The New Television Handbook

Jonathan Bignell, Jeremy Orlebar, Patricia Holland, James Curran

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781317532132
• Edition: 5
• Topic: Medien & darstellende Kunst
• Subtopic: Darstellende Kunst

The New Television Handbook provides an exploration of the theory and practice of television at a time when the medium is undergoing radical changes. The book looks at television from the perspective of someone new to the industry, and explores the place of the medium within a constantly changing digital landscape.

This title discusses key skills involved in television production, including: producing, production management, directing, camera, sound, editing and visual effects. Each of these activities is placed within a wider context as it traces the production process from commissioning to post-production.

The book outlines the broad political and economic context of the television industry. It gives an account of television genres, in particular narrative, factual programmes and news, and it considers the academic discipline of media studies and the ways in which theorists have analysed and tried to understand the medium. It points to the interplay of theory and practice as it draws on the history of the medium and observes the ways in which the past continues to influence and invigorate the present.

The New Television Handbook includes:

• contributions from practitioners ranging from established producers to new entrants;
• a comprehensive list of key texts and television programmes;
• a revised glossary of specialist terms;
• a section on training and ways of getting into the industry.

By combining theory, real-world advice and a detailed overview of the industry and its history, The New Television Handbook is an ideal guide for students of media and television studies and young professionals entering the television industry.

Part 1
On television and television studies

CHAPTER 1
Television and tele-literacy

TELEVISION TODAY

Television is a transnational business and a national institution. It remains our most-watched form of entertainment and our most important source of information. It is an outlet for creativity and a medium through which social concern and political views may be expressed. It is a substantial employer of administrators and office workers as well as skilled engineers, technicians, programme-makers and performers. Yet changes in recent years have been so great that it has been questioned whether ‘television’ as a separate medium is still a viable concept. That will be a question we come back to repeatedly in this book as we focus attention on different aspects of the contemporary scene.

At the same time, we should be wary of putting too much stress on ‘newness’ for its own sake – exciting though the prospect of unpredictable change may be. Technologies and structures may be evolving, but many of the trends we see today have longer roots in the history of the medium. Television has long pushed beyond the domestic screen in dialogue with proliferating technologies and cultural practices. Back in 1974, the great theorist Raymond Williams described the medium as a combination of ‘technology’ and ‘cultural form’. He, too, was writing at a time of change, and noted that new technologies are constantly emerging, but that aspects of the old ones always linger. He argued that we must always take into account these ‘residual’ technologies as well as the ‘emergent’ ones, while focusing on those that are ‘dominant’ in the contemporary scene (Williams 1974). Taking our cue from Williams, we will be discussing both the technological and the cultural aspects of television and observing how they interrelate. We will be careful not to fall into the trap of ‘technological determinism’, and assume that technology is the most important factor. Instead we will be paying careful attention to all those social, cultural, economic and political forces that are shaping the way technologies are used. All these aspects are important to today’s practitioners.

Since the 1950s, television has been a central and much loved part of British culture. It has developed from a comfortable, home-based medium – that warm glow in the corner of the living room still celebrated by programmes such as Gogglebox – to the multiscreen, cross-platform phenomenon we know today. Arguably, its contemporary manifestations still provide a companionate voice and a circle of friends old and new – Ena Sharples of Coronation Street; Brian Cox on the solar system; the ever-changing Dr Who; the anarchic disruptions of a Miranda Hart or of Ant and Dec; the antics of celebrities holed up in the Big Brother house and many more. Now that they are available beyond their domestic context and at any time of day on catch-up and on mobile screens, their appeal is, if anything, enhanced. At the same time, television aims to offer a ‘window on the world’ (Panorama’s first description of itself). Documentaries and factual programmes probe behind the headlines, while television news and its associated websites provide a major source from which most of us get to learn about and interpret domestic politics and world affairs. Those who work, and aspire to work, in the medium may aim to contribute to any one of many diverse areas.

Those who produce television programmes tend to inhabit what Jeremy Tunstall described as a genre-specific world, absorbed in their own very different fields, whether sport or children’s programming (Tunstall 1993: 2). However, a special characteristic of television in the United Kingdom has been that it has not allowed those diverse areas to drift too far apart, arguing that audiences do not always know in advance what it is they want to see, so they should be offered something of everything. The proliferation of formats, the constant invention of new genres, the ways in which disparate expectations are allowed to rub up against each other, has given UK television a richness that remains unique and valuable, alongside the increase in specialist, globally based channels. Across its free-to-air terrestrial broadcasters, UK television still maintains a balance between its commitments to entertainment and to politics; to information and to relaxation. The pressure to address only the biggest audience is moderated within a regulated public-service system. Variety, diversity and unexpected juxtapositions have been at the core of a television service that has taken seriously the privilege of entry into people’s homes.

However, the expansion of the multichannel landscape has meant that UK television is now part of a global, largely American-based, system. The twentieth-century pattern, with a number of well-established and familiar channels, where most production was UK-funded and UK-based, has given way to the expanding universe of multiple channels and multinational business interests. The advantages of the new, global landscape are that programme-makers have access to international commissions and international funding, while broadcasters can sell their programmes worldwide. Meanwhile audiences can view numerous channels offering a wide range of international programming – from hugely popular drama series, such as Breaking Bad, Lost, Game of Thrones – through to news from other perspectives, say from Al-Jazeera or CNN.

At the same time, questions about the social value and function of television have become more intense under pressure from economic and political changes. The lightening of UK regulation has made control of broadcast television a rich prize for multinational media companies. At the same time television has become a platform for entrepreneurs, advertisers, sponsors, celebrity agents, public relations organisations and marketing people. Television has become brand-conscious (Johnson 2012). We now hear talk of ‘product’ where once we spoke of programmes, and of ‘consumers’ and ‘the market’ where once we meant the audience. The future of the BBC as the publicly funded cornerstone of British television has come under attack. These trends towards a more commercial environment have long been present, but have been held in check by regulation and legislation. However, in the 20teens television is undoubtedly more commercial and more troubled. Old principles have been shaken and new ones are unsure. Chapter 2 will explore the contemporary landscape of UK television in greater detail.

In addition a generation gap is opening up. The under-30s (often referred to as the ‘millennials’) tend to take global content for granted. They regularly access multiple sources, and do not identify ‘television’ as their most important source of entertainment or information. The older generation, by contrast, prefer scheduled programming and rely on television listings (Ofcom 2014: 1.15).

We will trace the mutating television medium throughout this book, observing the landscape as it heaves and resettles. We will note the ways in which digital and online platforms interact with broadcast television so that it is unclear whether they make up a completely new medium or are part of a revolution within television itself. Either way, as time goes on, it will be those now entering the media professions who will be instrumental in developing these new structures. The need for a dialogue between those who think about television and those who make it has never been more acute.

TELE-LITERACY

This is a handbook for the tele-literate and those who aim to be tele-literate. We have deliberately stuck with the term tele-literacy here, rather than the more common ‘media literacy’, as this book is focused on television with its own specificity and history, as well as its contemporary extensions. We use the term to combine a knowledge of the skills of television practice with a critical appraisal of the content of television and an enthusiasm for the medium in all its responsible and irresponsible proliferations, from TOWIE to Newsnight; from The Great British Bake-off to major events such as the Queen’s 90th Birthday. This book puts practical advice on ‘how to do it’ within the context of academic theory, debates between television professionals, and issues that concern the public at large.

In recent years, many academics and others concerned with media education have turned their attention to the production of television, and have begun to grapple with the implications of an interplay between theory and practice. The days are past when television professionals and those who study the medium brought different perspectives that seemed totally at odds with each other. Yet there are still some who work in the industry who argue that ‘media studies’ are irrelevant, since television theory has nothing to do with the real world of production. Media theory is abstract and sceptical, they say; it attacks rather than helps practitioners. Although there is some justice in these criticisms, in many ways they miss the point. To make useful critical judgements, television studies can never simply take the perspective of the broadcasters. As two researchers into television talk shows wrote:

Whatever the intentions of broadcasters in making these programmes …, these do not determine the nature of the product. This must be revealed through textual analysis, and the programmes have many unintended consequences which only audience research can discover.

(Livingstone and Lunt 1994: 2)

Television studies have their own history, which is explored in Chapter 6, where we argue that practitioners have made an important contribution to critical ideas, and sometimes to the most abstract realms of theory. Meanwhile contemporary television theory increasingly takes into account the concerns of television practice. This involves reflecting on the context of programme production and the institutional constraints on practitioners, and has frequently led to the evolution of forms of critical practice.

Nevertheless, for many years, education and practical training had little to do with each other. Training in practical skills tended to be on the job, oriented to technical expertise and with the prospect of a secure career ahead. Meanwhile a degree from an élite university, in almost any subject, often qualified young men (and they were almost all men) for graduate training schemes at the BBC, which would lead to producer and management jobs. But the structures of employment have changed. The hierarchies have (almost all) broken down (women and particularly people from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are still under-represented), and much of television has become an industry for entrepreneurs and a casualised workforce. Universities and colleges have increasingly stepped in to offer practical training alongside their more critical teaching and have set about building closer links with the industry. Extended periods of work experience, both in small production companies and large organisations including the BBC, are now a regular and expected part of a university curriculum. Many universities have their own television studios and some have set up their own production companies. Southampton Solent University’s production unit contributes to the BBC’s coverage of the Glastonbury Festival (Figure 18.1), while RedBalloon, based at Bournemouth University, won an award for its contribution to the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta (see Chapter 18). Within these units students can do paid production work on real projects. They deal with budgets and a client brief as they would in any production company.

Beyond the universities there are many other opportunities for training to a professional standard. A number of organisations run short courses: they range from the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) to specialised projects such as the MAMA Youth Project. We look at these in more detail in Chapter 19. Meanwhile the digital revolution means that the paraphernalia of filming and editing has become more easily available and simpler to use, and a wider group of people is gaining access to television skills. An individual can own a camcorder, buy an editing programme for their computer and learn the basics of the craft from an expanding range of online tutorials.

Thinking about television and promoting tele-literacy is also an activity that is carried on in many forums, from the pub to the starchiest of academic journals. People new to the industry and all who seek to be tele-literate are now able to follow and take part in a debate that is more than just ‘did you see?’ It can be found on online discussion boards, Facebook pages and Twitter feeds – to say nothing of programmes that go behind the scenes of the blockbuster hits, such as The Xtra Factor and The Apprentice: You’re Fired. Debates may be superficial and chiefly concerned with gossip about celebrities, but these are also spaces where programme-makers may engage with viewers.

The daily and weekly broadsheet press carry extensive comment on topics as varied as personalities, technology and legislation. They report on the economics of the industry on the business pages, w...