Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: About Campbell Live

579 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 24 Newer→ Last

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    It’s true Steve:

    Or to quote Homer Simpson, "It's funny because it's true."

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22834 posts Report Reply

  • Jason Kemp,

    The 20 highest rating funded television programmes on air last week, 2 – 8 April 2015

    From that list Country Calendar is the real star coming in number 1 and number 11 as a repeat beats. a lot of other programmes I haven't seen either.

    Perhaps the key word there is *funded* TV 3 news & CL are probably unfunded.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 368 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Cosgrove,

    Most Kiwis think NZ is the greatest country in the world.
    #1 in everything.
    I don't think those people like to believe that kids go to school hungry or that some people in Ch'ch still live in garages or that there are kids on our streets being destroyed by legal highs.
    A lot of people are uncomfortable with these home truths so they watch something else.
    Soon they won't have worry anymore.

    Mangere Bridge • Since Feb 2015 • 3 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Nick Russell,

    They are a business, not a public service

    Yet we used to regulate broadcast licenses to reflect some basic public service expectations. Other nations still do. No reason we can't also turn away from this thread of the 'free-market' experiment. However I agree that's not the landscape right now. If Weldon's job is just to get MediaWorks ready for sale and he's relying on Christie for advice, I'm not expecting much.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19719 posts Report Reply

  • Alfie, in reply to Steve Barnes,

    Campbell doesn't get a mention in the "Top Twenty"
    Does anybody have any idea what sort of confidence factor would apply with those numbers?.

    Whoa there! Those "ratings" only apply to programmes which have received NZOnAir funding. In my experience, OneNews, 3News and both 7pm current affairs shows usually take out most of the top spots when you look at the top rating shows.

    Dunedin • Since May 2014 • 1436 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Bennett, in reply to Jason Kemp,

    "Perhaps the key word there is *funded* TV 3 news & CL are probably unfunded."

    As is Shortland Street.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 172 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Dylan Reeve,

    Oh, maybe that’s the cat stories?

    This is a programme that went worldwide viral with dogs driving cars.

    That was actually a really good example of the simple reality of working with comms people on shows like this.

    Consumer PR companies hit 7pm producers constantly with pitches – it's where a lot of the part-three stories you see originate. And Campbell Live went through a bad patch where it occasionally featured three PR-driven stories out of three, often touting the product without any real scrutiny.

    On the other hand, the driving dogs were an SPCA marketing stunt that worked for everyone concerned.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22834 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Michael Meyers,

    What I'm saying is some people disbelieve Dirty Politics, some people vote National and some people watch Seven Sharp. Very few of those people comment here but they clearly make up a good chunk of the population.

    and some people needed a better education but we wont hold that against them either. You may have tried to choose your words carefully but your insinuation was laid bare. I think a large chunk of our NZ population are ignorant also and they don't appear to be on PA either. Fancy that. Go figure.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Simon Bennett,

    “Perhaps the key word there is *funded* TV 3 news & CL are probably unfunded.”

    They are. As are One News and Seven Sharp.

    As is Shortland Street.

    Is Shortland Street the shining success of the contestable funding model? Nurtured early, delivered audiences and social goals and built the screen industry skill base, then stood on its own two feet. Or moved out to go flatting or something.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22834 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Lyall,

    I thought I’d have a quick look to see what stories are actually on the show.

    Wed 1st

    * The Easter Show rolls in to Auckland – fluff
    * Guilty sentence ‘right decision’ – crime w/twist
    * Quake companies accused of breaching human rights – beatup / semi-serious
    * School-in-a-Box helping Vanuatu kids – fluff

    Thur 2nd

    * Julio’s first day as a baker – fluff
    * Kiwi start-up company heading to Silicon Valley – Fluff / semi-serious
    * Mr B’s last day at school – fluff
    * Trade Me bunnies travel to new home – fluff

    Tuesday 7th

    * Woman shelters unwanted turtles – fluff
    * Young conservationists’ trashy kayak – fluff
    * NZ’s very own Ebola fighter – serious
    * Should retired MPs keep travel perks? – semi-serious

    Wednesday 8th

    * Beckenridge disappearance may be murder-suicide – crime w twist
    * Revealed: 2015’s Home of the Year – fluff
    * Ed Sheeran performs at Christchurch’s Redcliffs School – fluff
    * Changes to zero-hour contracts on the way – serious

    Thursday 9th

    * Turning the tide in Te Teko – fluff
    * A bright new smile for Megan – fluff
    * Brent Knight wanted by police – crime w/twist – semi serious
    * Former legal high addict – fluff

    So across five days I found

    * at least two pieces of fluff every night.
    * 3 “crime with a twist” stories
    * 3-4 other stories that you might count as serious.
    * The only stories I’d count as 100% serious were the Ebola Nurse and the Zero-Hour contracts story.

    Note: I didn’t watch more than a few seconds of any of them.

    Based off this page

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 60 posts Report Reply

  • Murray Hewitt,

    When Mike Hosking poo-pooed global warming on Seven Sharp

    Anyone point me to a video clip of this? Would love to add it to my collection of prominent CCD's (deniers)

    Wainui • Since Jan 2008 • 21 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    I'd assume your assessment is correct except... for a few stories, while the pieces themselves may be fluff, they're probably bringing attention to more serious broader issues. In this category I'd put "School-in-a-box helping Vanuatu kids", "Turning the tide in Te Teko" (the value of in-school swimming pools in helping children learn to swim), "A bright new smile for Megan" (a charity providing orthodontistry for children who can't afford it, part of an issue JC has drawn attention to previously), and possibly "former legal high addict". Current affairs lite, certainly, but still current affairs - as opposed to "Trademe Bunnies travel to new home", which is pure, unadulterated fluff(y bunnies).

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 585 posts Report Reply

  • Cecelia,

    Hmmm. I have just switched off tonight's show. Lost interest when the tourist driving item screened then saw that after the break there would be something about hens. (I found the Romanian woman's story worthy but sort of emotionally manipulative. Is that fair? I know that the poor woman has no other venue for her grief and CL might bring about a happy resolution for her, and yet ...)

    John Campbell is truly marvellous but this is a waste of his talents. Maybe more of us would watch it if he was allowed to do weightier stories. Yes I know the tourist driving item is important but it's not something I'd switch on for whereas Campbell interviewing someone would interest me.

    And the ads and promos are bloody annoying.

    Hibiscus Coast • Since Apr 2008 • 559 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    To be fair our politicians seem to on school holidays at the moment, it's probably hard to do political stories without politicians

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2622 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    I’d assume your assessment is correct except… for a few stories, while the pieces themselves may be fluff, they’re probably bringing attention to more serious broader issues.

    I think some of the serious ones are also mis-hits on occasion. eg. @Yamis mentioned the school thing (page 2 of comment thread), or more recently I felt they’d probably been set up by campaigners with this story on a topic that’s very emotionally charged and which could have been more objectively researched. I’m sure there are others. But for me it’s more the precedent with CL that’s important. They’re trying to do something that’s not just about giving interviewees a free ride, or feeding viewers whatever they might want to hear.

    John Campbell is truly marvellous but this is a waste of his talents.

    Yes it is.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Simon Lyall,

    In what reality is describing aid to a country hit by disaster = fluff?????

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4460 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve, in reply to Victoria Tupou,

    It’s ridiculous that in this day and age the only numbers that matter are the people who watched the programme live-to-air. So many people watch CL in so many different ways. Even if you watch on the TV3 website you still sit through ads – are they counted? The number of shares / tweets videos receive should be counted. It is all valuable to the advertisers.

    Basically live viewing is all anyone cares about because that's the number that matters to advertisers.

    A 30-second ad in week night primetime on TV3 likely costs $3,000 - 6,000 (I can't find a TV3 ratecard, so that's a guess) depending on the predicted ratings.

    On the other hand a 30-second ad in one of TV3's streaming video costs $120-160 per thousand views.

    A 30 minute show has 7-8 minutes of ads. Where as that same show on the website has, typically, one pre-roll ad and 1-2 ads per break.

    So that's the revenue model that TV3 is looking at.

    I can’t remember the last time I watched CL live-to-air. I watch it later on MySky, or OnDemand, or if I don’t have time to watch the whole show, I just watch the video segments that I’m interested in. In some cases, I have shared videos well after the on-air date. All videos still had advertisements.

    The live-to-air is the key. That's where it's typically assumed you actually watch the ads. While time-shifted viewings are calculated they are generally not appealing to advertisers (and thus broadcasters) as it's assumed that viewers may be skipping ads.

    Online streams are fine, but the revenue from ads on streaming content is minimal (as per detail above).

    I have never met nor ever heard of anyone who has a ratings box. Who has them? Where are they? When shows like CL depend on these numbers, the whole system just freaks me out. Sad face.

    Arguably that's a problem. There are about 600 households in the survey so probably 1800-2000 individuals. I believe it's a sound model statistically, but obviously it has weaknesses.

    I personally believe that broadcasters and ad agencies like that inaccuracy. I suspect more accurate measures may reveal that viewership is not exactly as it's assumed.

    Arguably the whole TV advertising industry is smoke an mirrors to some extent - it's incredibly hard to gauge engagement or viewership accurately. Everyone just sort of agrees to go along with it in terms of value of given demographics etc.

    But it's all we have at the moment.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 311 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Lyall,

    Bart Janssen says:

    In what reality is describing aid to a country hit by disaster = fluff?????

    Like I said I didn't look at all the stories but I went back and checked this one. The actual story is 2 minutes of John opening up a suitcase of stuff in the studio. He also tells the viewers they are great people for donating the money to buy it.

    Sorry, I'll stick with Fluff.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 60 posts Report Reply

  • Minnie Ball,

    The only thing I watch regularly on TV is Campbell Live. Most nights. I also watch it on On Demand. I don't watch the news...(I read that online). I don't understand the better ratings on Seven Sharp. It seems neither entertainment or news. Campbell Live always covers the important stories. Oh well..when we let our Telly become de-regulated .......this is what we get.

    CHCH • Since May 2014 • 7 posts Report Reply

  • Simon Lyall, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    I’d assume your assessment is correct except… for a few stories, while the pieces themselves may be fluff, they’re probably bringing attention to more serious broader issues.

    Agreed. It was a fairly quick check and how different people will rate a specific stories will vary but I think it safe to say the show isn’t thirty minutes of hard hitting journalism every night.

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 60 posts Report Reply

  • Mike Friend,

    The real worry has to do with the removal of dissent by stealth. A healthy society is one where critical discourse is celebrated as a given. New Zealand currently enjoys a climate of dirty politics, where the person is bagged for holding a contrary view to the right wing narrative. Where individuals may be arrested for no other reason than for holding alternate views to the hegemony of the state apparatus, or by being and acting in places contrary to the dominant opinion. The last society that I witnessed behaving in this manner was Thatchers Britain in the 80's. Her gunboat diplomacy saw the ruination of a public welfare state, unionism, nationalised public service infrastructure and a war with Argentina over scrub land on the other side of the world. The resultant gap between the rich and poor growing ever wider.

    nelson • Since Apr 2015 • 1 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    Captioning of Campbell Live would make it accessible to a lot more people. Seven Sharp is captioned so is the default watching for many deaf or hearing impaired people.

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3218 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to Michael Meyers,

    What I’m saying is some people disbelieve Dirty Politics, some people vote National and some people watch Seven Sharp

    Some people…Cosy way of putting it I must say…

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1890 posts Report Reply

  • Caleb D'Anvers,

    I've been away from NZ too long to judge the reliability of this, but is the information about Mark Weldon collected here at all accurate? Because, if so, and adding Barclay's and Hooton's comments to the mix, it's hard not to conclude that there's at least some level of party politics at play here.

    London SE16 • Since Mar 2008 • 482 posts Report Reply

  • Cecelia,

    Fran O'Sullivan is marvellous this morning. Looks at the political angle.

    Hibiscus Coast • Since Apr 2008 • 559 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 24 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.