Last week’s budget did include funding for the arts and culture sector – just not the arts and culture we’re used to seeing funded. And it’s long overdue, writes Sam Brooks.

There wasn’t a whole lot of arts and culture news in the 2023 budget last week. The government announced $1m in implementation costs for the artist resale royalty scheme, an $18m investment to build momentum of Matariki as a public holiday, and $2m for the Creative Careers programme, which teaches business skills to creatives.

The big arts and culture winners, however, were Te Matatini and the gaming industry. Te Matatini, often described as “the Olympics of kapa haka”, has steadily increased in profile over its 51 years, with the festival held in Tāmaki Makaurau earlier this year drawing large audiences in person and on TV as well as generating a week’s worth of headlines, viral social media stories and international interest. The government set aside $34m for the organisation over the next two years to stimulate the growth of kapa haka, and enable it to expand its scope and role.

The budget also included a $160m investment over the next four years to introduce a tax rebate for the gaming sector. This follows calls from the industry for such a rebate, which is offered by countries like Australia and Canada, and means game development businesses (that meet the threshold of $250,000 in spend) can claim a 20% tax rebate, allowing each business to claim up to $3m. 

At first glance, these might not seem like arts and culture investments. When arts and culture funding gets written about, it tends to be about the art forms that are historically assumed (from an outdated, western framework) to be worth calling art. 

If you look at the arts organisations that get funding directly from the Ministry of Culture and Heritage, you see the likes of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra (roughly $15m annually) and the New Zealand Royal Ballet ($5m-6m annually). These investments are important, as is the recent $22m funding injection Creative New Zealand received to fund its general arts programmes and festivals around the country. Stuff’s coverage of the investments, for example,  suggested that this budget “left artists in the dust”, without acknowledging that both Te Matatini and the gaming sector are built on the backs of artists and creatives.

In 2023, the public at large knows what art is, and what art is worth their time. It’s not just the ballet, it’s not just the orchestra, and it’s not just a painting in a gallery. It’s more than that. The nation, and the world, showed up in droves for Te Matatini this year. The world has had the work of New Zealand creatives in their pockets for decades thanks to gaming.

What these investments suggest is not just an increased government commitment to arts and culture, but an appreciation of what sectors contribute to the rich arts and culture of Aotearoa. But what does it mean to those receiving the funding?

Not only is it a massive increase for Te Matatini ($34m over two years compared to $2.9m), it’s timely. It recognises the festival at a crucial time for growth, capitalising on the immense reach it already has and supporting it to go bigger and wider. “It will contribute to our new vision Mana Motuhake ki te kainga: Matatū, Mataora, Matatini ki te ao,” he says. “That means that people in the rohe will decide who these funds will be distributed to which will include all the arts associated with kapa haka.” Seventy percent of the funding will go to supporting kapa haka in communities across the country outside of the biennial festival.

Ross is adamant that everyone who actively participates in kapa haka is an artist, and a creative, and this investment supports them. “That includes our kohanga reo, our primary and intermediate schools (Mana Kuratahi), secondary schools (Ngā Kapa Haka Tuarua o Aotearoa), our adults (pakeke) and kaumātua and kuia (Taikura Kapa Haka).”

Simply put, this investment funds the wider vision of Te Matatini: to support the growth of kapa haka nationally and globally.

According to Chelsea Rapp, the chairperson of the New Zealand Game Developers Association, the investment in the gaming industry is long overdue. “Without this incentive, New Zealand would have continued to create skilled graduates with creative ideas,” she says. “But the talent pool, investment and IP would have moved overseas.”

Rapp highlights not just the economic benefits of the gaming sector to the country, but the ubiquity of games as an artform. “Since the rise of the mobile phone, games have been everywhere that we are, and this will continue, with more of us spending time online and with advances in AI, the Metaverse and new media platforms.”

She believes this will present developers with an incredible opportunity to modernise the way that audiences view arts and culture “delivery”, highlighting the examples of games made here that showcase our culture to a global audience – Umurangi Generation, Guardian Maia, Toroa. “It’s important that New Zealanders own these narratives and be responsible for their guardianship, and that the government supports this, so that they are the ones to profit and not big US subsidiaries.”

Although the funding is welcome, it’s not perfect. The baseline for eligibility – that $250,000 threshold – excludes smaller developers, but Rapp believes this is by design. “It encourages studios to be ambitious,” she says. “The incentive is designed to help make NZ studios competitive in a global marketplace, and the baseline provides a space for studios to be aspirational.” 

“This incentive is for the studios that want to build commercial success, create jobs, and ultimately contribute to New Zealand’s creative economy.”

The upper cap of $3m presents its own issues, potentially hindering the rate at which New Zealand can compete internationally. Rapp believes there will be pressure from investors to move to Australia because of their higher cap ($20m). “This cap tends to be unpopular politically but from an economic perspective it makes a lot of sense because it encourages studios to be ambitious.”

“This in turn attracts investors, publishers, and distributors to New Zealand, increasing the profitability and tax revenue of game studios nationwide.” 

Again: the public knows what art is, and it shows up for it. What Budget 2023 has shown us is that the government is catching up to where the public is at, and spending public money accordingly.

Alex Casey talks to one of New Zealand’s most prolific and passionate Google Reviewers about why they do it.

When planning a visit to a new place like Paeroa’s L&P Bottle or Huka Falls, you might naturally want to check out the Google Reviews first. How else can you steel yourself for a “big bottle that smells like wee” or the “dirty brown water” that awaits? When buying a yummy treat, how else will you prepare your palate for a cookie that tastes like “tux dog biscuits” and might even give you diarrhoea? Google Reviews now make up a whopping 73% of all online reviews, an essential daily resource for answering the eternal question: is this thing good or bad? 

While many peruse Google Reviews as curious consumers, others see it as a platform for colourful creativity and personal revelations. Embracing poetic language, lashings of nostalgia and sprinkles of intimacy, Google Reviews also provide a window into the inner workings of our fellow New Zealanders. “If I ever have someone special 😝 we will have our first date here 🤣”, one reviewer wrote of Rainbow’s End. “Plenty to do,” wrote another of New Zealand’s premier theme park. “Only problem was tomato sauce on a chicken burger.” Tell me more!

Occasionally, you might even stumble upon a reviewer whose name you recognise. And, more often than not, that name will belong to one Colin Mathura-Jeffree. The former New Zealand’s Next Top Model host and man about town has 626 contributions to his name, a thrilling mix of high society Auckland – Depot (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐), The Northern Club (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐), Smith and Caughey’s (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐) – alongside the mundane likes of St Lukes Mall (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐), Z Energy Papakura (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐) and KFC Point Chevalier (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐). 

“I do throw the five stars around a lot,” Mathura-Jeffree cackles over the phone. “It takes a lot for me to pull it down to a four star or less.” He doesn’t recall the subject of his first Google Review, but knows exactly how it came about. “My phone kept tracking me saying, ‘you’re here. You’re there’,” he explains. “It’s totally Big Brother, but I’ve got nothing to hide. And then one day my phone came up with this surprise question: ‘You were just at this cafe – do you want to review it?’ And I was like, ‘yes, sure, OK’.”

He also remembers how writing his first ever Google Review made him feel. “I liked the freedom of it. I felt really satisfied doing it.” Compared to being “bullied and pushed around by faux clients” who ask him to say certain things about brands on his social media channels, Mathura-Jeffree finds Google Reviews a much more honest and earnest space. There, he says, he can “control the narrative” on everything from Maungawhau (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ – “Beautiful place to walk”), to Farmers LynnMall (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐– “Clean. Open. Great variety.”)

Data analysis of Mathura-Jeffree’s review repertoire also reveals not one, not two, but five different McDonald’s franchises reviewed. “That’s just me, I’m the real deal,” he laughs. “I love a dirty burger joint.” He admits to regularly going to McDonald’s restaurants before a supermarket shop (New World Alberton ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐– “Clean. Fresh. Nice Staff”). “I’m a maniac when I’m hungry. And you know those supermarkets are built so that your eyes wander towards all the things that you don’t need.”

Your eyes may also wander to the hundreds of photos that Mathura-Jeffree uploads alongside his reviews. Shots of Domino’s pizzas taken so close that they feel positively pornographic. Glasses of prosecco. Bowls of squid rings. “I’ll take a photo of food and I’ll catch that look from the person at the table next to me, giving an expression like they’re sniffing poo,” Mathura-Jeffree says. “I just tell them ‘Oh no, it’s not like that, it’s for my Google Review!’” There’s also selfies – lots of selfies. 

“I’ll take a bunch of photos of the beautiful meal I’m having and then flip it back on myself and go ‘OK, now me’.”

Like many Google Reviews, Mathura-Jeffree’s oeuvre reveals a lot about the writer. Where other Google Reviewers denigrate St Lukes Mall with its “bird poo covered trolleys” and “filthy young people in their nike shoes”, Mathura-Jeffree’s review (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐) is much more sentimental: “I went Christmas shopping there as a child in the 70s. I would hang around after school with my friends in the 80s. There was a restaurant we ate at as a family. Worked part time in there after school. So many changes. So many memories.” 

“I love weaving history into my reviews, because we all have history with places,” says Mathura-Jeffree. “The biggest treasure that we have in our lives are our memories. We can’t live in the past, but we can wear the memory like a jewel.”

Google Reviews, especially when written by Mathura-Jeffree, clearly have an emotional impact, but what impact do they actually have on businesses? Bodo Lang, professor in marketing at Massey University, says that online reviews are hugely influential in consumer decision-making. “They can sway consumers from one brand to another, shift market shares, penalise poor performing brands, and reward businesses that are exceeding customer expectations,” he says. “Such online reviews are particularly important when the purchase includes an element of risk.”

There’s value in “the wisdom of the crowd”, says Lang. “Consumers can get incredible insights about brands and products by listening to those who have genuinely used those brands,” he says. “So next time you buy and use a product or experience a service, consider leaving a review to help other consumers make the best possible decisions.” Conversely, if you have a bad experience, it can be useful to share to stop people making the same mistakes (Countdown St Lukes ⭐⭐ – “honestly how cheap are these bags that can’t hold 4 (average) items?”)

Lang says it is important that businesses respond to reviews, particularly if they raise specific questions. “Speed, empathy and being positive are highly important when crafting replies to online comments,” he says. “Businesses can easily do more damage by responding negatively or blaming customers publicly.” Sometimes that response can even move offline – Mathura-Jeffree recounts leaving a negative review of a supermarket after he was searched twice for shoplifting, and receiving a call from an unknown number asking him to remove it. 

Despite the ominous threats, Mathura-Jeffree has no plans to slow down his Google Reviewing. “It’s a reciprocal love language between AI and me. Artificial Intelligence Google and artificially intelligent Colin,” he laughs. His parting words were three pieces of wisdom for budding reviewers out there. 

“One: it’s fun to review things, so have fun. Two: try and have as optimistic an outlook as possible, because people need the love and candy right now.

“And three: if you don’t like it, you can always leave.”