New data has revealed only 4 percent of music streamed in New Zealand over the 2025-2026 timeframe was made by Kiwi artists.

Despite revenue being up, it's harder for Kiwi musicians to earn their share, with more people gravitating towards international artists.

Entertainment correspondent Steve Newall says the streaming share for Kiwi artists has dropped over 28 percent over the last 5 years, despite the growing number of homegrown acts bringing crowds to their shows. 

LISTEN ABOVE

New data has revealed only 4 percent of music streamed in New Zealand over the 2025-2026 timeframe was made by Kiwi artists.
Despite revenue being up, it's harder for Kiwi musicians to earn their share, with more people gravitating towards international artists.
Entertainment correspondent Steve Newall says the streaming share for Kiwi artists has dropped over 28 percent over the last 5 years, despite the growing number of homegrown acts bringing crowds to their shows.&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE

News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your Sunday morning listening covered with The Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin on Newstalk ZB.

The Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin

Steve Newall: entertainment correspondent on new data showing only 4 percent of music streamed in NZ was made locally

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/a6c5c477-7a4e-4163-83ee-b4ed0177510f/transcript

With less than a week until New Zealanders have their say at the polls, our political leaders have become remarkably good at telling us who they won’t work with.  

Christopher Luxon has ruled out Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori and The Opportunity Party. Chris Hipkins has ruled out National, ACT and New Zealand First. David Seymour has drawn his own line against the left, but would consider Opportunity. Winston Peters has made it abundantly clear that Labour and Opportunity aren’t on his Christmas card list.  

The Greens, meanwhile, have kept their options open, although their preference for a change of Government is hardly a secret.

And then there’s The Opportunity Party, led by Qiulae Wong, which has pitched itself as willing to negotiate across the political spectrum - albeit with serious reservations about serving in a Government with Peters as Foreign Minister.

Welcome to MMP: the electoral system in which everybody wants the numbers, but not necessarily the people and parties that come with them.

The two big ‘ifs’ are of course the possibility of an overhang, and whether The Opportunity Party will hit 5 percent. We have to wait and see how it unfolds, but given the tight polling and steady demise of the major parties, knowing who is prepared to deal with who matters.  

Voters deserve to know what they’re voting for. If a party has fundamental disagreements with another over tax, climate policy or the role of Government, pretending those differences don’t exist would be dishonest. 

But there’s a difference between establishing principles and bolting the door before you know who’s knocking.

National’s rejection of Opportunity is the much discussed case in point. Luxon objects to its proposals for a land tax and universal basic income, which sit awkwardly with National’s low tax philosophy. That is a legitimate policy argument. Luxon is also desperate for both the party and electoral vote so has kept the messaging simple.

But if the numbers on election night leave National needing Opportunity to govern, what then? 

Does Luxon stick to his promise and risk handing the Government benches to Labour? Or does he discover that Qiulae Wong is, after all, a perfectly reasonable person to have a cup of tea with?  

The difficulty is that a change of heart would come with a price. Having repeatedly ruled a party out, a leader cannot simply welcome it aboard and expect nobody to notice. Opponents would call it desperation. Disillusioned supporters may call it betrayal. And the media would have a field day replaying every previous emphatic denial.

Yet voters may also recognise political reality. A party that negotiates a workable agreement, secures sensible compromises and delivers stable Government could argue it had put the country ahead of campaign rhetoric.  

There is a difference between changing your mind because circumstances have changed, and abandoning your principles because the ministerial cars are beckoning.

The irony is that ruling parties out potentially reduces a leader’s bargaining power. The fewer options you leave yourself, the more leverage you hand to those still at the table.  

Opportunity’s potential importance lies precisely in its ability to talk across the divide, provided it can win enough votes to enter Parliament. 

LISTEN ABOVE

With less than a week until New Zealanders have their say at the polls, our political leaders have become remarkably good at telling us who they won’t work with. &nbsp;
Christopher Luxon has ruled out Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori and The Opportunity Party. Chris Hipkins has ruled out National, ACT and New Zealand First. David Seymour has drawn his own line against the left, but would consider Opportunity. Winston Peters has made it abundantly clear that Labour and Opportunity aren’t on his Christmas card list. &nbsp;
The Greens, meanwhile, have kept their options open, although their preference for a change of Government is hardly a secret.
And then there’s The Opportunity Party, led by Qiulae Wong, which has pitched itself as willing to negotiate across the political spectrum - albeit with serious reservations about serving in a Government with Peters as Foreign Minister.
Welcome to MMP: the electoral system in which everybody wants the numbers, but not necessarily the people and parties that come with them.
The two big ‘ifs’ are of course the possibility of an overhang, and whether The Opportunity Party will hit 5 percent. We have to wait and see how it unfolds, but given the tight polling and steady demise of the major parties, knowing who is prepared to deal with who matters. &nbsp;
Voters deserve to know what they’re voting for. If a party has fundamental disagreements with another over tax, climate policy or the role of Government, pretending those differences don’t exist would be dishonest.&nbsp;
But there’s a difference between establishing principles and bolting the door before you know who’s knocking.
National’s rejection of Opportunity is the much discussed case in point. Luxon objects to its proposals for a land tax and universal basic income, which sit awkwardly with National’s low tax philosophy. That is a legitimate policy argument. Luxon is also desperate for both the party and electoral vote so has kept the messaging simple.
But if the numbers on election night leave National needing Opportunity to govern, what then?&nbsp;
Does Luxon stick to his promise and risk handing the Government benches to Labour? Or does he discover that Qiulae Wong is, after all, a perfectly reasonable person to have a cup of tea with? &nbsp;
The difficulty is that a change of heart would come with a price. Having repeatedly ruled a party out, a leader cannot simply welcome it aboard and expect nobody to notice. Opponents would call it desperation. Disillusioned supporters may call it betrayal. And the media would have a field day replaying every previous emphatic denial.
Yet voters may also recognise political reality. A party that negotiates a workable agreement, secures sensible compromises and delivers stable Government could argue it had put the country ahead of campaign rhetoric. &nbsp;
There is a difference between changing your mind because circumstances have changed, and abandoning your principles because the ministerial cars are beckoning.
The irony is that ruling parties out potentially reduces a leader’s bargaining power. The fewer options you leave yourself, the more leverage you hand to those still at the table. &nbsp;
Opportunity’s potential importance lies precisely in its ability to talk across the divide, provided it can win enough votes to enter Parliament.&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE

Francesca Rudkin: Could Luxon change his mind about working with Opportunity?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/5b680214-01ff-46de-a8f1-b4f4015dc21d/transcript

Film director Travis Knight and his studio Laika have built up a name for themselves in the world of stop-motion animation, but his newest project is his most ambitious one yet.

Wildwood is in theatres now, after 16 years in development - and it took 6 years of filming, 233 handmade puppets and over a thousand artists to get it all done.

There's already plenty of Oscar buzz around this project, with early speculation claiming it could take home the prize for Best Animated Feature.

Travis Knight says it was 'bittersweet' getting this wrapped up.

"Now we're finally sharing this thing that we've been working on for years with the rest of the world and I'm really thrilled by the response so far."

LISTEN ABOVE

Film director Travis Knight and his studio Laika have built up a name for themselves in the world of stop-motion animation, but his newest project is his most ambitious one yet.
Wildwood is in theatres now, after 16 years in development - and it took 6 years of filming, 233 handmade puppets and over a thousand artists to get it all done.
There's already plenty of Oscar buzz around this project, with early speculation claiming it could take home the prize for&nbsp;Best Animated Feature.
Travis Knight says it was 'bittersweet' getting this wrapped up.
"Now we're finally sharing this thing that we've been working on for years with the rest of the world and I'm really thrilled by the response so far."
LISTEN ABOVE

Travis Knight: Wildwood director on the film's creative journey and the impact of stop-motion animation

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/a1727518-5ecb-493a-8cf7-b4ee00068363/transcript

Oscar-winning actor Ke Huy Quan's had a memorable Hollywood career, but there's more to his story than the fame and accolades.

He got his start as a child actor, having starred in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and Goonies - but he took a hiatus after he couldn't find any new roles in his 20s.

Two decades later, he made a big professional comeback and won an Oscar for his role in the hit film Everything Everywhere All at Once.

But before his big film career, he was a refugee escaping a war-torn Vietnam, and he's exploring that part of his life in his new memoir Never Say Die.

"I never thought I would have the courage to write this book, but I'm really glad I did."

LISTEN ABOVE

Oscar-winning actor Ke Huy Quan's had a memorable Hollywood career, but there's more to his story than the fame and accolades.
He got his start as a child actor, having starred in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and Goonies - but he took a hiatus after he couldn't find any new roles in his 20s.
Two decades later, he made a big professional comeback and won an Oscar for his role in the hit film Everything Everywhere All at Once.
But before his big film career, he was a refugee escaping a war-torn Vietnam, and he's exploring that part of his life in his new memoir Never Say Die.
"I never thought I would have the courage to write this book, but I'm really glad I did."
LISTEN ABOVE

Ke Huy Quan: Oscar-winning actor on his new memoir 'Never Say Die'

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/ff761e6a-a568-4e99-838b-b4ee00013eda/transcript

Steve Newall: entertainment correspondent on new data showing only 4 percent of music streamed in NZ was made locally

In 1 playlist(s)

The Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips