John Campbell says the internet will continue to present challenges for TV.
As part of our celebration of the first decade of nzherald.co.nz, Esther Goh asked some key figures in the media to predict how their industry will change over the next ten years. We also asked a series of experts to predict how New Zealand will change.
Bill Ralston - Media commentator, radio host
Everyone goes on about the death of traditional media, but the market's a really interesting thing, it expands and contracts. Very seldom do you see one form kill off another. Everyone's concentrating on digital - it's slowly making more inroads into
advertising. But it's not going to kill papers, it won't cut the throat of radio. TV didn't kill radio or movies. They all changed and adapted. Everyone jostles around a bit, squeezes up together and continues to make a living.
Obviously these are tough times, but when tough times come people look for cheap entertainment, that might be watching telly or listening to the radio, that kind of thing. Media can actually do quite well. And newspapers have another whole market to edge into online. There's a fantastic convergence available to large companies who have an established media outlet and also an expanding digital role as well. As the saying goes, content is king.
Dr Martin Hirst - AUT associate professor, journalism curriculum leader
People talk about the death of newspapers all the time. I would think we have another ten years of newspapers. Journalism will continue in one form or another. I'm not sure if online media are a replacement for newspapers and TV and radio. Online media tends to be a replication of other media, a mirror or extension of their newspaper outlets, not a replacement. Whether this will continue in the future is debatable.
I don't think the online model has proved itself. Globally there are a number of different models. The subscription model works for companies like Bloomberg which provide financial data, but not for the Wall Street Journal or any other major newspapers. The model has to be free to browse with advertising. Most online companies will find their hard copy is subsidising the online. Online doesn't make enough yet enough to make a profit off, or it is small or uneven.
John Campbell - Television presenter
The problem with television is that it's expensive to make. We will see a preponderance of niche communications, something for everyone, whether you're a macrobiotic vegan or Canterbury supporter. And where you'll find it is online.
How can a construct of broadcasting, born of one channel, reinvent itself in an utterly fragmented market where people have so much choice? How do we survive within that market? That comes down to everyone's ability to connect with an audience, an audience which has so much choice. I find it very exciting. It gives the audience a degree of power I could never have dreamed of as a kid.
Copyright is another thing to consider - I could do a story at 7pm and it could be on YouTube five minutes later. How do we enforce that, do we want to worry about it, what do we do about it? As a rule of thumb I can't take other people's work and take it to air. YouTube rides roughshod over all those notions.
Eric Kearley - General manager, digital services, TVNZ
In the next ten years storage space on home devices is going to increase drastically, and bandwidth prices will decrease. These two in combination will see much more content available on demand.
Internationally there's not a lot of content available, and it expires quickly. People don't want unlimited choice it's a hassle. What works on demand is what's available on television, the same type of content works when it's fresh.
Attracting mass audiences will become even more valuable and lucrative. Because of supply and demand, it will be rare to have huge mass viewing opportunities. So things like Dancing with the Stars will become more valuable for advertisers. And the profits from linear broadcasting will be healthy because they are the only ones to offer a mass audience.
