Cinema and television
The social aspects of television are influences this medium has had on society since its . Author John Steinbeck describes television watchers: Numerous studies have also examined the relationship between TV viewing Through television, even the most homebound women can experience parts of our culture once. As with any new technology, the use of radio and television in the classroom faced For example, silent films were used in the classroom along with What is not surprising is that these specific roadblocks are often the same Hans Christian Orsted discovered the relationship between electricity and. The relationship between filmand television - Television - actor, movie, tv, Given the importance of television in the film industry and in film culture, why do we Much classic film theory and criticism, for instance, sought to define film as an.
Hollywood and Television in the s: The Roots of Diversification | kinenbicounter.info
For example, the common assumption that television is a medium directed at the home, while film is a medium directed at theaters, overlooks the importance of the TV set as a technology for film exhibition. Similarly, the emphasis on television's capacity for live transmission obscures the fact that most TV programs are recorded on film or videotape and that feature films make up a large percentage of TV programming.
Third, film has enjoyed a prestige that only recently has been accorded to television, and this status marker has encouraged people to view film and television separately. Every culture creates hierarchies of taste and prestige, and whether explicitly stated or implicitly assumed, film has had a higher cultural status than television.Top 10 Intercultural Love Stories in Movies
It has been a sign of success, for example, when an actor or a director moves out of television into movies. Similarly, film critics have enjoyed much greater prestige than any critic who has written about television.
The scholarly field of film studies, and universities in general, were slow to welcome the study of television. All of this suggests that there has been an unrecognized, but nevertheless real, investment in a cultural hierarchy that treats film as a more serious and respectable pursuit than television, and this hierarchy supported the assumption that film and television are separate media. Of course, any hierarchy of cultural values is subject to change over time. When a television series like The Sopranos beginning achieves greater critical acclaim than virtually any movie of the past decade, it is a signal that values are shifting.
As film and radio historian Michele Hilmes noted, "the FCC, with an unerring eye for the maintenance of the status quo, rejected this vision…. It is important to note that the broadcasting industry had similar inclinations, as evidenced in the case against the radio networks in the late s, as well as a later anti-trust suit against the television networks for monopolizing program supply and distribution Meanwhile, other developments contributed to the doomed theater television project.
With the lifting of the FCC's freeze in Apriltelevision exploded on the scene, as millions of Americans turned to "free" television in the convenience of their homes. Bythere were commercial stations and 26 million TV homes. With these changes it became nearly impossible for theater television to compete. During this time period, the industry was undergoing profound structural changes that ultimately separated production and distribution from exhibition.
This became even more significant when it came to selling products to the newly developing television industry, but also ultimately affected the support for theater television by the different sectors of the film industry.
The Influence of Radio and Television on Culture, Literacy and Education
For instance, several unions were against theater television, especially the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees IATSEbut also trade organizations representing actors and musicians.
Various widescreen systems were adopted, as well as experimentation with 3-D. Theaters with financial problems found that these systems were less expensive, yet more profitable, than the equipment needed for theater television.
Gomery concluded, "if theater television had proven profitable, it no doubt would have spread quickly to all parts of the United States. Although there was some discussion of theater and subscription television co-existing, in the end, theater television was abandoned and the subscription TV battle began.
Subscription Television Various experiments with subscription or pay television in the s and s involved companies connected to the film industry in one way or another. But it also must be noted that some film interests were involved in introducing pay systems, while others opposed those efforts.
Though theater television was at least, initially welcomed by exhibitors, pay television was another thing altogether.
Exhibitors not only feared it, they vigorously fought against it. Again, Paramount took the lead in attempts to develop a viable pay television system.
White pointed out that Paramount had a form of subscription TV in mind when it bought Scophony inand continued these efforts with DuMont. In the mids, Paramount planned to form a mobile system using DuMont equipment to transmit programming to theaters. However, these ideas ultimately were abandoned.
Zenith's Phonevision was introduced inusing telephone lines to unscramble a broadcast signal. Indeed, Zenith was the first company to ask for FCC permission to experiment with pay television inand tested its system in Chicago in Afterthe company shifted to using a coin box or punch card system, but still was having problems obtaining programming. Paramount became involved with a system that used a scrambled broadcast signal through its 50 percent ownership of International Telemeter.
Films were viewed by placing coins in a box on a television set, which then descrambled the picture. ByTelemeter's system featured three channels using either wires or broadcast signals.
Social aspects of television - Wikipedia
Fox received the help of IBM to develop a system called Subscribervision, which used a punch card and a scrambled broadcast signal. For instance, see Chapter 1 for references to Sam Goldwyn's opinions. However, there were only a few actual experiments with pay systems during the s. The system that attracted the most attention was Telemeter inwhen it provided a community antenna system, plus special programs for extra fees, to homes in Palm Springs, California.
In addition to sporting events and other live programming, the service offered the same film that was playing at the local theater for a slightly higher fee. Apparently, the aim was to attract viewers who never went to theaters, and some theater owners even cooperated with the experiment. However, one of the Palm Springs theater owners charged that Paramount was in violation of the recent anti-trust suit against the majors.
Although Telemeter claimed to be a success with over 2, subscribers, the system apparently buckled under the threat of governmental restriction. And despite the connection to Paramount, the system seemed to be unable to procure an adequate inventory of Hollywood films. This featured a first-run movie channel and a rerun movie channel. First-run movies were shown concurrently at the local theater chain, thus avoiding one potential source of opposition.
But even though the experiment received a good deal of press attention, the service apparently had financial problems. The use of telephone lines was costly, the flat monthly fee to customers was very high, and the company had some difficulties developing a system for paying Hollywood companies for the use of their films. Meanwhile, Paramount maintained its faith in pay TV, increasing its interest in Telemeter to 88 percent by and announcing that it would open systems in New York, on the West Coast, and in Canada.
One might wonder why a direct pay system of television that became successful two decades later failed at this time. Again, the reasons are multi-faceted, interrelated, and similar to the reasons that theater television failed. First, systems that relied on phone lines found that the costs were prohibitive. However, it seems possible that such technical problems eventually could have been overcome.
While additional experiments were carried out in the early s, broadcast and theater forces continued to lobby extensively to defeat pay television. There were also serious obstacles due to delay and resistance from the federal government. Hilmes argues that pay television failed because of "slow strangulation by federal regulation.
Congressional representatives who had broadcast investments joined the anti-pay television movement as well. In fact, at least six bills were introduced to ban pay television, with hearings held on the topic by the FCC, the Senate, and the House. Another huge problem was the competition from "free" TV. It might be argued that the film industry mostly moved in the wrong direction with early subscription experiments.
Perhaps it was too early for pay systems that did not offer a regular schedule of special programming for which audiences would pay an extra fee. But the idea of paying for television programming also suffered notably from the campaign to save "free" TV. Pay television succeeded in later decades when the systems merged with cable television and offered programming not available on over-the-air broadcasting. In addition, Hilmes has pointed out that "the FCC's public interest mandate, adopted and reinterpreted by broadcast television and theater interests, became equated in the public mind with the unchallengeable supremacy of the 'free TV" system.
Mostly it's advertising business. Despite its inability to own or control broadcast outlets at an early stage or to develop successful alternative systems, the film industry eventually was able to profit from television in other ways.
Strategies for Coexistence with Television While the events surrounding theater television and pay television unfolded, Hollywood was developing specific strategies for selling its products to the emerging television industry. By the s, the film industry had firmly established a key role in the supply of the majority of television programming. Before discussing these developments, it is important to establish the backdrop for Hollywood's eventual triumph. The evolving economic structure of television programming had shifted rather quickly from commercial sponsorship controlled by advertising agencies, with one main sponsor per program, to a magazine format with different sources of advertising controlled by the networks.
By the s, virtually every component of the television schedule was both interchangeable and recyclable. The networks clung to live television, which was one way of maintaining control. Live television meant that stations had to receive live feeds from the networks according to a specific schedule. Taped or filmed programs could be aired by stations whenever they chose to run them. The networks and their critics also insisted that live television programming was creatively superior to filmed fare.
Additional changes included the decline of studio-produced feature films and the growth of independently produced films, as well as fewer, more expensive films with increased promotion costs. Generally, the production-distribution companies benefited from these developments, while exhibition mostly suffered.
In a article on Hollywood and television, William Boddy concluded: TV has had a terribly divisive effect on the film industry.
It has accomplished what even divorcement could not really accomplish, i. It is simply a fact that, today, with the TV mart looming so importantly and the electronic medium advancing ever further, the basic interests of the Coast and the rest of the industry are not necessarily the same. As new stations opened, the demand for filmed programs increased.
However, some of the studios delayed production for broadcasting, as they hoped to develop the alternative television systems discussed above. In addition, it wasn't until the late s that the major integrated companies were fully divorced from their theater chains. Thus, during much of the decade, they were forced to avoid conflict with theater owners and moved ever so cautiously into television production, as well as resisting sales of their new theatrical films to television. In fact, Boddy noted that in the FCC actually issued a warning to the Hollywood studios for withholding talent and products from broadcast television.
Nevertheless, a relatively large number of Hollywood independent producers created programming for broadcast television during the late s and early s. The business was highly competitive, with over producers claiming to be involved during this early period, which came to be known as the " gold rush " period of television production.
Even at this early stage, a distinct financing system was emerging, with programs usually produced at a deficit and profits emerging in syndication, international distribution, and other products. The most successful telefilm production companies were those that had resources available and could provide commercially oriented, profitable productions.
- The influence of television on cultural values -- with special reference to Third World countries.
- Social aspects of television
- 9.2 The Relationship Between Television and Culture
As Dennis Dombkowski concluded: It should be pointed out that it was no economic law that made this necessary for the television program supply industry, but rather the inevitable requirements of a commercial system which was being designed for a nationwide service of networks and their correspondingly greater capital requirements, rather than a decentralized and less "efficient" system.
The networks insisted that their live, dramatic programming was higher quality than the cheaply made action-adventure shows and situation comedies produced by film companies. At this point, relatively low prices were offered for TV programming, even though high costs were anticipated for Hollywood produced programming. The market for subsequent release of television programming reruns, syndication, and foreign sales was a major factor in the acceptance of filmed TV programming by the networks and the entrance of the Hollywood majors into telefilm production.
Only a few of the major companies produced television series, commercials, and news during the late s and early s. It might be noted that none of these companies were major integrated studios that owned theaters.
Most historians agree that the other major studios became much more active in television production after They also tended to draw from their film resources for some program ideas for instance, Rin Tin Tin, a series of movies since the s that became a popular TV series in the mids.
But the studios moved on to produce a wide range of programs, including prestigious dramatic shows such as Playhouse go and especially half-hour series that were quite profitable in network and syndicated markets. Each major company moved into television at a somewhat different pace.
InColumbia produced thirteen half-hour series and one ninety-minute program, with television representing one-quarter of the company's revenues. Around the same time, Twentieth Century—Fox produced four half-hour shows and one one-hour series. In those countries, the televisual organization is funded according to a cannon that the T. Thus the French Radio-Television stations or the Italian RAI-TV collect yearly thousands of millions of ancient francs or lyres as a compensation for the services they provide to the television spectators throughout the year, and whose nature is freely decided by the criteria of these organisms.
Definitely, while cinema has to conquer every time, film by film, the spectators who pay for its production, the monopolist state television broadcasts programs to previously guaranteed spectators, who have paid beforehand: In Italy, cinema and television have almost equivalent annual budgets: Not a lot of imagination is required to understand the advantages that would report, both to the industries and the audience, the accumulation of both budgets, complementing one another instead of competing.
We will come back to this issue. Anybody with an idea of cinema, as small as it might be, knows that the adventure of producing a film is only possible when the minimum budget is guaranteed under any of these formulas: But even those precautions are not enough to reduce or eliminate risks.
Cinema, then, seeks shelter in the repetition of commercially successful formulas, exploits the tendency. How long are those formulas valid for? Shooting of Agostino d'Ippona Roberto Rossellini, Cinema is thus condemned to Sisyphus torture, it is a slave of a system that forces it to start from scratch, to assume once and again the risks implied on guessing the successful in the timely quest of what audiences will enjoy, and all of these within an incredibly short amount of time.
At its beginnings, however, cinema regulated a very different direction: In one word, the one thousand and one products that were precise imposing to society that was not yet a consumer society, but was about to become one. And cinema, contributed in that sense to the dissemination of the new models of life, to create other necessities and other desires. Cinema has been a medium for entertainment and, simultaneously, the Trojan horse for the consumption society.
While those were the operative conditions for cinema, the funding posed greater problems, because the capital enjoyed completely independent advantages of the success of the film.
The production was abundant, and its abundance allowed, even if slowly, to widen the limits of cinematographic art, to try —even once in a while- new experiences. Conditions have drastically changed today. The institutional advertisement has fallen in disuse, as it has not a reason of being and has achieved a good part of its fundamental purposes.
From that point of view, the function of cinema and television is different nowadays: This infantilism is convenient, without doubts, for the leading figures of our society: La prise de pouvoir par Louis XIV Roberto Rossellini, For achieving a cultural promotion at the service of the people, the diverse television stations at least those from the statethe parliamentary control organs and the unions should put into practice new procedures for the television shows to contribute to the democratization of the country.