Hard News: The Advocate
131 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I like what Campbell is doing with the school lunches stuff because it's a REAL issue that needs sorting.
But having seen first hand the one sided hatchet job he did on our school (twice) over school violence/bullying and the restorative process last year, which was totally unfair, I'll take many of his stories with a table spoon of salt.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
trying to blame the rest of us for the problems of the poor
That statement deserved some analysis.
If you are not poor it means you have more stuff than the "poor" which, in a far and equitable society, you actually have some of their stuff.
Money can't buy happiness but it can buy food and shelter which is necessary to avoiding misery. -
Lilith __, in reply to
Disgruntled of Oratia, age 38
Yoofs always moaning about something. ;-)
-
Do "On Demand" views ever get figured into ratings at all? I was watching X at the time so I'll watch Y later online? I guess it is problematic for current affairs where you may choose to watch a segment online(edit) but not the whole show.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Time-shifted ratings seem to exist, at least. Throng publishes them sporadically.
-
Bevan Shortridge, in reply to
Ah. Time-shifted. Thanks for that.
-
Damian Christie, in reply to
So how many are watching all the other channnels combined? Another 20%?
No, it's not actually anywhere near that much. The drop-off to the other channels is such that (in the example I used), 0.9% watch Prime, 3.8% watch ALL Sky channels combined, and 1.2% watch something else. So it's another 5.9%, not 20%...
200000. Is that actually enough to make the advertising worthwhile?
Well that all depends how much you're paying for the spot, doesn't it, which is the whole point of ratings in the first place.
-
Damian Christie, in reply to
That statement deserved some analysis.
It doesn’t, really. I don’t agree with it, or the gist of it, but only put it forward to illustrate that just this week, while RB is applauding the great work of CL, someone else was saying to me exactly the opposite. And the key to [edit: successful, commercial] TV is often pleasing the greatest number of people most of the time – if those who are ‘comfortable’ are made to feel uncomfortable, they can either start to examine why they feel that and make major changes to their worldview, address the inequality etc etc – or they can flick the channel.
-
Damian Christie, in reply to
I was watching X at the time so I’ll watch Y later online?
It gets measured somewhere yeah, but not part of the ratings I'm quoting no. And you'd have to think it would either balance out in the end (person watches X and tapes Y, other person does the opposite) or if anything, it would favour the current affairs shows because of their immediacy? Maybe not, but all in all I don't think it's causing a massive distortion against any particular show.
-
Stephen Judd, in reply to
One explanation I heard suggests as we grow older, the less susceptible we are to the blandishments and deceits of advertising.
Here's a thought. The impact of advertising is both weak and cumulative. By the time you have reached middle age, your brand preferences have been set by long repeated exposure and require an even greater exposure to reset and redirect . They can be changed by an extended campaign, but it's not worth it compared to snagging another young person as a lifetime consumer. The only advertising worth targeting at older people is for products and services that only they need or can use.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
The impact of advertising is both weak and cumulative. By the time you have reached middle age, your brand preferences have been set by long repeated exposure and require an even greater exposure to reset and redirect .
I think it varies from product to product. Smokers, for instance, are notorious for not changing brands, no matter how old they are. When we bought a flat-screen, we spent ages shopping round and comparing specs and prices and what you could plug a USB stick into, but I can't see it right now, so I couldn't tell you what brand it is.
OTOH, there are things like cars, where you accumulate knowledge over a period of time that, say, Toyotas and Volkswagons are reliable whereas Subarus are badly-engineered pieces of shit (hypothetically, of course). That's useful knowledge, but if, say, all those companies get sold and practices change, it becomes a less than useful prejudice.
I'm not, to be clear, saying all "old people" are anything, I'm just arguing against the idea that they're all canny and disillusioned through experience. I've seen too many people believe they've won a lottery they didn't enter because that information was presented in an email.
-
How does MYSKY viewing get included in the ratings? (If at all???)
I would record through MYSKY about 5 hours of sport every day. Some days a bit less, some days it'd be closer to 24 hours (like during the weekends), and then watch it back either fast forwarding through ad breaks, or scrums, lineouts, penalty shots at goal ..., with football games I generally jump to the last ten or so minutes.
All because I don't have time to watch all of it. But I would watch some of most of it.
So IF there are people with peoplemeters similar to me is there any way that what they are watching can be noted accurately?
-
Geoff Lealand, in reply to
Nielsen did add 50 households with PVRs to the Peoplemeter Panel earlier this year (prior to that there was no way of reporting tine-shifting through MySky etc) but I don't know what impact it has made,
-
Sky is in over 50% of NZ households now (or so they said a year or so back), and I'd take a guess that about half of them have MySky so I'd seriously question their ratings if they don't have a fair spread and a way to accurately measure what they're watching which is probably close to impossible at the moment. When I'm fast forwarding through 30 second ads at x30 the advertiser isn't getting much bang for their bucks. :)
-
Excellent interview with John Campbell on Media3 this morning, Russell. If only more of our news commentators were that quick-witted and articulate,
-
Full version of the John Campbell interview (22 mins).
-
Beautiful example of the human truth in a 'soft' story - Kiwi who helped create Big Bird, and a love story spanning 50 years.
-
Haven't had time to read all the posts so my comment may have been covered. One thing that John Campbell does that I thoroughly approve of is the credit he gives on stories to the reporters and the back office staff - camera people, editors, producers et al. I enjoyed the interview and am an unabashed fan of the programme - warts and all.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
One thing that John Campbell does that I thoroughly approve of is the credit he gives on stories to the reporters and the back office staff – camera people, editors, producers et al.
I'm a big fan of that. In particular, when you make TV, you learn how much art and craft your video editor brings to your report. They are crucial people. So I had a bit of a fan moment this week when I met the famous Toby Longbottom in his edit-suite environment.
-
john Drinnan, in reply to
Good points Graeme - Campbell Live has been doing some good things, Saluted ths show in nzherald this week but has still been susceptible to crap like everybody else - choco-ade coverage a case in point. There's no doubt that Close Up has been dysfunctional for some time - but it has seemed more rooted in a wider (dare I say it) " mainstream" audience that does not assume one of looking at things n a certain way - more New Lynn than Grey Lynn.
-
Good discussion. I don't know anything about all these peoplemeters and demographics and that, so I'll just say this:
Like many New Zealanders I have to deal with the jokes from friends overseas (well, they're mostly jokes) about living in the past, "turn your watch back 30 years", etc. And of course I either joke back, or if I'm in the mood, I rant about how outdated and unfair that view is. You know how it goes - mentioning the Conchords is obligatory at some point.
And then, astride my high horse (or moa), I turn to our national broadcaster (you know, the one with those flag-waving, heart-warming promos) and discover ...
Are You Being Served?
and a little piece of New Zealand dies. Sob.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
That was a damn fine interview Russell, some beautiful nuggets in there, resonant stuff.
-
Sacha, in reply to
choco-ade coverage
Yes. Like Marmageddon, everyone seemed to get suckered by that one.
-
john Drinnan, in reply to
You're absolutely right Damian - CL has done some good things lately but there's a tendency to get carried away. Sometimes its difficult to work out which JC correspondents here are talking about, In general though TV3's approach to current affairs seems to be more coherent than TVNZ's right now.
-
Islander, in reply to
Glory! Barker is brillant!
Post your response…
This topic is closed.