Good reflesction, Phil. I’m thinking it might have something to do with age as well as changing social habits and losing interest. I got caught up in the sweep with Facebook in the beginning. After a couple years and a number of “bad issues” with folks I thought were “friends,” it became clear to me that the amount of time I was spending trying to keep up with everyone was not very productive, especially with the demands of friends, family and work.

Reading what was appearing on my page was “too out there;” at least that was the way I perceived it. That, and this thought: “Who do I think I am that anyone really gives a damn what I’m doing every five minutes of every day”

As you know, I never took to Twitter. Again, I’m sure it’s my age that deminished my interest in that social media program.

Anyway, we’re all getting old and supposedly wiser, and I think folks are beginning to experience the feeling of a void of human contact by relating only to peeps on the internet. Sitting in front of a computer all day long, whether for a job or for social media really dumbs down ones senses to the point we have so little time for the “real” thing… our friends, our families, and even ourselves.

Just thought you’d like to know what an “old guy” thinks about all this.

So… does that phrase I asked you about bring to mind anything that might smack of importance? After all, ten years is a long time. To me, it seems like yesterday… and always will. *grin*

Oh yeah… “hcooms”

Sky may not pay TVNZ to have their channels on Sky, but TVNZ does not have to pay SKY to have them there either (which would be expensive, given that Sky carries the regional variants of TV One and TV2 as well, for advertising purposes). And TVNZ gets to keep all money from advertising to a larger viewer base. Money which then can then get re-invested into more contents or into developing other revenue streams (such as TVNZ ondemand). Also, doesn’t Sky pay for TVNZ Heartland (in return for the channel being Sky-exclusive)?
The real problem is that the New Zealand Government (under National at least) is not prepared to invest in public service television (and are reluctant to invest in public service radio). This despite the fact that New Zealand invests far less in public service broadcasting then almost every other country we compare ourselves with internationally.
Oddly enough, it was also National that scrapped the dedicated TV License Fee and replaced it with direct government grants, National that forced Radio New Zealand to vacate Broadcasting House in Wellington (which Radio NZ owned) and make them lease an inferior office building on The Terrace in Wellington (the old building was heritage listed, purpose-built, had recording space for the NZ Symphony orchestra and was knocked down as the government needed a slither of the space for a re-arrangement of the government buildings, a plan which never went ahead), and which is forcing people outside the main centres to purchase a satellite dish to continue watching TV after 2013 when they shut down the analogue television network (because they don’t want to pay to upgrade the transmitters to digital) which will leave Sky as the only high definition broadcaster in these areas and further entrench their role as the default option for getting TV.
While Labours plans to make TVNZ more of a public broadcaster may not have worked as well as Labour hoped, at least they had a plan.

Oh yeah, TVNZ also used to have a shareholding on Sky TV – guess who applied pressure to make them sell their shares? Yup, National again (as part of their preparations to sell TVNZ to the highest bidder – this was the same time that TVNZ also sold off their award winning Natural History Unit in Dunedin).
Rant ends.