Despite recent missteps with its reality TV shows, MediaWorks is making another bold move, with plans for its own version of Dancing with the Stars.
It is likely to draw good ratings, but given the expensive production costs and limits on commercial exploitation, it will be a challenge to earn a good return on investment.
MediaWorks announced this week that it has picked up the format where 10 "celebrities" compete at ballroom dancing, with money going to charity.
Dancing with the Stars is the latest move in the refocusing of TV3 as the reality TV channel.
It follows the commercial success of The Block, and the ups and downs of X Factor and The Bachelor.
Dancing with the Stars is classier than those shows. The format rights are expensive: they are controlled by BBC World, the commercial arm of the BBC, known for taking a hard line over commercial tie-ins.
Even more than other format owners, the Beeb has stringent oversight rules and insists its format must not be overly commercialised. It won't want Paul Henry swirling around the dance floor with a Coke sign on his back.
Assuming TV3 gets over its hiccups - belches, take your pick - a focus on reality makes sense.
There will be a sponsor - it was Cadbury when the show was on TVNZ - but limits on commercialisation will make things difficult.
The show is very expensive to make and involves an intense commitment from its contestants.
It is understood that an independent production company, Great Southern Television, originally held the New Zealand rights to Dancing with the Stars. At that time, both MediaWorks and TVNZ turned it down for financial reasons, the Herald has been told.
One well-placed source said music-based shows were best suited to in-house productions, because TV stations paid for a blanket music rights package with the rights group APRA. An independent producer, however, would need to pay for the rights separately, adding to the show's cost.
Casting will decide the success or otherwise of TV3's version of the show.
MediaWorks director Julie Christie - who is running the reality strategy and influencing much of TV3 - is an expert in choosing people New Zealanders can relate to. I'm betting there will also be a cross-promotional selection from MediaWorks, incorporating its radio stars. Henry would be an obvious choice. MediaWorks might also try doing its bit to rehabilitate Cameron Slater. He had a close encounter with the boxing ring canvas last week - maybe he could could turn his attention to the dance floor.
Time for a rethink
I'm betting the arrival of Netflix - after Neon, Lightbox and Quickflix - will make people question their commitment to Sky TV.
I'm betting the arrival of Netflix - after Neon, Lightbox and Quickflix - will make people question their commitment to Sky TV. Given the various cheap opening offers, many will weigh up whether to give the new players a try, and the pay TV service a rest.
I like many aspects of Sky and love the MySky recording device that enables me to fast forward through the ads on free-to-air channels. But I'm not sure about the comparative value of about $70 a month compared with, say, $12.99 for Netflix.
You may see things differently. I already get Lightbox and I've started a month-long trial of Netflix, and I like what I've seen so far.
Our family is not big on sport. We've never been impressed by the Sky movie package, but love the premium art house channel, Rialto, and the premium drama channel, SoHo.
I am tempted to wait for the final series of Mad Men, but that will turn up somewhere on video on demand. There are a few old sitcoms on the Jones Channel and Comedy Central, but otherwise a lot of my viewing is on free to air.
It just doesn't add up to $70 a month of value. The least Sky needs to do is make SoHo a part of the basic package.
Port v Pead
Ports of Auckland is ramping up its public relations machine after initially keeping a low profile over plans to expand wharves further into the Waitemata Harbour. From past experience during industrial action, they can play a tough media game.
The expansion plans were exposed by the Herald, the Stop Stealing Our Harbour group formed quickly and consumer public relations company Pead PR enlisted high-profile people to oppose the move.
I'm interested in the PR angle, the role of Ports of Auckland PR versus Pead, and the apparent unwillingness of the Auckland Council and its over-resourced communications team to enter the fray and inform the debate.
Stop Stealing Our Harbour protesters have forced the port company to rev up its PR machine. Photo / Chris Gorman
It's as if council PR has been told to keep its head down. And the fact is that the issue is drifting into the political realm, raising further questions about whether Mayor Len Brown can stand for re-election.
Ports communications man Matt Ball rejects the suggestion the company has been caught napping and says Pead PR has long been acting against Ports of Auckland, through its past role as a consultant to Heart of the City.
The port has long needed to expand, but has not pressed the issue with the public until now, when it is pointing out why the expansion is a good idea.
Yet for many, the PR campaign to answer critics has been too little and too late.
Ball insists the port company is getting lots of positive comments and says it is getting balanced coverage from media including Radio NZ, but claims the Herald has taken an editorial position against the project.
Deborah Pead of Pead PR says she is working each day on a pro bono basis, because she feels strongly that the port's plan should be stopped.
In a practical sense it is clear the Stop Stealing Our Harbour project will be valuable for the PR firm's brand, though she plays this down.
In 2010, Heart of the City commissioned Pead PR to oppose Ports of Auckland's expansion plans - something that became a campaign by the Herald. So there was already ill-feeling between the port company and Pead.
Will Ports of Auckland play tough with its media management? During a waterfront dispute in 2012, the company admitted it leaked information about the personal circumstances of a worker to the right-wing Whale Oil website.
The CTU took the case to the Privacy Commission, but the outcome was confidential.
