11
Reshaping Public Reshaping Public Broadcasting:Broadcasting:
the New Zealand the New Zealand experience 1988-2003experience 1988-2003
IPPR Seminar 2004IPPR Seminar 2004
Paul NorrisPaul NorrisHead, NZ Broadcasting School, Head, NZ Broadcasting School,
[email protected]@cpit.ac.nz
22
OutlineOutline
• Overview of deregulationOverview of deregulation
• NZoA – the contestable funding NZoA – the contestable funding modelmodel
• Strengths and weaknessesStrengths and weaknesses
• Any lessons for UK?Any lessons for UK?
33
2 non-commercial
networks
Deregulation 1988Deregulation 1988
BCNZ
TVNZ LtdRNZ Ltd
TV One TV241
commercialStations
TV3
44
BCNZ/TVNZ FundingBCNZ/TVNZ Funding
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1977 1984 1991 2003$m
Charter
Other
Adrev
Lic/NZoA
Source: BCNZ & TVNZ Annual Reports
55
Deregulation / competitionDeregulation / competition
• Frequencies auctioned to highest bidderFrequencies auctioned to highest bidder
• No programming requirementsNo programming requirements
• Ownership controls relaxed, then Ownership controls relaxed, then abolishedabolished
• Broadcasting Standards Authority to Broadcasting Standards Authority to maintain programme standardsmaintain programme standards
66
Broadcasting Act 1989Broadcasting Act 1989
NZ On Air required to:NZ On Air required to:• Reflect & develop NZ identity & cultureReflect & develop NZ identity & culture• Promote programmes about NZ interestsPromote programmes about NZ interests• Promote Maori language & culturePromote Maori language & culture
• Ensure a range of broadcasts is available Ensure a range of broadcasts is available for women, children, the disabled and for women, children, the disabled and minorities, including ethnic minoritiesminorities, including ethnic minorities
77
Broadcasting Act 1989Broadcasting Act 1989
Re TV, NZ On Air required to:Re TV, NZ On Air required to:• Ensure reasonable provision is made for Ensure reasonable provision is made for
the funding of television drama and the funding of television drama and documentariesdocumentaries
Re funding, have regard to:Re funding, have regard to:• The level of contribution from the The level of contribution from the
applicantapplicant• The potential size of the audienceThe potential size of the audience
88
NZ On Air 1989 - 2004NZ On Air 1989 - 2004
• Mission is local content (NZ Mission is local content (NZ programmes)programmes)
• Populist programmes in prime time Populist programmes in prime time eg eg Shortland StShortland St – medical soap – medical soap
• Minority programmes – off peakMinority programmes – off peak
99
Documentaries
Children's
Drama/Comedy
Special Interest/Others
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
NZ
oAir
Fun
ding
Television Funding by Genre Television Funding by Genre 1990-20031990-2003
Source: NZoA Annual Reports
1010
Documentaries funded by Documentaries funded by NZoANZoA
0
50
100
150
200
250
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
Hours
Source: NZoA Annual Reports
1111
DocumentariesDocumentaries
Outputs:Outputs:
Range too narrow – commercial focusRange too narrow – commercial focus
Impact:Impact:
Ratings adequate for prime time 10-15%Ratings adequate for prime time 10-15%
Value:Value:
Valued for finding out how others face and Valued for finding out how others face and
overcome problems and challenges, also overcome problems and challenges, also
for the opportunity to learn something newfor the opportunity to learn something new
and to be challenged intellectuallyand to be challenged intellectually
1212
Children’s progs funded by Children’s progs funded by NZoANZoA
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
Hours
Source: NZoA Annual Reports
1313
Children’s programmesChildren’s programmes
Outputs:Outputs:
• Stand-alone programmes or kiwi links within Stand-alone programmes or kiwi links within global cartoons?global cartoons?
Impact:Impact:
• Cartoons win the ratingsCartoons win the ratings
Value:Value:
• Valued for giving children a sense of NZValued for giving children a sense of NZ
identityidentity
• Also for not being hypedAlso for not being hyped
1414
Qualitative research by Qualitative research by genregenre
Source: Attitudes to NZoA Funded TV Programming 2002
1515
NZ model - strengthsNZ model - strengths
• Contestability and competitionContestability and competition
• Diversity of programmingDiversity of programming
• Growth of independent sectorGrowth of independent sector
• Significant impact for $60mSignificant impact for $60m
1616
NZ model -weaknessesNZ model -weaknesses
• Broadcasters are gatekeepersBroadcasters are gatekeepers
• Range of programmes inadequateRange of programmes inadequate
• Emphasis on local content, not qualityEmphasis on local content, not quality
• Subsidises private commercial interestsSubsidises private commercial interests
• Dilutes concept of public broadcastingDilutes concept of public broadcasting
• Public broadcaster seen as cash cow by Public broadcaster seen as cash cow by government government
1717
TVNZ as SOETVNZ as SOE
$0
$20
$40$60
$80
$100
$120$140
$160
$180
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 0 1 2
profit $mdividend
Source: TVNZ Annual Reports
1818
Reforms of 2000-2003Reforms of 2000-2003
• TVNZ – from SOE to CrOCTVNZ – from SOE to CrOC
• TVNZ Charter from March 2003TVNZ Charter from March 2003
• TVNZ – direct govt. funding $11-15mTVNZ – direct govt. funding $11-15m
• NZoA – additional fundingNZoA – additional funding
• Voluntary quotas for local contentVoluntary quotas for local content
1919
Lessons from New Zealand?Lessons from New Zealand?
Caveats:Caveats:
• Ecology of broadcasting in NZ very Ecology of broadcasting in NZ very different to that in UKdifferent to that in UK
• NZoA has been public broadcastingNZoA has been public broadcasting
• Quantum of public fundingQuantum of public funding
2020
Public funding as % of GDPPublic funding as % of GDP
0.000%
0.050%
0.100%
0.150%
0.200%
0.250%
0.300%
Fin
land
Den
mar
k
Nor
way
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Ger
man
y
Hun
gary
Aus
tria
Gre
ece
Sw
eden
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Net
herla
nds
Sw
itzer
land
Bel
gium
Japa
n
Aus
tral
ia
Irel
and
Italy
Fra
nce
Kor
ea
Spa
in
Can
ada
Por
tuga
l
Pol
and
New
Zea
land
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Source: Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage Report Jun 03
2121
Lessons from New Zealand?Lessons from New Zealand?
• Use multiple mechanismsUse multiple mechanisms
• Funding agency must be proactiveFunding agency must be proactive
• Contestability + competitionContestability + competition
• Efficiency – competitive tendering Efficiency – competitive tendering keeps costs transparent and under keeps costs transparent and under controlcontrol