Why Canrsquo;t Broadcast Networks Make Great TV Dramas?

Nominations for the 2013 Primetime Emmy Awards were announced last week, and while there has been much chatter about Netflixrsquo;s history-making “House of Cards” -- the first online-only series to be nominated for a top award -- the list is also notable for what failed to be recognized.

This is the second year in a row that all four major broadcast networks (ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox) were completely shut out of the most prestigious Emmy category, Outstanding Drama Series. Throughout most of Emmyrsquo;s 65-year history, broadcast television had a virtual monopoly on TV content creation, and the Emmy Awards reflected that. Then in 2004, something unprecedented happened: HBOrsquo;s “The Sopranos” took home the coveted Outstanding Drama Series statuette, the first cable series ever to do so.

For the broadcast networks, it was a precipitous drop from there. In the nine years since, cable series have all but dominated the drama category. The last time a network show was named best drama was seven years ago, with Foxrsquo;s “24.” And it doesnrsquo;t look like broadcasters will regain their foothold anytime soon.

So what happened? Critics and analysts attribute the decline of network-TV drama to a variety of factors, not the least of which is the Big Fourrsquo;s continuing reliance on larger audiences. In terms of viewership, cable programming operates on a more niche-oriented model. AMCrsquo;s four-time Emmy-winning “Mad Men,” for instance, attracts about 3 million viewers on a good night. If a network show were to average those kinds of numbers, it would be canceled quicker than one of Don Draperrsquo;s extramarital flings. In other words, the Big Four donrsquo;t have the luxury of nurturing the kind of sophisticated, specialty programming that can survive on a small but loyal following.

“Before cable came along, networks wanted to get a 30 share to be considered successful,” said Robert J. Thompson, a media scholar and director of Syracuse Universityrsquo;s Bleier Center for Television amp;amp; Popular Culture. “You could never get 30 percent of the entire viewing audience to watch a complicated television show.”

And yet, if there is a divide in the broadcast/cable business model, Thompson pointed out the irony that the two platforms sort of created each other. In the early days of cable, the networks saw their market share dwindle for the first time in television history. With smaller audiences came the freedom to experiment, and that, in turn, paved the way for what is now thought of as the first renaissance of television drama, when shows like NBCrsquo;s “Hill Street Blues” and ABCrsquo;s “Moonlighting” added a new level of sophistication to the genre.

“We should remember that the networks invented this stuff,” Thompson said. “They were doing high-quality, serialized scripted drama when HBO was just getting into the series business.”

But the drama renaissance of the 1980s didnrsquo;t go unnoticed, and before long, cable networks realized they could not only produce the same kinds of shows, they could do it better. With smaller budgets, shorter seasons and fewer censorship constraints, cable networks found themselves perfectly poised to test the waters until they stumbled upon the perfect formula for creating engaging, even addicting serialized TV dramas.

Itrsquo;s a production model that continues today, with shows like AMCrsquo;s “Breaking Bad” and HBOrsquo;s “Game of Thrones” being created under far fewer constraints than broadcast series like CBSrsquo; “The Good Wife.” The result, some critics say, are TV dramas that are not even in the same weight class, even though they are force to compete for the same awards.

“Irsquo;ve thought for a long time that itrsquo;s an unfair comparison,” said Doug Strassler, a critic for the New York Press who covers television, film and theater. “The cable networks have so much more freedom. Itrsquo;s almost two different genres.”

One big advantage for cable producers, Strassler said, is time. Consider last yearrsquo;s Emmy winner, the Showtime drama “Homeland,” whose season consisted of 12 episodes. Broadcast offerings are often forced to churn out twice that amount, and that means less time to assess what works and what doesnrsquo;t.

“Itrsquo;s a very short time for hiatus,” Strassler said. “When yoursquo;re in the kitchen that long, you have very little time to step outside and see how the food actually tastes.”

More recently, broadcasters have been experimenting with shorter seasons (“Under the Dome,” a modest hit for CBS this year, clocked in at 13 episodes), but even if networks could solve the problem of time, they would still be left with the problem of censorship. Broadcasters are still regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, prohibiting them from producing the kind of edgier content audiences and critics gravitate toward.

The FCC, for its part, is considering relaxing its indecency rules, and is accepting public comments on the issue until August 1. Thompson, for one, thinks itrsquo;s about time, calling the FCCrsquo;s arbitrary community standards “ridiculous.” But he admitted that getting lawmakers to agree to broadcast deregulation is a different matter entirely.

“We know how politically dicey this is,” he said. “Itrsquo;s the one thing you can get Democrats and Republicans to agree on. They both had a cow when Janet Jacksonrsquo;s breast popped for half a second at 50 yards.”

With Netflix entering the Emmys race this year, and online giants like Amazon getting into the production business, broadcasters are only going find the Outstanding Drama category increasingly more competitive. The question is, should they get out of the drama business altogether? In the end, a production slate full of reality shows and sitcoms may be less prestigious than creating the next “Sopranos,” but if done right, itrsquo;s no less profitable.

“I do think networks realize that theyrsquo;ll neve

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

为什么现在难制作好电视剧

在上周揭晓的2013年艾美奖提名上，虽然Netflix的历史性制作“纸牌屋”得到了很多关注：它是第一个在线系列被提名为最高奖。但是值得注意的是，它最终并未被认可。

这是连续第二年四大广播电视网（ABC，NBC，CBS，福克斯）被拒之最负盛名的艾美奖优秀电视剧的门外。纵观艾美奖65年历史中，广播电视在电视内容制作中产生一个虚拟的垄断，艾美奖也将这现象反映了出来。但是在2004年，前所未有的事情发生了：HBO的《黑道家族》捧走了电视人梦寐以求的优秀电视剧的雕像。

For the broadcast networks, it was a precipitous drop from there. In the nine years since, cable series have all but dominated the drama category. The last time a network show was named best drama was seven years ago, with Foxrsquo;s “24.” And it doesnrsquo;t look like broadcasters will regain their foothold anytime soon.

对于广播电视网来说，这几年电视剧的质量急剧下降。在过去九年，通过有线播出的电视剧在戏剧类节目中都占主导地。但现在，网络自制剧开始崛起，上一次网络剧被评为最佳电视剧是七年前，是福克斯公司生产的剧集“24”。但只是一晃而过，它不像广播那样能迅速在市场占领一席之地。。

那么到底发生了什么造成了这一情况？评论家和分析师分析了网络电视剧逐渐衰弱的各种因素，最后得出结论：这不仅仅与四巨头持续依靠更大范围受众有关。从收视率的角度来说，编程电缆运行在一个更小众化的地方。AMC的四次艾美奖殊荣的“狂人”曾经举了一个易懂的例子，“打个比方，一个好电视剧在一个美好的夜晚吸引了大约3000000名观众观看。如果网络剧的平均播放量能达到这个数字，它就会被以比唐德雷珀的婚外恋更快的速度取消。”换句话说，广播电视界的四大巨头没有形成一种成熟、专业的规划，可以制作出特别的节目仅为一个小而忠实的跟随者而存在。

“Before cable came along, networks wanted to get a 30 share to be considered successful,” said Robert J. Thompson, a media scholar and director of Syracuse Universityrsquo;s Bleier Center for Television amp;amp; Popular Culture. “You could never get 30 percent of the entire viewing audience to watch a complicated television show.”

“有线电视出现之前，网络想获得30%的份额来被认为是成功的，”罗伯特汤普森，一个媒体学者兼电视人这样说道。“你永远不可能获得整个观众的百分之30，让他们去看复杂的电视节目。”

And yet, if there is a divide in the broadcast/cable business model, Thompson pointed out the irony that the two platforms sort of created each other. In the early days of cable, the networks saw their market share dwindle for the first time in television history. With smaller audiences came the freedom to experiment, and that, in turn, paved the way for what is now thought of as the first renaissance of television drama, when shows like NBCrsquo;s “Hill Street Blues” and ABCrsquo;s “Moonlighting” added a new level of sophistication to the genre.

然而，汤普森指出，讽刺的是，如果在广播/有线电视商业模式存在一个分水岭，这两个平台就会创造出彼此。在有线电视发展的早期，网络见证了他们的市场份额在电视史上的第一次减少。这是少数观众的经历，现在反过来被认为是为电视剧的第一次复兴铺平了道路，像NBC的节目《山街蓝调》和ABC的《月光》便为电视剧增加了一个新的水平的流派。

“我们应该记住，网络发明了这个东西，”汤普森这样说。“当HBO刚刚进入一系列的电视业务的时候，他们已经做出了优质的，序列化的戏剧剧本。”

But the drama renaissance of the 1980s didnrsquo;t go unnoticed, and before long, cable networks realized they could not only produce the same kinds of shows, they could do it better. With smaller budgets, shorter seasons and fewer censorship constraints, cable networks found themselves perfectly poised to test the waters until they stumbled upon the perfect formula for creating engaging, even addicting serialized TV dramas.

但在上世纪80年代戏剧在网络复兴后并没有引起多少关注，不久，有线电视网络开始证明他们不仅可以生产相同类型的电视剧，而且他们可以做的更好。网络剧的预算较少，较短的时间就可拍完一部，并且审查限制更少。有线网络，直到他们偶然创造引人入胜的完美公式，才准备全身心地在电视戏剧这块试水，甚至着手拍摄系列电视剧。

Itrsquo;s a production model that continues today, with shows like AMCrsquo;s “Breaking Bad” and HBOrsquo;s “Game of Thrones” being created under far fewer constraints than broadcast series like CBSrsquo; “The Good Wife.” The result, some critics say, are TV dramas that are not even in the same weight class, even though they are force to compete for the same awards.

这个生产模式，今天仍在继续，比如像AMC制作的《绝命毒师》和HBO的《权力的游戏》它们所受到的约束，比广播系列剧，像CBS的《傲骨贤妻》之类的要少很多。结果，一些评论家说，电视剧和网络剧，他们甚至都不在同一个价值级别，即使他们有力量争夺同一个奖项。

“Irsquo;ve thought for a long time that itrsquo;s an unfair comparison,” said Doug Strassler, a critic for the New York Press who covers television, film and theater. “The cable networks have so much more freedom. Itrsquo;s almost two different genres.”

“我想了很长时间，这是一个不公平的比较，”电视纽约新闻评论家，电影和戏剧家道格这样说到，“有线网络比传统电视拥有更多的自由，所以这几乎是两个不同的流派。”

Strassler表示，One big advantage for cable producers, Strassler said, is time. Consider last yearrsquo;s Emmy winner, the Showtime drama “Homeland,” whose season consisted of 12 episodes. Broadcast offerings are often forced to churn out twice that amount, and that means less time to assess what works and what doesnrsquo;t.

网络剧，其所拥有的一大优势是时间。考虑到去年的艾美奖得主，Showtime电视剧《家园》，“他们本季有12集，而电视剧往往被迫多出两倍的剧集，这意味着评估是不公平的。网络剧时间太少了。”

“Itrsquo;s a very short time for hiatus,” Strassler said. “When yoursquo;re in the kitchen that long, you have very little time to step outside and see how the food actually tastes.”

“这是一个很短的时间间隔，”Strassler表示。“当你在厨房里那么久的时候，你就很少有时间去外面看看食物真实的味道。”

More recently, broadcasters have been experimenting with shorter seasons (“Under the Dome,” a modest hit for CBS this year, clocked in at 13 episodes), but even if networks could solve the problem of time, they would still be left with the problem of censorship. Broadcasters are still regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, prohibiting them from producing the kind of edgier content audiences and critics gravitate toward.

最近，电视台一直在试验缩短剧集（“穹顶之下”，CBS今年的主打之一，大概在13集），但即使他们可以解决时间的问题和网络竞争，但是他们仍面临审查难的问题。电视台仍然受美国联邦通信委员会，委员会禁止他们生产前卫内容来吸引观众和评论家。

FCC，从它的方面来说，它正考虑放宽其限制的下线，并听取公众对此事的评论这将会进行到八月一日。一个叫汤普森的公众认为，限制是与播放时间密切相关的，所以FCC的任意社区标准是“荒谬的”。但他承认，如果让议员们同意广播解除管制，这将会是一个完全不同的事情。

“We know how politically dicey this is,” he said. “Itrsquo;s the one thing you can get Democrats and Republicans to agree on. They both had a cow when Janet Jacksonrsquo;s breast popped for half a second at 50 yards.”

“我们知道这是政治上的冒险，”他说。“这是一件你可以得到民主党人和共和党人一致认可的事情。但是想要真正做成功却十分困难。”

With Netflix entering the Emmys race this year, and online giants like Amazon getting into the production business, broadcasters are only going find the Outstanding Drama category increasingly more competitive. The question is, should they get out of the drama business altogether? In the end, a production slate full of reality shows and sitcoms may be less prestigious than creating the next “Sopranos,” but if done right, itrsquo;s no less profitable.

当Netflix入围今年的艾美奖竞争时，像亚马逊一样的巨头也进入了网络剧的生产经营，电视台即使找到优秀的戏剧种类，但是它遇到的竞争也越来越多。那么问题来了，他们应该放弃戏剧的业务呢？最终，一个完整的连续剧可能创造出下一个《黑道家族》所拥有的声望，但即使做得正确，这也是不赚钱的。

“I do think networks realize that theyrsquo;ll never be able to compete again on the prestige level,” Strassler said

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[501500]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word