FIFTIES TELEVISION (William Boddy)
These readings discussed the challenges television faced to change in the 1950s. One challenge was the duration of programming: 30 minutes versus an hour. Astonishingly, one hour programs were viewed as unviable because people couldn’t be expected to sit in front of their televisions for extended periods of time. Additionally in 1948 a report “endorsed the common belief that programs should be limited to thirty minutes in length” (67). An element that seemed particularly shady in this discussion was said by Bernard Smith in a 1948 issue of Harper’s, saying, “[t]hey will accept a much poorer level of entertainment in their own homes than they will demand if they have to leave their house or apartment to attend a public performance” (68). Thus, suggesting tv should be lower quality than film, a trait that tv has spent a good deal of time overcoming.
Another challenge/debate was whether to bring in film material to television. One reason against this would be that at the time film programming was expensive and this hurdle would need to be overcome in order to use it for television. People also thought that the advertising-format of television was not strong enough to support the expensive process of filmed programming.
Once it was accepted as a viable format in television, filmed content, that is, it was lesser content. Newsweek reported that “everyone who could buy or borrow a little drugstore movie camera announced himself as a TV-Film producer” (71). Even more shocking, CBS was in talks with Lucille Ball about making a television program but the network backed out after Ball insisted on a filmed program.
RUTHLESS CRITICISM (Robert McChesney)
This reading explored the challenges of developing the broadcasting system in the 20s and 30s. Initially, the early system was celebrated. But after broadcast historians such as Erik Barnouw began publishing, this preconception was challenged. McChesney says, “[w]hen historians abandoned the presupposition that a network-dominated, advertising-supported broadcasting system was the only rational choice for a freedom-loving and democratic society, and then scrutinized radio’s early years, a different picture emerged” (222).
Overall, the article leaves me with a feeling of sadness over what broadcasting could have been or should have been versus what it ultimately became. It emphasizes how powerful networks are in broadcasting, very few companies own a majority of the channels/airtime. Which means fewer gatekeepers in content. Fewer people are in the position to decide what content gets aired, thus controls what messages people receive.
“SELLING AMERICA TO THE WORLD” (Peter Miskell)
This article discusses an US-owned film distributer in the UK, United Artists. First, the article acknowledges that the United States’ greatest export is its culture — film and television. US-based production companies began making films to sell to international markets — quota quickies — as a way of gaining more profit. These films were specifically targeted to international audiences and were of less quality than the Hollywood counterparts made for US audiences (the core market). Here, the goal was to make something for moderate costs that would gather moderate success in foreign markets. Miskell notes that the UK audience became the target international audience for US-media products as the cultural gap was closer than that of countries that English wasn’t their national language.
In the end, Miskell notes that after initial success in the 30s, UA began to decline in the 40s. The initial success was due to “hit films” (767) which enjoyed higher box offices than average. Their decline wasn’t so much due to lower production values of these films or the films not being popular with international audiences, Miskell suggests the problem was “[p]ersonality clashes and management failures” (773).