AM Show aka National Party TV

The AM Show is a New Zealand weekday breakfast TV show. It's a lightweight attempt at current affairs, most of the guests are conservative and the views expressed are generally right-of-centre. That said, I think in the run up to the recent General Election and in the weeks after they've crossed the line and become an organ of the National Party. To recap, National are now in opposition as they lost the General Election and are out of office.

How I think the AM Show tried and still tries to support National is in the relentlessly favourable coverage they provide. This support extends to all levels, even right down to captions, with the National party leader Simon "Bill" English being described recently as 'National Leader' instead of Leader of the Opposition. With the former title one could be confused about his actual role.

So what I'm going to do is run a survey just to check if I'm right. I'll listen to three hours of the AM Show, each separate hour chosen randomly on any given day (also chosen randomly). What I'll be listening for is either National being mentioned or the government which could be Labour, NZ First or the Greens. How many times does the AM Show mention either and in what proportion?

Then I'll be listening for generally favourable comments. How I'll determine this will be going by how the commentator leaves the viewer or listener (the show is also simulcast on radio).

For example, imagine a new road is being announced. What I think the AM Show do is boost National but detract from Labour. What they'd say is something like this:

"Labour has announced a new road, 'bout time I'd say, where's the money coming from? (Labour spokesperson comes on and makes sense in pointing out National failed to build the road). Trust Labour to have not done their sums."

Then when National have their say (remember National had planned this road but never built it):

"The very capable Steven Joyce will be all over this, over to the money man, what about this then (Steven Joyce speaks with little interruption). Well that's the final word then, trust National to sort this mess out."

Clearly in such an exchange the intention is to create a generally favourable impression of National, wouldn't you say? I don't know why New Zealand puts up with it, there could be a good argument for having TV3's licence to broadcast suspended.

And a sidebar, the presenters are white and middle class. Duncan Garner is the so-called 'star' who wrote an offensive and deeply racist opinion piece for the Sunday Star Times awhile back, while the sports guy is a former cricket player for NZ. Cricket is largely white and who you know not how good you are largely determines selection. His name is Mark Richardson (you are not expected to recognise the name and few know what he has done despite his repeatedly reminding the audience he once played for NZ's biggest sporting chokers) and he openly endorsed National prior to the election.

When TV3 next goes bust, I suggest the frequencies be allocated to Radio New Zealand and let them run a TV news channel.