Hard News: About Campbell Live
565 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 23 Newer→ Last
-
TV3 do have a new nightly soap to fit in their schedule..
-
Mediawatch's Colin Peacock sets out the context.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
TV3 do have a new nightly soap to fit in their schedule..
I think they're looking at that as a lead-in the the news. Losing Home & Away to TVNZ had a significant impact on 3 News.
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
So why do they quote those poor stats all the time - unless there is another agenda?. I remember watching those lovely 10 year anniversary programmes and thinking that no one would be watching this with the cricket on
-
The easiest way to increase viewship is to watch it on demand over the internet. You don't even have to watch it just let it run in the background, even turn the sound off.
The good thing about it is that every download can be counted whereas every live watcher isn't so who even knows if their live stats are anywhere near right. (And live watchers have programs running as background noise rather than actually watching it anyway.)
~~~
Just out of interest, didn't mediaworks get bailed out by the govt for three years? Is that three years almost up? Do mediaworks need more govt bailouts? And are mediaworks giving payback in something other than money? -
Mediaworks would be very short sighted to cancel Campbell Live. While it may be expensive to run and not entirely profitable, it is bad business to make decisions in isolation from the wider context. Does anyone think McDonalds makes profits selling salads and wraps? I very much doubt they do but they are aware that in order to maintain their market share in profitable junk they have to offer a broad range of options in order to remain relevant to as many potential customers as possible.
Personally I watch TVNZ news at 6 but I reach for the remote as soon as the weather report is winding down, often to watch Campbell live (unless there has been much sport on in which case the Crowd Goes Wild gets a run).
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
I thought only live watching got counted in the stats they are quoting? Not delayed or on demand.
-
Lucy Telfar Barnard, in reply to
That's what I thought too - in part because the advertising delivery is different on demand.
-
bob daktari, in reply to
Serious question: who here regularly watches Campbell Live? And by that, I mean the full episode, live to air.
Very rarely since Ali Ikram joined the team I lost any interest in the show, watch the stories I want to or am down to via twitter online. Prior to him joining every night I was home in time
It is the only show on broadcast TV the 14 year old will ask to watch - and pretty much the only show on broadcast TV we do turn the telly on for
-
Keir Leslie, in reply to
I actually don't think it's at all strange for us to expect a major corporation to act in a social responsible manner. There's no obligation on consumer (or citizens) to watch a rapacious capitalist entity ripping apart civil society and go "oh well that's just maximising shareholder value what can you do". We're quite entitled to say: this is a crappy move.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
The only thing that matters to TV3 is their ratings. The number of people watching (according to Neilsen) determines the amount they can charge for advertising.
I totally understand what you are saying Dylan. TV3 believes that the only way to make money is to sell 15 second advertising slots in their broadcasts and the value of those slots is determined by viewer numbers as measured by Neilson ratings.
I will repeat myself - that is dinosaur thinking. Classic not-to-bright managers failing to understand that media has changed. Like cutting costs and improving efficiencies in your floppy disc manufacturing plant.
There is value in all the other things CL generates, if Mediaworks employed some managers with imagination and talent they would realise that and exploit it. If anything CL has actually adapted to the way news is changing better than most, interacting in real terms with it's audience, engaging them in the media they choose to inhabit rather than demanding they turn on a TV at a specific time. Sadly the management haven't had the skill to turn that into dollars. A really good board of directors would fire said management but instead we have Christie and co.
TV3 is doing what is in the textbooks that were written 20 years ago. Dinosaur thinking. But even in those textbooks there was an understanding of brand value and CL gives TV3 a brand value. I'm pretty sure Christie and co will toss it down the toilet and when revenue keeps on sliding down then they'll move on to new "opportunities".
Of course at its current value it would be relatively cheap to buy Mediaworks and turn TV3 into a state broadcaster, but maybe we should wait 'till it is really in the shit.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Arch thinking...
Does anyone think McDonalds makes profits selling salads and wraps? I very much doubt they do but they are aware that in order to maintain their market share in profitable junk they have to offer a broad range of options in order to remain relevant to as many potential customers as possible.
I'll have an order of that analogy - I'm hoping Weldon and Christie will be thinking of an Upsizing of this offering and not bowdlerising it off the menu...
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
After being part of a high school that got shat on by shonky ‘journalism’ by Campbell Live I refused to watch another episode.
Fair enough -- and I don't think anyone (least of all our host) is claiming Campbell Live and its host is a flawless jewel in the media crown that has never gotten anything wrong. The odds of that happening over a decade of working journalism are roughly zero.
But even though it's not a terribly high bar to clear, Campbell Live is more substantive than Seven Sharp by orders of magnitude, and for all its flaws I'd argue public discourse would be diminished if Three was penny wise, pound foolish enough to cancel it. Or effectively neuter it with a thousand budget cuts.
-
JacksonP, in reply to
I thought only live watching got counted in the stats they are quoting? Not delayed or on demand.
There seems to be much confusion over this, and surely it is important. The way people are consuming television in general, and news in particular, has to be part of the dialogue, even for advertisers. Relying on a traditional ratings approach is destined to become part of history, one way or another.
On my own viewing habits, I will often be drawn into watching by social media buzz, which CL does better than just about any other programme. He's also been incredibly adept at getting money out of viewers for genuine causes that change people's lives. I really hope we don't lose this aspect.
Then being able to selectively watch on-line is also important. With three under 14s in the house, this is their prime-time viewing, and as much as I'd like them to be watching Campbell Live...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Of course at its current value it would be relatively cheap to buy Mediaworks and turn TV3 into a state broadcaster, but maybe we should wait ’till it is really in the shit.
It would make more sense to sell TVNZ and use the money to set up a new public television service connected to Radio New Zealand.
-
Keir Leslie, in reply to
Wouldn't it be almost certainly more cost-effective to turn TVNZ into a proper public service broadcaster? We turned it into a commercial one, no reason you couldn't do the reverse, surely?
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Without Campbell, who would know about the suffering and the struggles of people in post-eqnz Christchurch?
How can we quantify what it did for Chch people to be told “We haven’t forgotten you”?That’s probably CL’s great example of putting editorial imperatives ahead of market sense. And good on them for that.
I thought it was both. "What are the legitimate stories of genuine broad public inerest the other bastards aren't telling, or telling well and in-depth?" Not only sounds like a good editorial imperative, but identifying a gap in the market you can fill.
And let's be honest: Am I the only one around here who can find Campbell's Tigger-on-speed persona occasionally cloying? But, hell.you can't say he's not a singularly distinctive brand. :)
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I thought only live watching got counted in the stats they are quoting? Not delayed or on demand.
Nielsen measures live viewing (with a sample of 600 Peoplemeter households) and also time-shifted viewing, via a smaller panel.
On-demand viewing over the internet is measured separately by the broadcasters and third-party companies. But it's still typically a fraction of the broadcast audience.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I thought it was both. “What are the legitimate stories of genuine broad public inerest the other bastards aren’t telling, or telling well and in-depth?” Not only sounds like a good editorial imperative, but identifying a gap in the market you can fill.
The rest of the country had lost interest in Christchurch's problems. Campbell used to actually get complaints about doing so much on Christchurch.
-
Martin Connelly, in reply to
In answer to your top question; I used to, but no longer do. CL used to be good but its become self-indulgent frothy crap. It needs a good review. Now I watch the intro - on learning that I will have to put up with either CL doing a show about itself (as in 'should we keep our beards' or 'how long does it take Lochie to get to work') or that I would have to endure the inane Ali Akram, I turn to the concert programme.
-
Campbell Live has changed in the last 6-12 months though, loosening up on the ties, less hard hitting political interviews, Ali Ikram recruited, and the addition of "Lachlan vs Tristram go on a zany caper at the pie shop" type of material.
So we don't watch it as much, but it gets recorded whenever there's a big political story and associated stoush going down, and I still think that is when it is at its strongest.
-
Alfie, in reply to
Serious question: who here regularly watches Campbell Live? And by that, I mean the full episode, live to air.
Hands up... we do... via MySky, every weeknight. Not in real time and we sometimes fast forward through some of the fluffier stories, but nowadays it's the only real nightly current affairs show in the country. CL is not afraid to call ministers to account along with shonky corporates, insurance companies, etc. Since TVNZ gave up on serious current affairs, CL is the only thorn in the side for those who'd prefer a more subdued media. Lose CL and it's the Henry/Hoskings "All hail the great leader!" show.
This may be a conversation for a diffferent time, but Neilson ratings are based on the viewing habits of 450 households. While statisticians might argue that's a valid and representitive sample, I have my own opinion about that. My Mum & Dad had a peoplemeter when they lived in the Marlborough Sounds, where they could only receive TVNZ. That skewed the viewing figures by around 0.25% before they even turned on the tele. Neilson argue that they rotate those 450 people every 18 months or so, but that never happened in my parents' case. They were influencing the viewing figures for at least 8 years -- in TVNZ's favour. I wonder how many other peoplemeters were sited in remote areas? Since then, I've distrusted Neilson ratings.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
Wouldn’t it be almost certainly more cost-effective to turn TVNZ into a proper public service broadcaster?
Certainly. But then you get Hosking not Campbell
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Campbell used to actually get complaints about doing so much on Christchurch.
Sure, but in the history of journalism it’s funny how many of the great stories outlets dine out on for years – if not decades – were initially greeting with “Oh, by Perry White’s salty chocolate balls, enough already , move on!”
-
I suspect that at this rate you'd have the choice between buying Hosking or Henry!
Post your response…
This topic is closed.