John Drinnan: Historic photos in legal limbo

Photographs are an important part of the historical record of New Zealand. Photo / Chris Gorman

After sending 8 million images to Arkansas, Fairfax is now trying to get them back.

Fairfax Media faces a Herculean task in trying to rescue its huge photo archive - including some of New Zealand's most important historic images - from a legal quagmire.

In May 2013 the Herald reported that Fairfax would be handing about 8 million images to Rogers Photo Archive (RPA), a company based in Little Rock, Arkansas. This week Herald columnist Brian Rudman showed how that arrangement is now causing a lot of southern discomfort.

Under the deal with RPA, Fairfax retained copyright and got its images digitised free, with the US company being allowed to sell a limited number of copies. However RPA has been placed in receivership, on the application of its bankers.

At the time of the deal there were widespread warnings from photographers and archivists about the risks of exporting so much of our history, and there are commercial risks as well.

The question now - as the Ministry for Culture and Heritage helps Fairfax try to recover its images - is whether Fairfax took too much risk with our photographic heritage.

Fairfax has lodged a claim in the circuit court in Arkansas against RPA and associated companies over their agreement to hold photo archives for 72 New Zealand newspapers dating back to the 19th century, the Sydney Morning Herald, Melbourne Age and other Australian papers.

The court document obtained by the Herald notes that just four months after the September 2013 deal - on January 24, 2014 - federal officers raided the residence of RPA principal John Rogers and his wife, Angelica, and RPA's business premises.

"Upon information and belief the search warrants were issued in connection with a criminal investigation being conducted by the United States Attorney's office for the Northern District of Illinois," the document notes.

The deal was conceived by Fairfax Australia, and implemented here by group executive editor Paul Thompson. He left soon after to become chief executive at Radio New Zealand, but said the photo deal had nothing to do with his departure.

History sold

Thompson's replacement, Sinead Boucher, said the archive was in the possession of the court-appointed receiver of RPA.

She said work was continuing to digitise the archive sent to Little Rock. "We're working with the receiver and the First Arkansas Bank to have this process completed."

Fairfax has said that ownership of the archive does not change hands to RPA until it has met all its obligations under the agreement.

According to Boucher, most of the New Zealand images have already been scanned and some tagging (application of caption data) has been completed. "The court in Arkansas has ordered that no Fairfax images should be sold or transferred without court approval," she said.

But some items may already have been sold on eBay outside the agreement: "We've recently become aware that a limited number of New Zealand images may have been sold without approval - and we're working with the receiver to find out more information and exploring our recovery options."

Campbell deal

Is there any chance Campbell Live can survive? It will be hard to overcome the ill-feeling surrounding the show, including claims political meddling is behind moves to shut it down.

In my opinion, MediaWorks chief executive Mark Weldon and director Julie Christie both have a personal antipathy to the programme, perhaps mirroring feedback they get from their pals. I am picking that Campbell Live has won a temporary stay of execution, tied to it maintaining ratings.

It is understood that Campbell - who is lawyered up - has previously, and directly, challenged director Julie Christie about her private comments regarding the show.

It is understood that Campbell - who is lawyered up - has previously, and directly, challenged Christie about her private comments regarding the show.

One insider suggested that after an earlier contretemps between Campbell and Christie, TV3 had offered him a three-year deal, with Campbell taking a lesser role in the show, and the introduction of a second presenter. Under that proposal, Campbell would have spent 70 per cent of his time on Campbell Live and 30 per cent on other roles.

The fall in ratings has been dramatic this year - both for Campbell Live and 3News, and that is partly due to MediaWorks' receivers deciding in 2013 to refuse a five-year term for the 5.30pm soap opera Home & Away, allowing the popular lead-in to the news to move to TVNZ.

Campbell Live supporters at TV3 say MediaWorks has been unwilling to market the prime-time show, while spending huge amounts on Paul Henry, which has so far made a slow start in the TV ratings.

Soft soap

A lot of attention has focused on the idea of a daily soap opera being developed by Julie Christie's old company, Eyeworks, for the 7pm slot. In February last year Hollywood giant Warner Bros bought the Eyeworks operations in New Zealand and several other parts of the world.

Eyeworks is developing a daily soap opera, though it has not received money from NZ On Air.

The funding agency said it had delivered a clear message that a substantial new drama project would be "challenging", given its constrained budget.

NZ On Air said it had suggested an open tender process to decide on a project, in the interests of transparency and getting the best idea.

"We will be considering an application for development funding at our May meeting," said an NZOA spokeswoman.

MediaWorks chairman Rod McGeoch has suggested the new soap is intended for 7pm. Subsequently, Christie insisted the show is not and had never been bound for 7pm.

'Fabricating'

A source said another option canvassed was the notion of a show in the style of Jono and Ben, or Hard Copy. In this column last week - based on a conversation that looked at the review of Campbell Live, I mistakenly attributed this idea to a TV3 document.

A source said an option canvassed was the notion of a show in the style of Jono and Ben.

My source said this was not the case, but that such ideas had been discussed. MediaWorks responded with vigour, accusing me, and the Herald, of "fabricating" the story. That would be unethical behaviour that I have not been, and will not be, involved in.

"The statement in John Drinnan's articles in relation to the Jono and Ben show, which is attributed to 'TV3 bosses', is a complete fabrication and is not based on fact.

"Jono and Ben has never once been mentioned in any MediaWorks management forum, discussion or document as a possible replacement for Campbell Live."

While I made, and corrected, an error about where the idea came from - it was actually from a discussion, not in a document as I believed - that statement implies dishonesty. The allegation represents the aggressive approach at MediaWorks since the middle of last year, which a source say represents a paranoia about other media. There is an increasingly tense relationship between that company and NZME., publisher of the Herald, which is a direct competitor with MediaWorks.