Posts by DD
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Replying to an earlier post:
" if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and acts as the prime agency for funding music. It's a music funding agency duck.
But. It. Isn't.
It operates under the Broadcasting Act, and it was created as the Broadcasting Commission. Maybe that should change, but you wanting it to be something else doesn't make it so. "
I don't know about you, but my copy of the Broadcasting Act says this about the Broadcasting Commission:
36
2 The Commission may also make funds available (on the terms and conditions that it thinks fit and, as far as practicable, in a manner consistent with its primary functions) for—(a) transmitting on demand; and
(b) producing content for transmitting on demand; and
(c) archiving content.The Act also says:
43 In making funds available under section 36, the Commission shall, to the extent that, in the opinion of the Commission, it is practicable to do so,—(a) invite competitive proposals for the use of funds made available by the Commission; and
(b) ensure by the terms of contracts that the recipients of the funds are obliged both to attain specified standards of performance and to account for the use of the funds; and
(c) adopt measures to ensure that recipients of funds comply with the terms referred to in paragraph (b).Furthermore, it says:
44 (1) The Minister may not give a direction to the Commission in relation to cultural matters.
(2) No responsible Minister or any other Minister, and no person acting by or on behalf of or at the direction of a responsible Minister or any other Minister, may give a direction in respect of—
(a) any programme or contentIs there some amendment to the Act that makes it illegal not to blow millions on "radio friendly" pop music? Have I missed something?
I may have missed something here but I thought the Broadcasting Commission is an Autonomous Crown Entity (ACE) and the Culture and Heritage Ministry stays out of funding decisions and how the Commission interprets its primary function. According to the Act, the Government leaves it to the Commission Board of Directors to make policy about how it spends the money and on what. Shouldn't the music industry be lobbying the Broadcasting Commission Board? Stop talking to/about Brendan Smyth. He is in a good position to approach the Board to make change, but he's obviously not up to it and may have his own agenda anyway.
Maybe it's time for the Ministry for Culture and Heritage to produce a discussion document that can help inform the Board on the future of music funding. This is overdue, considering the changes in technology, distribution and the music economy.
By the way, the Broadcasting Act says one of the Broadcasting Commission's primary roles is "to reflect and develop New Zealand identity and culture... promoting programmes about New Zealand and New Zealand interests"
When it comes to TV content the Commission seems to favour variety that reflects and develops NZ identity and culture, including funding of different genres and programmes that would not otherwise be made. When it comes to funding music content it is all about funding pop music, which in my view is a very narrow genre considering all the music that New Zealanders make. It doesn't have to be like this. There's a double standard here.