The future looks quite different for the doctors and nurses on Shortland Street. Photo / Supplied
The future looks quite different for the doctors and nurses on Shortland Street. Photo / Supplied
The doctors and nurses on Shortland Street have survived serial killers, viral outbreaks and volcanoes over the show's 30-year existence, but the biggest existential threat they face lies in the current chaos of the media industry.
The rapid splintering of audiences across media channels and streaming services has led to every show on television feeling a little less secure than it once did.
Speaking to the Front Page podcast on the current state of New Zealand media, critic and Spinoff founder Duncan Greive says that long-running Shortland Street has not been immune to the impact of these migrating audiences even as it celebrates its three-decade anniversary.
"The current numbers aren't great by Shortland Street standards," he says.
"I think it does roughly around 200,000 to 250,000 in terms of the audience aged 5 and older. At its peak, it was not probably not far off triple that."
This problem also extends to the 25 to 54 demographic, which remains integral to advertising decision-makers.
"It's well below 100,000 there now, compared to five years ago when it would have been closer to 200,000. And while there has been a big shift to TVNZ OnDemand, where it is consistently one of its most highly viewed shows, it still doesn't fundamentally make up for that shortfall."
Shortland Street isn't an underperforming outlier in the New Zealand media context. Instead, it's a symbol of the broader malaise and challenges that face entertainment producers and broadcasters in this country.
Broadcasting Minister Kris Faafoi is pushing ahead with the merger of TVNZ and RNZ. Photo / NZME
Given the shift in audiences from terrestrial broadcast channels, the Government has confirmed plans to merge TVNZ and RNZ into a single public media entity in the hope of ensuring a better future for local media.
This move has been concretised in a Budget allocation of $327 million over three years from 2023. To put this into context, RNZ is currently funded with $48m a year from the public purse while TVNZ currently makes around $300 million a year in TV and digital advertising.
TVNZ has also historically been able to contest for funding programmes via NZ on Air. But that could be about to change.
Greive explains that while an official announcement has not yet been made, it's understood that the new public entity will be directly funded and would not have to go through the process of contesting funding through NZ on Air.
While the details of this change (or anything to do with the merger) are still somewhat unclear, Greive says this shift in approach could be "confronting for the private media sector" in that it will give the public media entity an advantage when it comes to content production.
"The advantage it gives them is that they can be nimble," Greive says.
"If you're a production company and you've got a great idea, you can go to TVNZ and they can say they love it."
The alternative would be to rely on NZ on Air, which always has a long gestation period when it comes to funding.
Shortland Street remains popular, but not as popular as it once was. Photo / Screenshot
"With NZ on Air, there might be a funding round in two months, then the decision might take another two months – so that's four months away. But if you go to the public media entity, and they love your idea, they can go into production next week."
And then if the show is performing well, the public media entity could – in theory at least – commission a second season immediately.
"That's just a very different dynamic and it does present a big advantage for the public media entity as well as risks for private sector media."
Greive isn't alone in expressing concern about the unintended consequences that might arise from the merger between TVNZ and RNZ.
NZME chief executive Michael Boggs earlier expressed reservations about the impact the merger might have on commercial media.
"Additional government investment into this new entity can only add to the intense competition and cost pressures that already exist across New Zealand's commercial media," Boggs said in March.
"With TVNZ seemingly no longer required to pay a dividend to Government, this frees up millions for reinvestment into expanding the new entity's digital platforms, commercial capabilities and journalistic talent pool – further increasing audience and competition for advertising revenues."
Private media companies can do little but wait to see what the establishment board does as it begins the complex task of melding these two organisations together.
In the meantime, the level of funding being attributed to the new entity is already attracting critics, who question whether this funding could be better used elsewhere.
National Party leader Christopher Luxon has listed it as one of the examples of spending he would cut if he was in control of the Budget.
Asked for his thoughts on whether this was a good use of money, Greive wouldn't be drawn into the debate.
"It's above my pay grade to say whether a dollar is better spent here or there," he says.
"What I do think is that it's long past the time when you can continue to justify maintaining the current funding levels for TVNZ and RNZ, knowing that they have a proven track record of not being able to serve younger and more diverse audiences."
The point here is that the status quo was no longer working and the Government had to do something.
