Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
focus dubmugga, focus.
-
budgeting $1000 let alone $5000 doesn't say much for respecting the worth and talent of nz film and video makers either. The music industry has been relying on the good will of video talent for its entire existence.
maybe we're happier watching small indie done vids though, I certainly enjoy a great idea on a small budget, but then I like something with a bit of class too.
-
I don't think radio's actually over, just less important for music discovery.
from the mission statement nz on air is there to "reflect and foster the development of New Zealand culture and identity through broadcasting"
I guess it depends on the definition of broadcasting. is the internet more like a newspaper or a tv, or a bit of both.The amount of funding per grant would depend on whether it was considered a priority to up the production standard of content.
The initial $5000 was based on what someone though it would reasonably cost to make a video in 1993 and later on to record a song to radio quality specifications.
Have those costs realistically changed.
to make a home video and edit it on i movie, $1000 is arguably too much. to make a competitive broadcast-able vid, well there's not much difference in the cost of shooting it on digital video and hi def vid. film obviously more expensive.
but is the cost of a higher end vid in the media its shot on or in the staging and talent. If you budget on $1000 then you're saying talent can and should be for free essentially, cos $1000 won't get you much proefssional level involvement.
It also fosters the mates rates thing, which is great if you've got mates in the vid business. Do you make it part of the application that you must declare you friends in the vid biz and if you don't have any you're less likely to get funding? not realy a very professional scheme.the bigger issue and one which you raised Russell is its not a lot of money, especially compared to say the 20 mill the govt saw fit to give the americias cup thing cos they lost.
does nz take its music culture seriously?
-
I think you over rate the state of play for the internet right now.
Radio exists in cars and factories, when people aren't paying attention to the job or driving. that won't change and its a big market of exposure.
one of NZ on air's jobs was to target that specifically, so its a different thing to suggest targeting the internet. that should be another project with another budget.
Radio still needs to be tamed.and if simon is to be believed cds are still 80 percent of the market (I think that's what he said and he's pretty into the facts and figures of the music sales industry)
forget bands and managers approaching radio for play (what managers, who'd manage a band in nz? thankless task that takes all your time and gives you nothing). never going to happen. radio doesn't meet with individual artists. there arseholes enough as it is, you're not going to get em to meet and greet each artist that has a lame story of world domination.
I personally think the original intention of NZ on Air was a good one. Their mission statement reads well, it just bears no resemblance to what they're actually doing under smyth's management.
And it doesn't look like we're going to get an answer from the man on where he gets his direction from. Not from any document I've managed to track down and read that's for sure.wonder if I could use their catch phrase since they're not really using it.
-
what did you think of my idea of scrapping video and music funding and putting the money directly into changing radio, lobbying for a quota, setting up a a free youth radio network or something? got to be money better spent if one's objectives really were the enhancement of public identity and support of culture.
-
harangue, cajole, spam and troll him across all threads til he answers :)
all in the best possible taste of course.
I'm still chuckling over the its my fault the internet is broken thing. that was so "the dog ate my homework". It so deserved some teasing but it seems no one else here has had an older brother or sister give em shit before.
It should be mandatory for kids to have a crap name or parents that dress them funny so they can get a bit of skin thickening going on. sure it hurts while its happening but in the long run you can use that learned skill to handle things like the internets. ( I kid, I kid because I care, no really,...) -
Cheer up Russell :)
I'd be keen to hear your reasons for thinknig BS is the man for these changing times ? I do hope it's not a case of the devil you know. Personally I just dont think he's got an exit strategy or a turnaround one but if so I'd love to hear it.
how you going on your polite request for clarification there dubmugga?
notice how I'm staying out of this one, as a media experiment, I want to see if politeness works.ok, back to practicing my patience-ness for sofie,
its a lot more difficult than it seems, -
Patience is a virtue.
is gullibility a virtue?
-
frightened ???....PFFFFFT !!! that is some weak sauce .For my mind there is a whole lot of constructive opinions in here.
my thoughts exactly. If he's going to be the spokes person for nz on air he better
a) know his history and policy inside out.
b) be good at conveying said policy in a matter befitting a public servant.
c) be open to input from the knowledgeable community that nz on air services (ie listen, be seen to be listening)
d) be thick skinned enough to take on criticism and deal with it accordingly.if you can not handle these factors then you really shouldn't be a spokes person for any govt department.
As a manager of a government department you'll need most of the same skills plus a few extra.
I missed it initially in Russell's excellent title for this thread, "bean-counting the beat" (a title worthy of a british tabloid and I mean that as a compliment).
Brendan has said in interviews he's essentially an accountant, administering funds, balancing books etc.
He's been round a long time, I think way back to 1980 was it when he joined the arts council funding program, QEII arts council I think it was initially, and it was always a bean counting role. But now he's policy, and spokesperson. One has to ask why?
Why are we not putting in experts on our culture, our history and specifically music to guide this scheme. Is it that we've got no one versed enough in that field? I find that hard to believe. Mike Chunn and Chris Knox easily spring to mind. Both intelligent people with a huge background in the art of musically expressing yourself in this country (cultural identity - line one of the mission statement of NZ on Air).
So maybe I've been too rough on MR Smyth, its not his fault someone gave him the job and salary, but really, should he be doing?
-
thanks sofie
I take your point re barrage but initially discussion wasn't aimed with brendan's input or participation in mind, I didn't actually think it was an option and as yet haven't been proved wrong on that opinion, and noting the irony after his media 7 comment that he was always up for debate.other than that mostly just theorising and venting though,
I don't have much faith in the systems ability to change, it hasn't done very well with polite and positive input in the past, why should now be any different?