NZ Politics: Media Deregulation

Title

Media Deregulation

Author

Milan Holzapfel

Date

3 April 2000

Summary

Deregulation made its biggest impact on the broadcast media in New Zealand. Print media were always privately owned and controlled and have traditionally regulated themselves. Of the broadcast media, television underwent the most radical changes while radio remained the way it had been in most respects. In general there has been a shift away from the ‘public service’ model of television to the ‘commercial’ model.

Introduction

The public service model acknowledges the ‘fourth estate’ role of the media. The traditional (British) public service model defines these duties of the media:

• To acknowledge that their audiences consist of citizens partaking in the democratic process
• To inform those citizens so they can make sound political decisions
• To scrutinise the government and politicians
• To facilitate and encourage the public debate of political issues
• This was detailed in the 1973 Broadcasting Act which outlined the duty of television and radio broadcasters to ‘inform, educate and entertain’ the public.

The commercial tradition of broadcasting is more businesslike. It originated in the United States and is related more specifically to television, which has arguably become the most influential medium when it comes to forming public opinion. The commercial tradition sees the need to: Define television audiences as consumers Make a profit for the shareholders of the broadcasters Attract the largest audience Similar principles were endorsed in the 1989 Broadcasting Act that signalled the start of deregulation for the broadcast media. The act split the state-owned Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand (BCNZ) into Radio New Zealand (RNZ) and Television New Zealand (TVNZ).

It disassembled the Broadcasting Tribunal, which had up to then been responsible for allocating frequencies to potential broadcasters and guarded the fourth estate role of the media. Frequencies were now to be sold at an auction to the highest bidders. The newly defined broadcasting guidelines, with their focus on the commercial duties of broadcasters were to be enforced by an independent public body, the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

With a nod to the ‘fourth estate’ role of the media, the act decreed that a Broadcasting Commission be instated, to distribute the broadcasting fees amongst RNZ and TVNZ programs and to boost local representation and content on television. One way of achieving this was to be the allocation of financial grants to local filmmakers.

Commercially, there is a lot to be proud of. TVNZ pays the government a lot of dividends, in the range of 40 million NZ$ annually and there is a lot more local content on television than just a few years ago. The viewers have more channels to choose from, as well as ‘Pay-TV’ and can benefit from the latest technology because it has become easier for new broadcasters to enter the market.

The effects of these changes on New Zealand television were, when viewed from a public service tradition, negative. The amount of advertising on the two TVNZ channels rose continually. This was a trend that resulted from the rising production costs of television and stagnating income from the broadcasting fee, which governments had not raised since 1976. Additionally, the 1989 Broadcasting Act demanded that TVNZ should concentrate on earning a profit for the government.

The emphasis on advertising revenue resulted in a drive to capture a larger share of the audience. This, and the need to create audience segments that are easily targetable by advertisers, led to a range of programming changes.

In general, television has become more “action-packed�? to appeal to a mass audience. The length of the average soundbite and news item has become significantly shorter [Atkinson, 1993]. There is a tendency for news items to be more focused on personal tragedies, ‘law and order’ and catastrophes, in the tradition of ‘boulevard magazines’. Political issues and debates get less coverage because they are seen to be less appealing to a mass audience.

Because TVNZ was suddenly competing with other television broadcasters such as TV3, created in 1989 and the ‘Pay-TV’ channel Sky Television, there was a trend to compete with the programming of the other stations, which paradoxically often led to less choice for audiences even though there were more TV stations. In the days before deregulation, the two state-owned television channels were required to offer carefully balanced programs and avoid, for instance, screening two different current affairs programs at the same time.

The information offered on television has also lost in quality. One issue is that broadcasters try not to offend advertisers, so that controversial or anti-corporate opinions are not represented. It is also difficult to debate complex issues on television or to present expert opinions simply because this involves too much time and could involve criticising the public or questioning popular assumptions, all of which could lead to parts of the audience switching to another channel.

Finally, there is less representation of the multitude of groups within New Zealand society. A lot of the programs on television portray a world which does not exist and is likely to feature white, attractive upper middle class Americans that work as cops, doctors or lawyers. This is the result of broadcasters buying cheap American series and getting offered “packet deals�? where a lot of low quality series get sold along with one or two good ones.

The Broadcasting Commission, better known as New Zealand On Air (NZOA) was instated to address the issue of local representation by funding locally made programs. It has succeeded in boosting the number of hours that New Zealand-made programs have been broadcast from 2111 in 1989 to 5715 in 1996 [P. Smith, 1996]. It has also succeeded in developing a strong local film industry, which exports a lot of films overseas.

The quality of the funded programs is often dubious, however. They cater to the mass-audiences here and overseas and consist of soap operas or action-series and maybe gardening shows. Very few political programs in the definition of the ‘fourth estate’ or documentaries presenting minority views are funded.

A final blow was struck to the ‘fourth estate’ role of television when in 1991 in order to allow a Canadian company to buy the failed TV3 station, all restrictions on foreign ownership of New Zealand media were removed. This means that massive media conglomerates will be able to buy into the New Zealand broadcasting market leading to market concentration and ultimately, less choice for New Zealand audiences.

Radio in New Zealand has not undergone as many and dramatic changes as television since 1989. There have been private radio stations since the mid-1960s. Radio is a relatively cheap medium, therefore it is less reliant on advertising to fund it. Furthermore it is less influential than television when it comes to forming public opinion or selling products.

It has remained informative and is an important tool for policy makers to gauge public opinion. By listening to ‘talkback radio’ politicians can get an indication of what issues trouble ordinary members of the public. Radio New Zealand (RNZ) now consists of public radio stations funded by the broadcasting fee.

They provide news and current affairs information, parliament broadcasts and classical music as well as debates and interviews with politicians. Through ‘Access Radio’ RNZ provides small community groups with access to broadcasting facilities. The government sold off the commercial part of RNZ in 1996, consisting of radio stations funded by advertising. Publicly owned radio in New Zealand does still fulfil its ‘fourth estate’ role, however it is a tool for informing politicians of public opinions rather than ‘informing, educating and entertaining’ the public.

Conclusion

That is a role television would need to fulfil, with its powerful influence on public opinion. Unfortunately, the commercial focus instilled in television since 1989 conflicts with its ‘fourth estate’ role.

The Royal Commission on Broadcasting foresaw these negative effects of deregulation. When the Labour government of 1984 set out to restructure New Zealand in adherence to neo-liberal guidelines, it reviewed the regulation of New Zealand broadcast media. For this purpose, it appointed a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate broadly what changes were necessary to the way broadcasting was being managed in New Zealand.

The commission presented its report in September 1986, in which it recommended tightening government control over program content and generally expanding existing regulations. The main thrust of the report was clearly modelled after the ‘public service’ rationale of media, and saw state intervention as a necessity in order to protect the political qualities of the media.

The government however, with its emphasis on market-driven reforms, did not respond to the recommendations of the commission. There followed a minority report, which was appended by Laurie Cameron, one of the commissioners.

While the recommendations of the Commissions majority report were largely ignored, many of the suggestions made in Cameron’s minority report were subsequently incorporated into government policy. The views expressed in Cameron’s report were closer to the commercial tradition of broadcasting and more in keeping with the governments views on the media.

The Labour government saw a freely competitive and highly profitable communications market as a potential aid to economic recovery. So while it sought to address the ‘fourth estate’ role of television, it emphasised economic reforms and therefore we have today’s situation where the ‘fourth estate’ role remains inadequately performed by the most influential of New Zealand media: television.

References

Smith, P.1996, Revolution in the Air!, Addison Wesley Longman, Auckland

Feintuck, M. 1999, Media regulation, Public Interest and the Law, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

Politics and the Media: Harlots and prerogatives at the turn of the millennium 1998, ed. Jean Seaton, Blackwell publishers, Oxford

Anderson, R. 1995, Consumer Culture & TV Programming, Westview Press, Boulder

Mulgan, R. 1994, Politics in New Zealand, Auckland University Press, Auckland