"Stations have agreed to boost local music content to 20 per cent by the end of 2006."

'Agreed'? 'All Radio'. Don't know about that. It's a voluntary quota, and not all stations/networks, most notably the b.net (who really don't need to, as they're already well above 20% kiwi content) will not be signing up to the code. I hope Russell Brown doesn't mind me posting his thoughts from the nz radio discussion group (RB is presenting, I assume, bfm's point of view).

>>>>

We had no wish to charge out and diss the Code, but a couple of people from the RBA have been implying in public that we're letting the side down by not joining the code. This is annoying, because our mission statement commits us to support for New Zealand music and we really went to some lengths to give the idea a good hearing.

Anyway, the proposed Radio Code of Practice for New Zealand music is a compromise between the Radio Broadcasters Association presenting CanWest, TRN and a few minnows) and the office of the Minister of Broadcasting. To avoid the prospect of a compulsory local content quota like those in countries such as the UK, Canada and Ireland, the RBA undertook to devise an industry-regulated Code of Practice. It is in effect a voluntary quota scheme.

BFM and other b-Net stations are not part of the RBA and took no part in these negotiations. But for reasons we aren't quite clear on, the RBA was very keen for us to sign up to its Code. It even went as far as introducing a new genre - "progressive alternative" - to its scheme to cover the b-Net. They worked out targets for us and incorporated those in their overall industry goal of an average 20% NZ music across all genres in five years' time. We've guessed that our 33-35% NZ music rate might help the average to the tune of 1%, depending on how it's counted.

Unfortunately, they did all this without asking us. In fact, they even gave a presentation of the proposal that included us. When challenged at that presentation, the RBA chair David Innes claimed he had sent me tens of emails and left multiple phone messages in an effort to secure our buy-in. Unfortunately, this wasn't true.

We could have just walked away. But we accepted that the presentation had been a bit of a cock-up, no harm done, and Aaron Carson, Chris Hocquard and I sat down and talked to David for two hours about the scheme. And we duly decided we could not have a bar of it.

Our major objection lay with the committee the RBA proposes will oversee the code. We were offered a place on this committee. But the committee won't be able to exercise any meaningful governance because it will be provided with virtually no information. Indeed, that's the way the whole thing is designed.

Figures on what progress individual stations are making in meeting the Code will be compiled, but they will not be provided to the committee - only to David Innes and the CEOs of CanWest and TRN. The committee will see only bland headline figures for overall genres. It would be impossible for such a group to exercise a genuine duty of governance.

In Australia, the local music airplay of individual stations is not only available to a oversight committee, it is published - and forms the major sanction on underperformers. Under the RBA scheme, there are no sanctions for failing to meet the code at all. There are various loopholes for non-compliance (the version of the code with which bFM was first unwillingly associated required the government to indemnify broadcasters for playing New Zealand music!).

A closer look also reveals that a fair chunk of the commercial radio market - the Solid Gold and Hauraki formats - are completely absent from the Code. Easy listening wasn't on the last schedule we saw, but was apparently to be added. All those formats are included in the Australian scheme.

We don't wish to appear precious about it, but our mission statement already commits us to support for New Zealand music. We deliver on that commitment though our twice-yearly New Zealand Music Week activities (playing 100 per cent local music; staging more than 20 live-to-air broadcasts by local artists and releasing the highlights on a free CD), our high-profile live events, our strong links with local artists and promoters and, of course, our delivery of 33-35 per cent New Zealand music throughout the year.

We feel that signing up to a process about which we have some serious
reservations - and over which we would have no control - would dilute,
rather than enhance, our existing commitment. Basically, we have struggled to come up with good reasons to do it.

It appears anyway that our involvement is not critical to the scheme getting off the ground - and that our figures will be counted whether we agree or not. I hope that the Code, for all its weaknesses, will come to pass and will have a beneficial effect. It's just not for us. We won't be part of the solution to when we're not part of the problem.

>>>

As always, Murray Cammick has a nice alternative take on things ... a quota for local record companies...

[ external link ]

This comment by "economist" Dr Gareth Morgan in the Dom:

"if the product was no good, listeners would opt out by listening to overseas radio stations on the Internet rather than to New Zealand stations that did not give them what they wanted"

You'd have to go on a two week sovent abuse binge before you'd belive that.

Firstly, Internet radio is bollocks unless you're on a decent broadband connection. How many household or workplace stereos are equipped with that?

Secondly, where does he get the impression that consumers are "getting what they want" from commercial radio programming now? Hands up who has a radio station that always plays music they like, all the time?

yea well they're gonna put all this nz music on the radio which is great, but i hope that they do it right ie. play a broad range of nz music that no one gets to hear but is good, rather than my fear that we r gonna have rubicon and the feelers played twice as much. so my question is what kinda of nz music r they actually talking about playing 20% of the time?????????????????

About time! This bodes well for our music.

Yes people think that the quota-system will just mean the same Kiwi songs being played over and over again. In fact one of the arguments used by programmers at commercial radio stations, who were against quota, was that there wasn't enought good new zealand music or not enough music in the right genre.

Well, hopefully PDs will get out there and look around for Kiwi music that fits the style of their station. Infact they don't even have to look hard - the music comes to them via the NZonAir Hit Disks (Indie, Kiwi, Te Reo and others).

Also it sends a message to our musicians to get out there make music in any genre they like, as they will now have a better chance of radio play.

And finally remember - while some of us don't like The Feelers or Tadpole, others do. And surely it's a good thing they also get to hear more New Zealand music, rather than hearing an overflow of American music.

well heard something on radio on Saturday, classic hit and solid gold formatted radio stations are exempt.....wait for it.....because there is insufficient material for them to play...wtf