Posts by Robbie Siataga
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
If screen NZ took over selecting and funding music vids re-classified as soundtracks to short films i dont think there'd be the need to change NzoA's mandate. They could still fund music vids in conjunction with the new recording artist scheme or album packages.
Brendan would be out of the picture but still in his job with considerably reduced power and not be constrained to support anything outside commerical radio hits.
Just carve off the video funding budget from NzoA and snaffle some from 'outward sound' earmarked for international promotion/marketing.
wins all round and how easy would that be ?
-
I like that idea
chur Sacha...and theres plenty more where that came from:)
Often times it seems to be a downhill battle once they lose the favour of the funding agencies...
...and at the other end, an established artist that has plateaued or is on the downhill slide can still put out the most atrocious shit year after year and still get funded.
It just saddens me that for the last 10 years NZ music across the board has come of age, but it won't be fully reflected in our visual record because only mainstream pop got the nod.
that will be NZoA's legacy for the 00's but it didn't have to be that way. This says more than i ever could...
-
Choice post at the top of the page Russell so to follow up, heres an idea i've had for a while but seeing as how you're contributing now so will i.
Heres the NZon Air video funding criteria.
http://www.kiwihits.co.nz/funding/details/video
Objective
To fund music videos for broadcast on music television shows and music television channels and in turn increase the number of local songs played on commercial radio.
Now essentially I'm a visual guy. I've art directed music vids, commercials, short films, tv doco segments so i want to see vids that complement songs and not just shitty radio friendly popsongs. There is an outlet on air for videos that dont fit the criteria but fall within the scope of the NZoA mandate, that being specialist shows and themed segments for electronica, hiphop, metal etc not just the top 40 songs that are getting catered for.
For the last 10 years our visual record of musical arts has only reflected that one narrow and disposable pop facet. I want a record going forward that reflects the wider range of genres we produce regardless of whether you'd hear them on commercial radio.
If the criteria for music funding is the popsong then the criteria for video funding should be the treatment and the reputation of the production company who sign on to deliver culturally reflective art.
A song submitted for video funding should not have to qualify for anything else apart from being broadcast by TV even if only as part of a specialist genre show. The submission should be accompanied by a treatment, maybe a show reel by the director and possibly a story board to which the production company is accountable to deliver. There's countless stories of getting a video grant and making a shitty handicam throw together any of us could have done for fuck all and pocket the change.
To take Rhian and Dawnraids Rocker Girl as an example. Which would you want to reflect our art and culture in this era and which is more likely to get repeated plays now and into the future and which has more potential to be screened and promoted overseas ?
We make wayy better vids for less than we do pop tunes. So the selection panel for funding videos should be visual people, not neccesarily film industry people either but it most certainly shouldn't be programmers or public servants with a narrow vision and no idea of what looks good or sounds good beyond the scope of commercial radio and the top 40 charts.
But if you're looking at Rhian's non-commercial work, I don't think NZOA is the agency to deliver support for that. It just ain't. And maybe that's okay
Then video selection should go to screen NZ with music videos being treated more as soundtracks to short films cos to be honest i'm not interested in climbing into the incestuous sack with the music makers again. I do want the chance to make quality vids though.
-
For fuck's sake, the Music Commission and the Music Managers Forum have put together a seminar programme in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin, culminating with the summit on the 29th; RIANZ, NZ On Air et al are sponsoring the summit. It looks really useful.
yeah but look at what their focus is. It'll be useful if you want to make massive radio hits and get them played.
Maybe homebrew should turn up and learn a few tricks eh ? Turn em into the next great cookie cut american hiphop clones. BTW their fundrasier made enough for a shit hot vid. Can't wait.
or lets look at Rhian Sheehan. i'd love to see his latest work performed live in welli next month. the album for which hasnt got a shit show of getting radio play but is so deserving of complementary music vid funding but wont because it doesnt meet the criteria.
Yeah i know what Simon said, so am i to take it that you two are joined at the mouth ? So what and who do you mean by gatekeepers ?
Look, Im not shitting on anyone who isnt doing stuff with goodwill and best intent at a discount so if they're not offended by my opinions it probably doesnt apply to them. Why are you so offended ?
To be specific, I'm only concerned with and speaking towards the music/video funding arm of NZ on Air. Does the minister know anything about how it's really run beyond what Brendan and the board surreptitiously report to him ?
Now about that elaborate victim fantasy...pfffft says my tattooed blue arse. Dismiss with that shit cos yeah i'm just some ignorant welfare dependent Samoan with an attitude aren't I ?
You're onto a real winner with that line Russ though i think you do your best writing when wound up. I love seeing that fire coming through and exposing the soft underbelly :)
-
No, that was poorly phrased.
No... it wasnt a slip of the keyboard, what you're saying is that cronyism is endemic to the arts funding sector and now you're trying to back pedal. You're saying it's just a matter of how much one is willing to turn a blind eye to it to keep ones snout in the trough. For fuck's sake grow a pair and own that shit !
Stay focused Russell, we're not talking about CNZ, we're talking about NZon Air and the other music bodies being held up for public scrutiny and accountability purely on value for money as they expect their artist's value to be judged purely in financial terms.
For all that you say i've got an axe to grind, you're not saying i'm lying about how it really is behind the scene or that IMNZ and the music commish have been successful in the aid they provide to select groups cos the stats say they're failing.
You're not even saying you think Brendan should stay or that he's worth keeping. In financial terms and for the last 30 years he's been gatekeeping arts funding, is he really still worth the salary, does he still provide value for money ?
It seems you're happy to dance round the fire and that's cool. Next time you're suckin back the free piss at a taxpayer funded soiree or nobbing it with the industry fatcats at one of them trendy auckland eateries, have one for me and all the other poor saps whose money you're pissing up and that is supposed to work for the benefit of promoting NZ art and culture.
I'd love to get the attendance stats for these particular soirees.
and do an exit poll on attendees to see if the speakers were of significant value. Id say the answer would be yes because it costs nothing to attend but i bet the speakers arent doing it out for goodwill...Value for money, doubt it, perpetuating the status quo and a bit of cronyism, i reckon ?
And for all that, they're mostly geared towards creating pop idols for the radio and associated industries. The focus isn't on capturing art or preserving culture. About the only one worth attending might be Lyndon talking to the Dobbynator cos it'll be a hoot, even so check out the blurb.
and gets him to give tips on how he writes those massive radio hits. A must for all songwriters!
to be fair i dont really think thats Daves prime motivation for writing songs. I would venture he's more an arts and culture type of guy. But hey, for all you other songwriters, you need radio hits or at least the funding bodies tell you you do, but the truth is, radio and the funding bodies need your art to sustain their income. Only your art shouldn't neccessarily have to be geared towards massive radio hits and you shouldn't have to kiss anyones arse for a hand up in promoting your art.
If you're serious and music is your calling you'll want longevity in a career, you'll want an opportunity to create without the pressure of always scrambling for the dollar, you'll want growth as an artist, you'll want to forge a deep and meaningful lifelong connection with your audience.
The current system and personell doesnt provide for that. Me contribuiting a single practical policy suggestion isnt going to change that either. Nothing short of scrapping the mandate and the entrenched cronies, starting from scratch with a clean slate to eliminate the focus towards radio is going to do.
I think deep down we all know that and that we also know radio is dying. Do you agree Russell ?
-
What I think you're failing to acknowledge is the goodwill that nearly everyone involved has. If it was a simple as one or two villains, it would be a lot easier to sort out.
Nearly every one ? Most of nearly everyone will be the passionate and powerless ones at the bottom who enter the industry, innocent with goodwill, seeking to promote art and culture, thinking it's a level playing field and their art or services will be judged on merit by people whose goodwill also extends to the desire to capture and preserve art and culture.
Unfortunately the music and funding industry beyond the artistry of the musicians and producers is a game best suited for self serving villains whose goodwill only extends to capture the best price for their brand of art and preserve their own culture. The art of getting funded, in our instance, then becomes subject to the individual taste of commercial interests and selected tastemakers who deliberately cater for the lowest common denominator of branded art. The perfectly disposable, artistically neutered, culturally bland radio hit.
In doing so, these selected tastemakers become villains for betraying the value of art and culture in favour of capturing status and belonging to an elite who's sole purpose is self preservation. The artists come and go. If they're lucky they get to dip their head into the intoxicating waters of public funding. Only once you are baptised to the dark side and compromise your art, you are expected to forever be compromising it, to prostitute it to your particular pimp and sell out your soul to the dark arts funding priests at NZ on Air. If you don't or can't anymore, the pimp moves on to the next fresh young face who can and will allow themsleves to be exploited for profit and the priests anoint another soul to the darkside.
The pimps being the same, mostly unseen and unchanging faces who lurk in the background, and for a price are only too eager to push your art into the ears and faces of the powers that be at NZon Air's temple of temptation. So in essence it's not even music or artists getting funded. It's certain people, pimps that NZon Air for whatever reason have decided are arbiters of tastes befitting our untrained ears and dumbed down minds. Pimps charged with acting in good faith and goodwill on behalf of the artist, but really...
Sadly the NZ on Air music funding system was never set up to favour the artist or what they produce that might add value to NZ's cultural heritage and any goodwill artists initially have, soon evaporates as one becomes wise to the dark arts program, and programmers, running behind the scenes.
The current sytem was, with good intention, set up to capture and preserve art and culture in it's broadest definition and to promote it on all NZ airwaves. That good intention was usurped by a few villains within the funding body, and outside, colluding and conspiring according to the narrowest definition of a flawed mandate to preserve a system that vests all power and responsibility unto themselves with no accountability to the audience, the artists or the taxpayer upon whose work, attention and portion of income provides them with the means to perpetuate their villainy and then promote the products of their definition to only one portion of NZ's airwaves, the mainstream and commercial sector.
NZ on air, as they have always said, isn't in the arts and culture funding game they're in the funding radio hits game. A game that essentially sets them and the staff up as doing the work of what would normally be an A&R/marketing/sales team at a record label.
I don't know that is neccessarily something public servants like Brendan Smyth or his team should be doing or are qualified to do but its something he's been doing and being well paid to do since the QE 2 arts council funding regime for going on 30 years now. If he's learnt anything, its how to cover his arse and his tracks for any mention of impropriety, capture the favour of successive gov'ts and form relationships to preserve his status as the most powerful man in NZ music.
It shouldn't be that way but it is, and if anyone doesn't think so, then start a label, promote an artist, suckle up to the funding tit and meet the priests who squeeze the udder. Look into their serpent eyes, listen to their forked tongues and make your own mind up. And if you deign to bow down and pimp artists souls to their temple, there are gifts to be accepted, riches to be had, parties to be attended but at what cost to your own soul ?
Warning : woe betides those who would betray the dark arts pact one signs to become part of the anointed.
umm... so is that enough acknowledging of good will Russell ? :)
-
And even if there is cronyism, it certainly wouldn't be any more than you get (or is perceived) in "pure" creative funding agencies.
So that makes it alright ?
As long as everyone's doing it you're sweet with it cos that's how it's always been in the music industry and arts funding game, so if we can't beat them we should join them ?
The recommendation for all prospective artists seeking public funding according to the NZon Air mandate then is...
Make shit music, take the money, wind your neck in, keep your mouth shut, kiss the big man's arse at the free pissup and look the other way when you see others not doing it ?
Fuck that !!!
-
Oh, come on.
You've been accusing me of having nothing to say?
Ok, the one throwaway solution i have put forward is like you suggest, an 'amplifier' like server for applicants to upload, users to buy off, labels/agents to listen to demos to and broadcasters to program from, thus scrapping hard copy CD submissions and the kiwi hit disc with the most sales getting video funding.
sure you can manipulate it by registering heaps and buying loads to affect the charts like back in the day but you'd be found out real easy and get nada.
only why re invent the wheel just use 'amplifier' and go off their charts already.
-
To be fair, i'm only slagging of what i consider the hardcore serial troughers and the silent backroom brigade with vested interests, whoever they may be.
of course i got off my arse and Brendan kicked it to the kerb in 2001 for saying 'fund what artists produce not change artists to fit the funding' and if you look past the slagging theres a whole bunch of salient points and relevent questions needing to be asked which havent been answered.
I've got solutions but this isnt the place to air them cos i don't trust NZoA heads won't take them and use them to keep themselves in the mix.
Mostly my biggest solution is, clear out Brendan and his cronies then start an official, open submissions, discussion document, or whatever, where i can put them. He is the biggest barrier to change, he's proven his reluctance to, so the question is why ?
-
ok then Sacha if you're such a wise and understanding guy and not just some mealy mouthed troll, then put up or shut up...
Tell me how the complex system works.
Quote the relevent parts of the broadcasting act.
Define the terms of reference and the mandate.
Explain the freedom a CEO has to operate within the mandate.
The lawful repercussions for not adhering to it.
Account for the spending, the funding decisions, the appointments to the board, to the selection panels. Highlight the inconsistencies, the rorts.Identify the old boy relationships. Outline the process for change.
Connect the dots. Draw me the big picture so even a child could see the problem and help solve it !
Now I know Russell, as an expert on these matters can probably do all that, so my question is, why aren't you Russell ? Why are you sitting this one out and commenting form the sidelines. ?
If you can help and don't, then at least help me understand why and where i've got it wrong and how to make it right ?
I think the complexity is to cover something fundamentally wrong within the system and the morality of those in it, just like the goldman sachs derivatives bullshit. It's now all about damage control and butt covering.