Hard News: In the Game
141 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Andre -
I'm quite sure that bilingualism would be quite a burden for those in areas like direct marketing. That doesn't deny the legitamacy of an indigenous language as a significant cultural goal. Indeed the growth of the Welsh language though slow, is steady and suggests that there are significant possibilities and opportunities for the growth of Te Reo.
But it does take time, effort and affirmitave action. I can only take it that there are those in NZ not yet prepared to entertain such ideas.
One of my favourite TV channels
Playing host to an award winning soap
and of course Sam Tan
Please do provide a source other than the Heraldfor the estimate of billions spent or indeed the matter of appparently only 18,000 speakers of Te Reo.
-
Russell's not racist - his issue is where the money's coming from, which is fair enough. The Herald's choice of headline, however, is something else.
-
I am reminded of this wonderful quote that there is nothing like a bit of OE (usually further than Oz) being good for the soul:
And accessible broadband is the next best thing.
For all its multiculturalism, French language still seems to be a bone of contention in Canada, apparently more so than Maori language in NZ.
-
If a French language channel had won the rights I'd be more worried - and so would you.
And if we lived in France, I'd give a shit.
Andre, you've gone from "5 to 10% of the coverage" being in te reo to "0.004% of us speak Maori yet our biggest sporting event is going to be broadcast using the language" to now comparing it to being in French. Honestly, what are you afraid of?
-
My chances of understanding what happens at the breakdown wouldn't be significantly diminished if the commentary ended up being in te reo.
A squirrel grip crosses all language boundaries instantly.
-
Russell's not racist - his issue is where the money's coming from, which is fair enough. The Herald's choice of headline, however, is something else.
God help me, standing up for The Herald, but how is the headline or anything else about the story you linked to racist? Personally, I don't think watching a live rugby game is some kind of fundamental human right, but its not as if the O'Herald hasn't done plenty of huffing and puffing about evil Sky having exclusive broadcast rights to sports events. (A little rich coming from the newspaper that has an effectively monopolistic grip on New Zealand's largest media market, but that's a whole other kete of kai moana.)
And I had to piss my pants laughing at Media Works CEO Brent Impey huffing that "Applying public money to a commercial event, competing against legitimate business interests, raised serious issues." I guess the next highly successful series of Outrageous Fortune will be entirely self-financing, and several million dollars of NZOA funding can now be freed up.
-
I'm afraid that the other 4 million of us are being dictated to so that Sharples can win a political point and one of the side effects will be thousands of kids missing out on seeing any of the coverage.
We won the rights to host the event after years of toil creating and winning a bid. Then we are going to spend millions on building and upgrading stadiums. Then we are spending millions more building an events centre on the wharf. And then we are payng millions more to buy coverage rights for TV and radio. Then there is the cost of actually running the event to take into consideration. If it isn't billions it looks like at least a billion.
On that basis it is wrong to leave hundreds of thousands of Kiwis who want to see it without paying being unable to. It's their money that the event is chewing through as well. -
Thousands of kids won't be able to watch it because their parents can't afford sky or freeview and they live [in] ... Queenstown
Yeah, won't somebody think of the impoverished kids of Queenstown, scraping to pay for a sky sub as well as a lift pass, new pair of skis...
-
How about the kids of the many low-paid hospo workers. Who cleans those hotels in Queenstown?
-
Pommy backpackers, mostly. Rest assured they'll find a way to see England win the world cup back, whatever channel it runs on.
-
I normally only check a thread out a couple of times before moving on.
Yeah, I wouldn't read that drivel either..
-
I've always thought that All Black games should be free and live-to-air anyway but have accepted the status quo. We are a nation built on the premise that we are all equal and that being wealthy isn't a pre-requisite to belonging.
The RWC final will be our biggest sporting event since 1987. I'm disgusted that the government is actively discriminating against those who can't afford to pay to view it. It's wrong. What do we stand for? -
Doesn't this come down to the IRB in the end? If they decide a few extra bucks (on top of the obscene amounts I suspect Sky paid plus all the exclusive sponsorship stuff) plus the (to my mind) unique "NZ-ness" of the Maori proposal trumps getting analogue coverage to that final 10% then there you go.
Certainly the funding decisions are a separate topic to the IRB's decision making process.
And hey, 10% of households - that's about 200,000 homes yeah? How's about a $50 subsidy of a cheap Freeview box out of the Analogue Switchoff budget? Presuming 70% takeup, that's $7m that would probably have to have been spent anyway? -
Andre:
I wouldn't have caught the rugby as a kid on that basis. Love of our national sporting team is something that binds us together as a nation. Not everyone agrees (Paul etc) but the majority do...
A regularly trotted out generalisation.
The WC quarterfinal loss in 2007 was on a Sunday morning around 8am on free to air TV (TV3) and had 1,000,000 viewers.
What on earth were the other 3,000,000 doing?
-
From the Herald:
towns such as Russell, Paihia, Kaikohe, Wellsford, Warkworth, Coromandel, Whitianga
What strikes me is that most of these towns have large Maori populations. The ten percent or so of the population who can't get MTV coverage are more than likely places with higher Maori populations.
-
For all its multiculturalism, French language still seems to be a bone of contention in Canada, apparently more so than Maori language in NZ.
Yes, two imported languages fighting for the right to impose themselves on a nation.
Methinks te reo Maori may be a little different.
Sorry Andre, A quote is a quote and one can't decide that 100 years later parts of it should be censored. But my point was we should care about te reo. It is ours. Noone else in the world has it. And all I suggest is that one may lose that perspective if one does not / has not checked out the sginificance of that in relation to how the rest of the world lives.
If MTV do not get the rights, having part (10% was mentioned) of the commentary in te reo should not be a valid reason to deny MTV getting them.
Coconut tackle anyone? Things can get lost in translation even from an english speaking South Africa to an english speaking pacific country. At least te reo is pretty homegrown so maybe less will be lost.
Squirrel grip. SPCA? Where are you?
18,000/4,000,000=0.45%. An order of maginitude missing somewhere? (0.56% for the Bill and Ben Party at the last election. Now THATS worth a TV show!!)
-
On that basis it is wrong to leave hundreds of thousands of Kiwis who want to see it without paying being unable to.
Boo fucking hoo... Since TV One seems to have given up on broadcasting quality British drama and documentaries pitched above the 'when freakishly large tits gone wild attack!' level, and left Sky (and Prime, to a lesser extent) to pick up the slack could Uncle Trevor and Uncle Jonathan give me a free Sky box for Christmas?
And if you really want to get me into rant mode, just start me up on how the IRB qualifies as the biggest corporate welfare bludger in town -- and has been cheerfully enabled by local and central government.
-
@ George Darroch - many of the towns missing out are also rugby-playing towns.
If the All Whites get through to the World Cup I think that it should be of enough national importance to screen that live free-to-air as well.
My argument is about children missing out. Going to school and having their wealthier friends ask whether or not they are watching it etc. We are encouraging a split between the haves and have-nots that seems at odds with our stated beliefs as a nation. We spend lot on encoraging kids to play sport but these events will inspire children in a way that a Push Play campaign never will.
We spent $50 million on the yachting. At least rugby is a game that most kiwi kids can participate in. The priorities are wrong. -
@Craig_Ranapia The bigger question of whether TVNZ's offering is worse than it was twenty years ago is a much bigger kettle of fish. TVNZ7 seems to offer a better quality programming than TVNZ on many counts. TV in NZ is going user-pays. It's that simple. We've spent a lot of tax money over many years to build the infrastructure and now we are going to be charged to view it. The free Freeview box idea is a good one but I think that it should be rolled out nationally to every home. I love the way that MySky HDI dropped from $599 to $49 to sign up as soon as freeview HDI became available. What is the real cost of the box on that basis?
-
Andre:
5 to 10 % of the commentary and flavour stuff is going to be in Maori. You really can't put up with that? Maori is an official language of NZ.
Lets use an analogy from another country with multiple official languages (and DeepRed, I'd disagree that it is a bone of contention, really - Quebec nationalism is a massive one, but the language issue is only a small part of that).
Every Montreal Canadiens game is broadcast on TV in French only. While the majority of Montreal residents are fluent in French, a significant minority are not (the city has a large immigrant population, both from elsewhere in Canada and overseas). Also, the club has fans all over Canada, and French is not widespread outside Quebec. So you have a large team constituency that does not fluently speak the language of the commentators. There is almost no bitching about this in Canada. Oddly enough, people manage by either muting the commentary, which is inane whether or not you can understand it, or turning on the radio.
Let me repeat - this is the entire commentary in French. Not 5 to 10% of the prematch BS, which is what I understand MTS is proposing. You really can't handle that?
As for the coverage - even the current VHF networks only hit 97% of the population, so no terrestrial network in NZ has universal coverage. Some people are going to need to get a satellite service to receive the broadcast no matter who gets it. The question therefore is whether we say only TVNZ and TV3 are allowed to broadcast the RWC (both of whom seem unwilling to pay the price that the IRB is asking), or whether we also allow MTS and Prime to bid. If we don't let the 90% UHF broadcasters bid, there is a serious prospect of no FTA coverage.
I'd also note, and this is something that people are not really processing yet, that the digital terrestrial footprint once analogue TV is switched off (which will almost certainly be within 5 years) is only going to be 75%. 90% looks pretty good in that context.
Now, Russell's point about whether it's appropriate to blow 3 million bucks of TPK's budget on this (seemingly given to Sharples as a bribe to get him to shut up about all the times this term that the Nats have screwed over the Maori party) is another issue entirely, and one that I agree deserves some scrutiny. But complaining about coverage levels and language as 'disenfranchising' is just absurd.
-
Talking about free media: http://www.realgroove.co.nz/Giveaway/Default.aspx
-
My argument is about children missing out. Going to school and having their wealthier friends ask whether or not they are watching it etc. We are encouraging a split between the haves and have-nots that seems at odds with our stated beliefs as a nation. We spend lot on encoraging kids to play sport but these events will inspire children in a way that a Push Play campaign never will.
I agree with your sentiment and it's something I've lamented as well but sadly that ship has long since sailed.
If you don't have SKY then you basically do not watch rugby fullstop. Seeing a sport once every 4 years (and often it's on in the wee small hours) is not going to have the effect I think you think it will have.
If you want kids watching cricket, rugby, league and other sports they have the chance to play in NZ then it needs to be on regularly and that dried up aside from the odd single delayed game once a weekend on at some late time donkeys years ago.
Besides, there's 2 years for people to sort out their recpetion situation if they are that desperate.
-
@ Eddie Clark I watched the local rugby league national champ final on Maori TV and some of the Basketball on Maori TV and there is a huge amount that you just can't follow at all unless you speak the language. That's fine for some sport - but not the biggest sporting match in the last two decades that we've spent a lot of money securing the hosting rights to. The fact that most of the small towns in New Zealand won't be able to see it unless they pay for it is the thing that peeves me off the most about the issue though. And the feeling that we are being screwed over by politicians for their own vanity.
-
We spent $50 million on the yachting. At least rugby is a game that most kiwi kids can participate in.
NZ Young People: 14% Rugby, 8% Touch, 18% Soccer, 13% Cricket, 10% Netball, 1% Rugby League (yes 1%).
Maori Young People: 20% Rugby, 15% Touch, 12% Netball, 11% Soccer, 10% Cricket, 3% Rugby League.
Pacific Island Young People: 15% Rugby, 19% Soccer, 17% Touch, 10% Cricket, 9% Netball, 5% Rugby League,
http://www.sparc.org.nz/research-policy/participation-in-sport
"Most Kiwi kids" don't though.
-
What is the real cost of the box on that basis?
I'm selling my (secondhand) freeview box on trademe. I'll let you know ;)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.