Public Address | System (Home)

Posted at 9:31AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Why not be completely brave, transform Nightline into must-see late night telly rather than a showcase for young hotties?

How well does John do scathing sarcasm, and using facts to point out blatant hypocrisy? Or pointing a gentle finger in the direction of human fallibility?
Is he any good at voice impersonations?
Can the reporters do Faux news stories, oh thats right they already do.
Bastardo's took my Daily Show away.

And no I din't comment on the tits.

Posted at 10:01AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Of norks and news hours ...

There already appears to be a lot more fight in the show this year than last, when it seemed to run one soft human interest story lifted from a provincial paper after another and too many bromance appearances from Rove. Nothing like the threat of the axe to sharpen one's thoughts, obviously. Interesting to see they sent Campbell himself up to the dog people in Warkworth yesterday and I imagine we'll see a lot more of him as a reporter this year. Which is a good thing. I also want to see more of his ferocious interviews but I suspect there's a balance -- some viewers apparently find that kind of aggression a turn-off.

In any event, it's a lot better than another fumbling Sainsbury interview and those dreadful, gushing Dominic Bowden celebrity pieces on Close Up.

Posted at 10:22AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

I haven't been following the numbers; perhaps someone who has can clarify.

I'm wondering how 3news' ratings are going. They were at an all-time peak about the time Ironbridge bought, but the quality has definitely deteriorated since then -- orders from on high to even further dumb it down, is what I've been told. My guess would be that ratings have somewhat rolled off since then.

That's got to be tough on Campbell Live. In terms of numbers watching, the run-on viewership from the news is probably, in general, more important than even the content of the 7pm shows.

Posted at 10:56AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Sorry if someone's already posted this. I think this is perhaps how news should be presented:

Posted at 11:50AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Heh, nice one. But in seriousness, the formulaic nature of tv news is a big contributor to my loss of interest in it. The problem isn't the visual language per se -- we need that so we can understand what we're seeing -- but the stereotyped narrative that all stories get forced into, and the wider sterotyped script, the same for every bulletin, that they get forced into.

- breathless teaser about obviously trumped-up crap
- the footage from some US feed completely irrelevant to any NZ citizen which incidentally displaces a local, more important story where there were no reporters
- another teaser for the forthcoming crap in case you missed the first one
- a political story which doesn't actually explain anything about what the issues are and quotes politicians without fact checking
- a teaser for that story where by now we've let slip the only thing that might be remotely interesting about it, christ i don't know why we're even going to run that segment now
...
...
...
- at last the bit that the teaser was actually for, jeeebus help us what a let down, and finally
- the story about the cute kid or animal or other heartwarming irrelevance of the day
- closing stupid forced banter, spanning the range from the twee to the arch
- fade as the presenters mug their insincere smiles in silhouette.

I watch the tv news every xmas hols at my Dad's or the in-laws and get regularly reconfirmed in my decision to completely ignore it as the only information really conveyed is that the producers think we are very stupid.

Of course, they could be right.

Posted at 11:58AM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

PS: I would love to see an episode or two of avant-garde news. Paging Mr Lealand...

Posted at 12:10PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Ha, I think PAS has its own version of Godwin's law where any discussion about television or the media ends up devolving into a discussion about how shit the 6pm news is these days :)

Re Ratings, I'm not sure generally speaking, but last night, in TV3's demographic of 18-49 (TV One uses 25-54) the ratings were as such:

One News 5.1 (22.1% share)
3 News 5.3 (23.1% share)

Close Up 4.2
Campbell Live 4.8

I'd have to say that I don't think anyone will be getting shouted morning tea by the boss on those figures, but it is summer, and no-one is watching TV at 6 or 7pm...

Ratings are the perfect examples of the "lies, damn lies and statistics" quote though.

TV3 would probably point to the 18-49 Auckland market, where 3 News got a 7.1 (34%) to One News' 2.1 (9.9%).

TVNZ's publicity on the other hand love using the "everyone 5+" demographic (because of all the oldies who are glued to TV One), where One News got a healthy 11.1 (38.8%) to 3 News' 5.3 (18.4).

Ratings can also vary dramatically day by day, seemingly for no reason. Small sample size at the smaller demographics (there are 175 people sampled in the Auckland 18-49 demo) probably has a lot to do with it. Two people go to the beach that day, you drop from a 6.0 to a 5.0 (or whatever, you get the point...)

Posted at 12:11PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

And yeah, the Daily Show. Grrr. There is a facebook group, join it if you haven't.

All TV3 seem to be saying about this (according to the facebook group) is that it's "not being picked up for 2010". It rated well (for a late night show on C4), god knows what it cost though...

Posted at 12:14PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Ha, didn't see this until just now, but on Throng they've linked to a TV3 Press Release (not sure if it was before or after my blog) doing exactly what I've suggested - pitching the Auckland numbers to show a 'win'.

http://www.throng.co.nz/campbell-live/auckland-and-metro-audiences-make-campbell-live-clear-ratings-winner

Posted at 12:55PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

In any event, it's a lot better than another fumbling Sainsbury interview and those dreadful, gushing Dominic Bowden celebrity pieces on Close Up.

I like this - Sainsbury is disappointing. I think Bowden's talents are being thoroughly misused. But whenever I switch over to Campbell Live I find a trivial story there. I guess I could plan my viewing and look at the website but old habits of just turning on the telly are hard to break.

Posted at 2:02PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

It rated well (for a late night show on C4), god knows what it cost though...

Thought that's why they carpet bombed it with RadioLive ads.
To pay for it. I mean.

Posted at 2:14PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Ha, I think PAS has its own version of Godwin's law where any discussion about television or the media ends up devolving into a discussion about how shit the 6pm news is these days :)

Because the 6pm news is incredibly important. Where she goes, so goes the nation.

But yeah, you're right.

Posted at 2:46PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

There already appears to be a lot more fight in the show this year than last, when it seemed to run one soft human interest story lifted from a provincial paper after another and too many bromance appearances from Rove. Nothing like the threat of the axe to sharpen one's thoughts, obviously.

I'm not sure to what extent the axe was a real possibility -- although, like everyone else, I certainly heard the speculation late last year.

What my anonymous source tells me is that the programme isn't under any kind of ultimatum and Audsley thinks he can make it a winner.

I think it's beaten Close Up every night this week. So yes, rumours of Campbell Live's demise seem to be somewhat exaggerated.

Anyway, Audsley promised last year that he'd come on the first or second Media7 programme of the new season, which starts next month. I'll ask him all the questions then.

Posted at 2:56PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

It rated well (for a late night show on C4), god knows what it cost though...

I do wonder if they looked at moving it to TV3 after nightline/sports tonight.

It would have a great flow-on from nightline, though it might show up their flagship late news show. Would have gotten a bigger audience there though.

Posted at 2:56PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Thought that's why they carpet bombed it with RadioLive ads.
To pay for it. I mean.

Filling your slots with ads from another part of the same company doesn't seem like the best way to make revenue does it? Seems to me it's what you'd do if no-one was paying hard cash for your space.... you'd fill your un-sold space with ads to boost the ratings of the place where your ads are selling... or something?

(just guessing... not an insider in any media/advertising business)

Posted at 3:30PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

(just guessing... not an insider in any media/advertising business)

Me neither, Same company eh. So it was all ledger entries no money was actually exchanged. See a blip in the ratings exploit it.
As well as exploiting to the nth degree a tenuous connection that can be wrought from the word "controversial" .

Must be part of the meh!media.

Posted at 3:36PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

I'm not sure to what extent the axe was a real possibility -- although, like everyone else, I certainly heard the speculation late last year.

What my anonymous source tells me is that the programme isn't under any kind of ultimatum and Audsley thinks he can make it a winner.

I think it's beaten Close Up every night this week. So yes, rumours of Campbell Live's demise seem to be somewhat exaggerated.

All good news. Glad it was just alleged axe ...

Posted at 4:02PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Filling your slots with ads from another part of the same company doesn't seem like the best way to make revenue does it? Seems to me it's what you'd do if no-one was paying hard cash for your space.... you'd fill your un-sold space with ads to boost the ratings of the place where your ads are selling... or something?

Yes, exactly. They're called "house ads" and TVNZ screened plenty of them last year too.

Whenever you see a media company running ads for itself, it's almost always because that advertising inventory is unsold.

We do it in within the Scoop Media sales network, with those banners for Pundit and Scoop. This month there's almost no paid advertising on PA, but we actually have to serve something into those spaces. Even the banner ad for the marijuana shop at the top of the page is a freebie.

Posted at 4:07PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

I think it's beaten Close Up every night this week. So yes, rumours of Campbell Live's demise seem to be somewhat exaggerated.

Actually Russell, in TV3's stated demo of 18-49, it's 2-2 so far this week. Close Up has won every night but one in 18-54 and 25-54 (which is TV One's demo).

As well as confirmation from a Campbell Live staffer that the meeting did in fact take place, I've had a bit more info this afternoon which fills in a few blanks, but doesn't change my story overly. I'll let the reporter who's done all the digging and interviewing share that story with you himself, when it runs this weekend.

Posted at 4:40PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

all those quotes about The News

We may be a very odd household. We have a TV, we needed a replacement DVD player about August 2009, and we simply didn't bother to hook up the bits that bring broadcast TV in from the antenna.

Life is much better now. About the first thing one of us is remotely missing is the new series of House.

Posted at 4:47PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Why not be completely brave, transform Nightline into must-see late night telly rather than a showcase for young hotties?

At this point I'd be happy with "transform Nightline into half-an-hour of actual new content, instead of half-an-hour of highlights from clips you played at 6pm".

Posted at 4:50PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

While I must confess some sort of interest in the whole ratings thing, I do find it a little bit annoying that people outside the 18-49 age group don't seem to matter much to programmers and advertisers. When I see a number attached to household shoppers with Sky and kids (5-12) who live in Auckland Metro, you really have to ask why they are more important than single folk in Greymouth or Greytown.

Posted at 4:54PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

OK, I'm sorry I news-hateraded this thread. So let me add something relevant to it.

Apropos the stats: is it really so that only 10% of 18-49 year olds are watching the two main tv news shows? What would a typical midwinter figure be? Do we know what other tv they're watching, or are they doing something else altogether?

Posted at 5:36PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Apropos the stats: is it really so that only 10% of 18-49 year olds are watching the two main tv news shows?

Yeah, I think that's exactly what it means. It means that few are watching it at that time at least, because I don't think it allows for time shifting (MySky, TiVo etc) though I'm open to correction.

About the same again, 6% or so are watching something on Sky ("All Sky channels"), 1.5% are watching Prime and 0.5% are watching C4.

So yeah, about 1 in 5 of all the 18-49 year olds are watching TV at that time of night. Sounds healthy to me.

In winter the numbers jump quite a bit, but given they've been falling overall for a while I wouldn't want to guess what you could expect mid-year. But as an idea, a couple of hours later, about 35%+ of people are inside watching the telly.

Posted at 5:37PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

I'll let the reporter who's done all the digging and interviewing share that story with you himself, when it runs this weekend.

Which will be Matt Nippert in the HoS. It's the sort of story he'd greatly enjoy pursuing, and he seems to have got everyone's attention in doing so. Should be worth turning to.

Anyway, I was trying not to get involved in this for the moment, although obviously conveying the view of a source at TV3 was a slightly odd way of doing it.

I'm pretty sure we'll have Audsley to talk to on Media7 anyway. Which will be a relief: TV3 news got a bit shy of us last year.

Posted at 5:46PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Another context to this is that TV3/C4 is placing a lot of stpck in comedy programming, which does attract 18-49 year-olds. They've made programmes people like -- Jacqui Brown Diaries, 7 Days -- and they'd like to make more. That will have fed into the dabble with @7

I do think the makers of @7 were on a hiding to nothing though -- they had very little warning that they'd be making a five-nights-a-week show.

Posted at 5:49PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

you'd fill your un-sold space with ads to boost the ratings of the place where your ads are selling... or something?
Yes, exactly. They're called "house ads" and TVNZ screened plenty of them last year too.

So the radio arm makes more than the TV arm? Hmm
Could have floated the gorgeous visages of Graeme Hill, Mike King, even Bruce Hopkins around the screen.
Damn now my preferences are showing.
Thanks for the info.
Anyhow John Campbell is such a talented man TV3 would be crazy to let him go. Perhaps the 7.00-7.30 is now the wrong place for him.
Im now wondering where the follow the news with what was supposed to be an in depth look at news stories came from? Australia?
And if it is still relevant? I dont know, but change is always tricky apparently, lest the sleeping beast grumbles. Apropo of nothing
Lewis Black has a book out

How if we could just find a place for funnyangry.......

Posted at 7:47PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Quite right Russ. 3 has done particularly well with their programming in recent years, and their commitment to NZ shows (putting them on in primetime, for example) has paid off.

Barring any startling developments I'm going to draw a line under this one now, but I'd like to say the following:

Having worked for/with TVNZ for some years now, I know exactly what it's like to have your workplace, workmates, work and so forth constantly under scrutiny - particularly in the case of TVNZ I think because it's state owned, people think they have the right to give you their (usually negative) feedback on exactly what's wrong. And by people I mean everyone. The lady at the check-in counter at Air NZ, my mother, every taxi driver and so forth...

So while I realise I'm probably off the Christmas card list at Campbell Live (didn't get one from them this Christmas either though, so no great loss...) I'd just like to point out that this is more than whether or not Campbell Live goes, what happens to John Campbell next and so on. There are a bunch of people there who turn up every day, and sweat their guts out to find and produce new stories every day, and I don't want to trivialise or ignore that. I really don't want to see anyone losing their job. Of course that has a lot less to do with me than it does with the new boss, but if anyone from CLive is reading, I hope it all goes okay for you in the coming months. Okay? Sweet.

Posted at 10:07PM on 29 Jan 10. Permalink.

Bastardo's took my Daily Show away.

That's Bastardos took my Daily Show away. Or Bastardoes... possibly.

Anyway, they haven't. It's just going back home, mkay?

Posted at 8:22AM on 30 Jan 10. Permalink.

That's Bastardos took my Daily Show away. Or Bastardoes... possibly.
Anyway, they haven't. It's just going back home, mkay?

Hmm.... a titled superior pedant with a humour bypass.
Now its not often you see one of those.

There are a bunch of people there who turn up every day, and sweat their guts out to find and produce new stories every day, and I don't want to trivialise or ignore that. I really don't want to see anyone losing their job.

Phew glad we got that out of the way. I want everyone to have job, in fact I hate that we got all obsessed with efficiency, thinking smart, time and motion, cost benefit analysis and all that. It's reduces a life to how it fits a system, and from there its an easy (too easy) step to the system is all important and people just have to fit around that. Tho' we have been softened up for this kind of thinking by a couple of millennia of religious subjugation. But thats by the by.

Also the thing about TV work (unless you do production) it's the mental stress and strain which can make the job hard. Sucking up to reluctant story subjects, juggling peoples expectations and agendas, co-ordinating timetables, dealing with other peoples stress and worrying about deadlines, getting a balance in the story, not overstepping BSA guidelines, and all on a contract basis so job security always hangs over your head. Still some people seem to thrive in such high stress environments and some are just addicted to it.
Anyway that's completely off topic and I think I may have given you the wrong impression, I dont care that much. If I like a program I'll watch it, if not I don't. Television is making itself irrelevant with it's ratings driven dive to the bottom. Independent public service television would seem to be dead in this country, and that is a tragedy.
So can I suck up now? I like Backbenches and those occasional monosyllabic punters you stumble across are gold. And I've always wondered why we cant sort our problems out over a beer in a convivial environment like a pub. That's right some of us cant hold our drink or know when to say no.
As you were...Right-O I'm off to play with my Tokomak