Sessions look at future of TV

While the dreaded phrase information highway is causing motion sickness in entertainment elites, those cultural power brokers are still keen to debate the size, shape and national origins of the programming cargo poised for goin’ down the road.

Demographics

At TV94, an all-day conference on the future of television held in the midst of the Geminis earlier this month, the debate was spirited and varied. Economist David Foot woke up the crowd with a presentation on Canada’s demographics. By laying out the basics of supply and demand, Foot eliminated any magic the marketing wizards, technological wonders and 500-channel soothsayers may have hoped to spread throughout the rest of the day’s sessions.

The demographer bases his research on the simple premise that ‘every year, we grow one year older.’ Out of this pablum evolved the point that when population stats are broken down by age and geography, a solid definition of marketplace is uncovered. And with a minimum of analysis. For example, there are the baby-boom, baby-bust and `echo’ generations to account for the demand of tv programming, and with twice as many walking shoes as running shoes being sold now, it’s clear who’s out there watching.

‘Young person’s toy’

Foot trod into deep waters when he called technology a ‘young person’s toy’ and stated that ‘the golden era for introducing technology has passed.’

Aside from these and a few other pointed remarks, this university prof avoided direct advice to programmers. Instead, he displayed the numbers, set up a pretty gloomy picture for technology, and let his listeners draw their own conclusions.

Most of the panelists of ‘MapMaking’ – the morning session on the future of the information highway – didn’t much like what Foot had to say. With communications gurus making up the bulk of the panel, the success of future technologies was the blanket concern.

Information highway

The first issue on the table was assessing the term ‘information highway’ (near-consensus was that another term should be found). David Ellis of Omnia Communications felt the whole approach of the term was off-track and tagged it as ‘thinking monolithically.’

More weighty was the matter of defining the market – who will care about a digitally-powered phenomenon which will allow access to shopping, movies, banking and health services through something which was, not long ago, termed ‘the tube’? The existence of the market was not, in itself, debated, even though Alain Gourd, president and ceo of Cancom, read aloud from a recent survey which indicated an overall negative response to the highway (concerns started with ‘the super-couch potato syndrome’ and went on to address privacy, cost and purpose).

Of real urgency was establishing the stipulations for making this seemingly inevitable transition more successful. Key issues discussed included access, user-control, ubiquity, regulation and programming.

Evolution

Gourd summarized the gist of the morning session when he remarked: ‘This is not a new product. I don’t believe there will be a revolution. It will be an evolution.’

As the midday point in the conference passed, discussions turned from the means of distributing the content (apart from references by Jocelyne Cote-O’Hara, ceo of Stentor Telecom Policy, on the proliferation of multimedia products and research) to the nature of the content itself.

Inevitability

Moderator Pam Wallin’s announcement that Canadian actor and comic John Candy had died earlier that day provoked shock and sadness among delegates. Thinking of Candy and his career path also underlined a reality for many Canadians in the entertainment business – success can often require a move to the u.s. or, at the very least, a u.s. focus.

Like Candy, who did well in Canada but really hit the big time in the larger u.s. market, Canadian producers at the conference seemed to suggest they’re pushing their limits at home and can find better success by straying more and more abroad.

As panelists turned their attention to the growing number of programming windows at the dawn of the specialty-channel and interactive multimedia era, discussion of the role of Cancon was a natural. Nelvana principal Michael Hirsh pointed out that increasing channels available globally make it ‘more cost-efficient to produce.’ But he wondered how long Cancon production would continue at current rates if producers don’t find worldwide markets for Canadian-oriented products.

Michael MacMillan, president of Atlantis Films, said he doubts the days of Cancon are gone, but warns they may well go ‘as we (producers) make more of our money through international partners.’ These offshore alliances, he said, will bring about increasing homogenization of program content. ‘He who pays the piper calls the tune.’

But MacMillan and others on the panel suggested that if an effective regulatory system can be maintained (also described as carrot-and-stick/broadcast licence requires minimum Cancon levels), the crtc can at least assure that Canadian shows exist for those who want to watch them.

Said Paul Robertson, head of programming and marketing at the CTV Television Network: ‘I don’t think the Canadian marketplace is really ready for deregulation.’ Jon Slan, chairman of Paragon Entertainment, concurred, adding the crtc ‘should stay the (regulatory) course.’

Thomas Howe, director of programming at Northstar (a joint venture involving the cbc and Power Broadcasting) said the other critical means of maintaining a Canadian cultural presence on the tube is to make sure the cbc stays strong and maintains audience share levels.

Dollars for culture

To Micheline Charest, strong Cancon quality and quantity depends on the dollar value Canadians decide to funnel into cultural products. ‘Canadians are going to have to decide how much they’re willing to pay for indigenous cultural programming,’ she said, adding that English Canada needs a better star system to attract audiences.

Panelists disagreed on whether market fragmentation is an opportunity or disadvantage to producers – Canadian content aside – with MacMillan seeing fragmentation as a boon, a way to increase financing sources, and Slan countering that any new money will flow into technology rather than programming.

The notion that producers might want to diversify their own revenue opportunities by merchandising titles on such new media as cd-rom appeared to intrigue some producers while others are taking a wait-and-see approach.

Ron Mann of Sphinx Productions said he’s already made at least two of his films, Poetry in Motion and Comic Book Confidential, available on cd-rom. ‘With Alliance (Communications), I was the first filmmaker to deny them the cd-rom rights for a film,’ Mann said.