Growing Pains
In “The Independents,” Mark Alvey suggests that by the beginning of the 1960s, television had achieved a certain “stasis,” creatively and industrially. At the same time television was also in the midst of much crisis and tumult. What major norms and conventions had been established for American television by the early 1960s? Why, then, did the medium also enter into a so-called “atmosphere of crisis and criticism” at the beginning of the 1960s? What measures did the industry take to cope with these attacks?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs far as norms and conventions go, "The economical and programming trends within the TV industry climaxed at the end of the 1950s, giving American television a relatively stable set of commercial structures and prime-time program forms." (Alvey, 137). While TV had essentially developed its "backbone", it was still experimenting with the "meat" of most of its television shows. Also coming off of the quiz show scandals, TV was trying to gain its credibility back, which raised the question of what is now appropriate to show and air on television? The medium was simultaneously going through a crisis as well, "The 1960s witnessed further consolidation of the networks' control over programming - but against a backdrop of shifting Hollywood power relations, marked by the growing status of independent producers, the rise and fall of major program suppliers, and the ongoing struggles for survival among telefilm majors and independents alike." (Alvey, 138). The industry's solution was a process referred to as vertical disintegration, in which major studio heads would "subcontract production duties, delegating the nuts and bolts to independent producers, while retaining the considerable financial benefits of distribution" (Alvey, 138). Essentially, they both benefited and were able to "exploit a maximum variety of creative resources." (Alvey, 138).
ReplyDeleteThe biggest norm in American Television in the 1960s was the nearly absolute power of the big 3 networks to control what made it on air and consequently into American homes. Another norm was the big 3 networks trying to diversify so that they could gain a bigger share of the audience market with their programming. The 1960s was a time of increasing power, control, and consolidation by these networks. The beginning of the 1960s was fraught with crisis however, as television producers had to undergo several major changes in the wake of fierce competition and the quiz show scandals. Alvey argues that as television grew, the networks had to get creative to keep up viewership (or risk becoming a lame duck like Warner Bros who refused to innovate beyond their assembly production line style of creating). The bulk of Alvey’s article concerns the moves the 3 big networks made to stay relevant and in control of the airwaves. The most important changes were the move from live to filmed television (due to the increase of profits a network could earn in syndication), the move from NY based filming to mostly Los Angeles filming inside of Hollywood production studios that accommodated the change from live to film, the change from single sponsorship to multiple sponsorship programs that were bought after the fact by advertisers, and the co-production methods of the big Networks, Hollywood, independent studios, and agents to create the most creative and attractive content for audiences. Alvey spends a great deal of time discussing how all of these changes helped the three big networks become more powerful and gain more control over all of their programs even though they were primarily distribution companies that outsourced their work to other studios. Additionally, programs that were no longer owned by an advertiser but were sold to multiple advertisers meant the networks had even more creative control than before, and were beholden to almost no one.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the 50s, much of the conflict over what television would be, how it would be made, and who would make it would be finished. Hollywood would establish a dominant alliance with the big networks, the filmed series became the status quo over the live show, and the commercial structure of television as a whole would stabilize. With this stabilization would come a new wave of challenges. Both minor independent production studios outside of the studio system and, interestingly, talent agencies, would come to take up much of the space that was occupied exclusively by the big companies in the 50s, even though the major studios continued to prosper. Coproductions often took place between the two wings of production houses.
ReplyDeleteThere was conflict between those who wanted to see change happen in the industry and those who wished to maintain the status quo. Producers, eager to stand out, wanted to try out new formats and explore new themes and topics on shows, while executives did not want to risk big money when the old formats were still successful. Meanwhile, made-for-tv movies grew more popular, and movie nights on the big networks took away previous slots reserved for primetime series. The networks themselves grew more powerful and controlled the profits of more of what aired, and new federal regulations were proposed and argued to limit their power, and these would eventually lead to the institution of new rules by the FCC in 1971.
Three big networks ran the television industry in the late 50s and throughout the 60s. CBS, NBC, and ABC helped Hollywood possess more than 80% of the primetime slots. This “statis” industrially also severely affected what was shown to audiences creatively, which at the point of the early 60s was also in “stasis”. The three big networks got comfortable with the content that they were putting out that was considered successful, so they continued to do just that. For example, after ABC found success with Disney, they continued a steady stream of westerns and detective programs. Family comedies were also majorly successful at this time. But after the quiz show scandals were exposed, many audiences and critics became weary of the television industry and the people creating their programming. This caused worry among the networks that if they didn’t consolidate and diversify, their network would fall out of relevance. After ABC proclaimed itself as the #2 network in the television industry, the other two basically flipped out and all three made major changes to their programming and the way it was created. Some big changes that occurred during this time was the movement from live to telefilm production (which pushed the move from New York to LA), outsourcing of production to studios, possessing multiple sponsors for a show as opposed to one, ownership of their own content, and the bringing in independent producers (including Alfred Hitchcock) that could diversify programming and the process of creating that programming. ABC was a huge proponent for telefilm at this time, while NBC and CBS were working with more independent producers. Also by moving production to outside studios, the networks didn’t have to incur the “cost and complications” that were involved in production. Likewise, these studios were equipped for production, which made the process that much easier. And by bringing in multiple sponsors, the networks didn’t just have to answer to one company which helped them also attain more creative freedom, in essence giving them more power over their content. This pushed the networks to start demanding ownership over their shows. These changes that occurred in Hollywood and the television industry in the 60s helped the networks fight against criticism, save money while turning a higher profit, and possess more power than they already had. Likewise, the competitive nature of the three main networks continued and their success is still seen today, seeing as all three networks still exist and are still some of the biggest out there.
ReplyDeleteThe 1950s were seen as a stabilizing period that prepared the industry to eventually transform into a diverse field for cultural expression throughout the next decade. The three big networks were in complete control of what was on the air and were hoping to expand their viewership with new and exciting programming. In the 1960s, however, television experienced a period of crisis during the expected creative and industrial stasis because it followed on the hot heels of the troublesome 1950s. The decade prior left the ‘60s to deal with unresolved quiz show scandals, a programming crisis, and endless criticism from opinionated viewers as well as those that found themselves outside the community of this up-and-coming medium. Because of these difficulties, the big three networks scrambled to keep their dreams of big audiences and bigger profits alive. Therefore, as a result of these attacks on television, a move was made to consolidate American television into mostly just Hollywood television. People had once believed that television would be the ultimate destroyer of the movie market, but by the end of the 1950s, it was clear that the new medium was instead a great provider for movie content. This change of heart helped the television industry grow out of its state of crisis. In fact, independent producers dominated television production during the 1960s because many of them joined forces with the majors after they entered the market, and this resulted in the new and exciting content these networks had been searching for. Television also brought residuals to the movie-maker table, opening up an entire new avenue to make money without having to produce more programming, as well as multiple rather than single sponsorship—both of these measures helped the television industry usher in the much-anticipated money it had been hoping for.
ReplyDeleteThe 1950s, program wise, helped the industry move into a new age of programming and control for networks. Unfortunately, the 60s were left dealing with the game show scandals. On the plus, there were new programs for all audiences. NBC, CBS and ABC were the main stations that people tuned into. One of the major norms that was established was the taped programs. Live programs were lost forever. However with taped programs, those who were part of a series would receive residuals for as along as it was on syndication. Majors and independents were competing against each other.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn the 1960s television began o come into its own, with telefilm becoming the majority of shows on television. Unlike live TV which was lost after it was shown most of the time, telefilm had the opportunity for residuals. It was durable in the sense that it could be showed over and over again, gaining money off of it each time. It also offered the network greater opportunity for program control, since it could be brokered bt networks to sponsors.
Independent producers merged with large firms, keeping control of the creation of the program while the large firm took care of the logistics. Also in the 1960s television shifted more toward the practice of multiple sponsorship. Traditionally it was single sponsorship but this allowed sponsors to minimize risk, reach larger audiences, and have a better chance to be connected to a hit show by sponsoring multiple shows at once.
TV was being criticized in the early 1960s because they were still moving away from the scandal of the quiz show era. In order to fix this they moved away from the live TV, and real life show formats and moved more toward telefilm.
After the end of 1950s, the American television became a relatively stable set of commercial structures and prime-time program forms. However, for 1960s, because of the creative tensions of the telefilm period and also the competitive dynamic of Hollywood TV, informed by the enterprising efforts of independents producers, the terrain of 1960 television would not be a sterile expanse of banality, but rather a diverse field for cultural expression, marked by both imitation and invention, convention and creativity (Alvey 138).
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the methods the industry take to cope with these attacks, different company got their ideas. For the network-Hollywood axis, they increase their reliance on outside program packages. The NBC and CBS has increased their reliance on film series and cut back on in-house programming and thy also order programming from outside producers to lower their overall costs, some of them tries to spread the money spent on advertising across several shows. For the independents, some of them found success through coproduction with established Hollywood system and others established a solid status based on some of the distinctive programs. The major studios survived because of their open-door policy to the independents. Both of the Hollywood powers started to have coproduction to support both in-house projects and joint ventures. All of these companies also put emphasis on the differentiating their products through innovation, upgrading and diversification. For example, the Warner/ABC sparked a shift from the action-adventure to people drama. The independents also contribute a lot of innovation in feature films and telefilms.
Television had finally hit its stride by the beginning of the 1960s, with networks figuring out which kinds of programs work best for them, and where they should be stationed. Having a television in the household was the norm, and viewers were hooked on programming from the major networks. However, television is hypercompetitive and every network was looking for an edge on the others, thinking about what they can do differently to push them ahead of the pack. What can a network do to become distinct? They need to overcome, change, and adapt to a changing culture, or they’ll be left behind.
ReplyDeleteThe shift could be seen in a number of fields. The cookie-cutter nuclear family of the 1950s were replaced with eccentric groups that made for more distinct storytelling. Following the quiz show scandals of the late 1950s, consumers became weary of live television, and the market saw a move away from live recordings to the filmed series, bringing in outside producers to create content for the network. Single-advertiser programs became obsolete as the price of sponsorship soared, also benefitting networks by diversifying their ad pools. Networks brought in big-name movie companies and personalities in the industry (Hitchcock) to work on their projects. These changes set the 1960s apart from other decades in television, and paved the way for the structures we see today.
Television was in the midst of crisis due to the uproar of quiz show scandals, programming disasters and criticism from every every spectrum of the television industry. From the consumers, participants, and producers television was looked at differently due to these setbacks but in the 1960’s television not only survived but it regained its title by offering new content and industry opportunities for anyone who could get their foot through the door. By shifting from the original New York live and quiz show scene to a Hollywood-based cinematic filmic look, television turned itself into a daily movie business. Royalties for performers, writers, independent producers for rerunning content were popular and many people wanted in. Agents made ten percent of production packages and independent producers were making content with their own money and selling them to the studios for profit. Therefore independent television was categorized by two systems of built-in studios and established studio co production deals. This allowed them to move up the ladder and work with the renowned major studios that now offered more than scandalized quiz shows but telefilms that resembled Hollywood and the demand of more content consumers.
ReplyDeleteThe turn of the decade into the 1960s involved already established modes of commercial television and programming continuing to morph into new forms. The 1950s saw stability in both an “industrial and creative” sense, wherein Hollywood television dominated the market and tele-film pre-taped shows flourished. But, as Mark Alvey put it, the 1960s broke trends and was “a stage characterized by continuing transformation and redefinition. Quiz show scandals and criticism in all forms internal and external created a sense of crisis that had high stakes. It was a “competitive arena” where a “perceived programming crisis” lead to certain factors being established (and in some cases, reestablished).
ReplyDeleteTo combat these perceptions, live television was cut down as telefilm took precedent. The big networks’ consolidated their stronghold over television, but a rise in independent producers was seen as power within Hollywood shifted about. These independents were firms that were not owned by a retribution company or arm. Networks sought independents so that they could subcontract production duties and relegate where creative control went while still “retaining the considerable financial benefits of distribution.” This was known as “vertical disintegration,” where independents were distinguished from Hollywood. However, some independents found jobs within the Hollywood system as they were contracted to keep Hollywood on in the telefilm market.
Through the 1950’s, television went through lows and highs as it tried to find its viewers and successfully crossover from radio as the new media platform. By the early 1960’s television had found its dynamic and was extremely successful. Three networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) controlled TV and set the precedents. Though there were some bumps in the road (i.e. quiz bowl) The three major network’s made changes that allowed TV to dominate the 1960’s
ReplyDeleteThere were major changes that occurred in the 1960’s that led to major success. One was the switch from a live broadcast to a pre recorded one which allowed for the networks to syndicate shows and make more money. Another change was the move from NYC to Hollywood, as studios could now build large production lots that would host all the sets for filming. Additionally, studios now participated in multiple sponsorships instead of just one. These changes and and other ones as well led for the three networks to be in control and extremely powerful. This is the last time where they would have this much power, as the 1970’s saw legislation reform that prevented total domination by the three networks.