Kiwiblog

The Herald reports:

More than 470 of its 900 or so staff have had cards, and in the six months to January this year – a time of cost cutting – they spent $3.18 million. Almost 100 of the cards had a monthly cap of at least $10,000.

Mr Ellis racked up more than $140,000 on his own company plastic in two years – including $32,000 entertaining.

He and senior executives will be among those losing their cards, and soon there will be as few as 50 left at TVNZ.

Staff will now have to apply to get work-related expenses reimbursed, though some field staff will retain their cards.

Having half the staff with credit cards was excessive.  Most companies have very few credit cards issued, and other staff are on a reimbursement system.

I’ve never had a company credit card in my life, yet in certain roles have had tens of thousands of dollars of expenses – I just file expense claims.

Fran Mold has today quit as Deputy Political Editor for TVNZ, according to well placed sources.

The reason is an agreement in principle that she will replace Kris Faafoi as Chief Press Secretary to Phil Goff.

However the timing of this is very is interesting. You see Labour have yet to have their “democratic” selection process. Yet the outcome seems certain enough that Fran has quit prior to the 18th of September when the selection is made. I guess, the head office delegates are not going to be listening to who makes the best speeches on the night.

My God. One News had a segment yesterday in the 6 pm bulletin on the Australian election, and they decided to explain how the system worked. What a pity they got it so wrong. Simon Dallow, who fronted it, should send an angry-gram to whomever produced that item.

They correctly described the House of Representatives as having 150 seats, and you need 76 to form a Government.

But then Simon went on to say Australia uses the Single Transferable Vote, or STV, electoral system. No, they don’t – well not for the House of Representatives which the item was on.

They use the preferential voting (often called Alternative Vote) system.

Even worse Simon went on to say they get two votes, and showed a mock ballot paper.

That has no resemblance to an Australian ballot paper.

This sample ballot, taken from Wikipedia, shows that you rank the candidates in order. You do not tick them, there is no second column.

This is basic stuff. Someone at TVNZ should have checked the story.

John Drinnan writes:

Radio New Zealand faces a big makeover next year with the Government expected to merge the public radio operation with non-commercial TVNZ 7.

The plan is to create a new public broadcasting institution. Labour is understood to be broadly behind the merger.

Such a move is being challenged by TVNZ, which wants to keep government funding within its otherwise commercial focus. But surprisingly the biggest sceptics are within RNZ management.

A merger would mean a revamp of RNZ which has been caught in the cross-fire with Government demands that it works within existing budgets.

It would require the transfer of some TVNZ staff, and possible pay rises for some at RNZ, sources say. The new body would provide both radio and TV, though it is understood the Government is not yet convinced TVNZ should not be allowed to continue to provide some TVNZ 7 content.

A combined radio and TV operation makes sense, removing public service from the increasingly commercial focus of TVNZ while injecting fresh energy into RNZ.

I have been advocating this for well over a year. It is good to see both the Government, and Labour, looking favourably on doing this.

We spend a fairly large amount of money on public broadcasting – RNZ, NZ on Air, Maori TV, TVNZ 7. If you combine it all together you have the ability to have a pretty good budget for a combined public broadcaster. I recognize Maori TV won’t merge in at this stage, but no reason they can’t become a semi-autonomous channel within say the NZ Broadcasting Service?

Once the public broadcaster is established, I’d look favourably at floating some or all of TVNZ. It is effectively a fully commercial company and is not a public broadcaster. Radio NZ is. TVNZ 7 is. TVNZ as a whole is not.

Jonathan Marshall at the SST reports:

TVNZ boss Rick Ellis has racked up more than $140,000 on his company plastic – including $32,000 entertaining – during a time of major redundancies at the broadcaster, a Sunday Star-Times survey of more than 100 public-sector chief executives has revealed.

I’ve not been jumping on the bandwagon for most of these disclosures, as they seem reasonable. But hell $140,000 is a lot of money – even over two years.

Ellis’ liberal spending over the 24 months to June this year coincided with a period of plunging profits and savage job cuts at the state-owned enterprise, which has been hit hard by the global financial crisis.

TVNZ’s 2009 annual profit was 89 percent down on the previous year. Some 215 TVNZ staffers have lost their jobs since 2007. Between June 2008 and June 2010, Ellis, who earns between $710,000 and $840,000 yearly, spent $140,768.19 on his TVNZ-issued credit card.

The expenditure may be legit, but that does not mean it was prudent. I am glad to see the Minister asking the Chairman for a please explain.

But assessing just how Ellis spent $140,000 of TVNZ’s money was difficult. Citing commercial sensitivity, the broadcaster refused to hand over anything more than a grand total, broken down into broad categories. This included $11,765.52 on “miscellaneous” items. The broadcaster last night refused to say what they were. The ombudsman is investigating.

TVNZ spokeswoman Megan Richards said TVNZ would release only limited details of Ellis’s expenditure because “we are a commercial operation in a highly competitive, not to say cut-throat global industry. The kind of detail government departments may care to release is damaging to our competitive position.”

Richards said it was unfair for TVNZ to release its data when bosses of private companies Fairfax, APN, MediaWorks and Sky were not forced to.

But Maori TV CEO Jim Mather, also a state-owned enterprise boss, happily provided his credit card statements and receipts. Mather spent $19,632.53 in the same 24-month period.

I may be wrong, but I suspect the privately owned MediaWorks will have a massively smaller bill on their CEO’s credit card.

The Herald reports:

TV3 and Television New Zealand have been punished following breaches of Parliament’s rules, including one cameraman entering and filming inside Labour MP Chris Carter’s suite of offices in his absence and without his permission.

Lockwood Smith withdrew parking entitlements for their networks in Parliament’s basement carpark after they failed to get permission to film in the corridor and stairwell. However he also noted a cameraman had entered an MP’s offices without permission – a clear breach of parliamentary rules.

This is a fair call. MPs are publicly accountable, but it doesn’t mean their offices are public space.

At 7.30 pm tonight, it will be 50 years since the first TV programme in NZ. Some selected milestones from 18 pages TVNZ sent to me:

• 1936 – BBC began television broadcasts
• 1939 – NBC (US) began
• 1956 – TV begins in Australia
• 1960 – 1st transmission from Shortland Street studios at 7.30 pm 1/6/60, shows included Robin Hood and Howard Morrison
• Aug 60 – Alma Johnson (photo below) becomes 1st female TV presenter
• 1960 – a TV set cost the equivalent in 2010$ of $5,935
• 1963 – first televised election coverage and Close Up debuts with Ian Johnstone
• 1965 – over 50% of households now have TV
• 1969 – first network news bulletin with Philip Sherry and Dougal Stevenson
• 1972 – 1st live All Black test
• 1973 – introduction of colour TV
• 1975 – 1st Telethon
• 1976 -Nice One Stu with Stu Dennison and Roger Gascoigne
• 1977 – Fair Go starts and “A week of it” political satire
• 1979 – 95% of homes have a TVand Bill Ralston joins TV2
• 1984 – Karyn Hay fronts Radio with Pictures
• 1989 – Holmes starts and TV3 starts
• 1997 – start of Breakfast TV

TVNZ have also provided some of the shows on in each decade. Ones I recall watching are:

1. 1960s – Lassie, Bonanza, Mr Ed, Dr Who, Get Smart, The Avengers, Man from Uncle, Bewitched, Mission Impossible, Ironside
2. 1970s – Dad’s Army, Monty Python, Two Ronnies, Alias Smith and Jones, M*A*S*H, Six Million Dollar Man, Kojak, Basil Brush, It’s in the Bag, Top Town, Starsky & Hutch, A Week of it, Are you being served, I Claudius, The Professionals, Happy Days, Soap
3. 1980s – Mork & Mindy, Fawlty Towers, Minder, Dukes of Hazzard, Dallas, To the Manor Born, Benson, Billy T James, Gliding On, University Challenge, Hill Street Blues, Battlestar Galactica, Ready to Roll, After School with Olly Olsen, Brideshead Revisited Love Boat, Hogan’s Heroes, A Team, Night Rider, Blind Date,
4. 1990s – Holmes, Sale of the Century, Frontline, On The Mat, Counterpoint, Eyewitness, Assigment, Ralston Live, Flying Doctors, LA Law, Cheers, Young Ones, The Bill, Simpsons, Married with Children, Fresh Prince of Bel Air, Thunderbirds, Dastardly & Mutley, Family Ties, Magnum PI, Star Trek, Doogie Houser, Macguvyer, Cosby Show, Beverly Hills 90210, 21 Jump Street, Casualty, Roseanne, American Gladiators, Seinfeld, The Nanny, Friends, Ally McBeal
5. 2000s – Brothers & Sisters, Go Girls, Shortland Street, Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy, The Apprentice, American Idol, Two & a half men, Unauthorised History of NZ, Eating Media Lunch, Big Brother

That’s a lot of shows, but I guess its has been a lot of years!

When TVNZ ran their story tonight on Victoria University closing off enrolments, did they not know the student they interviewed (Caleb Tutty) talking about his anger was the International Secretary of Young Labour, and Judith Tizard’s former electorate agent?

Or did they just decide it wasn’t relevant?

Brian Edwards blogs:

But the eagle-eyed little bird had spotted something strange in the Close Up story. In it reporter Daniel Faitaua interviews David Henshilwood and his wife Sally about their problems with Serepisos. Referring to the interview, Faitaua says in voice-over, ‘That was them four weeks ago when they told us of their frustration trying to get paid for installing screens in Terry Serepisos’ Century City Hotel.’

Whoa there! Four weeks ago! You interviewed the Henshilwoods four weeks ago, but you only approached Sereposis’ office yesterday to seek a response. Isn’t that just a little strange?

The eagle-eyed little bird thought so and made a few discreet inquiries. ‘I’m told,’ he tweeted in my ear, ‘that Close Up was instructed not to run the story because it would embarrass TVNZ for not doing proper checks on Mr Serepisos before accepting him for the show. It’s only hearsay of course.’

I am sure normally Close Up do not wait four weeks before following up a story. It would be good to know if they were ordered to wait, to avoid damage to The Apprentice.

Well, if my eagle-eyed little bird has it right, it’s kinda sad isn’t it.  For a network to instruct or  even suggest to  a current affairs programme that it ought to abandon or delay an item of public interest on the grounds that the item might damage the reputation or ratings of one  of the network’s other programmes, really isn’t journalistically or morally defensible.

And if it didn’t happen like that, I’m happy to retract and apologise to TVNZ. As for my eagle-eyed little feathered friend, he may have to watch out for passing birdshot.

Sounds like a good topic for Media 7.

Have just received this response from Television New Zealand in response to an OIA request I made:

Dear Mr Farrar

OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT REQUEST

I refer to your request under the Act dated 8 April 2010.

Following an exhaustive search, and enquiries to the usual suspects, it appears that only one pair of pink handcuffs was purchased by Television New Zealand during the period of 1 March to 7 April 2010.

As I am sure you are aware, the handcuffs were purchased as a novelty prize for Back Benches. They were purchased from an undisclosed location in Wellington, and cost $24.99. I cannot confirm whether this represents a fair market price, or whether we paid over the odds for them.

Yours sincerely

Brent McAnulty
General Counsel/Company Secretary

I am intrigued by the reference to “the usual suspects”. Does Damien Christie make a habit of purchasing such items for TVNZ?

The HoS reports:

Glenn Sims, managing director of Redflame Media and producer of The Apprentice, last night defended his star: “I’m not worried about Terry’s credibility because all these attacks are Tall Poppy syndrome.”

All the stuff/rumours about Terry’s past are probably tall poppy syndrome. But the inability to pay his bill is not an attack – it is a matter of fact.

TVNZ was also standing by the top-rating show. Spokeswoman Megan Richards said: “Serepisos’ private affairs are his own business, and we will not be commenting.”

What nonsense. When you are promoting him as one of the most successful businessmen in NZ, and someone who people would aspire to work for, then it is absolutely relevant whether or not he can pay his bills or not.

TVNZ had undertaken due diligence prior to Serepisos’ being picked for the show.

Did that include a credit check?

TVNZ wants people to to mark on a map where they lost their virginity, and what it was like.

The site is a promo for Go Girls.

I wonder if one could demand under the Official Information Act (which applies to TVNZ) the IP addresses of all those who map their virginity loss!

Radio NZ is facing some tough challenges as it has been told it will not be getting an increase in funding. Now, as costs do rise, that does put some pressure on, and there may be job losses which are always regretable.

But as I have said before, when a recession knocks $50 billion out of the economy, that has real world effects. Most companies would love to have a guarantee of stable funding.

Take Television New Zealand – also a state owned broadcaster, but one without the benefit of direct state funding. The Herald reports:

All Television NZ programmes will be up for constant review as the state broadcaster faces tighter budgets and falling advertising revenue.

Figures released yesterday show TVNZ’s profit halved to $8.9 million in the six months to December, compared with the $18.3 million of the previous year. Total operating revenue fell 16.6 per cent to $186.9 million.

Now I don’t mean to be insensitive to staff at Radio NZ, who are facing pressures. But hell I’d much rather be in the state owned broadcaster with guaranteed stable funding than the state owned broadcaster which has had its revenue drop by a massive 17%.

I didn’t blog previously on Woman’s Day outing Ali Mau, as frankly I thought it was distasteful and didn’t want to publicise it further. I did comment on the Journz mailing list which discussed the issue, as follows:

I think the decision to out Ali Mau is regrettable, and part of a slippery slope which points the wrong way.

I accept that if someone is in the public eye as a celebrity, then who they are dating will make the media. But when that information doesn’t just reveal who they are dating, but a sexual orientation that is not yet public, I think it should not be published unless there is hypocrisy etc. I prefer people to reveal their own sexual orientation, not have the media do it for them – especially when they may have children etc. Her kids may now have to put up with teasing at school from classmates that their mum is a lesbian.

If Ali was going to come out anyway, then it is a different matter, but as Dean said I would not want to be an editor approving such a story unless I was certain.

A few people have said they broadly agreed with my stance.

Now since then Ali has hit back at Woman’s Day with force, as reported here by Stuff:

High-profile Television New Zealand presenter Alison Mau has struck out at a magazine editor she says hired a “creepy” paparazzi photographer to stalk her children, friends and family.

Today, on TV One morning show Breakfast, Mau addressed her recent tabloid coverage during a regular slot on the show dedicated to reviewing the weekly New Zealand gossip magazines.

Holding up the latest issue of Woman’s Day magazine – opened to a story titled “Alison Mau’s sleepover” – Mau questioned when the magazine’s editor, Sarah Henry, would leave her family alone. …

Mau then said some people had said she was “fair game” because of her public profile.

“But, here’s my question, now that they’ve run this story, I have a question for Woman’s Day editor Sarah Henry and her offsider Catherine Milford.

“Perhaps you’d both be kind enough to let me know when this, when this kind of thing, will stop?

“Just give me an idea when the dogs will be called off and me, my friends and my family can go about our business without having creepy guys in Corolla station wagons following us around?

“I hope that’s a fair question, if you’d like to comment at all, being our breakfast viewers, or pose the same question, drop us a line or send it direct to Sarah Henry at Woman’s Day, she’s on shenry@acpmagazines.co.nz”

The TV show then ran Henry’s email address on screen.

And below is the video of the Breakfast show:

Now I have no problem with Ali striking back. In fact I admire her for doing so, and all strength to her. Woman’s Day deserve to be called out for what they did.

But I do have an issue about whether TVNZ should be assisting Mau with her campaign. They not only flashed the e-mail address up on the Woman’s Day editor on screen (would they do that for anyone else) for people to fire hate mail off at, they also covered the story on Close Up that night. And again, I ask if they would have done that, if one of the protagonists didn’t work for them.

So again to be clear, I have absolutely no issues with Ali Mau hitting back, and wanting to use whatever opportunity she has. Good on her. But I do think TVNZ needs to be cautious about its role in this.

The Herald reports from Parliament:

Finally it was back to the Prime Minister for the last question – this time about his holding of shares in Jackson Mining.

Asked how he could not have known the company had merged with another and was now involved in uranium mining, he began with: “There was the small technical issue – I have been busy running the country.”

He added that he would be the first to admit it was “sloppy” but said the last time he had looked they were trading at 3.5c “and when I offered them to my son, who was 12 at the time, even he did not want them”.

I was absolutely stunned that TVNZ had as their lead story that the PM had admitted he was “sloppy”, as if this was Watergate II.In fact there was nothing that came within a million miles of being a conflict of interest.

John Key had declared the mining shares in his register of interests. This is what you are meant to do.

Now a conflict of interest tends to relate to something favouring a specific company, not something that affects an entire industry.

The mining company in question is Australian, does not operate in NZ, and has no plans to operate in NZ. Anyone who thinks this creates a conflict of interest, just because the Government is promoting mining is biased or stupid.

The Government promotes agriculture. So should Jim Bolger have had to sell his family farm when he was PM?

Helen Clark was a residential property investor. Should she have sold all her houses because the Government made decisions that affected rental properties?

Of course not. No reasonable person thinks that is a conflict of interest. If you adopt that standard, then every MP would be forced to liquidate all their assets and have only cash in a bank. But oh no, wait Government can affect banks, so lets force them to store their cash under their bed.

Having shares in an Australian mining company that does not operate in NZ is not a conflict of interest. Even if they did operate in NZ, it would not be a conflict of interest. The conflict of interest would be if a decision was made to grant some licence to that particular company, which the PM took part in.

The PMs statement that he had been sloppy, simply relates to the fact he hadn’t bothered to keep track of what the company was doing, as its shares were near worthless.

Now that may deserve a couple of paragraphs in a political story in a newspaper, but to have TVNZ make it their lead story is unbelievable.

UPDATE: Colin Espiner has previously blogged much the same thing:

As for the mining story, I’m a bit nonplussed. Frankly I don’t give a monkey’s whether Key owns shares in an Australian mining company, and I think TVNZ’s pretext that it’s a story because the Government is planning to mine national parks is a little flimsy.

If owning shares in a mining company could become an issue, it should already be an issue, since there is already extensive mining in this country. And we’ve known for ages that Key’s share portfolio includes mining companies. I remember him talking about it during the election campaign.

As for the second leg of the story – that it’s a bad look for a PM of a nuclear-free country to own shares in a company that mines uranium – I’m sorry, but I don’t get that. Uranium might be a precursor to the manufacture of plutonium, which is used in nuclear weapons.

But it’s also used in a vast array of medical and scientific procedures. I’ve always thought it funny that people claim we’re “nuclear free” when there’s enough plutonium in our hospitals and universities to make your hair fall out.

This is about TVNZ promoting itself. Because the so called “revelation” was made on a TVNZ show, that means they feel they have to keep it alive as a news story.

The NZ Herald looks at the TVNZ decision to bump John Key for Robin Brooke:

It is reassuring, in its way, that the Prime Minister could not commandeer the airwaves on state television on Tuesday to tell the nation about income tax cuts and a rise in GST. It speaks of TVNZ independence and editorial freedoms that should be valued, however questionable the actual judgment of those exercising them.

The Herald also looks at the drug law reform paper:

Mr Power’s problem with the Law Commission recommendations seems to stem from from the Prime Minister’s declared war on methamphetamine and drugs. Any relaxation would be perceived as contrary to that. It could also be argued, as John Key did yesterday, that softening the law on the possession of drugs for personal use would send the wrong message to youngsters. …

Given such political reality, there was a strong whiff of naivety in the commission’s suggestions. There was also, however, a solid strain of reason and rationality.

The commission, for example, is right to note that “while the harms and costs associated with alcohol are understated and misunderstood, those associated with illegal drugs are often generalised and overblown”. There is also much to say that drug policy should focus on dealing with problematic drug-users, rather than the many people whose drug use poses no serious threat to their own well-being or others.

I agree. that the focus should be on those drug use creates problems, rather than those who do not.

The Dominion Post talks about PHOs:

On paper, the last government’s decision to establish primary health organisations had a lot going for it. Bringing together doctors, nurses, midwives and other health professionals under one roof was a way to improve access to services and reduce overall health costs by reducing the need for hospital admissions.

In practice, as invariably happens when a government opens its cheque book, the results have been mixed.

A study by Capital and Coast District Health Board last year showed avoidable hospital admissions in the district have increased since 2003, but have fallen among people enrolled with PHOs. PHOs are also credited with increasing immunisation rates in some parts of the country and making visits to doctors more affordable for people in poor areas, although the latter is more likely to be a consequence of increased subsidies than the way the sector is organised.

However, some PHOs barely exist except on paper (their purpose is to channel money from district health boards to individual clinics) and their creation has contributed to a rise in administration costs.

Not exactly a stunning success.

The Press talks about Environment Canterbury:

For the second year in a row Environment Canterbury (ECan) is heading towards an overall rate increase well in excess of inflation.

Last year it approved a rise of 6 per cent, including a 10.6 per cent general rate rise, but if that decision prompted disquiet in the region, the questioning of ECan could well be even stronger this year. …

With the local body elections looming later this year, ECan ratepayers will be closely watching over coming months to see which councillors are prepared to identify areas where savings could be found, especially in the regional council’s bureaucracy.

We should have candidates sign pledges that they will not increase rates beyond inflation without voter approval.

The ODT looks at the merger of the Otago and Southland District Health Boards:

The way is cleared for the merger between the Southland and Otago District Health Boards with the Southland board’s 7 to 3 vote in favour.

Because Health Minister Tony Ryall is likely to back the proposal, the only remaining major issue is the speed of approval and whether the Southern Board will be in place early enough for this year’s local body elections in October. …

I suspect it will be.

Incredible. The bidding for the John Key flag doodle has reached $19,238. Now I suspect the bidding is more for the morning tea with John (and Pippa) than the artwork itself – I certainly hope so!

As at 6 am:

• Top Bid $19,238
• 188 bids
• Approx 250 questions and answers – many of these are hilarious. Well done to the TVNZ staffer answering them.
• 73,622 page views

The Cure Kids charity will be pleased, especially with five days left in the auction.

The Herald reports:

Television NZ bumped Prime Minister John Key from its prime-time current affairs show so it could feature former All Black Robin Brooke saying sorry for groping a teenage girl. …

John Key’s office has refused to comment on the Close Up show’s decision not to talk to the PM about his state of the nation speech.

Instead, most of Tuesday’s show was devoted to host Mark Sainsbury interviewing Brooke about his explanation for the New Year groping incident in Fiji, a story that has featured in newspapers.

Close Up ignored the changes the PM foreshadowed to the tax system.

Mr Key’s chief press secretary, Kevin Taylor, said: “It is TVNZ’s editorial decision for the programme and we will not be saying any more about it.”

But it is understood the Prime Minister was surprised by the decision to ditch a scheduled interview with him just two and a half hours before it was due to go out live.

Such “bumping” is common in television entertainment shows when they run out of time or there are better offers.

From a ratings viewpoint, sadly I guess more people would tune in to Robin Brooke. But having already pencilled in the PM, I am surprised they didn’t find a way to include both. It is meant to be a news and current affiars show after all.

TV One News kept referring to the National Standards as being about whether a kid is beow or above the national average.

This is totally wrong. The standards are about saying this is the level we think an x year old should be able to read and write to this level.

In an ideal world 100% of kids will be meeting the national standards. This is very different to comparing people to an average, where by default around half the people will be below average.

It is not about comparing one kid to another. It is about saying whether kids are on track to leaving primary school able to read, write and do maths.

Throng blog:

Ok, so I’m not 100% sure on the math here (need to check up the tax rules) but both bulletins can’t be right here in their calculations.  Using IRD’s website, currently for a minimum wage earner, they pay $2.27 in total for their tax and ACC levies.  I’m trying to double check these figures quoted, but I think 3 News is wrong – it can’t be right thatminimum wage earners are taxed 40%!

ONE News: $10 – $2.10 in tax – $0.20 in ACC levies = $7.70 in the hand
3 News: $10 – $3.00 New ACC levies in April – $1.00 PAYE tax = $6.00 in the hand

Note: Trevor Mallard also said about $6 in his 3 News interview.

Trevor Mallard is of course wrong, and if TV3 relied on him, shame on them.

One News had is absolutely correct. The marginal tax rate for a FT worker on the minimum wage is 21% and the ACC levy for next year will be 2%, so a $10 gross increase will be a $7.70 net increase.

Fun summer reading can be decisions of the Broadcasting Standards Authority. Some recent decisions:

1. They reject four complaints against TV3 for Ali Ikram’s satirical piece of Maori TV getting the Rugby World Cup rights. It wasn’t that funny a piece of satire, but no way should it be illegal!
2. They also turn down two complaints against TVNZ and Paul Henry over his comments re the Maori flag.
3. ACT member Peter Taskhoff is sucessful against TVNZ for a story at an arms show than unfairly portrayed him in a negative light.
4. Kerry Bolton wins against Radio NZ for Chris Laidlaw’s programme which made holocaust denying accusations against him withotu verifying them.
5. Henk van Helmond loses against TV3 for door stopping him at is home in relation to threats about Sue Bradford.
6. A complaint against TV3 for coverage of the Boobs on Bikes parade was not upheld.
7. A complaint fron a Patty Towl against Solid Gold FM for the joke that Ellen DeGeneres is the second most powerful lesbian on the planet, and Chris Carter being the first – was not upheld.

The Herald reports:

Broadcasting Minister Jonathan Coleman introduced a bill yesterday to repeal the charter, which was created by Labour in 2002 to require TVNZ to broadcast a wide range of programmes for all groups in New Zealand.

Under the charter TVNZ was required to have a “significant Maori voice” and broadcast programmes for people and groups not generally catered for by other broadcasters.

Under Mr Coleman’s bill, it will be told simply to screen programmes relevant to and enjoyed by New Zealanders, include some local content and “reflect Maori perspectives”.

And the charter funding has gone to NZ on Air to be contestable.

This is a huge improvement, and was election policy. One of the things you learn about Government is agencies and institutions work well with a clear focus.

The Reserve Bank works well with one task – keep inflation down. TVNZ works better with one task – be a financially successful broadcaster. We had five years of TVNZ trying to be both commercial and public service and it was a failure. And that is not my opinion but that of a passionate advocate of public broadcasting – former CEO Ian Fraser.

The charter was criticised by some for giving TVNZ an impossible task in meeting dual obligations of a strong commercial performance as well as public broadcasting requirements. The broadcaster has previously been criticised for its use of charter money when it revealed it had used some of it for Dancing with the Stars – a high-rating programme.

Exactly.

Getting rid of the charter is a good thing. There is still the same amount of money for “public good” broadcasting” but it rests with NZ on Air, rather than TVNZ.

Personally I would go radical and sell off TV2, and merge TV One, TVNZ6, TVNZ7, Radio NZ, NZ on Air and maybe Maori TV into one BBC style public service broadcaster. Their combined budgets would get you pretty close to what you need.

Damien Christie from TVNZ7 models the new official t-shirt for Television New Zealand

When I first saw the promo ad involving Bill English for a series of programmes on TVNZ7, I thought it was actually a promo ad for Bill himself

So I am not surprised Labour are upset:

Labour is crying foul over a TVNZ promotional advertisement in which Finance Minister Bill English appears as the poster boy for a series of programmes on the economy. …

The aim is to draw attention to a series of economy-focused programmes on Freeview Channel TVNZ 7 next month.

Labour’s finance spokesman David Cunliffe has questioned whether it is appropriate for the state broadcaster to use one of its shareholding ministers in what amounted to a party political broadcast. It also raised questions of editorial balance.

“It is not OK to give the Minister of Finance 135 minutes of free air time, completely coiffed and scripted, with no balancing comment.”

Even though they are advertisements, I can see Labour’s point. I doubt Nats would have enjoyed a couple of hours of ads with Michael Cullen.

He also queried whether it was appropriate for Mr English to have agreed to do the promo, given the need for ministers to adhere to strict conflict-of-interest rules. …

A spokesman for Mr English said he was invited to do the promo. He was not paid and had not scripted it himself, but had seen it and some minor adjustments were made for accuracy.

“We exerted no influence over the process.”

Oh it is silly to suggest Bill has done anything wrong. Hell what politician would turn down 135 minutes of free TV time. It would be like turning dowm Christmas.

A TVNZ spokeswoman, Andi Brotherston, said it was not considering pulling the advertisement, which is due to run until November 21.

She said the creative unit at TVNZ chose Mr English partly because of the pun on his name in the series’ title “Plain English”.

The promo went through internal approval channels, which “are set up to consider all aspects of programmes”.

When asked if it conflicted with TVNZ’s own editorial protocol, she said there was a clear delineation between news and promotions at TVNZ and the promotion had “nothing to do with news and current affairs”.

“We are not within an election time frame, so there isn’t a requirement on us to give equal time to specific parties.

“The other thing is while other parties might think it’s an ad for Bill English, if we consider it from the viewers’ point of view, they see it as the Finance Minister.

“The series is about demystifying the economy. Viewers might see it differently and they’re the people we have in mind.

“Those people may not care about the other politicians and the time they have on television.”

Yes the average person won’t care. Having said that, I do have some sympathy for Labour’s concerns. At the minimum you wouldn’t want this to become a habit.

The Herald reports:

Fresh from controversy over its coverage of psychics in the Aisling Symes case, TVNZ is deciding whether to buy another series of Sensing Murder – the commercially successful show that has been caught in a company receivership. …

TVNZ says it will not make a decision on another series until it has shown the one that it has “in the can” sometime next year.

I really hope they do not. The program feeds on human misery and tragedy, and promotes fakes who make money out of tragedy and gullibility. It has no redeeming quality.