[nephihaha]

New Zealand has always imported the bulk of its television content from the USA, Australia and the UK (more rarely Canada and elsewhere) and yet New Zealanders are forced to pay a sky high TV licence. Where is this money really going? The obvious answer is that a handful of people are creaming it off to fund their lifestyles rather than to produce domestic content. Has the BSA ever addressed this obvious elephant in the room?

Other than "Shortland Street", the news and some sports games, there has been disappointingly little in the way of domestic television production. A shame because NZ can produce excellent films and dramas sometimes. It is pretty clear that Peter Jackson has done more for New Zealand that way than the state broadcasters ever did.

[pansa2]

> New Zealanders are forced to pay a sky high TV licence

There’s no TV license in New Zealand

[nephihaha]

My bad. But my point sticks, because NZ TV licenCe did exist for most of the time TV has been in New Zealand, i.e. for well over forty years. These days, the state, aka "the Crown", controls major outlets, and still pays for some programming from public taxes as well as taking advertising revenue. So the public pays for it whether they want to or not. (Much like Australia which abolished its licence a while ago, and the Republic of Ireland which retains a TV licence but also carries advertising on RTÉ.)

Where is most of that public money going to?