Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I heard this on NPR the other day and I thought about posting it. But I think I have PC outrage overload. I just want to get myself frozen and only thawed out when it's all over. It WILL end won't it? PLEASE tell me it will end!!
Almost every show on TV today has the obligatory mixed race couple and gay characters. Not that either bothers me, but in 17th and 18th century English pieces?
Yes. This really bugs me. Should we put a certain percentage of Asians and Middle Easterners in a production of Roots?
The protest is about economics, The not race.
PBS has become THE network for documentaries at a time when the documentary as entertainment is extremely popular, possibly more popular than it has ever been in the past.
And with fewer places to exhibit their movies. There was a time when ABC, CBS and NBC all aired documentaries, and in the 60s, they were popular movie features. All that is gone now, leaving only PBS as the network that has lots of documentary programming.
So there are lots of big fish who want to own the same small pond now. And many more small fish who want to become bigger fish in the same small pond.
Ken Burn's shows always spike viewership and boost viewer support. In return, Burns gets a lot of guaranteed contracts and fat advances. If he has a big series, he gets a lot of big time.
But Burns isn't the only documentary producer out there, and is not the only one who's made PBS lotsa money. The doc series Eyes On Prize was both prize-winning and highly successful, and was a competitor's product who hasn't gotten another easy prime-time slot since then. That's become too common; one winning series and that's it, except for Ken.
The documentary industry are all a bunch of lone wolves; that's why they make the movies they make. When the relationship between PBS and Burns became too cozy, the PBS execs should have known someone would begin making some noise about it.
Personally, the way I see it is Ken Burns does so well because he picks material everyone wants to watch. Not just some of us. Almost all of us.
Then, when he does a good job of it, he turns out a most excellent documentary series. Sometimes, he swings and misses, but Burns never strikes out.
For a network, that's a producer who's hard to beat and good to invest in.
Netflix is PBS' primary competition in the documentary business and isn't so picky because it doesn't have to be. I reckon that's the place for the beginners, and when they do well on Netflix, they won't have such problems getting some air time on PBS.
The protest is about economics, The not race.
PBS has become THE network for documentaries at a time when the documentary as entertainment is extremely popular, possibly more popular than it has ever been in the past.
And with fewer places to exhibit their movies. There was a time when ABC, CBS and NBC all aired documentaries, and in the 60s, they were popular movie features. All that is gone now, leaving only PBS as the network that has lots of documentary programming.
So there are lots of big fish who want to own the same small pond now. And many more small fish who want to become bigger fish in the same small pond.
Ken Burn's shows always spike viewership and boost viewer support. In return, Burns gets a lot of guaranteed contracts and fat advances. If he has a big series, he gets a lot of big time.
But Burns isn't the only documentary producer out there, and is not the only one who's made PBS lotsa money. The doc series Eyes On Prize was both prize-winning and highly successful, and was a competitor's product who hasn't gotten another easy prime-time slot since then. That's become too common; one winning series and that's it, except for Ken.
The documentary industry are all a bunch of lone wolves; that's why they make the movies they make. When the relationship between PBS and Burns became too cozy, the PBS execs should have known someone would begin making some noise about it.
Personally, the way I see it is Ken Burns does so well because he picks material everyone wants to watch. Not just some of us. Almost all of us.
Then, when he does a good job of it, he turns out a most excellent documentary series. Sometimes, he swings and misses, but Burns never strikes out.
For a network, that's a producer who's hard to beat and good to invest in.
Netflix is PBS' primary competition in the documentary business and isn't so picky because it doesn't have to be. I reckon that's the place for the beginners, and when they do well on Netflix, they won't have such problems getting some air time on PBS.
I was going to say, there is netflix, Amazon prime and of course....youtube plus some others I probably am unaware of.
As you note, Burns has a well deserved fan base due to his generally excellent work. If someone makes great documentaries on other platforms, they'll get their shot.
However, your first sentence is obviously colored by your politics. It's not about race?
Quote:
Such an arrangement leaves less room for filmmakers of color, who may struggle to gain similar funding or promotional support. And while PBS has created an initiative to elevate newly emerging filmmakers of color, such initiatives can also create a false narrative that non-white artists are predominantly lacking in experience
I was going to say, there is netflix, Amazon prime and of course....youtube plus some others I probably am unaware of.
As you note, Burns has a well deserved fan base due to his generally excellent work. If someone makes great documentaries on other platforms, they'll get their shot.
However, your first sentence is obviously colored by your politics. It's not about race?
Personally, I think the argument is much more about money than race. Racial arguments seem to attract money, so it's pushed, but money is the real issue. I don't thing anyone sets out to get rich making documentaries, but the money can sure help those folks keep doing what they do.
I enjoy the PBS stuff a lot and watch it often.
I really don't care who produces the documentaries.
don't think my preferences are colored by my politics, as I enjoy watching a doc about fishing as much as one that's historical or one that's topical. Politics makes for good subject matter, but so do many other things.
I loved the Hemingway character in Woody Allen's "Midnight in Paris". Who needs a documentary when you have Corey Stoll playing a dead-panned Hemingway? Loved it. Loved it. Loved it.
Personally, I think the argument is much more about money than race. Racial arguments seem to attract money, so it's pushed, but money is the real issue. I don't thing anyone sets out to get rich making documentaries, but the money can sure help those folks keep doing what they do.
I enjoy the PBS stuff a lot and watch it often.
I really don't care who produces the documentaries.
don't think my preferences are colored by my politics, as I enjoy watching a doc about fishing as much as one that's historical or one that's topical. Politics makes for good subject matter, but so do many other things.
It might be about money, but they're using racism accusations as a weapon.
Do you know why if someone puts a noose in a black family's yard why the charges against them wouldn't just be "littering" ?
It's because racial attacks create division and hatred, hence why hate crimes also carry extra weight and there are laws for discrimination and so forth too.
So, I'm not exactly enamored with you blithely dismissing false divisive claims of racism (for profit) as merely some sort of negotiating tool.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,729,034 times
Reputation: 10256
PBS used to rely, heavily, on the BBC for programming, including documentaries. BBC America gets priority now, so PBS has had to broaden their net.
I do feel that Ken Burns gets too much time. Some of his subject matter isn't that appealing. His Civil War series was a great disappointment. If he had changed the name to The Army of the Potomac it would have been more appropriate.
March is supposed to be Women's History Month. It certainly isn't on PBS. Years ago they used to air a documentary on Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B Anthony and another about Eleanor Roosevelt, but haven't aired either in years. Ken Burns doesn't do documentaries about women, so PBS ignores Women's history month.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
