Posts Tagged ‘TV3’

1. Radio Stands Tall When Canterbury Earthquake Hits

   Published on Wednesday, September 8th, 2010
   While TVNZ proudly proclaimed that 2 million Kiwis tuned in to its coverage of the Canterbury earthquake, the run-away winner story-teller in the first hours of the disaster was radio.

   By 7am on Saturday morning National Radio and Newstalk ZB were bringing us eye witness descriptions from people – professionals and the public – who painted images of the devastation for us with their verbal accounts.

   On ZB anchor man Larry Williams was superb – seamlessly ensuring listeners understood the big picture, bringing us the personal tragedies while sending out a steady stream of civil emergency messages to those that needed vital information.

   It was compelling, and radio at its very best.

   Compare that to TV1 and TV3 at 7am. What earthquake! We were being served up reruns of ‘entertainment’ programmes. Not even an on screen caption mentioning our largest ever recorded earthquake had occurred.

   Naturally BBC and CNN were telling the world about it. What an indictment of our own television news services that we had to go overseas to find out what was happening in our own country.

   Some time after 8am TV1 finally woke from its slumber and started to bring us excellent coverage, and we were able to ‘see’ what ZB had been describing brilliantly for an hour. TV3 had roused itself to putting up an onscreen caption under its entertainment programmes telling us it would bring us news of the earthquake from 11am. ‘News’ – by then it was ‘history’.

   Social media also found the going tough as a communication medium through a combination of overloading, civil defence requesting people to restrict cell phone use to reserve capacity for emergency services, and the battery back up to power cell sites running low.

   The other standout was Mayor Bob Parker. It was a case of cometh the hour, cometh the man. Authoritative and calm, he exuded all that you want from the person in control when disaster strikes.

2. There was no Sunrise today at my place

   Published on Tuesday, April 13th, 2010
   The end of Sunrise highlights the challenges media will always face when they enter an established market and aim to grab a slice of the national media pie.

   Even in its category of breakfast TV it was always going to be David up against Goliath (TV1’s Breakfast).  When you add in the other competitors for morning audiences, multiple options from online, print and radio, Sunrise faced a major scrap winning a commercial share.

   Full credit to TV3, as it gave it more than a fighting chance. The quality of the product was first class, and it was delivered by a great team.

   Regrettably for Sunrise we live in commercially difficult times, and things have to pay their way.  For Sunrise, ultimately the numbers did not stack up.
    
   I had always thought it was a safe bet that it would remain an essential in the TV3 line-up.  How wrong I was and, to paraphrase Paul Henry – it’s sad to see it go. 

   Despite our scale, New Zealand offers excellent, possibly world class, media options and there’s simply not enough time to take in everything, no matter how good it is. 

   While there will always be the loyalists who are the backbone of media ratings charts, increasingly people are becoming promiscuous – looking, listening and reading around. In our intensely busy lives we are not inclined to spend our precious time on things we don’t have a high level of interest in, and this is reflected in modern media habits.  For example, how many families sit down and watch shows together.  More likely different people watch different items at different times

   Breakfast TV as a medium, only launched in the UK in 1983, is likely to continue to face major problems in attracting and holding an audience at potentially the most time critical part of most people’s day.  

   So what does Sunrise’s demise mean for the public relations sector, working to tell its clients’ stories via television? The options have just shrunk by half for stories that are great for morning television, and lots of them are. The visual element, a bit of entertainment, some ‘nice to know’ information and perhaps add in a worthwhile cause and we’re onto a winner.

   It’s a shame that now the (admittedly small) viewing public of Sunrise may not get to hear about it.

3. What a wonderful bizarre world we live in!

   Published on Wednesday, March 10th, 2010
   There are occasions when you can only but shake your head in disbelief at the antics played out in our media.

   Take for example the reaction by the majority of the media to the suggestion by ACT MP David Garrett that there might be some value in considering paying ‘bad parents’ $5000 if they agreed to be sterilised.

   The media went berserk, making it the leading news item of the day. Politicians and every sort of self appointed social or liberal commentator climbed into the debate. Someone even managed to manufacture a link with Hitler.

   You could be forgiven for believing that the suggestion was on the verge of becoming law rather than the musings on a blog by a MP who was unknown to the majority of us.

   The most poignant comment that I saw was that from the Herald’s Fran O’Sullivan, who quietly pointed out that many middle class parents pay for their own sterilisation once they have completed their families.

   Shame on you Fran for effectively killing off the debate when your colleagues were just getting started! And shame on the middle class for following the teachings of Hitler!

   Having recovered our breath we then moved on to the Destiny Church’s ‘cash cult’ expose. Not to worry that we have heard it all before, including stories about the extravagant living style of its leader Bishop Tamaki.

   It all started because part of the Brisbane congregation did what every right minded person would do if they disagreed with the ‘cult’s’ requirements around tithing and gifting – they walked out.

   The only nugget I gathered from the coverage was that TV3’s John Campbell has now adopted the practice of gate crashing other presenter’s interviews (Willie Jackson’s) to get a story if anyone dares to decline his demand that they appear on his show.

   Can we now look forward to the day when Willie gate crashes John’s programme?

   To mimic the words taken to the world by the late Paul Fuemana, ‘how bizarre, how bizarre’.

4. Bad news in thinner media ranks

   Published on Friday, May 8th, 2009
   Another week and another group of journalists made redundant.  I would caution against any business leader greeting this news with a shrug of resignation. These redundancies are not something to shrug about – truly.

   More redundancies create more pressure on those remaining, and inevitably copy quota will be filled with wire stories from overseas.  What’s so bad about that, I hear you ask, there are some high quality reporters in distant part.

   Aside from the fact journalists in overseas media are losing their positions even more quickly than those in New Zealand, Two recent stories highlight the risks of imported stories.

   Case 1:  The regulatory body in the UK recently took a precautionary position on topical oral pain relief gels. No one had died, and in fact no one who’d followed the instructions on the packaging had shown signs of illness.

   This was interpreted by the Sydney Morning Herald as “Fear ulcer drug could be fatal for children”.  Within hours the Stuff website, a close relative of the SMH, was carrying the same story.

   No checking to see whether the products in New Zealand were the same or different as those in the UK. It was easier and cheaper to run the overseas version. Not one media outlet in NZ commented on the fact that the Irish regulatory authority took the position: bugger off, this product is safe.

   It appears the media are no longer prepared to make simple checks on the status of a local products. There are exceptions, and in this case, TV3 did its homework well.

   Imported stories do not recognise that products (even of the same name) and regulatory requirements are not the same the world over.

   Case 2:  Just this week, again it was the UK media who reported on some so-called research by the Children’s Food Campaign, which among other things led to headlines like “baby food worse than junk food”.

   This story was picked up and commented on here, again without anyone bothering to check whether the products highlighted are sold in New Zealand. As for the fat content compared to a hamburger; technically this is correct but no one is going to give the child a box of the product at one sitting, which is what would be required to make the headline true.  No one goes around saying breast milk has more fat than a hamburger, because it is totally irrelevant.

   However as the ranks of journalists thin, I fear we will become even greater hostages to imported sensationalism, and there is a good chance that someone will spin a story about the level of fat in breast milk.

   For those thinking that dealing with fewer journalists might be easier, I suggest a re-think.