Radio Awards - Radio Broadcasters' Association

As noted in my previous post, the Radio Broadcasters Association has recently held the New Zealand Radio Awards 2006. I was quite confused as to how nominations for the various awards were decided upon. That Leighton Smith in particular was nominated was really beyond belief. On what basis are nominations and winners of these awards decided upon? Well I couldn't find any criteria at all on the Radio Broadcasters' Association website. I e-mailed Executive Director David Innes and asked him on what basis the awards were judged. He never got back to me. Either he couldn't be bothered replying or didn't really have any solid guidelines at hand to give out. I do think it is important considering publicity surrounding the awards there is some kind of transparency as to what basis they are judged upon. The public is told Paul Holmes is the best host, but no one tells them why. Holmes' ratings go up, more people listen to him, but no one knows why. It all seems rather silly doesn't it? Well who are the Radio Broadcasters' Association? They describe themselves and the tasks for which they are responsible as: ...to maintain high standards of commercial radio broadcasting in New Zealand and to represent the commercial radio industry to its many partners and stakeholders within government, business and the community. They are effectively the commercial radio industry's self-regulatory body. Its board is made up mostly of representatives from CanWest and The Radio Network (New Zealand's two major commerial operators). By virtue of its make-up then, the RBA is little more than an advocate for commercial radio in New Zealand. And according to its own submission, is strongly against public broadcasting (i.e. National Radio). It believes commercial radio can successfully fulfil the important requirement of impartiality and quality. Now, what does this mean for the NZ Radio Awards which are run directly by the RBA? When I first glanced through the list of nominations and winners I was extraordinarily surprised at the lack of recognition of publicly funded journalists / broadcasters. But now it all makes sense. It isn't in the interests of the RBA to allow National Radio to receive any commercial important awards. Instead, it is obvious that the RBA has a clear interest in ensuring its members dominate both nominations and awards which fit this category. Dominance here will help ensure higher listenership and hence greater advertising revenue. That Paul Holmes therefore won Best Talk or Current Affairs Host isn't surprising. Once you cut out National Radio (which includes Sean Plunket, Mary Wilson, Geoff Robinson, Kathryn Ryan, Kim Hill) much talent disappears from contention. Not only that, but National Radio is as a publicly funded model generally more objective in its reporting. By excluding it from the most essential awards, the RBA ends up reflecting success in less impartial and objective hosts / shows. The Radio New Zealand Awards are essentially little more than a PR exercise. They shouldn't be taken seriously and shouldn't receive the publicity they do. By handing out awards to commercial hosts / shows and cutting out National Radio, it is no surprise the awards do not reflect objectivity, impartiality, quality of information, intelligent opinion or issue comprehension. [My next post will concern Best Host winner Paul Holmes. He is a prime example of exactly why the Radio Awards are farce]