Feeling abused by the monolithic power of the major
television networks and studios, an organization of Hollywood writers, producers and
directors is hoping to curb what they see as unprecedented network interference in
creative decision-making by drafting a bill of rights for people working in those areas.
The Caucus for Producers, Writers and Directors, an honorary organization consisting of
roughly 170 members, has taken this step to shed light on ever-greater control network
executives wield. The encroachment into their creative turf, the caucus says, has grown
more onerous as the television industry consolidates through mergers and acquisitions.
Complaints about such intrusion include network executives vetoing relatively minor
supporting actors in a TV movie, mandating where projects are shot or participating in the
editing process. One producer recalled a middle-level executive demanding that a segment
of music be changed because he didnt like it.
Caucus leaders harbor few illusions about their position in this David and Goliath
struggle, saying their only chance is to shame the networks enough to establish a dialogue
on the issue. The effort nevertheless signals the first organized resistance to the
increased control networks now exercise over all stages of production and distribution.
"The only thing they will respond to
is the suasion created by public
embarrassment about the way they do business," said caucus chairman Jerry Isenberg, a
former network and studio executive who now serves as a professor at the USC School of
Cinema-Television.
This effort to better define the parameters of producers rights occurs at a time
of wrenching change in the way business is conducted in television, some suggest to the
detriment of what gets on the air. Only one in six of last seasons new prime-time
series survived to see a second year, and some within the industry lay part of the blame
on greater interference by the networks in creative matters.
Many producers nevertheless remain reluctant to publicly criticize network practices,
fearing reprisals in the form of refusing to buy programs from them. The fact some are now
speaking out underscores the frustration that has welled up within their ranks.
A portion of the production communityincluding several onetime network
executivesfeel the level of network involvement in creative matters has never been
worse. Producers contend the arbitrary exercise of power by network executives over who
gets to produce, write and direct has homogenized programming in assembly-line fashion,
inhibiting the development of risk-taking fare broadcasters need to compete in
todays environment.
"Quality gets diluted by the amount of interference in all directions," said
Fay Kanin, an Emmy-winning writer and former president of the Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences. Kanin said she doesnt expect change overnight, but "if we
make enough noise, I think we can get it into peoples consciousness."
The caucus will circulate its bill of rights to the talent guilds representing
producers, writers and directors and plans to gradually begin documenting where networks
have meddled excessively in creative affairs.
"When I was at the network, we respected producers because we assumed they might
know something about that particular project that we might not know," said Dennis
Doty, an ABC veteran who, with partner Gilbert Cates, is producing this years
Academy Awards. "Its not that way today. You have people telling you, "You
cant have that cameraman. You cant use that editor."
Producers have chafed about networks appropriating their traditional authority by
dictating minute elements of a production. Sources say networks frequently reject a writer
director or actor based on preconceived notions without considering their body of work.
"Its pretty bad," added Fred Silverman, who ran the programming
divisions at all three major networks before becoming an independent producer. "There
are exceptions if youre Steven Bochco or David Kelley, but for the average producer
or writer, its very difficult."
Amendments in the bill of rights seek to delineate the producers role in
selecting who works on a project, protecting their ability to shape scripts and put forth
a diversity of ideas.
A frequently cited example of abuse involves a producer told he could produce a
two-hour prototype for a CBS series, based on Louis LAmour novel, only if he agreed
to do so in concert with the network. CBS officials then overruled him on numerous aspects
of the production, including the director and cast, before finally opting to bury the
project.
Networks have increased control as they have become the producer as well as the
broadcaster of programming. ABC and Fox are both aligned with major studios in Disney and
News Corp., respectively, and NBC and CBS have aggressively sought to keep pace by owning
programs they broadcast.
For more than 20 years, networks were prohibited by federal rules from extracting an
ownership stake in a program as a condition of putting it on the air. In 1995, those
restrictions were phased out. The same year Disney acquired ABC and Westinghouse bought
CBS, as the TV industry rapidly contracted into a few players structured to control all
aspects of production and distribution.
Adjusting to meet this shifting business model has fueled acrimony within the industry.
Several veteran television producers have given up on the business saying they are not
longer able or willing to endure the dictatorial manner and tougher financial deals
associated with producing for the networks.
"The business has changed so much in the last three to four seasons, I think
its a good thing to re-define who does what and to whom [because] the balance is out
of whack," said director Michael Zinberg, who previously oversaw in-house production
for NBC. "I hope the networks say, Maybe our [ratings] arent so strong
that a singular point of view is working. I hope this starts a dialogue."
Officials at the major networks declined comment, but network sources say those
complaining have watched the industry pass them by and refuse to recognize how television
has changed. The networks frequently point to an explosion of new channels offering
producers innumerable outlets to sell programming.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, one network executive called the campaign
"ludicrous," saying these producers are honoring a time-honored tradition by
blaming the networks for their own failings.
"What theyre really saying is were not buying enough of their
ideas," he said.
Many of those within the caucus are of a different generation, having made their
fortune when just three networks ruled the landscape in the 1960s and 70s.
Formed 25 years ago, the caucus has historically lobbied to protect the interests of
independent producers on matters ranging from censorship of content to the right to own
and profit from programs they produce.
The emphasis on creative rights doesnt resonate strongly with many younger
producers and executives. While the caucus membership includes Aaron Spelling, David
L. Wolper, Marcy Carsey and the producers of such show as "JAG," "Dr.
Quinn, Medicine Woman" and "Coach," relatively few of those currently
hailed as the industrys top series producers are listed among its ranks.
One producer who has quit the group characterized its actions as "toothless"
and a waste of time, clinging to a past that no longer exists.
"Now that the government has said the networks can do whatever they want, they are
going to do whatever they want. Its all bout the bottom line," he said.
"You get used to it, or you do something else."