Hard News: Bean-Counting the Beat
444 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 Newer→ Last
-
I'm talking there about funding. We were talking before about how we tracklist the hit discs.
ok, understood,
so who from the music community do you consult, your nick bollinger types, your cheese on toast types, your blink jorgnesen types, the people recognised on the street as being in touch with what is happening in nz culture?
surely you're not leaving the funding decisions to comm radio, and your team? -
What is this mysterious airplay potential recognition thing you and PDs can see considering you haven't even seen the video yet ?
What are some of the other deciding factors re: video and new recording grants? At what stage in the process do you consult radio PD's about new recording artists ?
We ask the music television broadcasters to listen to all the songs that are applying for music video funding and to tell us which songs they are most likely to play on the channel that they are programming. We can't ask them to judge the video because the band is applying for funding in order to make the video. But most music television is programmed by ear rather than eye. Granted ... an amazing video of an ordinary song can sometimes get airplay but more often than not, it's the song that drives the programming decision.
Other factors ...
The strategic value of the video to the radio airplay campaign; timing; the plan around the release; what else is happening with the band ...
We get 200+ applications for new artist funding four times a year and we get radio feedback on the songs when we have shortlisted about 20-30 songs, as a result of which we will identify 10 contenders and then we go to the artists and ask them for more information about themselves, the song, the recording plan, the release plan, etc and we select the five that have the best combination of song and plan.
-
I'm going to bed now ...
-
thanks for answering the critics.
-
for you're next visit,
how do you reconcile the directive 'NZ On Air will allocate funding so that programmes and broadcasts that wouldn't otherwise be made in a commercial market can be produced." with your phase 4 and commercial radio bent initiatives. why are we using government funding for this kind of thing? -
we go to the artists and ask them for more information about themselves, the song, the recording plan, the release plan, etc and we select the five that have the best combination of song and plan.
Release plan ??? as in a CD single release for an unknown artist ??? you're kidding right ??? Have you funded artists solely on digital release with a digital plan yet ???
How about a hiphop artist with a massive groundswell of grassroots support and making tunes no different in style than any other contemporary american ie gangsta booty ???...Probably not cos thats not what you want the public to hear from a kiwi ??
And what of cutting edge electronica with potentially stunning video production ??? Wouldn't get a look in right cos it doesn't fit the radio format despite it being bound to go off on video ???
How about if i got Chris Cunningham (he of aphex twin vids fame) to make a vid of a tune with no commercial radioplay at all or even how about an NZ equivalent of aphex twin ??? NO ???
Surely artistic values of a leading production company should count for something rather than just airplay potential. And what then of all the has beens who get funding for shit tunes cos they or their manager is mates of a person of influence in making funding decisions. You're not going to tell me that never happens are you ???
Whats it gonna take to change NZoA focus and maybe become a bit more transparent or do you think things are going swimmingly according to some grand vision you have ???
-
How about a hiphop artist with a massive groundswell of grassroots support and making tunes no different in style than any other contemporary american ie gangsta booty ???
you mean like low riders and bitches and drivebye shootings gangsta?
you're saying someone in chch is making that kind of music? -
That remains to be seen. Both Brooke and Opshop are just now launching US and UK campaigns (respectively).
Hi Brendan,
I wish both artist well, as i do any NZ musician, but lets be honest, neither is accompanied by a major release of their respective albums.Re: Fat Freddies..I have to re-iterate the above statement..if radio hadn't had the nous to pick a track off a crossover 45,000 selling album by the stage it got to that level, there is something wrong. Surely they were aware of it. They simply jumped on it after the rest of the nation had already worked it out.
-
No, but Mr Sicc from auckland is making street hiphop and pulling no punches about it. I linked to his myspace earlier and he's got about a half a mil in hits, applied for funding and doesnt even get the courtesy of a reply or feedback. But lame shit like, oh take ya pick and is it any wonder NZ hiphop is crap all over again ??? The public lost interest in all the weak shit that got funded. And where the fuck are they now ??? Fast crew anyone ???
We ask the music television broadcasters to listen to all the songs that are applying for music video funding and to tell us which songs they are most likely to play on the channel that they are programming.
channel ??? Why not specialist shows within the channel or does it have to be some generic wet blanket pap as well ???
The strategic value of the video to the radio airplay campaign; timing; the plan around the release; what else is happening with the band ...
There we go again with the value to the radio campaign and the "band" focus.
Timing...hmmm how does that work ??? How does one judge timing ???
Release plan and what else is happening ???
Is anyone buying this cos i'm not.It just seems like arbitrary safe decisions, a bit of tokenism, a dash of croneyism and a push for whatever guitar band or angsty chick takes the fancy for that month based on what nostalgic little pub they're playing in.
c'mon man, fix up look sharp, step up or step off
-
Wow! Where in the world would you get the head of a govt funding agency personally entering an online debate? We can't be doing too bad if Brendan is willing to speak himself, and not send in a minion. I know Dubmugga and Robbery are hot on this subject but can we at least acknowledge:
if only those pesky visa requirements didn't get in the way. a little embarrassing.
embarrassing yes, but not really NZOA's job is it?
I doubt they've ever applied for anything but unfortunately that's the feeling for most of the bands down here, they don't consider that anyone will help so they keep their heads down play gigs to their friend and vanish into thin air, another kiwi classic lost.
Again, unfair on NZOA to expect them to fund an act that hasn't applied for funding. NZOA does not charge around the countryside on a white horse delivering cash to needy and deserving minstrels. Quietly doing your thing, not making a fuss, building up some 'underground' cred, international recording contract ... one of these things does not follow. (Acknowledged: Some artists don't want international success, fair enough)
Surely artistic values of a leading production company should count for something rather than just airplay potential.
So nevermind it's a shit tune, the video is going to be amazing because Chris Cunningham has agreed to direct it? You're confusing NZOA with Creative NZ or the Film Fund.
Re: Fat Freddies..I have to re-iterate the above statement..if radio hadn't had the nous to pick a track off a crossover 45,000 selling album by the stage it got to that level, there is something wrong.
Too true, and it validates Roberry & Dubmugga's concern that NZOA need to be more accountable. But Radio have never been that smart. Crowded House had to go Top 5 in the US before NZ Radio would play them.
Fast crew anyone ???
Personally I liked them. They were no more than they claimed to be: fun loving (white?) suburban pop rap. They did quite well in Australia too. Where are they now? I dunno, but where are Supergroove and Straitjacket Fits? Getting funded does not oblige a band to stay together.
-
embarrassing yes, but not really NZOA's job is it?
an aside, not aimed at nz on air. bit of a fuck up on the bands part though.
Again, unfair on NZOA
again. not aimed an nz on air specifically, more a comment on the current environment for artists. one of my personal focuses is attempting to keep some of this "history" in the public sphere.
NZ on Airs job is to get a better environment for our music, so that we can enjoy and appreciate our own culture. I think it is part of that to know what's happening and try and make it easier for it to come through. This one specific band did play a showcase for the industry, including 2 nz on air reps who were present, -
So nevermind it's a shit tune, the video is going to be amazing because Chris Cunningham has agreed to direct it?
he does have a point though. no point in giving money to a good song if they're going to fuck up the vid and make everyone cringe.
surely in funding videos enlisted crew and concept would be the biggest factor, assuming your song isn't complete rubbish.I can see the other side of that though.
These are people who need to apply for funding. its the start of the precess so you can hardly expect a finished video from them. -
validates Roberry & Dubmugga's
that was dubmugga's idea point, which struck me as so bleeding obvious I don't know why it isn't part of the process.
independent analysis. -
but can we at least acknowledge:
I did
and I do. that was a big step forward from the last 5 years, and kudos to the man for entering debate and doing so in an intelligent and credible manner. He was dismissive on his first entry but made up for it this time round. acknowledged truths and added background to his perspective. He acknowledged there were different philosophies on this.lots of important points missed but a good start.
I still think its time for a new approach, which could mean a whole new system that doesn't even think about commercial radio, or perhaps it puts commercial radio into perspective.Robbery
That was the crucial part of the whole endeavor. change radio not change us.simon
And that too, with some reservations as to our right to change companies who have been asked to pay millions for the right to broadcast,I've had a bit of a think about this and yes they paid for the right to use the frequencies (lease) but they belong to nzers, just like our national forests.
As with national forests there can and should be conditions of use.
ripping down natives and putting in pines shouldn't be accepted for either of these resources.I think its completely acceptable to say "sure, if you want to use our airwaves to generate business by selling advertising you have to respect our right to have those airwaves reflect us". here's a big quota, now fuck off and go make your money. (perhaps needs a re write on that last bit).
Funding isn't the only objective of NZ on Air either. They've got and had a (apparently ineffectual) radio plugger. Why not a lobbyiest, someone representing the the interests of NZ Music to govt (as they do to an extent with plans for new schemes etc), pushing full on for quotas, extended national radio, etc etc.
rather than throwing money at un-played music, put that toward a concerted effort to change the present conditions for a year make the change then supply a wider variety of local content.
just some ideas. its not like I get paid a govt salary to do it. -
Why not a lobbyiest, someone representing the the interests of NZ Music to govt (as they do to an extent with plans for new schemes etc), pushing full on for quotas, extended national radio, etc etc.
It would be an inappropriate use of taxpayer money for a government department or other entity to lobby government to change policy. Departments implement policy, and advise, lobbying is totally outside their brief.
And Nicky Hager would have to write a book on it, a la Timberlands, and I don't think he really wants to get that into depth on NZ music politics.
-
As with national forests there can and should be conditions of use.
ripping down natives and putting in pines shouldn't be accepted for either of these resources.Yes, I kinda agree Rob. All business, in NZ at least, is required to work within rules that mean that the conduct of their business is beneficial to the nation in one way or another, and broadcasting seems to carry some cultural and social responsibility across much of the planet.
Can't do station-by-station. That is information that we are not privy to. But format-by-format ... in the March 2008 quarter (the latest quarter) -
* Pop - 13.11%
* Rock - 26.05%
* Urban - 13.01%
* Adult Contemporary - 19.70%
* Hot A/C - 16.85%
* Easy - 15.33%* Overall - 19.90%
The peak in the March quarter was 21.04% (overall) and Rock radio as a format peaked at 30.25%.
In the March quarter, all but one format was up on the previous quarter and the overall was up from 18.88% to 19.90%.
Which is great but there still seems to be an element of smoke and mirrors in here. Clearly, using the Airplay charts from Radioscope, NZ music is not represented well in the 100 most played songs which is one of the places where it matters most surely, and it hasn't been for years now. Neither in the singles charts. NZ music is doing terribly in terms of the points system that the radio charts are based on.
We can claim strong percentages but when these percentages are raised artificially by the likes of Kiwi-FM and non-prime play it can only raise concern.
But well done on the Adult Contemporary figure, I know this was a real problem area a few years back.
-
It would be an inappropriate use of taxpayer money for a government department or other entity to lobby government to change policy. Departments implement policy, and advise, lobbying is totally outside their brief.
Agreed Kyle, but there are a couple of partially Govt funded bodies that are able to lobby, and perhaps should be for a system that no longer seems to be quite working as well as it should or perhaps could.
Perhaps I'm not seeing it, as I'm writing from a distance and you can only get so much from email contact but the debate doesn't seem to be going on as it should, and it does feel a little too comfortable now.
-
Agreed Kyle, but there are a couple of partially Govt funded bodies that are able to lobby, and perhaps should be for a system that no longer seems to be quite working as well as it should or perhaps could.
Yeah, there's a boundary between policy advice, and lobbying.
I presume that NZ on Air were involved in the decisions about youth radio, and quotas in some way, providing information.
-
Surely artistic values of a leading production company should count for something rather than just airplay potential.
So nevermind it's a shit tune, the video is going to be amazing because Chris Cunningham has agreed to direct it? You're confusing NZOA with Creative NZ or the Film Fund.
Of course the tune would have to be banging but it could be cutting edge electronica thus outside the brief for commercial radio play but would still generate considerable interest on line possibly leading to broadcast overseas and an on line or hardcopy sale.
To my mind, the shelf life of a video far outlasts that of a radio tune especially now with youtube. I got kids who churn thru the bandwidth watching vids of tunes they just don't hear on radio and not just flavour of the month ones either.
Besides I'm still not sold on the correlation between video play and radio play. Any stats floating around to back that claim up ??? They seem to me to be mutually exclusive and totally different artforms so should be looked at and funded as such.
Creative NZ and the film fund are more likely to redirect you back to the NZoA video funding stream having far more serious art to sponsor than silly old pop music.
-
Besides I'm still not sold on the correlation between video play and radio play.
And you are right now. There used to a much closer correlation..ie video play was like the radio play with pretty dancing girls....a play on the Sunday morning TV video show was gold for record and could be a huge sales boost. But YouTube has changed much of that. The primary outlet for a video is a very small screen on a monitor that is 100% on demand..hence MTV making the move away from being a video channel. I see kids every day watching videos on their phones, and the video has a life all of it's own that can often outlast the hit record. I know I spend hours some nights on the laptop just hunting down classic videos to watch. I'd never buy the record / CD though.
-
I presume that NZ on Air were involved in the decisions about youth radio, and quotas in some way, providing information.
I was on an advisory group that developed ideas for a YRN. I was pretty clear in my head that we weren't being paid to lobby for a YRN, but that view wasn't universal.
I think one think that Rob et al are forgetting is that the NZ On Air doesn't just sit around doing what it wants. Brendan will be responsible to his own board, and beyond that to the Ministry of Culture and Heritage, which advises the minister. They'll have been reviewed and accounted up the wazoo over the years.
And MCH under Labour has not been shy about pressing cultural duty on the agencies it oversees.
Trivia: the boss of the agency group at MCH (which oversees NZOA) used to tour with a band.
Martin Durrant, formerly of Sneaky Feelings, is on the TV oversight side, too.
-
Wow! Where in the world would you get the head of a govt funding agency personally entering an online debate?
Back in the day on NZmusic.com, every time there was a new NZ on Air funding round announced there would be a lot of, uh, robust debate on the forums, with all sorts of conspiracy theories, halftruths and outrage flying about.
The regulars usually did a good job of sorting out the moaners, but every now and then Brendan Smyth would pop in and give his side of things. I think everyone really appreciated that he was willing to do that.
-
I think one think that Rob et al are forgetting is that the NZ On Air doesn't just sit around doing what it wants.
Which I think was kinda the point I was trying to make pages back...please don't attack the messenger.
That said, I do think that the board would direct under expert advisement and Brendan is the closest thing they have to such. He would certainly have a voice that mattered more than most with few on the board having the sort of insight and understanding he is privy to.
used to tour with a band.
more than tour, he was an original member of The Mockers when they were a classy little garage band from Wellington.
-
more than tour, he was an original member of The Mockers when they were a classy little garage band from Wellington.
yeehaaa jobs for the boys...:)
I can see him coming down real hard on BS and his mates over a glass of merlot down at the boys own club.
with few on the board having the sort of insight and understanding he is privy to.
You keep saying that so what exactly are some these insights and understanding. Sounds more like he can just baffle the board with bullshit and they buy it.
Its great having 20/20 retro vision and an understanding of history but surely a vision for the future and an ability to implement change at the right time is more important.
There goes that timing thing again...heh and i just don't think BS is that man for these times anymore.
Time for change and to rip obamas catch phrase. Change we can believe in.
-
Where in the world would you get the head of a govt funding agency personally entering an online debate?
well this small countries a good start for political figures to have direct interaction with the people they serve. Helen Clark's set a bloody good example in that respect, on everything from b nets, kiwi, morning tv etc.
its something that should be happening in an open and transparent society.
When it doesn't happen you get a gap between your people and what you do and then you get descent.i'm not sure what the situation is in other countries. I found the uk quite open considering the size of the population they have to deal with.
america, not so good, but then they're not really as socially minded, private health and all that.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.