Rethinking the Model of Production

Ratings for the major television networks are shrinking while programming costs rise. Viewers have defected in droves, especially over the summer, when reruns struggle to keep audiences from straying to cable or videos.

What, short of popping Prozac or securing all the strings on one’s golden parachute, is a TV executive to do?

Fred Silverman, once network television’s best-traveled programmer, thinks he has an answer: a relatively inexpensive prime-time serial set in and around the music industry. Tentatively titled “Big Rock,” the show would be able to offer viewers an original episode every week throughout the year.

Costing about half as much as the average prime-time drama, the program would be shot for a reasonable price, without the deficit spending associated with most programs. There would be no need for the customary reruns, meaning no drought during the summer, when network viewing has slid to precipitous lows.

Thanks to foreign sales (soap operas enjoy vast popularity in parts of Europe, and in Latin America under the heading telenovelas), the series could achieve a profit immediately, instead of the usual wait to cash in selling reruns in syndication.

“For as long as I can remember, people have been saying we have to find a way to attack program costs,” Silverman says. “Everyone makes the speeches, and year after year it remains the same.”

“Big Rock” is being developed for the Fox network and at this point may never escape that labyrinthine process. Still, Silverman’s call to transform talk into action represents the latest in a chorus of voices saying that prime-time’s financial structure must change dramatically if traditional comedies and dramas are to avoid being displaced any further by newsmagazines and pseudo documentaries culled from the work of amateur videographers.

Silverman, who headed the programming departments at all three major networks before making the transition to producing, is convinced “Big Rock,” or something like it, can help derail that trend. His partner in this venture, onetime MGM/UA Chairman Lee Rich, has an equally lengthy resume, having been associated with such programs as “The Waltons” and “Knots Landing” when he ran Lorimar.

The two have devised a production scheme designed specifically to alter the pattern followed on most one-hour series, bringing some of the discipline associated with daytime soaps to prime-time production.

After the initial start-up costs, “Big Rock’s” budget would run roughly $600,000 per hour, less than half the price for many prime-time shows. Instead of seven or eight days, episodes would be shot in three or four days, with 13 scripts blocked out well in advance so all shooting in a single location could be done for multiple episodes at a time.

As for actors, a large ensemble cast would be paid a little above union scale, although they would also be guaranteed twice as many episodes as an average show. Most prime-time series turn out between 22 and 26 episodes per year.

According to Silverman, who discusses the idea with the fervor of either a brilliant salesman or someone who has experienced a true epiphany, keeping the show on track financially would require producers to take a hard line with actors who sought the $1-million-an-episode salaries paid to the likes of “Mad About You’s” Paul Reiser and Helen Hunt or “Home Improvement’s” Tim Allen. The executive alluded to his early days in daytime television, where soap opera characters either died or disappeared and were replaced by another performer.

“You have to take a really tough stand,” he says. “When someone gave us a hard time when I was working in daytime, we recast. In other words, don’t give the store away. . . . You’re just establishing a whole new set of ground rules.”

At this juncture, there’s no assurance the cameras on “Big Rock” will ever roll. The project started percolating at Fox under former president Peter Roth, which leaves Silverman and his comrades waiting for the new regime to determine if they want to go ahead with the program, which could conceivably premiere this summer. Networks are currently evaluating candidates for next season, with their revised lineups to be announced in May.

Even so, the concept reflects a heightened sense of urgency in some quarters to tackle the challenges plaguing network television. Increasingly, it’s no longer seen as mere exaggeration or labor posturing when someone observes, as Silverman puts it, “the industry has to start taking a stand on this, or there isn’t going to be an industry as it’s presently constituted.”

“Big Rock” has its roots in the fact that serials like “Beverly Hills, 90210” and “Melrose Place” draw a loyal audience but rerun so poorly they can’t be repeated in prime time. Fox, as a result, has been forced to take both shows off the air in recent years from the end of May until September.

From a creative standpoint, Silverman and Rich have enlisted producer Charles Rosin, who oversaw the first five seasons of “90210,” to work with writer Julie Sayres. Rosin saw the wisdom in trying to construct a program conceptually around a certain economic structure, instead of pulling out all the stops to sell the network on a prototype for the series, then wrestling to deliver regular episodes on a weekly basis that look as good for considerably less.

“It was very clear that if hour dramas were going to survive, there had to be new forms,” Rosin says. “What attracted me was the whole format of doing a TV show in which you say going in, this is the money you have, and then figuring out how to make it work for an audience.”

Attempting to make comedies and dramas for less amounts to a defensive maneuver by the suppliers of such fare, who are occupying less space on the major broadcasters than they have. Of the 81 hours in prime time offered weekly by ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, nearly a quarter are now devoted to newsmagazines and so-called reality programs such as “Cops” and “America’s Funniest Home Videos.”

The increase in these programs reflects a network response to declining profits--brought about by lower ratings as well as wildly escalating costs for hit shows and sports rights. Series such as “World’s Wildest Police Videos” and “Kids Say the Darndest Things” score respectable ratings despite significantly lower budgets, helping harried programmers balance the cost of their prime-time lineups.

Newsmagazines like “Dateline NBC” and “20/20” have proliferated for the same reason, with five editions of the NBC program now scheduled each week. News shows can be produced for about half the price of a dramatic hour, and networks can generally provide at least some fresh segments throughout the year. Last summer, newsmagazines routinely accounted for half a dozen of the Top 10 most-watched programs.

Finding a way to do more traditional entertainment at competitive rates, with fewer reruns, might allow producers to reclaim some lost prime-time real estate. Sitcoms and dramas also offer networks the opportunity to catch lightning in a bottle and capture viewers in numbers that news shows are hard-pressed to match. That was demonstrated again recently by NBC’s “Providence.” The drama, which made its debut in January, increased viewership by roughly 60% in a Friday time slot where “Dateline” previously resided.

Studios USA, the production venture under the aegis of mogul Barry Diller, has undertaken its own cost-oriented initiatives. The company kept the Fox science-fiction series “Sliders” alive, for example, by moving it to the Sci-Fi Channel and slashing the program’s overhead by a third--altering the cast and placing more emphasis on story than special effects.

The studio is also developing a pilot titled “Beat Cops” that would mix the cinema verite style of the Fox series “Cops” with improvisational and scripted comedy. The series could be shot for roughly $300,000 per half-hour, drastically less than an average comedy.

Studios USA President Ken Solomon maintains TV studios must begin to emulate the independent film business, allocating a portion of their development to low-budget fare and nurturing projects internally before shopping them to a network.

By necessity, reducing costs entails giving a chance to unproven talent, breaking (or at least bending) the network habit of repeatedly calling upon producers of an existing hit like “Frasier,” “Friends” or “Home Improvement” in search of the next sensation.

“To do this you have to challenge a lot of sacred cows,” Solomon says. “The real stumbling block is the process. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. As [the networks] continue to use people again and again, their price goes up.”

Jeff Sagansky, the former CBS Entertainment president now responsible for start-up network Pax TV, has followed a similar model in creating programs for that venture. While Pax relies primarily on reruns of such shows as “Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman” and “Touched by an Angel,” the channel is airing the original series “Little Men”--a 19th century drama based on the Louisa May Alcott novel. The program looks just as good as “Medicine Woman,” Sagansky notes, for less than $750,000 per episode.

The key, he says, is to return to the way series were done when he started his career in the mid-1970s. Then, an executive producer oversaw production with a story editor, hiring freelancers and doing without the dozen or so writers most series employ in staff positions. Sagansky also hopes to find new faces instead of turning to established stars, who--between higher salaries, producer credits for their managers and other requisite perks--can add $150,000 or more to weekly costs.

Sagansky also intends to streamline the development process, finding a script he believes in and going straight to series production, eliminating the intervening stages of producing and testing numerous pilot episodes before deciding which will become a series. While there’s a comfort level in tapping big-name talent, Sagansky suggests that and other facets of the present system are often luxuries the industry can no longer afford.

“In the end [using well-known stars and writers] may make you feel good, but the only thing that’s going to help you there is your ability to make hits,” he says. “It’s certainly easier that way, but at some point, the convenience curve and cost curve intersect.”

While some question if the networks have gotten that message, they do appear to be taking to heart the necessity of employing different strategies in how they develop programming and what they spend. ABC, for example, has contemplated creating lower-cost series to broadcast Saturdays, a night on which ratings have long suffered.

Along the same lines, NBC is looking for an action show that would fit with “The Pretender” and “Profiler” on Saturdays--one the network would own and sell overseas, meaning even modest ratings could support production. The network has also challenged convention with a plan to produce TV movies on a “scale plus 10%” basis that would greatly reduce the total spent on talent fees.

“They all understand the need to find other ways to produce programs that don’t cost them $1 million an episode,” says Alan Berger, executive vice president at talent agency International Creative Management. “You can’t justify that in certain time periods anymore.”

That economic climate has prompted the networks to pay more attention to cable and syndication, where one-hour action shows are usually shot for much less. Because the major studios also produce many of those programs, including series such as “Xena: Warrior Princess” and “Hercules, the Legendary Journeys,” insiders say they must begin to bring that frugality to the programs they supply the major networks.

In fact, there were reports last year that at least one network asked about acquiring “La Femme Nikita,” a series on cable’s USA Network. Network executives took notice of the show due to its loyal following within the cable universe and moderate price tag.

Cable networks have also taken the lead experimenting with different genres, including the little-seen variety format, once a staple of prime time. Examples range from magicians Penn and Teller’s program on the FX network to USA’s upcoming “Happy Hour,” a show the network compared to “Dean Martin Presents the Golddiggers,” only hosted by Dweezil and Ahmet Zappa.

Finding ways to produce shows more cheaply won’t be of any value, of course, unless those programs satisfy viewers.

“The audience doesn’t care about our financial problems,” Rosin says. “The audience cares about being entertained.”

Still, what would probably be the most effective approach to keeping viewers happy--simply offering more episodes of the series they like--often isn’t possible logistically. Programs such as “The X-Files,” “NYPD Blue” and “ER” require nearly 10 months to produce 22 episodes, working on eight-day shooting schedules.

Even half-hour comedies, which don’t rely on special effects or elaborate action sequences, labor to exceed their current production pace.

Phil Rosenthal, creator of CBS’ burgeoning hit “Everybody Loves Raymond,” turned down CBS’ request this season to increase the number of episodes produced from 26 to 28. In his view, trying to wring any more scripts out of the writing staff could ultimately dilute the final product.

“Raymond” delivered 22 episodes its first season, and Rosenthal says just the four extra installments have noticeably heightened the workload. Adding to the existing order would extend production well into May, leaving only a few weeks for the producers to recharge before starting to prepare for next fall.

“You feel every single episode,” Rosenthal says. “You don’t want to burn out. You want to keep the show fresh and good. You want to have a life, so you have something to write about.”

Having a few programs other than newsmagazines that could play year-round, as Silverman advocates, would provide continuity and potentially help resist some of the viewer drain experienced during the summer. For years, those months were left to reruns, passed-on series pilots and left-over episodes of canceled shows.

Though the networks have conceded they must air more fresh programming after the May sweeps and NBA basketball playoffs end, introducing new series between June and August--when viewing levels traditionally drop--has proven to be an uphill battle.

Whether or not “Big Rock” comes to fruition, Silverman contends its framework has become inevitable--a fact he has incorporated into his sales pitch, in case anyone from Fox and the other networks happen to be listening.

“It’s got to happen. If it’s not this show, it’ll be another show,” he says. “I know if I was [at the network], I would buy it. . . . We’re not doing a show about Japanese hieroglyphics here. It’s a very, very commercial idea.”