Media giants are growing but not necessarily winning

Despite the hoopla that surrounded last month’s Federal Communications Commission rule-making letting the few big companies that control most of the media grow even bigger, it will do little to alter the shape of the television industry -- a point worth pondering as we prepare to celebrate another Independence Day while watching the slow eradication of independent program suppliers.

Still, at times you have to wonder what those leviathans that have brought production, distribution and exhibition under their corporate umbrellas have truly gained -- and what the public might have lost -- as they force-feed networks and TV stations programs from sister studios, not just in prime time but daytime, late-night and early-evening syndication.

While it’s taken for granted that TV’s oligopoly wants to further consolidate its power, it’s equally clear that networks aren’t any more adept at tapping into the public zeitgeist when production stays all in the family. In fact, the ratio of shows that stick around at least four seasons -- generally the cutoff to be deemed a hit, ensuring there will be enough episodes to run in perpetuity -- has consistently stayed around one in six since the early 1990s. Although a hit can pay for a lot of flops, that percentage wouldn’t exactly qualify for the hall of fame, or even the Dodgers’ batting order.

Now that the major companies have become their own best sources of programming, that also means they take it on the chin twice with each failure, losing money as the producer and exhibitor.

This is often discussed in relation to prime time -- with a coalition going so far as to petition the government to set aside space for independent producers -- but is seldom mentioned in regard to areas such as daytime, where the hunt for the next “Oprah” usually results in single-named also-rans like “Iyanla” or “Ananda.”

The derivative road to hoped-for riches is littered with such entries from companies affiliated with the stations airing them, including struggling franchises like “The Other Half,” NBC’s version of “The View” with dudes, and the low-rated talk show “Wayne Brady,” which, by the grace of Disney’s relationship with ABC-owned stations, is returning for another year. Already canceled was “Rob Nelson,” Fox’s ill-fated attempt to do “Donahue” by employing someone with darker hair but less charisma, and Tribune’s “Beyond With James Van Praagh,” whose host, a spiritual medium, should have foreseen its demise and not even bothered. Understandably, entities like Viacom, News Corp. and Tribune, which also owns the Los Angeles Times, want to provide themselves programs so they can collect profits from hits and guard against being raked over the coals as badly when the time comes to renew the next “Friends” or “ER.”

Yet such clear-cut winners are more elusive than ever -- while the red ink flowing from losers can quickly soar into the millions, which starts to add up even if you’re Rupert Murdoch or Sumner Redstone. That has prompted some to wonder if TV’s inbreeding is taking its toll, spurring cautious executives to be more so because of the financial double-whammy they endure with each misfire.

Pointing to that fear-driven climate, many producers insist that having independent suppliers involved fosters better programs, although it’s arguable whether that’s the case. After all, home-grown series such as NBC’s “Will & Grace” (from NBC Studios) and CBS’ “Everybody Loves Raymond” (whose producers include CBS Productions) rank among prime time’s biggest hits.

What’s undeniable, however, is that programming sources continue to dwindle, as the handful of major players still standing amasses more channels and larger herds of TV stations. Just compare the landscape with a decade ago, when the 10 biggest groups -- as measured by how much of the country their stations reach -- controlled 76 outlets. Today, the top 10 own more than 260 -- a figure destined to rise unless Congress blocks the FCC guidelines from taking effect.

At the same time, producers and distributors are disappearing faster than the new “Harry Potter” book is flying off shelves. Recently Hearst Entertainment significantly scaled back its operations, and Big Ticket Television -- a Viacom division that gave the world, among other things, “Judge Judy” -- was folded into sister Paramount Television. Then there’s Vivendi Universal, which, in auctioning itself to the highest bidder, promises to further constrict the programming pipeline.

As companies get swallowed or fall by the wayside, the idea that networks and stations look to themselves for programming almost becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, since just a few players are still in the game. At this point, the only question is whether the survivors can deal fairly with each other, allowing them to order shows from outside sources and expand their search for hits beyond the confines of their own studio lots.

Of course, with units of AOL Time Warner and Fox producing 31 and 28 series, respectively, of the 117 scheduled in prime time this fall respectively, the fact that many of those shows will air on competing networks won’t put independents back in business; still, it’s at least preferable to the incestuous scenario that occurred last year, when 90% of ABC’s new-series candidates came from Disney.

The big, meanwhile, will inevitably find ways to get bigger. As Dennis FitzSimons, Tribune’s chief executive, stated in a memo following the FCC ruling, “We’ve said all along that building scale is important to our future -- that to compete effectively and grow we will look to be a consolidator in the media industry. Now there will likely be more opportunities to expand, particularly in television.”

Listening to the media conglomerates tell it, this appetite for growth is practically patriotic -- something Viacom and Fox selflessly undertake so they can better provide viewers expensive programming, like “Big Brother 4” and “Paradise Hotel.” By this logic, they need more TV stations to preserve our TV-watching way of life, a gift all neatly wrapped in red, white and blue.

Well, the FCC bought it, anyway, and with shows like “Wayne Brady” and “Beyond,” I can certainly see where the red is coming from. I’m just not so sure about the white and the blue.

Brian Lowry’s column appears Wednesdays. He can be reached at brian.lowry@latimes.com.