Broadcasting Telecasting (Apr-Jun 1957)

OPINION THE RISE IN THE FALL OF NETWORK PROGRAMMING WHAT is the meaning behind the drastic revision in tv networks schedules next fall? Leonard H. Goldenson, president of American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres Inc., speaking in New York last Wednesday at the Radio & Television Executives Society weekly luncheon, answers this question in a talk entitled, "Television's Better-Balanced Diet." Mr. Goldenson says the networks next fall will offer the most variety ever in programming; ratings are not the whole picture; that change brings creating; the audience is becoming more sophisticated, and that the "showmanship" content of public service programs must be improved. NEXT SEASON the television viewing public will have, a very different menu from the one which they have had this past year. In prime evening time there is only one single half-hour when all three networks plan to offer the same shows next season that they offer today. That single half-hour which is status quo, incidentally, is Wednesday 9-9:30; NBC will have Kraft Theatre; CBS will schedule The Millionaire; and ABC will program Ozzie and Harriet; Every other slot in prime time is seeing some program change by at least one network, and sometimes by all three. I think this is very good. It is a testimony to the tremendous creative urge of our program cooks, who are seeking new ways to please the public palate. It is a tribute to the value of competition and the benefit it brings to the public at large, to stations and to advertisers. Next year's programming, I'm sure, will be the best ever. It will build on the remarkable record of achievement that the networks made this year. To look at the program prospect for next year, just from the standpoint of variety, the many different kinds of dishes that are offered . . . the three networks will offer 20 different kinds of programs. The payoff for this greater variation in menu, this more balanced diet offered to the television viewer, is the broadening base of tv, its even deeper penetration into the lives of everyone. The proof: More hours are being devoted to television by the typical home today than last season — to be exact, 5 hours and 38 minutes per day. (That's an October-to-March Nielsen average.) And another interesting point is that the typical network program this season has a Nielsen rating of 24.4 — a higher rating than the average program of last season — this despite increased competition. This increase, even though sets-in-use figures have remained steady, indicates that the public is hardly dissatisfied with network programming, as some critics have claimed. ABC Strategy: Counter-Program Against Competition It is understandable that the greater variety of programs offered to the public, the larger will be television's total audience. We at ABC have followed a policy of counter-programming — that is, offering the kind of show which the other networks are not programming in the particular time slot. But, more than that, the principle of counter-programming means working and experimenting to develop a kind of show not available at any time on other networks. A network's primary objective in selecting most of its programs, but not all, is to choose those it believes will appeal to the most viewers — always subject, of course, to the dictates of good taste and public welfare. But there are many publics. The executives who help shape our television programming policies— and I include those in talent agencies and advertising agencies — are well aware of the preferences of those segments of our viewing population whose tastes differ from the mass audience — or, rather, whose tastes are a little ahead of the mass audiences. Networks and stations present — in addition to mass-appeal shows — programs of relatively lesser appeal, which add to the richness and fulfillment of our lives. They will do so, I believe, not merely out of their sense of showmanship and public service, but also because it is good business practice to present a varied and well-balanced schedule. It is sound marketing strategy, as research data show. The day when we just count noses — and judge a program only on its rating — will be a very sad one for the industry. Circulation alone is too mechanical a basis for judgment. It leaves out many of the human elements in the equation— the emotional appeal of the program, the nature of the program as a framework for commercials, its merchandising and promotional values, its impact on special segments of the audience the advertiser wishes to reach, and the kind of image and personality the advertiser is trying to create. And it leaves out many of the business factors in the equation. If our goal is merely big numbers, we would end up with copycat programs. There would be nothing fresh, no new formats, no new faces — just carbon copies of the big shows — pale reflections of / Love Lucy, synthetic Lawrence Welks and "me-too" westerns. And very soon the program pool would dry up, the virus of sameness and monotony would sap the strength of television. This followthe-leader game would lead to a downward spiral. , Fortunately, for every advertiser who wants a "program with a track record" there is one who wants a new property or a new personality. So there is change, and the next season more change than usual. And it is directed change, movement in the direction of a bigger and more varied menu, more of the smorgasbord, less of the ham and eggs. As the program spectrum expands, as we offer a broader variety of shows, the interesting thing is that we find more programs with special appeal, more programs with ideas, more programs that might be termed public service. At first glance, the basic function of our television industry appears to be entertainment. But we actually have a double function — to entertain and inform. Walt Disney has expressed the philosophy well. He said: "In the discovery of knowledge, there is great entertainment — as, conversely, in all good entertainment there is always some grain of wisdom, humanity or enlightenment to be gained." Walt's concept is, I feel, the key to my second point — the steadily rising quality of tv programming. Each week the three networks telecast many hours of programming that meet the highest standards of culture, journalism and dramatic art. There is ballet . . . the fine music of a Voice of Firestone . . . the news interpretation of the Ed Murrows and John Dalys . . . the stimulat Page 116 • May 20, 1957 Broadcasting • Telecasting