Digital Television – Sync or Swim

2 March 2012
MEDIA RELEASE
Digital Television – Sync or Swim

Since its inception five years ago, the New Zealand television broadcasting industry has had every opportunity to deliver compelling quality digital television. Instead, marquee broadcasters have demonstrated the industry is now in a state of chaos.

Channels have come and gone, promises broken, and subscription television services have now established a firm foothold. Even TVNZ is in bed with its competition, offering select channels that are only available on its rival network, Sky TV. Viewers are frustrated at the quality of content, and pervasive technical problems affect a positive viewing experience. The television landscape has altered, but have these changes satisfied the desire to be entertained, informed and made New Zealand television better?

In September 2012, analogue switch-off will begin, how ready and prepared are New Zealand’s television networks? Can they provide the viewer with superior quality digital television as advertised? With five years to sort out issues and address teething problems, they do not appear ready. Or will viewers continue to be burdened with content and quality issues?

Analogue television broadcasts present their own set of technical challenges, namely a grainy picture, poor reception and fewer available channels. In the new digital Freeview era, viewers experience volume inconsistencies, advertisements are often louder than the preceding programme, as well as out-of-sync picture; by varying degrees, the audio does not match or sync. Is this acceptable?

Freeview does not accept responsibility for the synchronization issues, and squarely place the fault with each individual broadcast network, therefore complaining directly to Freeview is not the solution. Created as a non-profit organization, Freeview is only a “broadcast platform” and is not responsible for the technical quality, and content that is broadcast on its service.

The abundance of “Reality” programming has seen channels lose their identity, as TV1, TV2 and TV3 are now virtually indistinguishable. While cheaper to produce, Reality TV does little to enhance viewing experiences. The exploitation of conflict, competition and controversy does not compare with the viewer’s satisfaction and desire to be entertained by other compelling programming content. Shows of cultural or artistic significance are almost non-existent. If the viewing choice is for “live” mainstream sports, then for a fee, it is available through Sky’s subscription TV service.

The alternative is to watch Reality television on Freeview. With the exception of Maori TV and TVNZ7, other major Networks have determined the viewer wants to watch Reality television; perhaps this decision is based more on economic considerations. In support of a well-balanced and productive NZ broadcast industry, Reality TV does little to provide jobs for local actors or encourage technical excellence and competence by the crews and operators.

In response, the networks generally state that their programming selection is determined by ratings, and Reality TV return significant ratings. However, if there are no other available programming choices, then chances are, the viewer will always end up watching either a cooking or a Police Reality programme. Scheduling inconsistencies do not nurture viewer loyalty.

Presumably, the more channels that are available to the viewer, the more choices they have in deciding what to watch. In simple terms, the result of more channels is a reduction in broadcast quality, as more TV Channels reduce available bandwidth and more channels unfortunately equate to poorer quality.

After five years of digital television, some networks have been slow in responding to the technical challenges they face. Viewers have lost a functioning television Public Broadcaster, but have more TV channels and proportionately more low-cost programming to view. As evidenced, more available channels does not equate to better television, and Digital television isn’t the answer to improved picture and audio.

If broadcast standards have been breached, then concerns can be addressed to the Broadcast Standards Authority. If viewers are looking to report technical or other broadcast related issues outside the scope of the BSA, then no effective mechanism exists that can receive and investigate those concerns. Clearly, writing to the networks or Freeview achieves very little. Who then is really ensuring the New Zealand broadcast industry is acting in the best interests of New Zealand and more importantly New Zealanders?

--

Paul W. Feenstra is an entertainment industry professional. He has over 25 years experience working in Hollywood as a producer, director, audio mixer, studio facility owner, and media consultant. He has accumulated over 1000 screen credits and is a recipient of multiple Emmy nominations, Paul now lives and works in New Zealand as a Media Strategist. He is honoured to be a member of the World Class New Zealand Network.

ENDS

© Scoop Media