Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The Phoenix Foundation tracks are from another band also called (the) Phoenix Foundation.
What are the chances, I thought it was a pretty original name.
guess its a law suit or ad NZ to the end of your name.....sigh
-
Along those lines ... and yes, I'm happy to share whatever I can contribute for free
for a second there I thought you were fishing for a job,
that's cool of you to offer your advice pro bono.That still doesn't address the failings of the current system with regards how they interact with the current crop of musicians. I think nz is small enough for a small organisation to be up on what most centres have going on and actively help artists to achieve wider exposure for their various styles, not just commercial radio fodder.
yes tie in internet with that.
At the moment we have an ivory tower with 3-4 people sitting there defending themselves and telling us all that nothing is wrong in the kingdom.
-
Anything else is a qualitative judgment. Full Stop.
a judgment called for and avoided by mr smyth. see links above to nz on air mission statements.
I know its a difficult job to assess cultural significance but its a distinction that would have favoured many of these bands and musicians we all seem to agree don't get a fair shake of the stick.I'm having trouble see why we seem to agree yet some seem to disagree while agreeing.
-
.why toss that away.
who said toss (ok I did, it was me), move him over. if the policy is so clear cut then other people with new ideas will surely have a good impact on implementing the objective which brendan has so obviously struggled with.
-
No, Rob, it doesn't. I see the guy several times a year at various events, I like and respect him, but I've never been to his house or even sat down and had a drink with him.
ok, I'll take you at your word on that, to use your phrase.
There's no need to invent conspiracies. My opinions are my own. Could you please stop trying to personalise the issue in this way?
I'm not conspiracy theorising. its a simple question. does it have any affect on your judgement? If I was Brendans mate and was hosting a program on funding I'd certainly feel conflicted. But that's just me.
luckily he's not my mate so I can feel free to have a good open critique of the system, if that counts for anything.
did you answer dubmuggas direct question yet? haven't seen it.
-
Perils of television. We were over time and I needed to wrap up. It's the kind of thing you realise afterwards.
ok, can you as a media commentator expand on what brendan was saying. what's the story behind the 12% rise. can you find out?
-
If it's not going to get on air, then it's not going to be supported by NZ on air.
That's a very chicken and egg comment to make kyle and I completely understand why you would make it. to answer it though you have to look further back, beyond the name to see why the organisation was started in the first place
NZ on Air were there to help combat NZ's cultural cringe which was seen to be in part caused by the fact that we hardly ever heard or saw ourselves on the airwaves, so when Ms Universe NZ came on and said how she wanted to stop world hunger in her hard kiwi accent we didn't reach for the volume control and wince. We weren't in need of more musicians in gainful employment (something impossible on any reasonable scale in a country of this size), we were in need of more of our songs, about us, referencing Cathedral Sq and Dominion Road etc to let us know we had a valid culture.
I think programs like shortland street have done wonders for our acceptance of us for who we are and what we sound like, although I never watch the program, and I also never had a problem with what who I was.
The music program has been a lot less successful though. Changing radio's attitude was their objective. Radio said the quality is the issue. NZ on air said fine, we'll fund some recordings and get the quality up. NZ radio said , don't like the style, NZ on air said fine, you pick the bands, and there is where we have the start of the problem, and it has been a very damaging problem, as we've saw a big drop off in original and innovative bands around the start of the decade.
Interestingly enough, after a good few years of people feeling nz on air was not catering for them and they'd just do music for self expression we've had a big surge in new and interesting bands coming through and they're one again getting noticed for their interesting and unique styles, as noted in marks linked article . That's great and all but that doesn't address the failings of the system, and that it should be put right. No shrugging of the shoulders and move on, it needs a solid examination and we need to make sure the same mistakes are not made again, and it needs to happen right now.
-
The death of radio is about as spot on as the much touted death of CDs..they still account for about 80% of sales and digital seems pretty stagnant right now.
hieratic!!
surely you're not contradicting the words of self proclaimed web gurus that they are the new kings. -
I do understand, and actually do agree with the fact that the people of NZ should be those being served and not the radio programmers.
sorry scott I wasn't dissing you at all. I thought you illustrated exactly the common mis conception about what brendan smyth has led us to believe is the role of nz on air. see above for links to nz on airs mission statements.
Its all about us, always has been, we've been mislead.
those fancy political speakers have twisted words and intent to fit their own personal objectives, those cheeky scallywags, who'd have thunk.
-
Pursuant to the brief there is, Brendan has done an amazing job ......... And he's pulled it off, more less.
you're confusing me simon.
you're blowing Brendans trumpet with one .....mouth, and then with the other (you seem to have two) you're saying the system is greatly flawed and has failed to achieve the cultural aspects associated with a funding scheme set up to enhance and support our differences as a cultural aside from american UK or other influences.
This Brief brendan says told him to give the over riding control to the entity previously known as 'the enemy" (not chris knox's old band but commercial radio programmers), I've been trying to find a copy of that for years. I've looked over beehive discussions (what a sad borning day that was) and scoured NZ on Airs site but I haven't seen any quotes directly from this mysterious directive that compelled my Smyth to change direction and set sail for the heart of the sun.
The NZ on Air site (please do go and look) says things like
andNZ On Air will operate in a flexible, consistent and fair manner.
can someone explain to me again how that guy brad from stereogram got phase 4 funding for his new band when that scheme requires 4 previous radio hits and they hadn't even recorded one song yet? that doesn't seem consistent at all.
specifically mention NZ's culture on the airwaves, nothing about pandering to commercial radio's formats there.
and then of course tidily summed up in this little statement
so you can see its absolutely all about culture and identity and none of this I'm in the broadcasting business cop out or some mythical brief.
Brendan has never sufficiently addressed this issue even though he led the media 7 audience to believe he "didn't shy away from debate, we will always answer debate".
Does that constitute a lie from a government official? What's the penalty for that these days? a pay rise?