John Darkin: Public programming bosses need to listen to the public

The Herald-Digipoll findings on the performance on Television New Zealand reveal a glaring programming misjudgment similar to one lately admitted to by the revered BBC - and one that Aunty is about to rectify.

Few would argue that the BBC is the greatest broadcaster in the world. Even if it's not, it has been around a long time and sets high standards that other networks try to emulate.

Soon, however, the BBC will turn popular television on its head. The BBC director-general, Mark Thompson, is, he claims, listening to his audience and will make sweeping changes to the corporation's schedules.

We might ask our own pre-eminent broadcaster, TVNZ, if it will have the courage to follow suit?

Research done by the BBC shows that viewers are tired of their money being wasted, particularly on nonentity reality and makeover television shows, when other commercially driven stations do them as well. The message is that Aunty must raise her game if she is to continue to be funded only by licence fees.

Having seen the light, Mr Thompson plans to dissociate the BBC, which he describes as "the greatest force for cultural good on the face of the Earth", from television programmes that amount, in the minds of many viewers, to 24-hour wall-to-wall television garbage.

Reality TV and its brethren have been variously described as "cheap, rubbishy and piffling" - or crap for short - and though there is a limited market for it, it falls within the commercial rather than cultural sphere of public entertainment.

Financial accountants, as in any industry, usually win boardroom battles on spending. In television, the best creativity is stymied by budget restraints and, in the case of TVNZ, by its obligation to be all things to all people under the broadcasting charter. In the face of pressure to drop its licence fee and become commercial the BBC fell into the populist trap and has come unstuck. Quality programme-making has suffered and its audience doesn't like it.

Here, we do not pay a licence fee but we do pay taxes, and we taxpayers are turning to Sky TV's wider variety in increasing numbers. In return for our fiscal support, TVNZ provides a fair dollop of cheap, rubbishy and piffling programmes. Consequently, both TVNZ channels are littered with gaping opportunities for cultural improvement.

As the BBC has discovered, you cannot fool all of the people all of the time, and crap entertainment is no substitute for quality news, current affairs, comedy, drama, and other memorable programmes.

Will TVNZ rise to a similar challenge when, according to the Herald-Digipoll survey, 80 per cent of 40 to 59-year-olds (the group containing most parents of children and impressionable teenagers) say that there is too much reality TV.

However, can TVNZ ever produce a full schedule of quality programmes in a commercial environment?

Competition in business is healthy. But the national broadcaster should exist outside the conventional business environment. Television is essentially art, and the artists' raison d'etre is their creativity, originality, inspiration and, above all, quality.

TVNZ, especially, has a responsibility to contribute to this country's cultural and national identity, and that shouldn't include dumbing down. Leave that to others.

When reality TV and similar programming is offered by the national broadcaster, the image of this country is all the poorer. National television should be a beacon of light reflecting the intellectual soul of the nation by providing the highest quality, with absolute impartiality. It is unfortunate that in New Zealand these goals must be achieved in a commercial environment.

But why should TVNZ executives and the Government care about the public? They can point to high viewer ratings for a few of their programmes and claim success. But they shouldn't be fooled; for many people television is their only entertainment and they are suckered into watching even banalities.

For national TV bosses, tied to measuring their performance within the constraints of the charter, cheap, rubbishy and piffling programming is a false success.

The place for this type of television is the commercial sector. It sits happily there and people are free to choose it. Which is not to suggest that the national broadcaster shouldn't produce high-quality programmes that have popular appeal. Indeed, it must focus on just that - more Pride and Prejudice and less Regency House Party.

Broadcasters must hate being measured against the BBC. But on this occasion, when the British broadcaster is admitting failures, surely it is not beyond the Government and TVNZ to do the same, and implement changes that will protect the broadcaster from the pressures of commercial interest and allow at least TV One to go upmarket. Let TVNZ become yet another great force for cultural good.

Breaking out of its mould will take some lateral thinking by TVNZ and the Government, plus the co-operation of the public. But ask the public at the next poll if they will back quality against cheap, rubbishy and piffling programming and they just might.

* John Darkin is a Gisborne writer.