TV 'dinosaurs' slammed as years out of touch

A father and son combination - one a former head of programming, the other a retired television critic - yesterday slammed a group of high-profile New Zealanders as "arrogant and narrow-minded" and "a bunch of pterodactyls" over their stand against Television New Zealand.

The group of 31, including Sir Edmund Hillary, this week called on the state-owned broadcaster to slash the amount of advertising and adopt a publicly funded quality broadcaster.

They also expressed regret at the disappearance of shows such as Close to Home and McPhail & Gadsby.

But Andrew Shaw, former programming boss at Prime, said the group's demands were arrogant and narrow-minded.

"To claim that there was a better time ... is to readily dismiss anything that has happened in the past 20 years."

Mr Shaw - who worked at TVNZ for 25 years, as well as South Pacific Pictures where he was executive producer of NZ Idol - said that although the group's intentions were admirable, they could not speak for everyone.

"There are 4.4 million people in New Zealand ... do these people want a public television system?"

A licence fee would have to be introduced to compensate for loss of advertising revenue.

With up to 70 satellite channels, and more terrestrial channels than ever, a fully state-funded broadcaster was not really feasible.

"That's just not the world we live in any more."

Mr Shaw's father, former Auckland Star and Herald television critic Barry Shaw, reckons our eminent New Zealanders are "a little bit off the beam" if they want programmes such as Close to Home resurrected.

He slammed as "puerile and agonising television in slow motion" the suburban Wellington drama, which ran for eight years from 1975.

"It lasted five years too long."

He likened the group to a bunch of pterodactyls - long-extinct airborne dinosaurs.

Mr Shaw believes that if the group want commercials slashed by at least a third, while still being able to watch quality programming, they had better be prepared to pay a licence fee.

"If people want a channel that is not debased by the number of commercials, you have to pay for it."

Mr Shaw said he was "sad" to see TVNZ made the whipping boy, as "there's some excellent people there".

"Morale there must be pretty low. TVNZ has suffered in programming choices ... by not having people with the right sort of integrity."

* TVNZ assistant chief executive Stephen Smith wrote to the Herald yesterday, in response to a letter by the group of 31.

He defended TVNZ, and its need to advertise.

"Advertising is the primary source of funding for free-to-air television. Advertising creates jobs, contributes to the economy, and encourages audiences to buy New Zealand made."

He said many advertising campaigns - such as the Toyota "Bugger" ads - had also contributed to the national identity.

He invited viewers to contact TVNZ to make their opinions known.