Tuesday, January 25, 2005

PRESS TO PLAYOpen letter to Radio New Zealand

Feel free to circulate this to anyone you think might be interested. Journalists, musicians, bloggers, friends - anyone who might be inclined to take sides for and against this. This is a debate that needs to be had - and soon.

Dear RNZ,

In September last year, I moved to the UK, happy in the knowledge that your revamped website was - if not nearing completion - at least well and truly underway. I've been looking forward to listening to the sounds of home - and, in particular, an apparently stonking doco series on the life and times of the Enz.

But sadly, that's not to be. I'm reliably informed that Radio New Zealand will not be streaming its content online, and will only be making certain spoken word programmes available as an archived stream at very low bitrates, with a one-week shelf life.

As I understand it:
- No programmes will be downloadable.
- No programmes will stream live on the internet.
- No music content at all will be available from the RNZ website.
- No high-bandwidth options will be provided for broadband listeners.

The reason? Radio New Zealand is scared of the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ).

Never mind the fact that just about every major public broadcaster on the planet streams live online: ABC, BBC, CBC...

Never mind the fact that the people of New Zealand - both at home and abroad - are missing out on a valuable source of public information, entertainment and education.

Never mind the fact that most (large and small) commercial, student and iwi broadcasters in New Zealand don't seem to have a problem operating in the face of the draconian RIANZ policy not to give streaming licences to any broadcaster under any circumstances for any sum of money.

Never mind the charter.

To bow to RIANZ by taking the safest and least adventurous path with streaming radio - ie: a crippled website that is, frankly, an embarrassment as it is - is an insult to the public of New Zealand, an affront to the technically pioneering spirit that is an integral part of the culture that you are meant to represent, and the opposite of what the government is trying to achieve in the broadcasting and digital media sectors.

David Cunliffe's progressive Digital Strategy paper speaks of a New Zealand Creative Commons.

The Prime Minister of the country is directly involved in the propagation of Arts, Culture and Heritage in the nation.

Government vigorously debates liberal approaches to format shifting and music ownership in parliamentary session.

The broadcasting funding body, New Zealand On Air, has flown in the face of all probability by not only getting NZ music accepted in the mainstream - but beyond anyone's wildest imaginings.

And Radio New Zealand simpers its way through the most important changes in its history since deregulation with a degree of cowardice rivalled only by the recording industry's own fear of change in the face of new media.

Enough. You've had the best part of a decade to work this out.

You're bigger than they are. You have the government on your side. You have the people on your side. You have history on your side. You have international precedent on your side. You have technical capability and a staff who believe wholeheartedly in what they are achieving.

You're not competing by providing anything that record companies sell. You're already paying RIANZ for the use of the music.

Listening to the radio - whether time-shifted as an mp3 download listened to the following day on an iPod on the bus, or tuned in on the AM radio - is no threat to the music industry. Radio airplay - of any kind - is the record industry's best ally.

Congratulations on the FM rollout. That's the 1980s dealt with. This is an even more profound shift in that it will inform the nature of everything you do as a content provider. Take it seriously.

Stream everything. Archive everything. Allow everyone to download any programme.

You will not be promoting theft and piracy - you'll be vitally contributing to an informed and dynamic public sphere. That's your job.

RIANZ will complain. Let them. This battle needs to be fought and they need to be slapped down hard at a legislative level.

Stop acting like an obedient puppy to the corporate music cartel and start acting like a public service broadcaster.

Sincerely,

Andrew Dubber
Lecturer in Radio
Auckland University of Technology

Currently Visiting Lecturer
and Research Project Coordinator,
Online Music Enterprise / New Music Strategies
Urban Cultures Research Centre
University of Central England
Birmingham B42 2SU

email: dubber (at) gmail (dot) com


=======================

70. Leon Thomas - Blues and the Soulful Truth BMG 1972
71. Shihad - The General Electric Wildside 2000
72. Mesh - Who Watches Over Me? Columbia 2002
73. Talking Heads - Remain In Light Sire 1980
74. Able Tasmans - Store In A Cool Place Flying Nun 1995

    • 13 Comments:

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Someone sent your page to me - I can understand your sentiments - I can't get enough of web radio myself.

    But I don't understand some of your comments.

    I have listened to Enzology at 128k on my broadband connection, and when it is running I listen to Digital Life on the net too. Admittedly this is only at 32k but hardly 'very low bitrates'.

    I also noticed a copy of the Tsunami Memorial Service on the site which plays at 64k. It seems to be mono, but better than nothing.

    So they have music content and highish bandwidth...or are they just teasing us?

    Cheers,

    Joe Wilson.

    6:45 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    There was a piece by Russell Brown in the Listener a couple of months ago that quoted some guy at RNZ.

    http://www.listener.co.nz/default,2565.sm

    6:58 AM  

    Blogger Dubber wrote:

    I'm delighted to be wrong about the Enz series - though the mp3 links (128k or otherwise) attach to .asx (Windows Media proprietary) files that don't appear to be on the server, so I'm back where I started from on that show.

    I'd read Russell's column - and that's always been the official line at RNZ as far as I can make out: "we'd rather do it right and late than soon and badly" - but that's starting to wear thin, and although RNZ are not actually providing the roadblocks, they are clearly stopping at all of them.

    When Russell wrote that - and particularly before I left NZ - there was definitely an optimistic sense of hope that things were going ahead. Budget had been allocated, people were actually working on the site. But apart from the very pretty Enz series subsite, I can't tell much of a difference for all that.

    I actually visited the RNZ technical department that was charged with making the new site, and was told at the time that they had committed to a maximum 32kHz and a second choice of a much lower bitrate for people with rural service copper wire dialup connections. No plans were being made to go higher than 32k and only Real Audio and Windows Media proprietary formats were being considered for content delivery (which is another issue I have, but is secondary to this main rights argument).

    Perhaps the 128k Enz feature that you were able to listen to (and I wasn't) represents an advance in that area.

    I don't dispute that RNZ are trying. APRA are being very helpful and reasonable in that area too right across the board - from the big broadcasters to the little guys. You can get a licence from APRA to stream with no problems. You just can't get one from RIANZ, and thus anyone who is streaming online in NZ is effectively doing it illegally.

    Apparently the real holdup is not over streaming but over on-demand, and the two issues are being treated entirely separately. Just before Christmas, negotiations between RIANZ and RNZ concerning on-demand hit a brick wall, and things are as they are now.

    I have no problem with the owners of intellectual property receiving due payment for the use of their works. I have a problem with a collective representing all of the major owners of recorded works holding a public broadcaster to ransom. RIANZ are the only game in town for 95% of all the music - and they are fixing all the rules and all the prices for the sole purpose of profit maximisation.

    Without challenging this, RNZ and the people of New Zealand who listen (and, incidentally, who buy a lot of music) are at their mercy. Only a refusal to play by their rules and openly challenge them can this change it.

    Only by having this debate can the situation improve.

    7:41 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Gosh, if you are getting your information from inside RNZ then this is not too good at all.

    Though '...holding a public broadcaster to ransom" seems to be quite a serious charge indeed.

    I still don't understand then how Enzology is there on the web (I just noticed on the audio help page that it is limited to NZ which is probably why you can't get it. That is a major bummer!)

    Also, the tsunami service I mentioned does not appear to be limited to NZ (according to an overseas friend), yet it has music. Very odd.

    Have you asked for any 'official' comment from your contact at RNZ that could clarify these issues for us, your readers?

    I'd certainly like to know more about the RIANZ thing too as you can hear a lot of other broadcasters streaming in NZ already.

    Joe.

    8:07 AM  

    Blogger Jessie wrote:

    Thanks for highlighting the issue Dubber. I went to the RNZ site a few weeks ago fully expecting to find it streaming live, since practically every other station around does. Here's hoping you kickstart some questions, and better yet some answers.

    9:35 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Dubber,
    As a fellow Kiwi in the UK, I enjoyed reading about this issue with RNZ.

    It should be possible for any of us to be able to listen to our radio station anywhere. Specifically over the internet. It is the same content broadcast over a different medium.

    Piracy issues the RIANZ are silly, how many kids out there have not at least tried to tape a song off the radio? Perhaps radio should be banned entirely then?



    Kia Kaha, Kia Toa, Kia Manawanui!

    LANCE

    lw (at) judocoach (dot) com

    11:02 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    I am an avid internet listener to radio, and am patiently waiting for RNZ to get some programmes on for me to listen to.

    From what you say I could be waiting for a very long time and when it finally arrives it'll be low quality and limited selection.

    I haven't notice any press coverage of this either.

    What IS going on?

    Grrrr.

    cheers from the sunny North (of NZ)
    Roger Philips

    10:28 PM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    I talked to Richard Hulse on my bFM show today and it seems that the situation is not as bad as you think, Dubber. RIANZ *has* been negotiating, and I would think that when Campbell Smith arrives as the new CEO, things should move along more rapidly. The eventual license still might be on the niggly side though ...

    Also: no RealPlayer - the server licence is just too pricey - so WMA and MP3 streaming, up to 128k, with (this will please the geeks) the possibility of Ogg Vorbis format later on. And live streaming hasn't been ruled out ...

    I'll sum it up in the blog tomorrow morning.

    Cheers,
    Russell Brown

    2:58 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Russell Brown interviewed Richard Hulse from the RNZ tech team today on his Wire show:

    http://y3m.net.nyud.net:8090/files/russell,rnzholst-2005-02-02.ogg
    http://y3m.net.nyud.net:8090/files/russell,rnzholst-2005-02-02.mp3

    Same old excuses to my ears. I'm one of those that emailed to see when they're getting their act together. It seems that live 24/7 streaming of National Radio is low priority at best :-( Quote from an email last year (hope RH doesn't mind):

    "There are no plans to provide a live audio stream due to problems obtaining copyright clearance for some of the material we broadcast via conventional means."

    Weak.

    3:09 AM  

    Blogger alinkyoto wrote:

    28th of March, 2005.
    AL in Kyoto.
    I've been enjoying and enduring Radio New Zealand's feeds through
    http://xtra.co.nz/streaming/0,,10980,00.html
    for the last few years from my apartment here in Central Kyoto
    ( 100Mb/s fibre optic connection).
    The Australian Broadcasting Corporation: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/default.htm
    provides an excellent example of what Radio New Zealand could (and should) be doing to provide an international audience with access to New Zealand.
    As a language teacher here, I frequently use their Audio files of interviews with their transcripts with my higher level students which provide an enlightening insight into our language ,society and culture.
    Internet Radio provides an experience which is valuable,both for listeners and for the community from which it is broadcast.
    Changing one cultures' preconceptions of what another culture is like is an important first step in facilitating interaction.
    This alone should have been enough to have inspired RNZ to have focused on getting their programs onto the internet as part of a wider effort to promote tourism and trade with New Zealand,-but it seems there has been a lack of sensitivity in this regard to date.
    If some effort were made to quantify what benefits the service could have to the New Zealand economy , perhaps RIALTA would be more likely to compromise its intransigent position....

    AL in Kyoto.
    P.S. Thanks Dubber for setting up this forum.

    3:54 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    I am a Kiwi living in rural Thailand and enjoy the few Radio NZ programmes I can access through the xtra.co.nz news site. But it is not enough. Furthermore, they have now stopped recording and posting any weekend programmes on the xtra site.
    With elections coming up the weekend current events programmes keep us expat Kiwis up to date with what is going on at home. It is shameful that Radio NZ cannot provide this service.

    John
    Krabi, Thailand

    8:48 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Its quite obvious to me why Radio New Zealand have only limited availability of online radio streams.

    They pay millions of dollars per year for exclusive rights to frequencies around new Zealand. This very asset is what sperates their network from the rest, therefore increasing the value of their airtime.

    If RNZ were to start streaming their broadcasts online, then for those who do listen online, they have no marketplace advantage and their precious frequencies are worthless.

    RNZ are protecting their assets.

    It wont be long before digital radio is delivered the same way as conventional radio and so RNZ have only limited time to capitalise on their investment.

    I'm not saying I approve or disapprove of their stance, I am just making readers here aware of the underlying reason for limited webstreams.

    Just like Telecom protecting their bottom line (voice) RNZ as a business will protect theirs.

    :)

    8:52 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    The don't seem to have limited streams now (September 2005)

    8:06 AM  

    Post a Comment







    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?