Untitled

Radio Record, Volume I, Issue 7, 2 September 1927, Unnumbered Page

On Tuesday of last week the "Radio Record" was the subject of attack by the Labour Party in Parliament, Mr, H. E. Holland in particular excelling himself in the things he said. On noticing the Press reports we wrote Mr. Holland on Wednesday as follow :- "T notice from this morning’s "Dominion" that some complimentary attention has been devoted to the "Radio Record" by your good self, "Without knowing the exact incident to which you refer, I am still prepared to give your statement that we published a "deliberate lie" a flat denial. If any inaccuracy has appeared in our columns, either in the news columns, based upon newspaper reports, or editorially, we are quite prepared to make the necessary correction; but I would ask you to accept our assurance that no inaccuracy has been deliberately published. That is quite apart from our practice or policy, and for it to have been suggested that such was done deliberately is in my opinion ungentlemanly and definitely untrue." So far we have not received a reply from Mr. Holland, and at this writing we are still ignorant of the grounds upon which Mr. Holland thinks himself justified in descending to the level he did. We do not claim any immunity from the possibility of error, and if error has occurred in our columns, either in our report of Parliament’s proceedings or in what we consider perfectly fair and justifiable comment upon those proceedings, we will be happy, on proof being given, to make the necessary correction. From the reports of Mr. Holland’s latest outburst, we are unable to determine where his complaint lies. So far as his allegation is concerned as to our having perpetrated an untruth deliberately, that remark can be flatly contradicted. We invite Mr, Holland to either justify his statement or apologise.

Mr. Peter Fraser joined his chief in the attack, and sought to make political capital out of the dual editorship of the "N.Z. Dairy Produce Exporter" and the "Radio Record." An extraordinary inconsistency and confusion of thought seems to characterise the observations of this group of members of Parliament upon wireless and associated matters. In his remarks Mr. Fraser alleged, first, that the "Exporter" had been used by the Government as a party journal prior to _ last election. Next, he complained that it had been used to attack the Government. Exactly where doe Mr. Fraser stand in the matter? The truth is that the "Exporter" has been perfectly independent, and never has at any time been used politically either for or against the Government, or the Labour Party. Criticism has on occasion been directed against both, and doubtless will be again. At the last election period those responsible for the Reform Party’s campaign recognised the extraordinary advertising value of the "Exporter," with its circulation of approximately 60,000 copies, reaching all dairy farmers’ homes throughout the Dominjon, and inserted a number of full page advertisements which were duly paid for in hard cash. The same privilege was cpen to the Labour Party, and if the Labour Party intends next election to follow the lead in _ publicity given them by the Reform Party, we would take the oppor- : tunity of putting a word in now on behalf of the "Exporter." Mr. . Fraser, we believe, holds the purse-strings of the Party, and will realise that he can spend its money in no better direction, or secure better advertising value.

Humour apart, however, Mr. Fraser’s allegation is utterly unfound- | ed. The "Exporter" editorially has been perfectly independent, and will semain so. Its function is not a political one at all, and even in relation to the outstanding contributions of "Economist"-who wields the best informed and most trenchant pen on economic matters in the Dominion to-day-his articles have been equally independent. He has on occasion subjected the Government to very well informed and sound criticism on financial matters-so much so that the Minister of Finance, in his presessional policy speech at Feilding, paid "Economist" the unique compliment. of singling lis observations out from those of all other Press writers, by replying to them in detail, Mr. Fraser will probably recall that thereafter "Economist" very effectively traversed the Minister’s statement, and proved his original contention. Mr, Fraser’s charge against the "I°xporter" is quite baseless. We can also emphatically deny the observation that the "Record" has "frankly indulged in propaganda against the Labour Party." ‘That is not so. We have criticised the observations of certain members of the Labour Party. in relation to broadcasting, but we have made no other comment upon the Labour Party’s policy, and are not, in this field, concerned in the slightest degree with it, We are perfectly entitled to express our views upon the comments made in Parliament by the Labour Party upon broadcasting matters, and the thin-skinned and petulant complaints of Mr, Fraser and his confreres will not deter us from doing so. Mr. Fraser says we are out to boost broadcasting. He

is awarded top marks for his perspicacity. That is exactly our function -to Serve broadcasting and give listeners essential information of value to them. From the listener’s point of view, what good purpose has been’ served by this carping Parliamentary criticism of the Government loan? It would almost seem that this. undue attention to broadcasting is a confession of the Labour Party’s inability to find anything to talk about. Listeners are concerned to secure the best possible station, and the best possible programmes for their delectation and entertainment. When the Government wisely conceived the idea that it would be advantageous to have a high-powered station at Wellington, in order to have a daylight range over the whole Dominion, and a night range over the whole Pacific, and approached the company to that end, the company rightly enough pointed out that such an extension of the original commitment of £20,000 would require a revision of the financial arrangements. In that revision the company, from its own strength, extended its obligation from £20,000 to £35,000, and the Government advanced on suitable security the £15,000 in question, to permit of the completion of 2YA on the high-powered basis desired. From the listener’s point of view the Government is wholly to be commended for giving the financial assistance necessary, As a result, listeners have secured better service without any increased license fee, more listeners have been attracted, so that the revenue available for programmes has been enlarged, and as a consequence a general forward movement for the betterment of the broadcast service has begun. The whole atmosphere in broadcasting circles has changed for the better in the last two months, and this has its foundation in the opening of 2YA on the basis made possible by the Government’s financial provision. The advantages of 2YA that we have enumerated are quite apart from the extra asset that this station represents in the case of national emergency. We cannot see that the Labour Party, in their excess of criticism on this feature, have rendered any service to listeners or added to their own credit or reputation. The debates have been of a distinctly carping nature, and there is at least ground for the suspicion that their attitude has its base in the dairy control controversy, and the Labour Party’s resentment of Mr. Goodfellow’s necessary reminder to the farmers of the country of the Labour Party’s attitude to the method of election, and the consequences thereof. If that is so it hardly seems cricket to make broadcasting the stalking-horse for political revenge.