|
 |
 |
|
|
Report: Programmer Focus Groups 2000 
Focus groups were held at WNPT/Nashville, WHYY/Philadelphia and OPB/Portland, sites chosen for geographic diversity. Twenty-three programmers representing stations in 18 states attended. At the end of the second year of this initiative, ITVS has met with programmers from 58 stations and 40 states to date. Beyond the clear value of these meetings to ITVS, the programmers themselves again affirmed how rare the opportunities are for them to get together and talk about the future of the field. What changes do you see in your community and how is the station responding? Hi-tech companies are beginning to make their presence felt in communities outside Silicon Valley, replacing older industries as major employers. They are attracting diverse populations of newcomers, particularly from South and East Asian countries, and the rapid growth in this sector of the economy is creating new strata of "haves" and "have-nots." Recognizing that these changes can take very divisive forms in their community, one station is actively seeking opportunities to play a "public square" role in bridging the differences between rich and poor, longtime residents and new neighbors. By contrast, another is making the 18-to 34-year-old "techie" their primary target audience, initiating new hi-tech theme programming that will "take over the channel" over time. Many programmers mentioned the high number of new residents or transient populations in their audience—whether military, students, second homeowners or tourists, none have a sense of loyalty to the station regardless of their financial means. A common programmatic response is to air a high proportion of local productions, to educate the audience about their new community and to brand the station with a quality of uniqueness. The importance of localism was repeated often, in all sessions, from stations throughout the country, and will be discussed further below. Audiences naturally want to see themselves reflected in the station's programming, and programmers often feel the pinch of balancing programs addressed to diverse local constituencies with the demands of the national primetime PBS schedule. Stations are likewise pressured to attract young, new and diverse audiences while continuing to air the favorite shows of their loyal older PBS core audience, retirees in particular. One participant expressed this strategy in starkly economic terms: planned giving and endowment contributions are a high priority of station development, especially as they face the exorbitant demands of the transition to digital. "You can't leave [the older] demographic in the dirt when they're about to give big money." A continuing theme from last year was the rapid rise of immigration from Latin America, seen in all parts of the country. By and large, stations have not been successful in attracting this audience for several reasons, and have mixed feelings about increasing the pipeline of programming addressed directly to Spanish-speaking audiences. There is a general preference for English-language programming about Hispanic cultures, rather than Spanish-language programming per se, to retain white core audiences. Programmers also recognize that the Latino community is not monolithic, and that Salvadoran service economy workers will not watch programs of interest to a middle-class Cuban audience, for example. In general, it was felt that it is patronizing to assume that Latin American audiences will be interested only in culturally specific programming; providing the PBS core schedule with a SAP Spanish audio channel in the "standard" Colombian dialect was thought to be equally or perhaps even more valuable, making the programming easy to consume regardless of language barriers. However, in at least one state, even providing that much support is controversial, because of English-only political activism. Another ethnic group seeking entry into the public television system are increasingly affluent Native American tribes. Gambling has brought the means for this community to play an influential role as underwriters, and stations are finding that their interest is not in undifferentiated Native American programming, but in specific productions which reflect their local stories and history. How have the digital transition and new media platforms affected your programming? Stations are facing the prospect of having to schedule as many as 44 digital signals in some statewide networks, with no more financial or staff resources than they have currently. In addition, some stations are already moving forward in developing multi-platform programming; at many smaller stations, the programmer is also in charge of production, which adds significantly to a burgeoning workload. At the same time, the enormous cost of transitioning to a digital signal is forcing many stations to cut back on local production and outside acquisitions. Many stations feel caught between a rock and a hard placebetween multiple channels and platforms demanding content, and the fear that they will not be able to get enough quality programming. Other stations, particularly smaller ones with minimal staff, are placing little to no effort into Web development for the time being. In the face of all these changes, some programmers are reflecting with relief that they are approaching retirement age and may not actually have to face the looming problems of time, money and content in the digital future. They observe personnel cutbacks in their field, with the growing trend of stations being programmed by offsite consultants rather than full-time staff programmers, the declining number of assistant program managers coming up through the ranks, and the relative lack of young programmers starting out at small stations. We cannot overstate the pervading concern programmers have over a more uniform national common carriage schedule, and the fear that local identity, which they consider to be the highest value their stations offer to their communities, will be lost. What was the most exciting show of the past year, and how did it epitomize your station at its best? Local productions were far and away the most frequently mentioned, with the sentiment that this is as it should be. As one programmer said, "I would hope I'd be most jazzed about a local in-house production." Ratings, tape sales, pledge response, publicity and station branding were the measures of success that most people mentioned. One programmer singled out the Independent Lens series because two of the shows were about subjects local to her market. Unlike 1998-99, when many programmers had cited THE FARMER'S WIFE in response to this question, no show on the national PBS schedule generated any enthusiasm, with one programmer calling the past year's national schedule "a yawn."  What kinds of programs are you looking for but never find in the pipeline?This year, programmers did not seem to have strong responses to this question, feeling that airtime is limited and the programming stream full. The most consistent request was for 30-minute shows. "I'll take anything at :30," was the general sentiment. Individual requests included timely news programming; one-minute interstitials for commemorative months which stations could customize; "upbeat" shows ("Can't we get anything fun? ITVS programming is always so heavy and bleak."); shows about minority cultures; and shows interesting to people in their twenties. Teen Programming: As we heard last year, programmers continue to feel that there is "no way" that public television programming targeted to a teen market will succeed because of the difficulty of maintaining a consistent pipeline and the marketing expense necessary to reach and hold a teen demographic. Drama: Programmers have no great enthusiasm for drama programming. The quality is considered to be iffy, the pipeline unreliable, the long lengths difficult to fit into the grid and the audiences minimal. Family drama like Wonderworks is most likely to find a welcome at stations, but they "don't go looking for it." Masterpiece Theater is widely considered to have become "too leading edge and avant garde." Independent Lens and P.O.V.: The majority of stations used at least some of the PBS Plus series Independent Lens, although most programmers observed that it is a series in name only, with no unifying concept and an inconsistent quality level. One programmer, however, said that he pays more attention to productions included in Independent Lens and P.O.V. than he does to one-offs in the national schedule or on Plus because of the extra level of "vetting" that inclusion in the series involves. Another programmer said that he would love for P.O.V. to be a 52-week series: "Independent documentary is an area where public television doesn't have a lot of competition; only cable subscribers have access to HBO, and the Sundance Channel and Independent Film Channel aren't available in my market. Public television could rule here." Non-Standard Program Lengths: Because we sometimes have producers who believe their program does not fit naturally into the standard 56:40 broadcast length, we asked programmers their willingness to broadcast shows at varying lengths, with filler. Without exception, programmers responded that "the show would have to be really wonderful to get on the schedule at an odd length." "Once you put in filler, you lose your audience." They also said that despite their dislike of 90-minute shows, it is even harder to work with one that comes in at a 75-minute length. What are the limits to the kinds of programming you can air? As we heard last year, there are strong regional differences in what a given community considers to be controversial. In the Northeast, stations can get very good response using shows on gay and lesbian issues like It's Elementary for pledge drives, but programs on the Middle East are almost untouchable. In the West, land use, environmentalism, evolution and Mormonism (pro- or anti-) are risky topics. By and large, in all parts of the country outside the largest urban centers, programs on gay and lesbian issues are likely to generate protest calls and emails. Programmers observed that new technologies make it more difficult to know if negative responses are coming from within their audience or from campaigns coordinated by national organizations. Because stations are so reliant on public funding and are in some cases government licensees, they are particularly susceptible to pressure from state legislatures. One representative comment we heard was: "We are funded by the state legislature, and all eyes focus on us. Nothing happens until the legislature meets, and then BOOM. The legislators make their reputations by bashing public television." Stations universally expressed a willingness to air controversial subject matter if they considered the show's approach to be defensible, and if they were provided with promotion and outreach tools and talking points for the viewer services staff. A show's inclusion in the PBS national schedule is also considered very important in terms of the station's ability to justify it to critics. While programmers recognize the value of shows with strong points of view, they also prefer programming that at least acknowledges different perspectives, "briefly, cogently and clearly expressed." Since we had co-presented AN AMERICAN LOVE STORY the previous fall, we asked whether programmers found its portrayal of interracial marriage to be controversial with their audiences. The response was that there were few complaints, reflecting a major change in social attitudes nationally, and that stations got more negative feedback about the Bill Sims CD solicitation than about the content. In general, programmers felt that as the baby boomer generation turns 50 they are bringing values from the 1960s and '70s to their public television viewing, values that are more liberal than the audience demographic known as the "Welks" (as in Lawrence). What has been your experience and impression working with independent producers? By and large, stations had a positive view about working with independents, although many programmers emphasized the need for clear parameters regarding copyrights and responsibilities of the producer and the station. It was felt that independents could provide a more extensive formal vocabulary and creative input than station in-house producers, but at the same time needed an education in economics and public television realities, for example in the factors affecting a programmer's response to a show. It was also felt that independents can be "testy" about editorial control, which is "the test of a real partnership," but again that setting up a clear agreement up front would avoid or mitigate most problems. While many stations are open to proposals from independents and may be able to offer some level of in-kind support, none offered any prospect of funding or even of assistance in finding outside funding. Some programmers who seemed most enthusiastic about working with independents then described arrangements that were actually contractor relationships, with the producer hired for a production that the station had already planned but did not have the in-house staff to bring to completion. What is the best role for ITVS to play in the public television system? By and large, programmers felt that we were on the right track as a mission-driven program provider, particularly since the 1998 success of THE FARMER'S WIFE: "THE FARMER'S WIFE put ITVS on the map. It was to ITVS what The Civil War was to Ken Burns." Recognizing that "there is a public television franchise over and above PBS," we were encouraged that programmers acknowledged a real need for challenging material that would not come to them through the national programming stream. "ITVS has a track record now. It's always worth looking at your shows." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
ITVS: NEWS | NOW SHOWING | FUNDING FOR PRODUCERS | RECENTLY FUNDED PROGRAMS Contact us at itvs@itvs.org |
