke of the pen. ; But it was made

(abundantly clear that from (now on broadcasting must I pay its way — and that inI eludes capital development. (So the SBM being spent this (year, including extension of I South Pacific’s coverage, must come from income, and not from loan money as preSo where does this leave I New Zealand television? (Some cuts in spending have been made news coverage (is shared, overseas trips are ’severely curtailed and local

programme-making has been pruned. The diet of repeats, imported pap and cheaply-pro-[duced New Zealand light ■ entertainment shows continues to predominate. Keen [ competition for advertising [also continues.

There is a shortage of ; quality New Zealand docu- 1 mentaries, dramas, current affairs and information pro- < grammes. First-class fare ] from overseas seems to be increasingly rare. 1 For many Christchurch viewers, the two-channel ' system meant an end to the h i g h 1 y-rated community magazine programme, “The South Tonight.” and the popular pair who brought a light touch — Bryan Allpress and Rodney Bryant. Even local news has disappeared on South Pacific,) and the only coverage on j this channel is an item or I two in the nightly bulletin,; or a Christchurch contribu-) tion to a current affairs programme, Televiaion One haa

local news but a weekly magazine has been severely cut back. Television belongs to New Zealanders, argu» the critics. Much should be about and for things New Zealand. Programmes that often reflect the worst of other cultures

should not receive the main emphasis. There is a strong feeling of disquiet among thinking parents over some of the values constantly being emphasised on television. Programming for children often lacks careful consideration and educational television is practically nonexistent. As Mr lan Cross, the new director-general of the Broadcasting Corporation of; New Zealand (8.C.N.Z.) which has replaced three,: j separate corporations, com- j ments; I “Here we are. a single corporation running two | television channels which

doubles the available time, especially prime time, for

audience satisfaction. Is programme scheduling actually doing that?

"I don’t think it is. and neither do the directorsgeneral, nor do their con trollers of programmes." Mr Cross talks of greatei co-operation, true com pigmentary programming more New Zealand-producee programmes and both chan nels catering for minority groups.

He has asked both chan nels to make sure they art getting the best of available programmes from overseas

But the major problem re mains — two commercia channels each concernec with selling advertising time to clients interested in how ;many viewers are watchinj their sets, rather than the I worth of programmes. ' The new chairman fa ai

organisation man whe knows how to stimulate ane influence change. It will h 'interesting to see what hap ; pens.