Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
but can we at least acknowledge:
I did
and I do. that was a big step forward from the last 5 years, and kudos to the man for entering debate and doing so in an intelligent and credible manner. He was dismissive on his first entry but made up for it this time round. acknowledged truths and added background to his perspective. He acknowledged there were different philosophies on this.lots of important points missed but a good start.
I still think its time for a new approach, which could mean a whole new system that doesn't even think about commercial radio, or perhaps it puts commercial radio into perspective.Robbery
That was the crucial part of the whole endeavor. change radio not change us.simon
And that too, with some reservations as to our right to change companies who have been asked to pay millions for the right to broadcast,I've had a bit of a think about this and yes they paid for the right to use the frequencies (lease) but they belong to nzers, just like our national forests.
As with national forests there can and should be conditions of use.
ripping down natives and putting in pines shouldn't be accepted for either of these resources.I think its completely acceptable to say "sure, if you want to use our airwaves to generate business by selling advertising you have to respect our right to have those airwaves reflect us". here's a big quota, now fuck off and go make your money. (perhaps needs a re write on that last bit).
Funding isn't the only objective of NZ on Air either. They've got and had a (apparently ineffectual) radio plugger. Why not a lobbyiest, someone representing the the interests of NZ Music to govt (as they do to an extent with plans for new schemes etc), pushing full on for quotas, extended national radio, etc etc.
rather than throwing money at un-played music, put that toward a concerted effort to change the present conditions for a year make the change then supply a wider variety of local content.
just some ideas. its not like I get paid a govt salary to do it. -
validates Roberry & Dubmugga's
that was dubmugga's idea point, which struck me as so bleeding obvious I don't know why it isn't part of the process.
independent analysis. -
So nevermind it's a shit tune, the video is going to be amazing because Chris Cunningham has agreed to direct it?
he does have a point though. no point in giving money to a good song if they're going to fuck up the vid and make everyone cringe.
surely in funding videos enlisted crew and concept would be the biggest factor, assuming your song isn't complete rubbish.I can see the other side of that though.
These are people who need to apply for funding. its the start of the precess so you can hardly expect a finished video from them. -
embarrassing yes, but not really NZOA's job is it?
an aside, not aimed at nz on air. bit of a fuck up on the bands part though.
Again, unfair on NZOA
again. not aimed an nz on air specifically, more a comment on the current environment for artists. one of my personal focuses is attempting to keep some of this "history" in the public sphere.
NZ on Airs job is to get a better environment for our music, so that we can enjoy and appreciate our own culture. I think it is part of that to know what's happening and try and make it easier for it to come through. This one specific band did play a showcase for the industry, including 2 nz on air reps who were present, -
How about a hiphop artist with a massive groundswell of grassroots support and making tunes no different in style than any other contemporary american ie gangsta booty ???
you mean like low riders and bitches and drivebye shootings gangsta?
you're saying someone in chch is making that kind of music? -
for you're next visit,
how do you reconcile the directive 'NZ On Air will allocate funding so that programmes and broadcasts that wouldn't otherwise be made in a commercial market can be produced." with your phase 4 and commercial radio bent initiatives. why are we using government funding for this kind of thing? -
thanks for answering the critics.
-
I'm talking there about funding. We were talking before about how we tracklist the hit discs.
ok, understood,
so who from the music community do you consult, your nick bollinger types, your cheese on toast types, your blink jorgnesen types, the people recognised on the street as being in touch with what is happening in nz culture?
surely you're not leaving the funding decisions to comm radio, and your team? -
Which artists do you mean, Mark ... ?
he could mean good night nurse, they do a good american accent.
jody lloyd could fill you in on all the hip hop acts that do fake accents for you. -
as I say ... that's with music videos and at one stage in the new artists scheme process where we are funding radio singles ... but not with the hit discs.
no you were specifically talking about radio programmers, here's the full quote in context.
we have not given the funding control over to radio programmers, radio does not “pick the bands”. The reality is that when we are making decisions about which songs to fund, we research those songs with the broadcasters. Yes ... that's true. We do not exist in a vacuum. We consult the broadcasters and we get their feedback on the “airplay potential” of the song from their programming point of view as part of our research.