All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Beyond Ratings or Quality. Surpassing the Dilemma of Entertainment in Public Broadcasting
Unformatted Document Text:  20 In this article I have argued that by identifying ‘enjoyers’ as a third group of viewers in addition to the two groups commonly identified (citizens and consumers), program makers and managers in public broadcasting can more easily move beyond the difficult dilemma of ratings versus quality. The mission of public television in the Netherlands and other European countries is to produce quality programs for everybody and this opens up opportunities for a more relative view of quality. This applies to the distinction between high and low culture, which makes it possible to talk about the quality of entertainment in the first place, and to the insight that quality depends on the language you speak. When quality discourse is dominated by artistic and marketing languages that focus on either content or ratings, it obscures the significance of the implied impact of programs on viewers. By differentiating between five quality idioms (the marketing, artist, artisan, teacher, and moderator vocabularies), it becomes possible to conceptualize a broader range of program quality dimensions compared with the quality dimensions of Albers and Leggatt. The distinction of these five repertoires not only opened up a more finely tuned analytical understanding of professional quality. Acknowledging these vocabularies in the actual practice of making programs for public networks is - as many interviewees assured us after reading the draft research report - likely to cause less conflict and confusion between program makers and network managers and will enable more sustained and productive interactions on program quality. The combination of the five quality vocabularies and the three audience groups we identified above (citizen, ‘enjoyer’, and consumer) results in a multidimensional framework in which the various quality aspects of entertainment programs come into view:

Authors: Meijer, Irene.
first   previous   Page 20 of 27   next   last



background image
20
In this article I have argued that by identifying ‘enjoyers’ as a third group of viewers in
addition to the two groups commonly identified (citizens and consumers), program
makers and managers in public broadcasting can more easily move beyond the
difficult dilemma of ratings versus quality. The mission of public television in the
Netherlands and other European countries is to produce quality programs for
everybody and this opens up opportunities for a more relative view of quality. This
applies to the distinction between high and low culture, which makes it possible to
talk about the quality of entertainment in the first place, and to the insight that quality
depends on the language you speak. When quality discourse is dominated by artistic
and marketing languages that focus on either content or ratings, it obscures the
significance of the implied impact of programs on viewers. By differentiating between
five quality idioms (the marketing, artist, artisan, teacher, and moderator
vocabularies), it becomes possible to conceptualize a broader range of program
quality dimensions compared with the quality dimensions of Albers and Leggatt. The
distinction of these five repertoires not only opened up a more finely tuned analytical
understanding of professional quality. Acknowledging these vocabularies in the
actual practice of making programs for public networks is - as many interviewees
assured us after reading the draft research report - likely to cause less conflict and
confusion between program makers and network managers and will enable more
sustained and productive interactions on program quality.
The combination of the five quality vocabularies and the three audience
groups we identified above (citizen, ‘enjoyer’, and consumer) results in a
multidimensional framework in which the various quality aspects of entertainment
programs come into view:


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 20 of 27   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.