29 April 2021
M.R Hawk
[FYI request #14847 email] Dear M.R Hawk
I refer to your request received on 4 March 2021, which has been considered under
the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA) for information relating to the support provided
to the media. Please find a response to each part of your request below:
1. Please provide a breakdown of the $1.3m subscription spend, by media
organisation subscribed to, also indicating whether the subscription
was new for 2020/21 or previously existing.
Please find attached as appendix one to this letter.
We do not have information about the number of existing subscriptions for each
government agency, for the nine media organisations. In the interest of time, we
needed to follow a process that enabled us to make good decisions without needing
specific detail from each government agency or media organisation. We agreed the
number of subscriptions to be purchased for each agency, and the pricing, based on
the following factors:
•
The size of each Public Services Department that will receive the subscription
and the number of staff requiring a license.
•
The average number of licenses that an organisation of that size would acquire
for the subscription.
•
The pricing models provided by each applicant.
Where agencies had existing subscriptions, the subscription purchased by Manatū
Taonga (MCH) was to start at the end of the current term (e.g. if the current
subscription ended in November 2020, the new 12-month subscription was
purchased upfront but would start in December 2020 for a 12-month duration). The
start date for new subscriptions was arranged by the media organisation and
agencies directly.
2. Please provide a breakdown of the $11.1m targeted assistance to media
companies, detailing which companies received the assistance, the
quantum of assistance and any conditions associated with the
assistance.
The $11.1M Supplementary Fund was a discretionary fund available for use as the
impact of COVID-19 on the media sector evolved. This was ultimately used to
deliver two initiatives:
•
Advance Government Advertising Initiative; advance payments to local media
businesses for advertising space that will be placed during 2020/21 by core
government organisations.
•
Publications Initiative; a flat-rated, one-off grant for magazines and community
newspapers impacted by the COVID-19 lockdown.
For which companies received the assistance and the quantum of assistance for
these two initiatives, this is included in appendix one.
In addition:
•
Once exact subscription costs were confirmed, a total of $1.55 million was
spent on Subscriptions and the additional $0.25 million was secured from the
Supplementary Fund.
•
The Advertising Standards Authority received $150k from the Supplementary
Fund.
Associated conditions
The associated conditions can be found in the website content, application forms
(which for publications includes the terms of agreement) and, for the Advertising
initiative, the terms and conditions of the loan. These documents are released to
you.
3. What conditions or framework were employed to judge the suitability of
the merits of applications for relief under the $11.1m targeted assistance
program? Please provide a copy of the conditions/criteria/framework
used in the decision-making process.
For both Advertising and Publications initiatives the eligibility criteria were outlined in
the website content and application forms, which have been provided. This is the
criteria that was used to judge the suitability of the application.
The general framework for the initiatives in Media Package One followed a similar
process:
a) A review process, which would include an initial review by a Customer
Services Representative (CSR) or Case Manager
b) If required, a further Specialist/Technical review to test specific aspects of the
application or if a second opinion was required
c) A peer review for QA purposes eg to double check bank account details and
financial information.
d) An escalation process was generally employed for cases where the eligibility
was less clear cut (the Advertising initiative included the option to escalate to
the Initiative Lead and the Publications initiative had a Moderation Panel).
e) Approval process – advertising included Treasury and Publications the final
approval was the MCH Sector Support Governance Group (SSGC)
All the steps and outcomes at each stage of the decision-making process were
recorded in a database.
We have provided documentation where relevant.
4. Were any applications for targeted assistance rejected, if so please
provide details?
Advertising – 44 applications of which 31 were successful, 7 withdrew from the
initiative and 6 were declined because they failed to meet the eligibility criteria.
Publications – 369 applications of which 34 were declined because they failed to meet
the eligibility criteria.
2
5. The [press] release states “The key concepts of the fund have been
developed alongside independent media experts". Please provide the
identities of the "independent media experts", their qualifications,
remuneration arrangements (if any) for said advice and details of their
appointment process.
These experts were Gavin Ellis and Peter Bale.
Appointments process
NZ On Air recruited two experienced journalism experts to assist with early work on
the initiative at a time when the project was confidential and so wider consultation
was not possible.
NZ On Air has engaged Gavin Ellis as an independent expert on a number of
previous occasions to review regional media funding and the LDR scheme, and so
invited him to bring his extensive experience and industry knowledge to this early
work.
Peter Bale was invited to provide his extensive international perspective, and an
added impartial view as someone knowledgeable about but not at that time
employed by any NZ media.
Qualifications
Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies.
He is a media consultant and
researcher. A former editor-in-chief of the
New Zealand Herald, he has a background
in journalism and communications – covering both editorial and management roles –
that spans more than half a century. His editorship of the
Herald coincided with a
period of major redevelopment of the broadsheet weekday newspaper, the launch of
the
Weekend Herald, and the creation of the newspapers’ Internet presence. A
strong advocate of freedom of speech, he was chairman of the New Zealand Media
Freedom Committee and was recipient of the British Commonwealth Astor Press
Freedom Award in 2005. He was created an Officer of the New Zealand Order of
Merit in the 2015 Queen’s Birthday Honours List for services to journalism. He has
been a university lecturer in politics and media studies and a regular commentator
on radio. As a consultant, he has advised on significant developments in media in
New Zealand.
Peter Bale is a New Zealand-born journalist and COVID refugee who has spent
most of his working life overseas, with roles at Reuters, The Financial Times, News
Corporation, Microsoft and CNN. He was the chief executive officer of investigative
news organisation The Center for Public Integrity when its ICIJ team published the
Panama Papers. He's been a consultant with clients from CGTN in China to
Facebook. In New Zealand he's working for Stuff on some strategic questions and
has written for The Spinoff, BusinessDesk, and Newsroom.
Remuneration
• Gavin Ellis $1,134.30
• Peter Bale $13,281.00
I trust this information answers your queries. However, if you wish to discuss this
decision with us, please feel free to conta
ct [Ministry for Culture and Heritage request email].
3
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this
decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Yours sincerely
Liz Stewart
Programme Manager, COVID Response Media and Broadcasting Programme
4
