Changing the Mix of PBS Programs : Public television: Programming chief Jennifer Lawson has plans for a coordinated prime-time schedule--a first. The plan has the grudging support of most of the system’s member stations, but it has also been roundly criticized.

When the Public Broadcasting Service trims its children’s series “Wonderworks” to once a month instead of once a week this fall, the move will be more than just a routine cutback.

The change, made at the behest of PBS programming chief Jennifer Lawson, signals a new era for public television, one in which a single executive controls decisions that were once made by a consortium of public stations and their officers, and in which Hollywood, prime time and ratings are no longer dirty words.

Since the creation of the noncommercial PBS network in 1967, programming decisions have been made in an atmosphere of benign anarchy mixed with democracy. Public stations across the nation voted on which shows the system would fund and distribute, and then, once the programs were made, aired them whenever they wished.

The result was an eclectic soup that--while it might have taken months to organize--provided an alternative to mainstream fare offered by the centralized commercial networks.

Lawson, who became PBS’ executive vice president and chief programming officer last November, is working to change all that.

If Lawson prevails--and all indications are that she will--PBS in the 1991-92 season will have a coordinated prime-time schedule for the first time in its history. And the decisions on what programs to place in that schedule will have been made essentially by one person: Lawson.

The plan has won the grudging support of most of the system’s member stations, who say that something had to be done to speed up the decision-making process and to reverse PBS’ 3% loss of viewership over the past year.

It has also been roundly criticized. Some stations fear that programs they don’t want will be imposed on them. Producers at PBS stations are concerned that long-running shows might be canceled without warning. And independent producers worry that the creation of a national prime-time schedule--coupled with PBS’ increased concern for ratings--will result in a perceptible move toward mainstream programming, and away from projects that might be unique or controversial.

“For public television--America’s ultimate free speech institution--to have any single entity or person in control over the program matter is not a very good idea,” said William Baker, president of public station WNET in New York. “Right now, with decision making being so diverse, I think it turns out to be a wonderful heat shield (to protect) the programming process from undue influence” by special-interest groups.

But Lawson--with support from PBS President Bruce Christensen, who hired her and has encouraged her to make these changes--said that without a coordinated schedule and the ability to make fast decisions, public stations will be left behind as the number of television outlets grows and competition for viewers increases.

The system needs new, innovative programs, Lawson said, and as television continues to expand into areas such as cable, home video and direct broadcast satellites, someone needs to make sure public television retains its foothold.

Specifically, the changes--which have begun to be been set in motion even though they have not yet won formal approval by the PBS board of directors or the stations--would work like this:

* The national schedule would be managed by PBS. Through Lawson, PBS would take control of programming decisions ranging from choosing and funding programs to developing a coordinated broadcast schedule.

* The new program schedule would be designed with an eye toward increasing viewership. Stations would be required to adhere to the schedule during prime time.

* The Station Program Cooperative, the mechanism through which the stations have chosen what programming the loose-knit system would fund, would be disbanded. A step in that direction was taken last month, when a committee of station executives agreed to temporarily suspend the cooperative.

* The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the agency set up by Congress to fund public television and radio, would no longer provide separate funding for ongoing productions, such as “Nova” or “Frontline.” Instead, the money previously spent to augment production of those shows would go to PBS, to be handled by Lawson. Under the plan, the only funding that CPB would provide on its own would go toward the development of new programming.

* Advertising and promotion would be increased.

The loudest criticism to the plan has come from those public-television stations that produce the system’s long-running blockbuster series, such as “American Playhouse,” “Nova” and “Live From Lincoln Center.”

Producers and executives at these “producing” stations fear that Lawson may not choose to renew some of their cherished programs, or that the number of programs in a season may be cut back. And, indeed, the programming chief said in an interview that her new system was designed in part to prevent the large stations from maneuvering their programs into the schedule at the expense of new or independent projects.

“Local stations used (the old process) to promote their own series, even if they were stale,” Lawson said. “And they would not fund new series.”

Lawson said she might cut back some long-running series, but she has declined to specify which ones might be on the block. Some of PBS’ best-known shows, including “Masterpiece Theatre” and “Washington Week in Review,” have been on the air 20 years or more.

“Wonderworks” executive producer Jay Rayvid--who is also senior vice president at WQED-TV in Pittsburgh--said that his program is being trimmed at the request of PBS, and he confirmed that the changes are part of Lawson’s consolidation. For the next two years, the change from 18 one-hour programs to seven two-hour television movies does not mean that the show will suffer financially. “Wonderworks” funding has already been approved for the next two years, he said. But he remains worried about the future.

“We’re very concerned about the money,” Rayvid said. “We don’t know a whole lot about what’s going to happen.”

Still, he said, somebody had to take the first plunge. And there are some aspects of the new deal that he likes. “Wonderworks”--under the name “Wonderworks Family Movie”--will be placed on the Wednesday prime-time schedule. And as part of PBS’ new focus on media outside of broadcast television, the “Wonderworks” producers--a consortium that includes KCET Channel 28 in Los Angeles, along with WQED--are developing a movie for release in U.S. theaters. Some of the two-hour TV movies already in production will be released in theaters overseas by the consortium’s British and European partners.

Christopher Ridley, spokesman for WGBH in Boston, which produces “Nova” and “Frontline,” said that the producing stations are willing to concede power to Lawson, but are lobbying for the right to vote on her schedule after it is proposed.

In addition, Ridley said, the stations want to retain at least part of the old system. The idea, he said, is for PBS to allow them to keep some of their funding, which they could then pool together to buy programs that Lawson did not wish to pick up.

Sharon Rockefeller, president of WETA in Washington, said that some stations are considering selling their programs to cable networks if Lawson does not pick them up.

“I think it would be a terrible shame if that happened,” Rockefeller said. “But there is still a bottom-line business need at public-television stations, which might cause some to go to a cable outlet.”

Larry Daressa, chairman of the National Coalition of Independent Public Broadcasting Producers, said that he fears the consolidation will push public-TV programming too close to the mainstream.

“They’ve decided they want a larger audience, and they think the only way to do it is to move to the center,” Daressa said. “Prime time is this fetish with them. They are absolutely convinced that they’ve got to win back that prime-time audience.”

There is some truth to Daressa’s claim. Like the commercial networks, public television has lost viewers to cable, home video and independent stations. And while public stations do not depend on advertisers who watch every ratings point, a loss in viewers means a loss in potential subscribers, and that could mean less money for the stations. PBS executives worry that it also could mean less money from Congress. If lawmakers get the idea that no one is watching public TV, they may decide to stop funding it.

“When the Reagan Administration came to power and said it wanted to eliminate federal funding for public broadcasting, the appropriation began to go down,” said William Kobin, president of KCET. “So we moved through the ‘80s with pressure on two fronts: competition for dollars and competition for viewers.”

As the pressure mounted, Kobin said, public television found itself unable to respond effectively. “This democratic structure that we had was beautiful in theory, but it developed into a very slow-moving bureaucracy,” Kobin said. “We were a dinosaur in dealing with the very fast changes of the ‘80s.”

The result was a systemwide decision, two years ago, to explore the possibility of centralizing programming power, an experiment that led to the hiring of Lawson and her plan for a coordinated prime-time schedule. By sheer force of personality, the 44-year-old Lawson has managed to put much of her system into place even before the final vote in November.

Lawson makes no bones about her goals. Yes, she said, the big stations may lose some power. Yes, the programs may go more toward the mainstream--that’s the whole point.

“We are interested in reaching out to the broadest number of people,” she said. “We are not narrowcasting here.”