Public Television For Sale by William Hoynes

Author:William Hoynes [Hoynes, William]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Language Arts & Disciplines, Communication Studies, Business & Economics, Industries, Media & Communications
ISBN: 9780813318288
Google: EHS4AAAAIAAJ
Barnesnoble:
Goodreads: 54996635
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 1994-03-31T01:29:01+00:00

Funding Controversial Programs

Public television workers have a clear understanding of why corporations fund public television, as well as what they will and will not fund. As such, I heard repeatedly that corporations will not support "controversial" programming. Several producers noted that they had worked on programs for which corporate dollars were impossible to raise because the programs were "too controversial." One producer suggested that "it is a question of corporate willingness to take risks. . . . The problem is that whatever program we do, there's probably somebody who's unhappy. . . . It isn't quite the subject or editorial control or anything like that. I think it has to do with their name associated with something that made somebody unhappy." Another producer explained why some programs are too controversial for corporations, arguing that the reasons are content-specific. "It means, practically speaking, that no corporation wants to be identified with that subject. And it means that the corporate funders who are close to the issue worry that you are going to be fair to the controversy and therefore deleterious to their interest." As a result, any program with potential for controversy is perceived by producers as an unlikely candidate for corporate funding. One staffer suggested that it is not simply programs that are obviously controversial, but public affairs programming in general, for which it is difficult (perhaps even impossible) to bring in corporate underwriters.

This perspective suggests that there are a whole range of programs that do not have access to corporate dollars. This is not to say that only procorporate programming can be produced; clearly, corporate underwriting is only one source of funding for public television. However, it is an important source of funding, one that can be the difference between a program proposal's ending up in production or in a file cabinet.

Nor does this mean that programs that accept corporate dollars become slaves to corporate interests. In fact, my interviews indicate that there is a very strong sense that underwriters must keep their noses out of the production process. As one producer put it, "more sophisticated funders understand that they can't call the shots." If an underwriter did try to interfere directly, the attempt would likely backfire, because producers are sensitive to the importance of remaining independent.

The impact of corporate underwriting is much more subtle than direct intervention. The most significant impact of underwriting is that corporate dollars can often be the key variable that determines whether a program will make it on the air. That is, when all other things are equal, the program proposal with access to corporate dollars is more likely to get produced and broadcast. And because controversial programs rarely, if ever, have access to major corporate underwriting dollars, the inevitable result is a narrowing of the range of discourse on public television.

This narrowing operates on two distinct levels. First, major production houses inside the system, in particular WGBH in Boston or WNET in New York, have a limited capacity to raise funds for national programs.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.