Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The Advocate

131 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

  • Yamis,

    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.

    Since Nov 2006 • 903 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Damian Christie,

    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.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Lilith __, in reply to Danielle,

    Disgruntled of Oratia, age 38

    Yoofs always moaning about something. ;-)

    Dunedin • Since Jul 2010 • 3894 posts Report Reply

  • Bevan Shortridge,

    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.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 122 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Bevan Shortridge,

    Time-shifted ratings seem to exist, at least. Throng publishes them sporadically.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Bevan Shortridge, in reply to Sacha,

    Ah. Time-shifted. Thanks for that.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 122 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    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.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie, in reply to Steve Barnes,

    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.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Damian Christie, in reply to Bevan Shortridge,

    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.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1164 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd, in reply to Emma Hart,

    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.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Stephen Judd,

    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.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Yamis,

    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?

    Since Nov 2006 • 903 posts Report Reply

  • Geoff Lealand, in reply to Yamis,

    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,

    Screen & Media Studies, U… • Since Oct 2007 • 2562 posts Report Reply

  • Yamis,

    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. :)

    Since Nov 2006 • 903 posts Report Reply

  • Geoff Lealand,

    Excellent interview with John Campbell on Media3 this morning, Russell. If only more of our news commentators were that quick-witted and articulate,

    Screen & Media Studies, U… • Since Oct 2007 • 2562 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Full version of the John Campbell interview (22 mins).

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Beautiful example of the human truth in a 'soft' story - Kiwi who helped create Big Bird, and a love story spanning 50 years.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Bruce Ellis,

    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.

    Taranaki • Since Oct 2012 • 2 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Bruce Ellis,

    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.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • john Drinnan, in reply to graeme muir,

    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.

    Auckland • Since Oct 2010 • 31 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    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.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1330 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to Russell Brown,

    That was a damn fine interview Russell, some beautiful nuggets in there, resonant stuff.

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to john Drinnan,

    choco-ade coverage

    Yes. Like Marmageddon, everyone seemed to get suckered by that one.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • john Drinnan, in reply to Damian Christie,

    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.

    Auckland • Since Oct 2010 • 31 posts Report Reply

  • Islander, in reply to linger,

    Glory! Barker is brillant!

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.