Tuned In, TV Blog, Television Reviews, James Poniewozik, TIME

May 12, 2008 12:30

Upfronts Preview: TV Faces Its Shrinkage

Posted by James Poniewozik | Comments (4) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This

We TV critics like to pretend we're a heartless, puppy-kicking, candy-from-baby-taking bunch, but we're as sentimental as anyone else. So don't be surprised if you read a bit of a melancholy streak in the this week's coverage of the big-network upfronts, which kick off today.

As I've mentioned, this week's presentations will be a diminished affair, in several ways. First, thanks to the strike, there will be less new programming to announce. Now, the upfront schedules were highly theoretical to begin with—some shows would never air, some would be heavily retooled, many would suck and most would ultimately fail. Nonetheless... there was something heady about having the network execs get on stage and preview an entire season's worth of programming all in one day. There was an exciting, first-day-of-school feel to it (depending how much you liked school) or a Christmas-morning feel (depending how good your childhood Christmases / alternative holidays were). Now it's more like Santa coming down the chimney and leaving you a vague promise about all the great toys his elves will be producing sometime in the next fiscal year.

Second, there will be less razzle-dazzle. Fewer of the big parties following the presentations, and the presentations themselves will be shorter and less showy. All of which, frankly, is fine by me—I'd rather drink at home, thank you very much—but all this relates to the final, big change that's driving this year's upfront: the growing realization that network TV is just not the big business it used to be. The audiences are smaller—markedly so this season—and many of those remaining are watching in formats that the nets are still figuring out how to monetize, from online to DVR.

None of that is necessarily bad news. Not for viewers, because the main lesson of the cable revolution has been that smaller networks and audiences mean shows that don't have to please everybody, which in turns means more risk-taking and better shows. (Worse shows too. But with more networks putting on more different things, the best of the best has gotten better.) And not for TV critics, at least those whose jobs aren't falling victim to the (different but related) traumas of the print and newspaper markets: because whether CBS has 30 million viewers or 10 million, whether people watch shows live on TV or time-shifted on a cellphone, the business of pop culture and entertainment is only getting bigger, if more diffuse. Even in this diminished upfront, there is something for us to write about, even if the diminishment is itself the story.

But it's still different, and different is still a little sad, even if it's ultimately for the best. The real thing we are seeing pass this week, with the scaling back of the huge parties and expensive network stage shows for advertisers, is TV's sense of bigness, its expansiveness, its grandness. The networks' lavish fests are passing, probably forever, this year, going the way of the free airline meal. And with them passes the networks' sense—much like the airlines'—that they are big, optimistic, growing industries. Like the airlines, they are getting ever more bottom-line-driven and no-frills. And even if you always hated the airline food and brown-bagged it, once they started throwing pretzels at you, you still had to note, sadly, that something had changed.

In any case: today kicks off with NBC's trade-show-like "NBC Universal Experience" presentation at 30 Rock, followed by ABC, CBS and Fox in order. (I'll probably be skipping whatever little press conference The CW is planning.) There may or may not be much news, but watch this space anyway.

Sphere Related Blogs & Articles

Reader Comments (4)

Tom Shaw:

"I'll probably be skipping whatever little press conference The CW is planning."

Actually, CW's sublease of their air is one of the most intriguing things about this season (from a business standpoint, not an entertainment standpoint). See also NBC unofficially turning into the Reveille Productions Network.

I admit, I haven't paid attention to the business side much in previous years, but was there always such an emphasis on midseason shows?
While I understand the nets want to use their existence as a promise that there's always something new they can tie their ads to, from the viewer's perspective, all they serve as is a giant sign that half of what they watch will be gone in 6 weeks and a promise that their eyes only matter in the aggregate.

And as un-entertaining as it may be, please keep an eye open on the advertising front (see your commentary on NBC's upfront); it will be interesting to see how the nets adjust their business models in these diminished times.

Posted by Tom Shaw | May 12, 2008 2:12 PM

Chris Kw.:

Last year was the first year I paid any attention to the upfront presentations. I thought it was cool as well and I was interested in a lot of the shows that were unveiled. But based on the fact that none of those shows became hits I am less excited for the upfronts this year. A good comparison of upfronts would be to the NBA and NFL drafts. So much time is given into analyzing programs or players that are most likely not going to make it a full season in the league. But there is ususally one or two hits in every season or draft.

Don't get me wrong. I liked Chuck and Pushing Daisies but I hate having to depend on the rest of America for shows like that to stay on the air. That is why investing in cable shows is so much easier because reviews seem to be just as important as ratings (see AMC)

With all that said, I am probably most interested in what Fox has planned for next year: "Fringe" "Dollhouse" and that animated show from the AD people.

Posted by Chris Kw. | May 12, 2008 2:32 PM

James Poniewozik:

@Tom: re: midseason shows. I assume you're referring to NBC's talk of a "52 week schedule"? Actually, I'm suprised that the presss coverage of it haas been as credulous as it has. As long as I've been going to upfronts (8, 9 years now), nets have announced both fall debuts and midseason shows. The (very minor) difference with what NBC did last month was to assign more specific debut months to different shows. But until next yeear rolls around and NBC actually *debuts* the shows iit says it will, at the times and time slots it's now saying, by me their midseason talk is as theoretical as it always has been.

Remember, part of the specific situation you have now is that networks (owing to the strike) simply don't have a realistic option of debuting as many new shows in the fall as usual, so of necessity there will be more midseason--but we'll have to see how much of that is due to the strike and how much is a permanent change.

Bottom line, while I think that the trends are driving networks much more to year-round debuts (as has been the case for some time), I think we need to be skeptical about how firm any midseason plans for 2009 announced in May 2008 are. And I would think the advertisers would be similarly skeptical.

Anyway, for all I know, this year's upfronts may be more interesting because they're different, even if fewer new shows are previewed.

BTW, my statement about the CW is not meant as a dis--it's just my understanding that the press pportion of their upfront will be fairly small-scale and so I'll probably skip it simply for time reasons.

Posted by James Poniewozik | May 12, 2008 2:33 PM

shara says:

James: Do we know yet whether T:TSCC will be back in the fall or not until the winter?

Posted by shara says | May 12, 2008 4:00 PM

About Tuned In

James Poniewozik writes TIME magazine's Tuned In column, about pop culture and society. Tuned In, the blog version, is about the stuff we used to call "TV," whether it's in your living room, on your computer or--once the networks figure out the technology and line up the advertisers--in your dreams themselves.