The radio annual (1957)

Network, Agency, or Indie Packager for TV Production? THERE is no neat and easy answer to the perennial question — which is preferable, an agency, network or independently produced program? That was the position taken by Lewis H. Titterton, who is in charge of TV programming at our agency when I discussed the matter with him. Together we took a nostalgic look at the history of radio programming which demonstrated clearly that in the early days the networks produced practically all programs, in the next period the agencies took over the bulk of the work, but in the heydey of radio in the late 1930's and post-war 1940's networks took a back seat while agencies shared most of the programming with independent package producers. (XIX) In the relatively short span of television we have seen an even greater fluctuating change in emphasis. Again in the earliest days the great bulk of programs were produced by networks with the agencies rather rapidly increasing their share of the work. However, the immensely greater expense of television programming over that of radio and the problem of absorbing into the agencies the vast number of new people necessary to handle agency-produced programs soon caused the mushrooming of the independent package producers. Because competition is stimulating and healthy in the program field as in any other, and because there is room for all comers as sources of original program ideas, we believe that agencies, networks and packagers can jointly provide better programming than could any single one if it were to dominate the field to the exclusion of the others. Currently this agency is providing for its clients all three kinds of television programs. What to us is most important is effective control where possible over the costs and quality of a program, regardless of its origin. 0<I>0 A network controlling facilities is in a position to experiment with new patterns and new and rewarding channels. The fact that a network has numerous potential sponsors for any one show it develops makes bold and imaginative new programming possible. The networks can and do create the large programs which require multiple sponsorship and for this reason cannot be produced by the agencies. The independent packager, working in an By BARTON A. CUMMINGS President Compton Advertising, Inc. intensely competitive field and with limited nstwork time periods available for the launching of his programs, has the difficult task of creating exciting ideas while molding ihem along fairly traditional lines. 0<Z>0 There aie times when neither the network nor the packager has a program that satisfies the specific advertising or merchandising needs of an advertiser. When this is the case, it is obviously the duty of the agency to create such a program. If the program by its nature is complex and requires a substantial staff, it is always possible for the agency to arrange to have the program packaged by one of the competent package producers. Where this is done the agency, knowing every item in the budget in just as much detail as though the program were agencyproduced, can effectively fight the battle of spiralling program costs. 0<Z>0 Where an advertiser through its agency buys one or more segments of a network package of which other segments are sponsored by other advertisers, it is obviously impossible for any one agency to exercise legal right of approval over all arrangements of the show. Where, however, an agency buys a complete package for one of its clients it is in most cases possible to obtain effective control, not in order to place a heavy hand on or to impede the imaginations of the creative people associated with the program, but by objective criticism to improve and sharpen a program's material. We believe from experience that there is not only room for the three sources of shows, but there is a real necessity for all and that the earlier the agencies can work with the networks and package producers during the period when a show is in its planning stage, the better the results will be. 127