Hard News: Bean-Counting the Beat
444 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 Newer→ Last
-
et al are forgetting is that the NZ On Air doesn't just sit around doing what it wants.
not forgetting, questioning.
I have a problem with a funding organisation being one mans vision.
I've asked questions to determine how much of the policy we see enacted comes from Brendan and I think thats a fair question to ask.There is obviously a lot of interpretation going on with what nz on air does and what it's told to do by its charter/mission statement.
as simon pointed out perhaps the board takes on a lot of what brendan advises.
I'd like to know who the minds were behind the original charter. anyone got that info lying round?
-
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.
I think both are important.
There's preserving heritage and culture, and there's enabling new culture to develop.
I think its also important to have someone who can get the job done, once its decided what the actual job is of course.Smyth's been building his vision of the house for 15 years now.
The guys at fair go should have been called in on this puppy years ago -
37. Promotion of New Zealand content in programming
(d) Ensure that, in its funding of sound radio broadcasting, reasonable provision is made to assist in the production and broadcasting of drama programmes and in the broadcasting of New Zealand music.seems it is nz on airs job to ensure provision is made to assist in the broadcast of nz music.
not enough to provide content to radio and shrug it off. have to find whatever ways of assisting broadcast.I'm liking these guidelines. they seem very well thought out.
Who nutted out these ideas. -
here' s a good one for us simon.
(a) Consult from time to time with :
* i. Persons who have an interest in New Zealand broadcasting and the production of programmes in New Zealand;
shall I book you a session?
-
36. Functions of the Commission
The functions of the Commission are :
(a) To reflect and develop New Zealand identity and culture by:
* i. promoting programmes about New Zealand and New Zealand interests; and,
I wonder if music is considered a program? probably a loop hole in there somewhere.
-
... the imitation North American accent ...
Which artists do you mean, Mark ... ?
Homework for you Brendon, if you don't know, if you can't hear it if it doesn't grate with you, if your radar ain't tuned to that frequency, then why are you doing in that job?
to get you started
scribe from detroit
don't put the onus on me to do your job. If you're still having trouble here's a pointer, In the following video you will hear 4 gentlemen preaching the virtues of healthy intercourse. However one of these rappers is not like the other, one of these rappers is not the same, one of these guys is rapping like a yank, can you identify which one.
is it the rapper with:a) insects on his face
b) a fake mustache
c) a lampshade on his head
d) a vagina on his nose
-
if you don't know, if you can't hear it if it doesn't grate with you, if your radar ain't tuned to that frequency, then why are you doing in that job?
that's a very good point very well put (except for why should have been what are you doing in that job)
if it does all sound the same to anyone, then you're probably also the same people who rubbish art cos you don't get it.There are decernable features to nz music, not all of it fits in to easily definable categories but there are definitely some key ingredients, and most likely there will be more in the future. if yo can't hear them, then ask someone who can.
They wouldn't have bothered specifically noting culture and identity in the mission statement if the people who wrote it didn't think there was some culture and identity to be noticed.
-
Homework for you Brendon, if you don't know, if you can't hear it if it doesn't grate with you, if your radar ain't tuned to that frequency, then why are you doing in that job?
I always liked that Beatles' tune "Please Please Me". It was Lennon trying to sound like Roy Orbison, a guy from the southern USA. Of course it doesn't sound a lot like Roy but it does sound a lot like a guy trying to sound like Roy. It was one of a series of tunes that band did trying to sound like American singers. Their second album was full of such things and changed the musical world.
Likewise much of the earlier work of Mick Jagger et al.
Anyone who thinks Scribe actually sounds like an American rapper rather than a guy from NZ trying to sound like an American rapper must be hearing more than me. I quite like the mutation that implies.
-
I have a problem with a funding organisation being one mans vision.
Your problem is that you believe that.
-
Your problem is that you believe that.
my problem is that I suspect that, your problem is you say things like the above and expect me to treat you with respect.
do you really think I'm that stupid, that I haven't given any thought to this. I'm asking for clarification, I'm asking these questions cos thats the way it looks and people have said things in private that make it look that way.
if you don't want me to criticise you (ie say things about you you don't like and will see as insults) then try to refrain from thinking you're all knowing and everyone else has no right to have a different opinion or train of thought, cos thats the way it comes across sometimes.
-
I always liked that Beatles' tune "Please Please Me". It was Lennon trying to sound like Roy Orbison, a guy from the southern USA.
but the beatles weren't going for funding from a govt organisation set up to promote indigenous culture and identity as stated clearly in their mission statement.
Nothing wrong with a bit of the overseas influences but part of the issue was us being comfortable with our own accent.I don't think scribe is the worst offender but it is an issue.
we're not the only country that has this issue either. My friends in germany say there's a movement for german language music, because the push is to sing in english to conform to commercial radio trends.
As part of reclaiming their national identity a first step is to reclaim their language, or in our case our accent. -
my problem is that I suspect that, your problem is you say things like the above and expect me to treat you with respect.
I've sort of given up on that.
do you really think I'm that stupid, that I haven't given any thought to this. I'm asking for clarification, I'm asking these questions cos thats the way it looks and people have said things in private that make it look that way.
But you're generally not "asking for clarification", you're making allegations. There's a difference.
Look, I share concerns that the present funding system is failing in some respects. I think it needs some new thinking. I've written various things to that effect. I just don't accept the need to personalise it and demonise people the way you do.
-
I've sort of given up on that.
well don't. I've given you kudos for a few things on here and am happy to do so, give credit where credits due. I've not seen one acknowledgment of my experience, or potential insight into issues.
I've been dealing with grant systems for over 25 years, I've done a lot of work in exactly the area that nz on air's mission statement says its targeted at, I deal on a daily basis with musicians who are left out of the system, but are valid contributors to our culture, more so than some of the recipients although history will prove that I guess.
Why would you be so dismissive of opinion that came from that background? others in the industry aren't. Even brendan isn'tfrom brendan pg 19
Who's the band, Rob ... ? I would genuinely like to know because, despite our philosophical differences, I am interested in what knowledgeable people in the industry consider to be "one of the best bands (they've) seen in 10 years".
Why would you think you have more insight and knowledge from your background or at least the knowledge to dismiss my input?
I just don't accept the need to personalise it and demonise people the way you do.
I think I addressed those issues after brendan undemonised himself by entering into debate, and undid a lot of my resentment toward him for avoiding it, and good for him. I still disagree with the way the system has been run and you also feel it has failed so we're not exactly on opposite sides of the fence.
Post debate with brendan (and I hope he will address a few more issues and not just leave it at that) I don't even hink the man is without merit, I just think the vision reeds refocusing on its original intent and that the process be around a consensus which includes the music community it serves, ie not the apparent vision of one person, and I'll keep that view until I see it proved otherwise.
-
___Who's the band, Rob ... ? I would genuinely like to know because, despite our philosophical differences, I am interested in what knowledgeable people in the industry consider to be "one of the best bands (they've) seen in 10 years".__
Why would you think you have more insight and knowledge from your background or at least the knowledge to dismiss my input?
I'm not dismissing your input. But compare the respect Brendan showed you there with what you've repeatedly said about him in this thread.
I think I addressed those issues after brendan undemonised himself by entering into debate, and undid a lot of my resentment toward him for avoiding it, and good for him.
After you'd expressed a good deal of that resentment in personal terms, and implied I was lying when I explained the delay in him responding to the discussion. That's the kind of thing that annoys me.
I still disagree with the way the system has been run and you also feel it has failed so we're not exactly on opposite sides of the fence.
No, we're not.
-
Actually, seeing as I'm in avoidance mode on real work, I might as well address this point.
__but please try and bear in mind that it's my house.__
that's an interesting concept.
It's a fact.
I don't know that I agree with you entirely on that.
My understanding is public address is an open discussion forum, and this is your blog in that forum.I'm responsible for Public Address. I own the site and pay for the development and if (god forbid) a defamation writ should one day arrive, it will have my name on it.
It depends on if you see your blog on public address as a route to frank and honest feed back to your other activities such as your media show or listener column or if you see it more as a fan site for you, like a band website etc.
Oh, don't be so pompous. The original blog post wasn't about me, it was about some issues that warranted discussion. You can sit in judgement all you like about whether I'm "qualified" to have an opinion, it's just not very useful.
Public Address seems somewhat of a media experiment.
Not really. It's based on norms about online discussion that have been established over the past 25 years, in the first instance in Usenet newsgroups. I've been participating in such discussions for 15 years and I've certainly made my mistakes along the way. The desire to not turn into Usenet is a fairly powerful principle in managing online discussions.
Can you have open and frank interaction with the public in an open forum?. people might say things you don't like.
What do you do about it when they do?
you could disable their account but then the experiment has failed cos you're silencing that which you don't want to hear, not really in the spirit of the internet and open access.Lots of people say things I disagree with. That's cool. I participate in discussions attached to my posts much more than most bloggers (and certainly most journo-bloggers), but I also have a role as a moderator in maintaining the environment for everyone else -- the alternative is that it turns into Usenet. Your occasional baiting of people makes that difficult.
Rob, I actually really respect the work you do with music, I'd like to help what you do, but you do have a way of pissing people off that doesn't aid your cause.
-
Oh, don't be so pompous.
I wasn't. try not to read it as such?
its a legitimate distinction. I didn't say ego boosting site, which would have been pompus, I said fan site, the best term I could find to describe a site supporting an entity.but you do have a way of pissing people off that doesn't aid your cause
:), I hadn't noticed.
from my position I wonder if brendan would have addressed this forum if I hadn't pushed, or if you would have stated you position as per dubmuggas question. there is a trend to use the say nothing approach to make things go away in the modern world, I'm experimenting on how to push past that, sometimes unsuccessfully, sometimes, results. at least I'm prepared to speak up and state a position. got to give me credit for that. many many people keep quiet on this issue because they're scared it will hurt them, me, I don't rally care.
But compare the respect Brendan showed you there with what you've repeatedly said about him in this thread.
It was an accurate representation of feelings on my part, and I didn't try to hide them. it came from brendan and his team's last few interactions with me when we were on good terms and his subsequent actions and I think it was deserved. His last discussion on this site indicated a change in attitude and I give brendan due respect for that as you may notice in my subsequent posts. I'm still not a fan but I'm not calling for his blood either. He showed himself to be an intelligent debater, he acknowledged due points in his opponents case, while making his own.
now if he'd address the rest of the issues maybe we'd get somewhere. I don't think he's the man for the job though, although finding the right replacement person isn't always as easy as biffing the last guy. My current position is persons not person.lots of people say things I disagree with.
I'd like to see more of you listening and acknowledging.
Rob, I actually really respect the work you do with music, I'd like to help what you do,
thanks, nice to hear, and I've given you kudos for your media commentary and internet, is this where we group hug?
-
Why not? I think you've both arrived somewhere really special over the last twenty-one pages...
-
Why not? I think you've both arrived somewhere really special over the last twenty-one pages...
Brilliant.
-
..and there we have it. The great NZ music month internet debate about NZoA funding structures and personell of 2008
So what have we learnt or achieved ??? Well apart from having a good ol grizzle and whine with a large chunk of rant thrown in and the rare appearance of the top dawg in to elucidate the official postion without really answering the BIG questions, I'd say we learnt a little and achieved fuck alll...
So was it worth it ??? I'd like to think some positives could come out of this. It's surely not for the lack of ideas if nothing did so where to next ??? Wait another year and do it all over again ???
Maybe we should place bets on changing govt policy for a possible change in gov't with accompanying clean out in the public sector of all the entrenched labourite bureaucrats. Can't really see that happening, more likely a budget cutback and trim around the edges compensated for by an extra weeks holiday for those who make the grade.
Surely though with the change in focus from sourcing music for personal and professional purposes shifting from radio plugged stuff with timed video release leading to increased sales of CD's, to net based promotion and sales bypasing the radio element and retail stores there must be a change in focus of the funding structures to reflect that???
Somehow i doubt that too. Just as those responsible for implementing the vision for the current system have legitimised the virtual arsekissing ol boys network of BS and the radio jocks so too will those with too much to lose duck and run, shuck and jive, baffle in bullshit and blind in ignorance resist the winds of change still sweeping the music industry.
Things to expect in the coming year would then be. More crap one hit wonder groups, watered down hiphop, boring lo fi guitar pop bands, inauthentic reggae artists, aged icons making another comeback, possibly even a supergroup of reformed 'cats away' proportions looking to cash in again and hayley westenra doing what she does so well, soft porn covers
On the' live' international side, more gov't sponsored junket trips for bands and bureaucrats to largely irrelevent music conferences showcasing talent which for lack of innovative marketing in the digital age and lack lustresongs would see them achive far more with the money spent on getting them there. Locally, less chance of any band building a live fanbase due to escalating costs of touring, the lack of patronage, decent venues and thus being incapable of leveraging that into massive CD sales.
Cant fucking wait...
BTW, in capitalising on the increased awareness brought about by music month, does anyone have stats on CD releases and sales for this music month compared to last year and the years before ??? Somehow I dont think music month is about that either. It seems more about counting the beans, ticking the boxes, attending the industry parties, browning the nose and backslapping congratulations for another year of awesome kiwi achievement but really what have we achieved through the current system ???
...one step forward 2 steps back or one giant leap for bureaucracy one tiny step for art and culture
-
Why not? I think you've both arrived somewhere really special over the last twenty-one pages...
sam sam sam sam,
i'm taking it your comment was a sarcastic one, I'm sure hoping so cos there's not nearly enough of it in the world.
20 pretty reasonable pages of interesting and indepth debate and you focus on the melodrama side line off 2 clashing egos.that about sums up the media and the media eating public who only want the hype.
I think I'll bait someone, not now, in a few days. got something better to do with my life but soon I'll be bored.
-
Seriously, I've found the substance of the debate fascinating, even if the "melodrama side line" seems to have become the main event at a few points.
I would have stuck my oar in earlier, but forgive my humble self, a mere member of the public, for not having anything much to add to a twenty-page discussion of NZoA funding priorities which includes several industry experts and a senior official from the body in question. I know we are all about getting everyone involved here, but even by PAS standards this thread is intimidating to the common folk.
So you can interpret my posts as a compliment, or a heckle, or a sign of intellectual weakness, or whatever. But at the same time, can't we have a little fun? How po-faced and dignified a response do you expect after you've ended a post with a (seemingly backhanded) comment about group hugs? If there isn't enough sarcasm in the world, you seem happy to be doing your bit.
-
Isnt it funny how the young turks become the old boys.
-
I know we are all about getting everyone involved here, but even by PAS standards this thread is intimidating to the common folk.
I was actually interested in getting kyle's view on things, from the non involved average kiwi thing, but it was not to be.
Its hard to get an outside perspective when you're in the middle. kinda like how kiwis think aussies care about the kiwi ausie battle (they on't even think about it), or that the rest of the world is waiting for our music (they're not, they too obsessed with their own).But at the same time, can't we have a little fun?
absofuckinglutely please, its like no one can take a friggin' joke (at their expense)
How po-faced and dignified a response do you expect after you've ended a post with a (seemingly backhanded) comment about group hugs?
again, all in the reading, I was being pleasant, honest, I didn't put a smilie on the end of it cos I thought it might come across as .... something else.
I'm all for a little piss taking please,
go on, you know you want to, but I do give it back -
little bit of spare time to address a couple of comments
and implied I was lying when I explained the delay in him responding to the discussion. That's the kind of thing that annoys me.
I was winding you up, taking the piss, I thought it was amusing, and certainly events read as such.
you have to admit it was mildly amusing that brendan couldn't get onto a discussion board that takes all of 2mins to sign up to. That it was such an effort to get on and address some serious criticisms.Until he actually made it it looked like more of the same avoidance, as per previous occurrences, which did make it look suspicious, I think thats fair, no offence meant to you but....
Its to his credit that he did get on and make some effort to address issues raised. But really, what choice did he have? It was making him look really bad on a reasonably well known public forum. Maybe my goading played no part in that, maybe it did, who knows. I'm glad he did present himself and got a few good points cleared up from the sessions.
He hasn't been back to address anything further though. maybe I'll write out a list of unanswered straightly put questions. Maybe put them to the broadcasting commission too.
-
but please try and bear in mind that it's my house.
that's an interesting concept.
It's a fact.
without prejudice I see what you're saying re paying for and responsibility for the site etc,
The interesting concept bit (said without sarcasm) is to what degree can someone call a section of the internet open to the public theirs?
yes its hosted on serves you pay for but the content when made public enters a whole other level, one quite different from ones modest Auckland accommodation, let alone the difference between a private forum and one such as PA which sets itself up as a media experiment of sorts.and no I wouldn't engage in lively debate/criticism in your real world home. I would do it here though
Do you think there is a philosophical difference between the 3 places (real world, private forum, public forum)?(serious question, no sarcasm)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.