People start by looking at how they're going to distinguish their show.
There's the template that evolved on the Carson show, with a monologue, a
comedy piece, and three guests, as well as a band and an announcer who
serves as sidekick. Sometimes the people doing the show implement the
variations; other times they're dictated by the network or the people doing
the preceding show. The template evolved for a reason, though, and shows
often drift to that state of equilibrium. (For instance, the host will find
he or she needs someone to play off of. If it's not the announcer, it will
be the bandleader, or the producer, or the security guard, or even a robot
skeleton.)

The show will start by trying all sorts of things, and seeing what works.
If very little works, somebody else will be doing the show before too long.
If enough stuff clicks, though, the show will start doing more of the same,
and things like it, while they won't do what doesn't work. Over time, this
means that the average level of the show will become reasonably high, but
there will be less variation.

If all goes well, the show will eventually receive the sort of pickup where
they know they'll stay on the air. At that point, the focus goes from
trying to attract every possible viewer to filling four or five hours a
week. The host and staff may well decide that they want to have lives
outside the office, so they won't spend an extra hour trying to make a
comedy bit 3% better. Given the choice between spending a whole day putting
together a new segment, or spending a couple hours on a more typical piece,
they'll stick to what they know. Occasionally a new idea will strike
everybody's fancy, but it will become rarer, especially after a couple
crash and burn either before or after they make it to air.

Interviewing is rarely a new host's strongest skill. Given time, most
become acceptable at it. Some guests click with the host. Others have no
chemistry at all. There are some people who are good at being guests on
anybody's show, but even they run the danger of being overexposed. It's
easy to imagine that a host's enthusiasm for talking to third leads of
movies or TV shows will vary, and the boredom will be evident from time to
time.

So the successful show will continue to hum along at its high level. The
audience will be comfortable, and even appreciate some of the recurring
elements for their familiarity. Viewers who come along at this point,
though, might see some of that competence as disinterest.

Of course, as time passes, the host and the core staff age. (So does the
core audience that's been around from the beginning.) Some of the physical
demands that a young host would be able to meet are more of a challenge for
the older person, so the show becomes that much more static.

Pop culture will also whiz by. The entertainment industry is built around
continually selling new product. So any successful talk show will see
guests whose entire careers come and go, and if they're on the air long
enough, whole genres will emerge and then disappear. As a host and his or
her viewers age, favorite actors and musical acts will become less relevant
to the broader culture. In a less competitive era, Johnny Carson could
continue to book jazz instead of rock since that was what suited his
tastes, but a show now that didn't want to bring on a popular genre would
just be making life easier for the other guys.

Eventually, the host may decide he or she has had enough. Or the network
might decide that they'd like to go younger/hipper/cheaper. So the
announcement will be made that the show is coming to an end. As things draw
to a close, the show will be able to book favorite guests who may not even
have anything to plug. With fewer rote interviews of random actors, as well
as a good excuse to show highlights from the archives, the show will go out
at a high level, and some will ask why it couldn't be this good all the
time.

Then the next people will come along and try to distinguish themselves.

(NOTE: This is all from viewing and reading. I have no first-hand
experience inside the industry.)

-- 
-- 
TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TV or Not TV" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to