Tag: Radio New Zealand

Chair’s subtext contains key to RNZ audience revival

New Radio New Zealand chair Brent Impey has told every journalist who has interviewed him about his new role that he will not interfere in operational matters. He does not need to meddle because he has now made it abundantly clear where changes have to be made.

He told Colin Peacock on RNZ’s Mediawatch that there were four priorities. Audience numbers on RNZ National and Concert must improve. So, too, must the state-owned organisation’s level of trust, and the size of its various digital audiences. Finally, it needs to become country’s most popular digital news platform.

Earlier in the week he threw down the gauntlet to a principal target.  He told the New Zealand Herald’s Shayne Currie that RNZ was “coming after” the Herald’s NZME stablemate NewstalkZB. He also highlighted a point of difference between RNZ and the commercial network – 18 minutes of advertising to which RNZ audiences did not have to listen. That may have sounded odd coming from a man whose background was in leading a company that had fought hard for every advertising dollar it could earn. However, Impey’s experience as chief executive of MediaWorks for a decade taught him more about audiences than advertising.

That was clear from what Stewart Sowman-Lund reported in The Post. Impey told him young people were not interested in radio, which was the province of people over 50. And he acknowledged that the habits of this older audience were harder to shift. He told The Post that adding 28,000 to the listenership of RNZ National by the end of the year (a goal the broadcaster had set itself) was “actually quite a challenge”.

The over-50s may be harder to shift but they have already moved…away from RNZ. Continue reading “Chair’s subtext contains key to RNZ audience revival” →

Trump Filter reveals NZ news media need more protection

I am tremendously grateful to the current president of the United States of America for adding even greater validity to the defensive mechanism I have named in his honour – The Trump Filter.

Before I go further, I should also thank Mr Trump for adding the word “tremendous’ to the lexicon of verified facts.

But to return to The Trump Filter.

It is a process I have developed against which I test the robustness of political decisions and, in particular, legislation produced by the New Zealand Government.

The filter applies a simple question: “Could this be misused or abused by a future government or leader, the nature of which we do not yet know?”

I don’t pretend the test is a novel one. It is really no more than an assessment of the ability of constitutional safeguards to do their job on behalf of the public. I do, however, suggest that the actions of Donald Trump provide us with excellent benchmarks against which to view the potential future misuse or trashing of things that this country takes for granted or, in some cases, holds dear.

There were warning signs in Trump’s first term, but his current term as president has created unprecedented assaults on institutions once thought fully protected by the US Constitution and the amendments embodied in the Bill of Rights.

Domestically and internationally, he has ridden roughshod over far more than the length of this commentary can accommodate. However, last week the impact of one of his more vengeful acts prompted me to apply The Trump Filter to the current state of a century-old institution in this country.

Let me address a specific question: “Does New Zealand’s public service media have sufficient safeguards to protect it against a future government or leader, the nature of which we do not yet know?” Continue reading “Trump Filter reveals NZ news media need more protection” →

An audience in the hand versus one in Neverland

I have some friendly advice for Radio New Zealand: Stick to the radio audience you know you can get, rather than the one you think you would like to have.

That advice is based on the belief that RNZ National’s cumulative audience decline from more than 700,000 in 2020 to less than 500,000 today is due in no small measure to its strategy of seeking new listeners at the expense of its old ones.

‘Old’ in this sense has two meanings. First it denotes those who has since switched elsewhere or off. Secondly it means, yes, listeners aged over 60 who are as valuable as those below it.

In both its music and talk programming, RNZ National has sought to meet social and cultural targets that are both worthy and in line with movements within New Zealand society. It plays music that supports local musicians and music production. It has interspersed te reo into its dialogue and promoted culturally diverse programming. Its subject matter, and sometimes its approach, have shifted to reflect these new emphases.

In the process it has alienated older listeners used to certain formats that reflected their interests and tastes. Continue reading “An audience in the hand versus one in Neverland” →

RNZ ‘pro-Kremlin garbage’ enquiry has lessons for all newsrooms

The penetrating review of Radio New Zealand’s “pro-Kremlin garbage” scandal by an independent panel has a clear message for all news media: Make sure your own houses are in order.

The expert review panel – long-time media lawyer William Akel, broadcaster-turned-lawyer Linda Clark, and former Australian Broadcasting Corporation Editorial Standards Director Alan Sunderland – found the sub-editor who doctored Reuters content had breached editorial standards. However, the panel also found a swathe of systemic issues within RNZ that could well be repeated in other news organisations.

To recap: In June, RNZ was accused of publishing overseas wire stories on its website which had been deliberately edited to include unattributed statements that were one-sided and contested. RNZ subsequently found 49 stories that were inappropriately edited. This included adding pro-Russian content to stories on the invasion of Ukraine. The RNZ board ordered an independent review.

The review found the journalist at the centre of the controversy “genuinely believed he was acting appropriately to provide balance and accuracy, and was not motivated by any desire to introduce misinformation, disinformation or propaganda.” Nonetheless, he breached editorial standards.

It could have ended there: A misguided individual who had since resigned and was no longer a problem for the public broadcaster. But the review panel did not stop there. It found that RNZ’s structure, culture, systems, and processes contributed to what had happened and sheeted home responsibility for that to RNZ’s leadership.

Other media might say it ended there: It was RNZ’s problem and a result of its unique way of doing things. But those ways are not unique, and other media organisations could face their own embarrassments if they do not audit their processes and, where necessary, make the sort of changes recommended to RNZ by the review panel. Continue reading “RNZ ‘pro-Kremlin garbage’ enquiry has lessons for all newsrooms” →