The commercialisation of New Zealand television in the 1990s has provoked debate between those who hold that markets increase diversity and those who believe that competition produces homogeneity. Focusing on the formal structure of program types, this article uses a range of statistics to assess historical shifts in the entropic breadth of genres, the stability of this mix, shifts in modality and variations by channel. In keeping with the convergence hypothesis, the findings indicate a general trend towards stabilisation, domination by entertainment and increased hybridity. However, entropy has remained consistently high. Moreover, entertainment declined and information rose throughout the 1990s. These unexpected results are an outcome of market partitioning established by state television in the 1970s and 1980s. Rather than either the advent of neo-liberal variety or a decline of public service diversity, this analysis emphasises the state's persistent hegemony over the free-to-air market.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinsonJ.1994, ‘The State, the Media and Thin Democracy’, in SharpA. (ed.), Leap into the Dark, Auckland University Press, Auckland, pp. 146–77
2.
AtkinsonJ.2001, ‘Tabloid Democracy’, in MillerR. (ed.), New Zealand Government and Politics, Oxford University Press, Auckland, pp. 284–98
3.
de BensE.1998, ‘Television Programming: More Diversity, More Convergence?’, in BrantsK. (eds), The Media in Question, Sage, London, pp. 27–37
4.
Boyd-BellR.1985, New Zealand Television: The First 25 Years, Reed, Auckland
5.
BrooksT.MarshE.1999, The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows, 1946-Present, 7th edn, Ballantine Books, New York
6.
DayP.2000, Voice and Vision: A History of Broadcasting in New Zealand, Auckland University Press, Auckland
7.
DebrettM.2004, ‘Branding Documentary: New Zealand's Minimalist Solution to Cultural Subsidy’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 5–23
8.
DimmickJ.RothenbuhlerE.1984, ‘The Theory of the Niche: Quantifying Competition Among Media Industries’, Journal of Communication, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 103–19
9.
DobreyS.KimT.-Y.HannanM.2001, ‘Dynamics of Niche Width and Resource Partitioning’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 1299–1337
10.
DominickJ.PearceM.1976, ‘Trends in Network Prime-time Programming, 1953–74’, Journal of Communication, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 70–80
11.
DoveyJ.2000, Freakshow: First Person Media and Factual Television, Pluto, London
12.
FarnsworthJ.NorrisP. (eds) 1998, The Way Ahead: New Zealand Broadcasting in the Nineties, Christchurch Polytechnic, Christchurch
13.
GrimesA.TyndallJ. (eds) 1999, Counting the Beat: Culture, Democracy and Broadcasting, IPS Policy Paper 4, Victoria University, Wellington
14.
HellmanH.2001, ‘Diversity — An End in Itself? Developing a Multi-Measure Methodology of Television Programme Variety Studies’, European Journal of Communication, vol. 16, no. 2, June, pp. 181–208
15.
HellmanH.SauriT.1994, ‘Public Service Television and the Tendency towards Convergence: Trends in Prime-Time Programme Structure in Finland, 1970–92’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 47–71
16.
HillveP.MajanenP.RosengrenK.1997, ‘Aspects of Quality in TV Programming: Structural Diversity Compared over Time and Space’, European Journal of Communication, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 291–318
17.
IshikawaS. (ed.) 1996, Quality Assessment of Television, University of Luton Press, Luton
18.
KambaraN.1992, ‘Study of the Diversity Indices Used for Programming Analysis’, Studies of Broadcasting, no. 28, pp. 195–206
19.
LealandG.2000, ‘Regulation — What Regulation? Cultural Diversity and Local Content in New Zealand Television’, Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, no. 95, pp. 77–89
20.
LitmanB.1992, ‘Economic Aspects of Program Quality: The Case for Diversity’, Studies of Broadcasting, no. 28, pp. 121–56
21.
McQuailD.1992, Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest, Sage, London
22.
Ministry of Commerce1993, Broadcasting Policy in New Zealand, Communications Division, Wellington
23.
New Future2003, A New Future for Public Broadcasting Conference, www.newfuture.govt.nz
24.
New Zealand On Air1992, Local Content Research, NZOA, Wellington
25.
New Zealand On Air1999, Local Content and Diversity: Television in Ten Countries, NZOA, Wellington
26.
New Zealand Treasury1985, Treasury Submission to the Royal Commission on Broadcasting and Related Telecommunications, Government Printer, Wellington
27.
NorrisP.FarnsworthJ. (eds) 1997, Keeping It Ours: Issues of Television Broadcasting in New Zealand, Christchurch Polytechnic, Christchurch
28.
RicheriG.1985, ‘Television from Service to Business: European Tendencies and the Italian Case’, in DrummondPPatersonR. (eds), Television in Transition, British Film Institute, London, pp. 21–35
29.
ScannellP.1989, ‘Public Service Broadcasting and Modern Public Life’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 135–66
30.
SuichM.1997, Benchmarking Public Broadcasters: How TVNZ Compares with Other State Owned Broadcasters in Australia, Britain and Canada, report commissioned by TVNZ, no publisher
31.
van CuilenburgJ.1997, ‘Diversity Revisited: Towards a Critical Rational Model of Media Diversity’, in BrantsK. (eds), The Media in Question, Sage, London, pp. 38–49
32.
WoodB.2004, ‘A World in Retreat: The Reconfiguration of Hybridity in 20th Century New Zealand Television’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 45–62
33.
YeabsleyJ.DuncanJ.JamesD.1994, Broadcasting in New Zealand: Waves of Change, Report to the Ministry of Commerce, Wellington
