Sounding out the Long-Time Listener: a Study of the Talkback Radio Audience That Doesn’T Talk Back in Aotearoa New Zealand
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Sounding out the long-time listener: A study of the talkback radio audience that doesn’t talk back in Aotearoa New Zealand Maureen Sinton A thesis submitted to Auckland University of Technology in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 2020 School of Communication Studies Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies Abstract Talkback radio is a very popular medium in New Zealand with hundreds of thousands of people tuning in daily to listen to a huge variety of topics from politics to dreams to stain removal. Anything and everything are up for discussion. This Grounded Theory study of talkback radio listeners in Aotearoa New Zealand asks why do they make the choice to listen to talkback in a digital market place crowded with options. Stereotypes suggest that the talkback listener mirrors the talkback caller: older, right wing with a desire to vent their frustrations. This study finds that talkback listeners are more varied than this stereotype suggests, as are their reasons for listening. However, stereotypes do apply to the content which is in the main presented from te ao Pākehā, a Pākehā world view. Talkback radio listeners and producers and hosts from the industry were interviewed. Listener participants said they listened to learn what other members of their community were thinking at any one time. Talkback’s liveness assures them that what they are hearing is current as compared with prerecorded talk-based media. The participant’s choice of talkback did not indicate agreement with what they heard, nor did they expect to agree. They did not expect the content they heard on talkback radio to be factually correct. (The exception to this is in emergency situations when listeners prioritise accurate information). Socially active listeners felt that talkback content gave them useful insight into the thinking processes of those with opposing views. Industry participants (hosts and producers) reframe this and believe listeners enjoy the moral outrage of hearing opposing views. As well they believe listeners find comfort in a talkback host who has consistent views. The study references the work of listening theorists in its analysis of why listeners choose talkback. While seen by some as a passive form of media consumption, the act of talkback listening, requires those who do, to actively ‘listen to’, rather than just ‘being a listener’, a role that implies passivity. Talkback comprising as it does entertainment, information, pathos and scintillation, rewards the often-alone listener with the opportunity to be absorbed by what they are hearing. It is an example of polyphonic discourse; a range of opinions or ii observations, each one as valid as the other, expressed and curated not for those who call, but for those who listen. iii Table of contents Abstract ii Attestation of authorship vii Acknowledgements viii Ethics approval ix List of figures x List of tables xi Kuputaka (Glossary): Radio industry and research terms xii Kuputaka (Glossary): Te reo Māori xiv Chapter 1: Introducing the long-time listener 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Ko wai au? (Who am I?) And why talkback listening? 5 1.3 Talkback: A definition 6 1.4 A history of talkback radio: Te whakapapa o whakawhitiwhiti kōrero ā reo irirangi 11 1.5 Aotearoa New Zealand’s radio market: An overview 22 1.6 Summary 26 Chapter 2: Literature review 2.1 Introduction 28 2.2 The theory of listening: Active or passive? 30 2.3 Media audience research: The story so far 36 2.4 The talkback listener: Socially inadequate loner seeks company or engaged citizen seeks information? 42 2.5 The talkback host: Shock jock or just ‘larger than life’? 47 2.6 ‘Significant Shifts’: Listening to talkback in the Web 2.0 era 49 2.7 Talkback radio: An academic tin ear 52 2.8 Summary 55 Chapter 3: Methodology 3.1 Introduction 57 iv 3.2 Research design 3.2.1 Data sets 57 3.2.2 Time frame 58 3.2.3 Participant recruitment 59 3.3 Thematic analysis 61 3.4 The Grounded Theory process 61 3.4.1 Initial coding & categorisation 63 3.4.2 Concurrent data generation 64 3.4.3 Writing memos 64 3.4.4 Theoretical sampling 65 3.4.5 Constant comparative analysis 65 3.4.6 Theoretical sensitivity 66 3.4.7 Intermediate coding 67 3.4.8 Identifying a core category 67 3.4.9 Advanced coding and theoretical integration 67 3.4.10 Generating theory 68 3.5 Data collection 3.5.1 Data sets 1 & 2: Listener & industry interviews 68 3.5.2. Data sets 3 & 4: Talkback content 69 3.6 Revealing the themes 70 3.7 Limitations 71 3.8 Summary 73 Chapter 4: Data analysis 4.1 Introduction 74 4.2 Talkback: The voice of the average Joe 75 4.3 Talkback through the lens of te ao Māori (the Māori world view) 91 4.4 The talkback host: ‘Damned know-all’ 94 4.5 What liveness brings to talkback 99 4.5.1 Instantaneity 103 4.5.2 Liveness in emergencies and major news events 104 4.5.3 Authenticity 108 4.6 Digital engagement: ‘Bam! Did it’ 110 4.7 Talkback as companion: ‘Acquaintances I listen to’ 116 4.8 Talkback as soundtrack 122 4.9 Talkback: Reality radio 124 4.10 The stigma: ‘I don’t actually know anyone who’s ever admitted to listening to it’ 127 4.11 Talkback listening on targeted stations 131 4.12 Summary 134 Chapter 5: Findings and Discussion 5.1 Introduction 136 5.2 Not the Nine O’clock News, but maybe a sports game? Talkback as entertainment 138 5.3 Relatability: Direct and indirect 140 v 5.4 Liveness: The unacknowledged motivator 143 5.5 Talkback: A multi-platform experience 145 5.6 Companion or companionable? Enjoyment or requirement? 146 Chapter 6: Conclusion: Re-conceptualising the long-time listener 147 References 153 Appendices Appendix A Notes on participants and citations 175 Appendix B Synthesis of participant data: Initial, Intermediate and Advanced coding 177 Appendix C Transcript of Newstalk ZB, 15 March 2019, 2.08 to 4 p.m. 182 vi Attestation of authorship I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person (except where explicitly defined in the acknowledgements), nor material which to a substantial extent has been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma of a university or other institution of higher learning. Signed: Dated: 22 October 2020 vii Acknowledgements (Ngā mihi) Like a marathon, writing a doctoral thesis is in the main, a solo effort. However, there are people without whom you would not have made it to the start line. From there they cheer you on along the way, remind you why you’re doing it as you hit the 30 km mark, and are on hand to get you across the finish line. Ngā mihi nui to my supervisors, Dr Peter Hoar and Dr Vijay Devadas. Always encouraging and so knowledgeable, they never hesitated to tell me when I went off course. Tēnā rawa atu koe to Dr Frances Nelson who, in her inimitable way convinced me that I could and should undertake a doctorate. I cannot thank you enough, Frances. Tēnā koe Richard Betts for being a fine proof reader. Thank you so much to all the radio listening and industry participants who gave of their time to provide me with valuable data. I hope I have done justice to your insightfulness. Tēnā rawa atu koutou to my colleagues at the AUT School of Communications, especially the radio department, for their encourgement and advice, the WG12 administration team, and to Te Ara Poutama, the Māori faculty at AUT, for the opportunity to begin my tertiary haerenga (journey) as a mature student some nine years ago. Kia ora Lisa Duder and Atakohu Middleton for your guidance. Ngā mihi and many thanks to my friends whose encouragement to keep running towards that finish line was so appreciated. Ki tōku iwi Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki me tōku Whānau Beamish – your tautoko is a taonga, a treasure to me. Kia ora Laurie for your blessing to use kupu Māori at times in this thesis. Ngā mihi nui me arohanui ki tōku Whānau Sinton, especially Kris and Frances. I dedicate this thesis to our Johnson whānau, especially Great Uncle Joe Johnson (aka ‘Scribe’) who plays a role in this thesis. From the Johnsons came my father’s love of words. Thinking of you, Mum and Dad, at this time. I’m sorry I missed that appointment with the typing pool, Dad. And this is for Paul. Moe mai rā. viii Ethics approval This research has obtained ethical approval 17/341 from the Auckland University of Technology Ethics Committee on 9 October 2017 ix List of figures Figure 1.1 Average audience [000s] aged 10+ 3 Figure 1.2 Average audience [share] aged 10+ 4 Figure 1.3 NZ radio station matrix showing age and gender skew 24 Figure 4.1 The People’s Column, The Northern Advocate, 27 September, 1929, p.9 76 Figure 4.2 Top 3 activities undertaken while listening to the radio. 122 Figure 4.3 Excerpt from The Simpsons, Season 3, Episode 41: Like Father, Like Clown 128 Figure 4.4 RNZ National Facebook page, 26 September 2019. 129 x List of tables Table 1.1 10+ audience share and rankings in Auckland and Total NZ Markets for Newstalk ZB and Mai FM. 26 xi Kuputaka (Glossary): Radio industry and research terms Air time That time when content is being broadcast; when it is ‘on the air’.