Is the judging of the 2003 Tui Awards flawed?

A fairly accurate transcription of an interview by Linda Clark on National Radio from yesterdays Nine to Noon programme.

Introduction announced by Linda Clark:
The Tui awards are New Zealand’s equivalent to Grammies. They’ll recognise the talent of the countries musicians. The awards are organised by R.I.A.N.Z., that’s the Recording Association of New Zealand, and this years awards are being tipped as being bigger than ever. There are more awards. There’ll be like twenty five in all. And more judges deciding who gets what. The ninety judges are meant to have voted on who the finalists should be by today, only here’s the catch; they are being provided with no C.D.s or tapes of the music they’re judging. They’re also judging best video, they’re not giving away tapes of the videos either. Wayne Mason was one of the judges. He’s decided that this is a farce and has pulled out. He joins me now.

Linda Clark: Nice to have you on the programme. Hello.
Wayne Mason: Linda, how are you?
L.C.: I’m very well. Now tell me how was this meant to work?
W.M.: Well, I don’t know. I was, um…I was flattered to be asked to be a judge and I got all the stuff in a package last week and it’s says; ‘please find enclosed’, you know, your voting papers and the reply note, and I said, I thought to myself: ‘Well,ok, my C.D.s must me arriving [the] next day’. When I rang up [the] next day they said there were no C.D.s. And [huffs], and I looked at the list of people I had to vote for and realised, probably about, you know, a third of them, I wasn’t very familiar with what they were doing. And I had to be very particular about how I voted for them. And I looked at those people[‘s names on the list] and I just felt really, really bad. And um, when I phoned up and asked and said; ‘What should I do?’ they basically said; ‘basically vote for what you…’ [laughs] ‘…what you know’. And so, and so I thought I had to resign on principle and that. I felt so bad for the people that… You know… Not saying that the people who are going to win it aren’t, you know, deserving it. But the people that who are up and coming, it’s… I felt very sad for them.
L.C.: Well it’s pretty hard to judge something you haven’t heard isn’t?
W.M.: Well, I suppose going to a fashion show and not seeing it… and judging [laughs], and that sort of thing. I think we all trust that we’ve all heard the stuff so I guess we’re supposed to go out and buy it. I don’t know.
L.C.: Well, but in some of these categories; album of the year, there’s something like twenty two contenders.
W.M.: Yes. I know.
L.C.: Would you have possibly heard all of those albums?
W.M.: No. Definitely not. Um, I’m not familiar with the stuff, I had ten categories to vote for, and I just felt inadequate. And I mean, I think, you know, New Zealand music is fantastic but, but you do need to have it in front of you. And I mean, I thought there’s probably another thing we could have done about that. I know it’s a lot of judges but in a bigger sense of a presentation, like awards, I think probably that’s not too bad, or maybe we could have had a [web]site with it on and download it or something. But um, I just feel it’s…
L.C.: Well it certainly puts the lesser known bands at a tremendous disadvantage.
W.M.: Oh totally. Totally… yeah. If I was a band with a record in it and I, you know, it’s big thing for bands, it a big career thing if you win something. You’d real want to feel that you had a show, and that’s the people that I feel for. I feel that they’ve been short changed badly.
L.C.: Alright, stay with us. Mark Ashbridge is C.E.O. of Festival Mushroom Records, he’s also spokesperson for the 2003 [Tui] music awards. He joins me now. Hello, nice to have you on the programme.
Mark Ashbridge: Good morning Linda.
L.C.: And Jim Moss, who is with Jayrem Records. He also joins me. Hello.
Jim Moss: Hello Linda.
L.C.: Mark, to you first; how do you expect this music to be judged?
M.A.: Well just, um, Linda, for the benefit of your listeners, I’m on the awards committee and I’m spokesman this year. However, I’m not on the judging eligibility committee so I may be limited to some of the answers I can give you, but, um…
L.C.: You are none the less the person that has been…
M.A.: [speaks over L.C.] Correct, correct.
L.C.: …that has been put forward to speak on this matter, so how are they meant to be judged?
M.A.: Pardon me, Linda?
L.C.: How are they meant to be judged?
M.A.: Ah, this year, we’ve, um, selected; we’ve split their judging this year. We’ve looked at the more commercial awards. Eleven of those twenty five awards are going to be judged by an academy of ninety judges and the other awards will be will be judged by specialist people in those specialist areas. Now, the ninety people that we’ve selected are from, ah, the wider New Zealand music community, and, um. They basically are meant to have sound knowledge of the [clears throat] nominations. And I sort of liken that to perhaps something like the N.M.E. awards; where, um, at the end of the year, when they vote [on] their top fifty it’s very unlikely that they go and listen to all of those records again. They would know, they would have a feel for it of the course of the last twelve months.
L.C.: So, basically; you’ve sent out the judging forms to people who you are sure will have heard this music before hand?
M.A.: Yes. We’ve had an overwhelmingly positive response to date, actually. Only three of the ninety judges have felt that they are unable to, uh, contribute in the judging.
L.C.: [speaks over M.A.] Alright. O.K. Let’s just hold it there for a moment. Wayne Mason, when you’ve got your form, you clearly had not seen or heard all of this music?
W.M.: I hadn’t. No. Definitely had not…
L.C.: [speaks over W.M.] And had you talked to any of the other judges?
W.M.: …some of them [the musicians] I don’t know [about]. And you can’t just also hear it. I just don’t know [any of the musicians]… There’s quite a lot of New Zealand music now and it’s all over, quite like a bulk of work basically. And if I’m a person in the music business industry, a sort of representative musician, I don’t get to hear a lot of everything that has been made. So I mean, I’m disadvantaged in that respect. A lot of it I do know. Some of it I do know, some of it I don’t. And I think it’s, um, not right, really.
M.A.: Can I just say, Linda, that in this instance perhaps that Wayne is probably right in, in pulling out because, you know, I must reiterate, so far, today is the end of the judging and we’ve actually on had three people out of the ninety [withdraw from judging] and, you know, and we’re really comfortable. We feel we’re on track with the judging process.
L.C.: I’m not sure that the fact that only three have pulled out proves that much. I was speaking to Wayne Moart this morning, who of course our listeners will know as a presenter on National Radio. He is also a judge [for the 2003 Tui awards]. I have his judging forms in front of me. He was hoping to fill them out today, but I’ve nabbed them, in the mean time we’ve got them in the studio. Wayne [Moart] is a judge in the best urban album category. There are one, two, three, four, five, six albums in that category. When Wayne [Moart] and I had a conversation this morning he had not heard any of those albums. He’s also a judge in the best dance category. Again there are six…
M.A.: Correct. These are all mainstream awards Linda.
L.C.: Well, but heard these albums. He’s the first to put up his hand and say he hasn’t heard these albums. How could he possibly judge them?
M.A.: I can, I can actually, I can only go back to the fact that only three are unable to perform the judging process. We feel that it is an overwhelming success.
L.C.: So the fact people don’t put up their hand and say… I mean, actually, you know I think what Wayne Mason is doing is kind of a brave thing. If you’re a real muso, to put up your hand and say to your colleagues; ‘I am not an expert on New Zealand music. I haven’t heard all of the latest C.D.s’. That’s quite a brave thing. I mean, maybe many of your judges just don’t want to be outed in that way?
M.A.: I don’t think so. Cause we’ve had the applications, we’ve had the judging processes, um, coming through now, so…
L.C.: [interrupts M.A] Well, they’ve only got the forms last week.
M.A.: That’s fine. This year we decided that we would have a shorted judging process because we tended to have, um, difficulty in collecting them all, so…
L.C.: [interrupts M.A.] In the past, let’s be clear, you have provided music.
M.A.: Pardon me?
L.C.: In the past you have provided your judges with music.
M.A.: This year, um, we chose to take a different route, similar to that of the Brits [music awards] and the Australian music awards, where by we increased the judging panel and we carefully selected…
L.C.: [speaks over M.A.] My understanding is that in the Brit awards they still provide them with music.
M.A.: [speaks over L.C.] Just let me finish please, Linda, for the benefit of your listeners…
M.A.: May I finish? Um… We carefully selected those judges so that they; we felt that would have, um, enough knowledge to complete the judging process. These are eleven mainstream awards. Now can I suggest that if Wayne and, and, and various, some of the other people don’t feel qualified to do that then it’s probably right that they actually say, you know, that they can’t complete the judging process. But to date, I must stress, that we’ve had eighty seven of ninety who seem to have had no problem with this process.
L.C.: I’ve just been told actually that Wayne Moart has also pulled out because he feels contrary to your assurances. I mean, here is a man who has…
M.A.: [interrupts L.C.] He has… I’m sorry, he has just pulled out?
L.C.: He has also pulled out as a judge. Wayne Moart loves New Zealand music, loves all music. But he’s the first to put up his hand and say; when you send him information saying: ‘be the judge of the best urban album’ you are not matching the right man with the right job.
M.A.: There’s also another National Radio, uh, judge that is on the panel as well and we’ve had no problem with that one so…
L.C.: Jim Moss you have been a judge in years past. What do you make of this?
J.M.: Ah, it all sounds a little bit strange to me Linda. Um, we’re [Jayrem Records] also, we also have, um, nominated an act in the best female vocalist category as well, so we have a great deal of interest in this process. It would seem to me that, um, R.I.A.N.Z. have looked at, ah, a British system, they’ve had a look at an Australian system and decided that this is better than, ah, we’ve done it in the past here, in New Zealand, and it doesn’t seem to me to make any sense; because you have more judges you are going to make better decisions.
L.C.: And Wayne Mason said at the out set; ‘These things matter commercially’. Don’t they?
J.M.: Of course they do. It makes a lot of difference if your act ends up being a finalist or actually wins one of these awards. It’s, um, makes, um, a big difference to the, uh, to, to a band or a musicians career. Very prestigious.
L.C.: Mark Ashbridge, one of the categories is best video. Now New Zealand is not dripping in video programmes on television. Now how are the judges to judge the best video if they haven’t seen the best video?
M.A.: Over the course of the year these are the people that are from the music industry. They work in the music industry. They, they’re in radio. They’re in television. They’re in the media. Um, they will have seen the videos that have been nominated and I, you know…
L.C.: [interrupts M.A.] How do you know that?
M.A.: As I say to you, I can only quantify, um, the fact that the overwhelming response is positive to the process to date.
L.C.: How do you know that they’ve seen them?
M.A.: Because that they’re involved in the music business.
L.C.: So you don’t [know]?
M.A.: I do. They’re involved in the music business over the last twelve months. They will have collected the information in their heads just as a book reviewer would do when he sits down to judge the, you know, his best twenty novels of the year. I doubt that, very much that, he would re-read them. And the same again, I must go back to the point; with the New Music Express, which is a British [music] magazine, um, when they judge their top fifty, they certainly would not listen to them.
L.C.: That’s a magazine though. That’s a poll.
M.A.: Well, it’s an, needless to say it’s still a top fifty selection process.
L.C.: Nice to have you on the programme. Mark Ashbridge there, one of the organisers of the music awards, and Wayne Mason and Jim Moss as well.

external link ]

Forums: NZ Music,

So are we to assume that the tuis are a popularity contest, not a reflection of merit?
It astounds me that just because you are in "music business" you will know all 22 albums......... it would be interesting to have just this list put up on nzm and we could tick the ones we had heard, that would be a way to pick the best surely, I mean most heard must mean the best right? It not like anything but merit influences what we hear.
But then again maybe the tuis are a popularity contest........... or as with all polls the winner should be announced like this ...
" This years winner of the best female +/- 5% for accuracy is........"
yes i know we are talking about nominations but will we like the Oscars only see those films nominated that have been seen since xmas? What will happen to the music released not long after the tuis, but then again if you can't remember it is that an indicator that it was rubbish any way?
so maybe not a popularity test but a test of memory, not the best ablum of the year but the most memorable? or is it really just the best markected?
hmmm this one will have my mind ticking over for the rest of the day

wow, there it is in black and white... pick who ya recognise... nice one ... i bet not a single judge can say he's heard every song/album/artist/video he/she is ment to judge.. i mean, come on

Well too me the Tui's (by the way it's a terrible name) have pretty much always just been the music industry patting themselves on the back... nothing like a little self congratulation to inflate the ego's.

It has ALWAYS been about the commercial side of the business not the musical. From how bands and artists are 'nominated' through the judging, the criteria for for sucess and the actaul prizes themselves it has always had a strong (if not overbearing) focus on the commercial aspects of the music industry.

Now personally I'm not actually interested in that side of things. I can certainly understand why it is approached that way, I mean it is the music INDUSTRY, but for me the industry side of things has always taken precendence over the artistic endevours...

Like usualy I won't bother watching...

My 2c (getting worth steadily less with inflation)

// I can certainly understand why it is approached that way, I mean it is the music INDUSTRY, but for me the industry side of things has always taken precendence over the artistic endevours...

What I meant to say there was....

I can certainly understand why it is approached that way, I mean it is the music INDUSTRY, but for me the [overwhealming focus] of the industry side of things has always taken precendence over the artistic endevours [and it kinda makes me sick]...

Bloody editing as I'm going and forgetting to reinsert what I'd cut... bah

I wrote this after last years awards:

/// The best way to put it is: And the award goes to "Warner Music for Anika Moa" ///

Its always been a popularity contest, and at the end of the day, its the marketing that is awarded. Its not true to say this of every case, certainly, but the overwhelming feeling I have gotten from the last three Music awards is: give yourself a pat on the back EMI/SONY/WARNERS, this is YOUR year.

No disrespect to past winners, but you can't say anything is "THE BEST". I just wish they'd call a spade a spade and say "The biggest selling single of 2002 award goes to blah blah blah".

yep, it's totally the marketing.
How big would Anika be without $$$$ behind her. Not very. Sorry Anika, no disrespect to your talent, but lets be realistic here.

Strangely enough, there will be two sales categories judged by company audit.

external link ]

// // L.C.: ‘These things matter commercially’. Don’t they?

J.M.: Of course they do. It makes a lot of difference if your act ends up being a finalist or actually wins one of these awards. It’s, um, makes, um, a big difference to the, uh, to, to a band or a musicians career. Very prestigious.

Uh huh

The way I see it, the music industry is like the old(still current???) 6th form assessment. a certain percentage of people will get 1's and a certain percent will get 2's and so on. Only those that get the 1's can pass GO and be eligible for a Tui.

There are definite levels in the industry
1. funding for new artists to get radio airplay
2. funding for videos - only available to those that have had radio airplay
3. funding for albums - only available to those that are signed by a label
4. repeat steps 1-3 5 times
5. then...and only then could you even look at being considered for a Tui.

The point I'm trying to make is that there is a hierarchy. Unless you've had somewhere in the vicinity of 3- 5 great songs (not including new artist award) on commercial radio you're unlikely to be noticed. And you're only going to get 5 songs on radio if you've got at least $3000 for a decent recording, or get funding. And you're only going to get funding if you're already signed, already have a radio hit or you're one of the 10 out of 210 that get new artist funding. Those people that are up for Tuis, have been at it for years and years, they know the people, they know the industry, they know what songs get funding, they've been overseas etc etc.

But what annoys me is that yes we know Che, Anika, The Finn Whanau, The Feelers, Zed Ardijah etc are our countries (subject to personal opinion) best musical talent. By not giving them awards every year we're not saying they're crap at all, we're saying that they're possibly too big for this award and should be recognised for their outstanding talent but not awarded again and again.

At the end of the day it's all about money. Money=marketing, marketing=exposure, exposure=more people buying and voting for you. I bet there's an Anika soundalike out there, with maybe better songs, but she's got the record co, and the money behind her and thats why she's recognised for awards and no one else is.

Maybe someone should do an indy music award to represent the BULK of the NZ musical talent. It's actually possible, just need the attendance numbers.

Thats my rant anyway.

//Maybe someone should do an indy music award to represent the BULK of the NZ musical talent. It's actually possible, just need the attendance numbers.

How are the b-net awards in comparison to the Tuis? Are they more democratic?

I'm not entirely sure. It's more focussed on indy stuff, but still if you're not in with the bfm crowd, you're not in on the b-net awards - despite it's NETWORK status.

It is a hard topic, for eg, with 200odd apps for new artist funding each round, 90% of these people wouldn't get a look in on an indy awards anyway, which brings us right back to square 1.

I personally...and this is just personally!! believe that the first hurdle before even worrying about awards is getting that elusive radio airplay...and getting that shithot recording, which costs the money of course. The issue should probably be shifted from "The Tuis" to how on earth does an artist to get a good start to even include Tuis in their future goals.

If I won a million dollars...which I won't cos I don't enter anything. I would start a funding body for new artists. 1 track per artist. I don't believe in record companies applying for funding to recoup the costs of recording albums, that just makes the known artists stronger and of course priming them for the Tuis.

Record companies have enough bloody money to sustain themselves. After all The music industry is one of the biggest money spinners in the world.

I've gone way off topic

// How are the b-net awards in comparison to the Tuis?
// Are they more democratic?

Theoretically, as most of the awards are decided by public vote. In reality, of course, the end effect is probably the same as this years Tuis, as the public vote for the songs and acts they've heard.

I dunno -- any awards system is fraught with danger. I think the idea of a large 'expert' voting pool isn't a bad one, but not supplying the judges with all the music totally undermines its validity (for the reason outline above -- it becomes a popularity contest).

I reckon the way it should work is: peer review.

Only the nominees vote. Each nominee ranks their competitors 1-5. The nominee who gets the most approval from his/her/their peers wins.

//peer review

Nice, although I can imagine personal disputes between individuals from different bands may cause a few biased results..

Except that who chooses the nominees? You'll still have Anika, Che, James, etc for best whatever as the nominees. wouldn't make any difference unless there's a new pool of talent to choose from.

I say recognise these artists, but award new ones. Betty Anne Monga (Ardijah) keeps winning awards for new music that is written identically to what was done in the past...that shouldn't be allowed, I don't care who she is.

// I can imagine personal disputes between individuals
// from different bands may cause a few biased results

true. Maybe expand the voting poll to the nominees from all the categories, so as to avoid any internal-genre squabbles. And besides, wouldn't it be nice if all the bands had to be nice to each other so as to not spoil their chances. :)

// Except that who chooses the nominees?

And who chooses the people who choose the nominees? You have to draw the line somewhere. There's a 'breakthrough' artist award for up-n-comers, and the dance, urban and roots categories have been introduced to open up the awards to a whole range of acts that were previously left out. If an act is worthy enough they'll sneak into the top 5 of their category, surely. There's just not that many albums released every year to see a bad act left out (witness last year's hip-hop category: only two nominations).

// recognised for their outstanding talent but not awarded again and again.

why not? If they're the (ahem) 'best', let them get their rewards. It's like saying the Williams sisters should be stopped from playing tennis because they've won enough Grand Slams.

The best way to win a 'best whatever' category is to just be the obvious best act. Easy.

In which case this whole argument is void. The best people are winning, therefore The Tuis aren't flawed

// The best people are winning, therefore The Tuis aren't flawed

No, I think we've sussed out that the best people aren't winning, because all the acts aren't getting heard by the judging pool. You can't vote for the 'best' act if you haven't heard it (or, at least, are more likely to vote for an act you have heard, over a superior one you haven't).

And when was the last time Betty Anne Monga won a Tui?

// And when was the last time Betty Anne Monga won a Tui?

aha. answer my own question: 1999. I think that's the only time she won.

Yeah, I was there when she won. I wasn't very impressed.
Much like the Americas Cup, to win a Tui you need a cash driven product. Unfortunately the pool of talent with money backing is too small for the Tuis to even consider acts that may be "better". Isn't it interesting when the level is reached where 'art' has no merit anymore and money talks.

It's like pissing into the wind and pushing shit up hill all in one go.

after watching the news last night and hearing the anchorpersons (*shrug*) refer to shania twain repeatedly as the worlds top female artist, i feel like giving up.

this is adding insult to injury.

I was wondering how much effort it would take to make up CDs and/or DVDs for the judges to review the nominated songs and videos. But then I realised that that would involve burning CDs, which, as we all know, RIANZ rallied against with their "BRN&GTBRNT" campaign.

That Steriogram(or similar band) were put throughto the top 3 lastyear after nominating themselves as a hip-hop group shows that the awards arn't particularly well orchestrated.

I think really most big awards are just the industry they represent patting themselves on the back.

my point? no major point. I'm just sleepy and rarr!

http://rarr ! ]

God, how can you fucking nerds read all that.

Stupid Inbreds.

// God, how can you fucking nerds read all that.

It's this skill called literacy and is a very useful thing to be good at.

// Stupid Inbreds.

Hey, that may be so, but they're still your parents, they still love you and deserve a little respect, ok?