‘Hedgecock’ Producer Says Focus Groups Hurt Shows

Every few months, groups of average citizens gather in hotel conference rooms, brought together by television executives eager for the viewpoints of “real” people. From these focus groups of 60 to 70 people, television executives gleam nuggets of information that are used to determine the fate of television programs.

Almost all stations use focus groups to some degree. Besides ratings, it is the only opportunity for them to get unfiltered feedback from the public. The stations test the groups’ reactions to programs and to individuals--a negative response can scuttle the career of an anchorman faster than any drug scandal.

For example, Channel 39 used focus groups to test aspects of the “Ross/Hedgecock Report,” which was canceled Friday. General manager Neil Derrough said reaction to anchorwoman Allison Ross was quite positive; he didn’t detail reaction to other aspects of the program.

“After the first couple of focus groups (Ross/Hedgecock) took a trend toward shows about three-headed transvestite dwarfs,” said former “Ross/Hedgecock” executive producer Jack Merker, who was fired in February after a year at the helm of the show.

He said that “too many consultants spoiled the broth” in the case of “Ross/Hedgecock,” a common complaint among TV professionals, who often see focus groups and other research projects watering down and homogenizing the product.

“If the focus groups had decided they liked Roger with a runny nose on TV, then Roger would have appeared with a runny nose,” Merker said.

Focus groups, which represent the snap opinions of only a few people, naturally gravitate toward more titillating shows. This forced the program to lose its identity, so it began to alternate between such serious topics as sewage treatment and shows about strippers, Merker said.

“Focus groups are the great equalizer for those who don’t want to make a decision,” Merker said.

Focus group studies are usually conducted by consultants, the hired guns who rule television news. Considering how often stations make ridiculous decisions, the operation of these projects is something of a mystery.

I recently obtained a copy of national consultant Audience Research and Development’s “specifications and general requirements” for a Channel 39 focus group project--not one for “Ross/Hedgecock,” but one that is fairly typical of these projects.

As the guidelines make clear, this isn’t exactly rocket science.

To qualify for a focus group, each respondent “should watch a local weekday, evening newscast at least once a week,” according to the guidelines. Right off, this would taint the results, since it would seem at least reasonably interesting to hear the reactions of people who are so turned off by current TV news that they no longer watch.

For this particular study, four groups of 15 people were set up: women 21-44; men 21-44; women 45-and-over and men 45-and-over. In the world of television advertising, no other opinions matter.

Each group would contain five people who say they most often watch the KFMB-TV (Channel 8) newscasts; five who watch KGTV (Channel 10); and five who most often watch KNSD-TV (Channel 39).

A “diverse age spread” and wide “socioeconomic and occupational cross-sections” should be represented, but the guidelines offer little more than a “do what you can” approach. “No group should be weighted with respondents who reside in a single area,” it says, which seems more than a little obvious.

There are no suggestions about the ethnic makeup of the panelists, who are paid a small stipend, beyond that “each group should contain two Hispanics.” But the report also states, “We will not pay any respondent who has trouble speaking or is difficult to understand. (This includes those with a speech defect or heavy accent).”

In other words, two Hispanics should be in each group, as long as they speak English without a heavy accent.

In many areas, the guidelines are very specific, directing details of the sessions down to to the use of “tent-type name cards” and the number of pads and pencils that should be made available.

Six chairs should be set up in a “viewing room,” from which respondents can be monitored through a one-way mirror. Audio tape recorders should be placed in the rooms to record the reactions of the group, the guidelines state.

“It is preferable to use 90-minute (audio) tapes because longer tapes tend to tangle,” says the report. “Because the sessions may be longer than 90 minutes, your hostess may be required to change audio tapes mid-session.”

Food should be provided, preferably a “deli-type sandwich platter or equivalent,” according to the report. This food “should be hearty enough to satisfy the dinner requirements for a male/respondent viewer.” Apparently, ARD doesn’t believe women have hearty dinner requirements.

While details like these are probably essential to control the scene, the tone is eerily reminiscent of an elementary school teacher explaining the use of a toilet to a seven-year-old. Either that, or maybe ARD is trying to justify the exorbitant sums it charges for staging these studies.

The value of these sessions is really determined by how the executives choose to use the results, said Channel 39 general manager Neil Derrough.

“You have to be careful because you’re not dealing with a large sampling,” Derrough said. “You have to be careful not to take it as gospel, but there is no doubt they can point to trends.”

Still, it’s kind of scary that 60 people, who may have indigestion after eating a “hearty” meal, have such inordinate power to say yeah or nay on what the public gets to watch.

“There is a need for people in our business to know where the applause is coming from,” Derrough said. “We don’t. Some think they do, but they don’t.”

After all the analysis of the quirks and faults of the newly deceased “Ross/Hedgecock Report,” ultimately the weight of the failure must fall on Roger Hedgecock’s shoulders. He just never worked in the role of genial host. Even when terminally stiff Steve Kelley guest hosted, the show seemed to have more life. On the other hand, the station would be making a mistake to completely sever its ties to Hedgecock. As a commentator, Hedgecock’s neo-fascist viewpoints would certainly liven up a newscast. . . .

The May ratings didn’t bring good news for Channel 10’s “Inside San Diego.” Arbitron showed it two full ratings points below what the syndicated “Home Show” pulled in the same 10 a.m. weekday time slot last year. “The Price is Right” earned a 5 rating in Arbitron compared to “Inside San Diego’s” 2 rating.

CRITIC’S CHOICE

BORDER DOCUMENTARIES DISCUSSED AT CENTRO

For 10 years KPBS-TV producer Paul Espinosa has focused his energies on the Mexican border, the problems and prejudices that stem from the interaction of two cultures. The Centro Cultural de la Raza will host a discussion of Espinosa’s work and screen excerpts from several examples on Thursday, beginning at 7:30 p.m. Among the selections to be sampled: “The Lemon Grove Incident,” “Uneasy Neighbors” and “Ballad of an Unsung Hero.”