The 53rd annual Promax/BDA conference, which ended June 19 at the Hilton New York Hotel, came to a close reporting yet another year of increased attendance from a total of 48 different countries. But the halls still seemed somewhat empty. And the roughly 70 sessions (which also seemed less than full) ranged from the relevant — World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) chairman and CEO Vince McMahon receiving a Lifetime Achievement Award — to the mostly unrelated — the Reverend Jesse Jackson extolling the virtues of U.S. presidential hopeful Barack Obama. Promax/BDA, which purports to be about advancing the role of entertainment and information content marketing, promotion and design professionals, definitely needs to refocus its energies and get back to basics. At least in the view of some observers.

“As an industry, I think we’re at the crossroads of the most challenging, but also the most exciting time in the history of entertainment,” said Jonathan Block-Verk, Promax/BDA president, during his opening address, which began nearly 40 minutes late. “It’s not about television — it’s about entertainment and information content marketing, promotion and design.”

The three-day event, featured a wide range of keynotes, sessions and speakers, including such relevant-to-TV seminars as: “That Was Then, This is Now: The Animal Planet 2008 Relaunch,” “Case Study: Wrestlemania—24 Years of Excitement” and “Maximizing The Mothership: Getting the Most From Your Network, Station Group and Syndication Partner” and such seemingly irrelevant sessions as the aforementioned Q&A with the Reverend Jesse Jackson; an Innovation Keynote with Nicholas Negroponte, founder of the One Laptop Per Child Association, an organization that oversees the creation of affordable laptops for kids in the third world; and “Can’t Live Without My Radio!”

At the awards ceremony, where WWE’s McMahon received his Lifetime Achievement prize from Promax/BDA, the ever-humble wrestling bigwig said: “I really appreciate this extraordinary award. And you’ll probably never hear anyone else say this, but I really deserve it.”

One of the issues weighing on many attendees’ minds was the imminent February 2009 U.S. switchover to DTV. A related concern was the loss of TV households that receive TV signals over roof antennas.

During one of the few interesting presentations, “Deciphering Digital Transition,” Barry Goodstadt, senior vice president of Los Angeles-based Centris, a media market research firm, presented new findings on the decline of over-the-air (OTA) households. “An analysis of Centris data collected since early 2004 shows that the number of OTA households has declined from nearly 24 million to about 17 million in first quarter 2008, a loss of seven million OTA households,” said Goodstadt. “We estimate that with consumer choice information and the evidence of potential reception problems factored in, this number could drop to between 4-5 million once the transition has ended. This substantial reduction in the number of OTA households has serious implications for broadcasters and the TV industry.”

In other words, the transition to digital television may result in viewers’ reevaluation of how they receive their local television. And up to 13 million households might decide to get rid of off-air reception in favor of cable or satellite. If and when this happens, towers and transmitters that are currently aimed at a diminishing number of OTA viewers will be devalued, resulting in lower stock prices. Also, government regulators might have to change their views in respect to broadcast spectrum that will be used to reach only a handful of people.

Some of the most popular sessions were also the “30 Minutes With…” dialogues, which included conversations with such luminaries as Adam Stotksky, svp, Marketing and Brand Strategy, NBC Universal Sci Fi; Jakob Trollback, founder and creative director of Trollback + Company; Douglas Scott, senior partner/president of Ogilvy Entertainment; Lee Hunt, president of Lee Hunt LLC; and Dave Martin, director, Interactive Media, Ignited. These meetings gave people the opportunity to directly interact with their design and promotions mentors.

Last year’s Promax/BDA featured the keynote address by former U.S. president Bill Clinton. This year’s featured a reverend discussing the probability of Americans voting an African American into the White House. Here’s hoping that next year, conference organizers recognize that attendees were there to discuss promotions (especially TV)… not politics.

More than 25,000 people from 82 countries gathered to check out 6,000 properties and brands at the 28th annual Licensing International Expo, a three-day conference for merchandising rights holders that was be held June 10-12 at New York’s Jacob Javits Convention Center. Doug Schwalbe of Classic Media, an Entertainment Rights company, was on hand to discuss the latest trends in licensing and merchandising, whether the weakened dollar affected the Expo and why he, for one, may not attend next year’s conference, which will take place in Las Vegas, June 2-4, 2009.

VideoAge International: Why was it important for Classic Media to attend the Licensing Show this year? Was it a success?

Doug Schwalbe: It was very exciting. There was a lot more going on for us as a company this year than last year — just a lot more energy here. We’re celebrating the 60th anniversary of Casper the Friendly Ghost, as well as the 15th anniversary of VeggieTales. We’ve also been experiencing a lot of success with George of the Jungle, which is big with boys ages 6-11. We have two other shows in production: Guess with Jess, a British preschool show from Nelvana and Treehouse, and Casper’s Scare School, which we’re working on with MoonScoop in France and DQ Entertainment in India. We’re getting ready to present both to U.S. broadcasters soon. At Licensing Show, our people were taking folks through the licensing and merchandising of these and other shows, as well as through our revitalized style guides.

VAI: Have you noticed any new trends this year?

DS: The biggest trend I’ve noticed is that companies are trying to refresh classic characters. It’s a big issue for everyone involved in character licensing. We’re doing that with Casper, of course. We have the new CG Casper’s Scare School and at the same time, we’re re-launching classic Casper with a completely separate style guide. He’s living on as a hip, Halloween-themed retro property.

VAI: After last year’s safety scares with foreign-made toys, do you think things have been resolved?

DS: Absolutely. These concerns were so serious that every company worked at 110 percent to correct them. They had to do whatever they could to make sure everything was safe.

VAI: Has the weakened U.S. dollar affected the Show?

DS: It’s got to be weighing on people’s minds. The weakness of the dollar certainly doesn’t help. But prices for things that people want will still be driven by competition — not the dollar.

VAI: What do you think about the Licensing Show’s plan to relocate to Las Vegas next year?

DS: NATPE will also be in Vegas and I don’t know that two trips to Vegas are necessary for me. It’s nice to have the show in New York because you don’t have to make a big trip. You’re able to go back to your office. But as someone on the TV programming side, not the licensing side, I probably won’t travel to Vegas for a related business.

The highlight of the ninth annual Brasil TV Forum, held June 3-5 in São Paulo’s Frei Caneca Convention Center, had to be the first ever “Portuguese-Speaking Broadcasters Meeting,” which was held at the nearby Novotel Jaragua. This meeting represents a precedent as, to the best of VideoAge’s knowledge, there have never been any other, similar gatherings among broadcasters of nations that share the same language.

Broadcasters hailing from all of the nine Portuguese-speaking nations around the world, including Brazil, Portugal, Angola and Mozambique, got together to discuss technological innovations and co-production opportunities.

At the Frei Caneca Center, there were 18 exhibitors, six panels, three pitch sessions, 20 meetings (including the much-anticipated “30 Minutes With…” sessions in which directors discussed their programming and acquisition policies, as well as offered tips for producers and distributors on how best to pitch projects to acquisition execs), and a whopping 83 screenings.

Bringing together broadcasters and producers from more than 30 countries to network, share experiences and find product, this year’s Forum occupied double the space than last year’s edition. Organizers moved the event to a different floor at the centrally located Frei Caneca Convention Center hoping to make things more comfortable for attendees.

The Latin-flavored Forum drew roughly 1,200 participants — mostly hailing from Brazil, but with contingents from Canada, and for the first time this year, a delegation of eight producers from Italy, seven from Spain and 10 from Uruguay.

At the opening cocktail reception which officially kicked off the event, prizes were awarded to Brazilian production house Flamma for its children’s cartoon series Princess do Mara; to HBO for a large number of original productions made in Latin America; to Brazilian TV network RBS for encouraging local production; to Janete Clair, in memoriam, for her contribution to Brazilian dramaturgy; and to Colombia’s Fernando Gaitan, creator of Ugly Betty, which has become a hit in many countries, including the U.S. Besides the opening ceremony, Brazil’s own TV Globo organized the only other cocktail reception at the event.

Organizers of the Forum, including André Mermelstein, are hopeful that the number of Brazilian co-productions will soon soar due to new tax incentives that should soon be in place, which are designed to encourage TV channels to partner with independent producers in Brazil. Article 3 of the new Audiovisual Law allows foreign companies that sell or license programming to invest 70 percent of withholding tax due in the development or co-production of independent features, shorts, series or documentaries. The National Film Agency (Ancine) still needs to implement the rule, but locals expect it to happen in the next few months.

But even before those new incentives are available, there was big news of a co-partnership coming out of the Forum. Globo TV announced the renewal of its partnership with Portugal’s SIC for another four years. The deal gives SIC the exclusive rights to exhibit all new soap operas produced by Globo until 2012. It covers only the purchase and sale of soaps — not programming of any other kind.

Earlier this year, Forum Brasil organizers announced plans to move the event to Rio next year in order to make it more palatable to visitors, but during this week’s market, they said that the plan has, for now at least, been scrapped. Dates for next year’s event have not yet been set, but Forum Brasil 2009 will most likely take place in early June.

It looks like the entertainment industry is moving away from the realm of show business and entering into something akin to the shoe business. At NATPE, after listening to all the reasons why the industry has to scale back, to downsize, to re-tool, to face reality, to cut costs, etc., I’m convinced that this business has now become purely a question of numbers, just like shoes: a 32 small, 42 wide, and so on.

So, if this is indeed the case –– that the industry has been reduced to mere numbers — how did this happen? In effect, the industry has not changed much during recent times. What has changed, though, is management. Years ago, the sector was run by showmen. Today we have MBAs who are proud to say that they’ve been trained to run any company. To them, selling entertainment is just like selling shoes or toasters.

The new business philosophy, based on “cutting,” instead of “making,” reminds me of a studio that, in order to save $10 million annually, absorbed an acquired company and, in the process, caused $30 million per year loss in missing revenues, from what the company was making independently.

If the industry’s corporate leaders want to remove the “show” component from the show-business combination, supposedly in order to improve the bottom line, aren’t they changing the whole nature of the entertainment business?

In order to save money, the corporate suits are taking away extravagant parties to launch new programs. They want to do without the hoopla surrounding personalities connected to programs and eliminate promotional and advertising campaigns at various trade shows. But in the end, what are they getting? A dud, that’s what! Something without life, that one cannot call a “show,” but simply “content:” just like tomato paste in a can.

Plus, how do they expect that this demystified and un-eventified content is going to be sold for real money to advertising agencies, clients and international buyers?

If today’s producers, networks and international distributors are no longer allowed to be excited by their own product, how do they expect the buyers (be they advertisers or international programmers) to be excited?

The reason why American entertainment became popular throughout the world is because Hollywood relied on talent (in front and in back of the cameras and in the sales field) and… excesses! And it was those excesses that brought-in truckloads of money. For years, American distributors could sell ice to the Eskimos, because they made a “show” out of that boring thing that is snow, aka content!

I remember, years ago –– when the big independent companies roamed the television field –– a resourceful advertising and marketing executive named Doug Friedman called me into his West Los Angeles office for some advice. He had a problem to solve. His company, New World (later incorporated into Fox), had just launched a new half-hour show called Grudge Match in U.S. syndication.

The show quickly became popular among local TV station managers and the company looked for ways to monetize it on the international market, as well. Now, the premise of the show was downright silly: two people hitting each other with pillows inside a boxing ring. So, the question was: How can we position a show that is popular in the U.S. but could offend the intelligence of international buyers, let alone try to sell it to them?

The answer was to position it with a showy advertising campaign, as the craziest thing that Americans could come up with (Italians have a word for it: Americanata). And with that, Friedman was able to transform an obstacle into a sales tool, since all international buyers, who are for the most part, intellectuals, like to make fun of Americans, who they think to be simpletons. Friedman proved that, by putting some extra “show” into show business, the business can rule over most difficulties.

The industry began changing not because television took over cinemas, or cable-TV overwhelmed broadcasting, or pay-TV, or home video, or DVDs or the Internet…

The entertainment industry began to change when MBAs entered the sector, which was flush with cash. When these MBAs overtook rich TV broadcasting outlets, they began lobbying (i.e., paying) politicians in order to have relaxed rules and regulations to allow them to buy studios.

But once they did all the work, instead of TV networks buying studios, the latter ended up for the most part buying them, often without having cash, thus loading themselves with debt.

One could say that this state of affair represents the new reality that the industry has to face, but has nothing to do with show business, only with detrimental financial engineering.

In my view, to effectively deal with the problems caused by this financial “reality,” we have to force-feed the “show” back into show business.

Recently, Italian philosopher and University of Florence professor, Sergio Givone, wrote a front cover story for Roman daily Il Messaggero, stating that television is not society’s mirror, but rather an instrument to shape it. With the speed of light, I immediately (technically, immediately is faster that the speed of light) e-mailed a letter to the editor, which was promptly ignored.

Even though I’m a contributor to another section of the same paper, in Italy, one cannot challenge a front-cover story, especially one written by a noted university professor, even if, as in this case, the pundit is out of his element (i.e., television). Only if the dissenting note had been written by an even more noteworthy university professor would the letter have been accepted for publication. After all, in the Italian media world, hierarchy must be respected if not revered, and what I did was irreverent!

In that e-mail, obviously destined to end up where it belonged (i.e., a spam folder), my position was that television not only trails society, but follows it so closely as to be a slave of society’s own rules and customs. Indeed, to be successful or even accepted, television has to take into consideration when people leave their homes to go to work, when they come back, when they go to the movies or to restaurants, when they come back from vacations and even when they go to the toilets. Television follows –– it doesn’t lead –– and what the aforementioned Italian philosopher has failed to analyze is that television reflects society –– otherwise it would lose its followers.

Imagine if television programmed its key shows when potential viewers were out of their homes, stuck in their cars or on commuter trains? Picture a TV network showing a rugby match in the afternoon when housewives are home. And all this is just for the sake of shaping people’s habits!

Society’s malaise doesn’t have to be linked to television. Television should not be the scapegoat. I’d venture to say that the social, political and economic problems we’re now facing are mainly due to the inadequate, unresponsive educational system and, especially to the money-hungry and power-grabbing university system, which, ultimately, failed to spew out valid managers, politicians, regulators and public servants.

In the U.S., there are accidental firearm deaths and shoot-outs not because of television, but because people can keep rifles and pistols at arm’s length.

Michael Suman, a professor at the Department of Communication Studies at the University of California at Los Angeles, has analyzed the effects of violence on television. Suman, who has taught in Japan, Korea and China, said: “I would never want to say that the mass media does not have a powerful influence and effect on people. It does. But it is much too simplistic just to blame all of this on TV. The media in Japan is more violent than it is in the U.S. [but] if you look at Japanese society, the rates of violent crime are much lower than they are in the U.S.”

In France, Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president but not because of television coverage (after all, TV stations over there favored his opponent, the charming Segolene Royal). The same thing happened in Italy. Despite the fact that former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi owns three TV networks and, when he was in power, reportedly, influenced the three main public TV networks, he lost the 2006 election to former bureaucrat Romano Prodi.

On my side, I’ve got also a comment from MIT professor David Thorburn, who in an interview stated that, for example, the characters of the TV series Seinfeld, were mirroring [not creating, shaping or influencing, mind you] a society that was selfish, nasty, greedy and self-absorbed. “The narcissism of the era is simply reflected in the show,” he’s quoted as saying.

Certainly, television is influential. After all in the U.S. there are more TV sets than toilets! However, only when people at large are ready to accept, for example, changing gender roles, will television shows dealing with that subject, be accepted and thus popular.

In his book “Everything Bad Is Good For You,” American author Steven Johnson even argues that, “Popular culture has…grown more complex and intellectually challenging over the past 30 years…the popular media is steadily…making our minds sharper, as we soak in entertainment usually dismissed as so much low-brow fluff.”

Now, on one level, this could be interpreted as proof that TV shapes society, making it smarter. But it also dismisses the tone of the Italian professor’s negative premise that society is challenged because television –– which shapes it –– is also challenged. On the other hand, Johnson could also be stating that society has changed and television has followed it.

For all its innovative spirit, digital technology has proved to be a devastating killer of various forms of communications and methods of entertainment. And that’s only the beginning. Just imagine all the money and energy spent introducing terrestrial digital TV –– and it’s already been rendered useless, even before its implementation, by another digital development, IPTV.

Recently, much has been said about the discontinuance of Polaroid photo camera production by its manufacturer, but the latest most celebrated victim of digital technology should be the cathode-ray tube (abbreviated as CRT, and also known as the picture tube), which was replaced by the LCD in today’s TV sets. The former was produced in 1927 and commercialized in 1947. Sony discontinued its CRT manufacturing this past March. Similarly, Polaroid, which debuted in 1948 and started to decline in 2001, halted its production in 2008.

Before the disappearance of the CRT, videocassettes, which were born in 1975, practically vanished in 2003 with the increasing popularity of DVDs. But even the “modern” DVD is destined to soon fade out, eclipsed by the more versatile, compact and consumer-friendly flash memory drive, which, in turn, will be eclipsed by the mighty download. In 1998, a combination of CD, DVD and flash memory virtually replaced the floppy disk, which was introduced in 1973.

The biggest shock to the media industry, however, could have been caused by the disappearance of the audiocassette in 1993, which after only 30 years of life, was replaced by the CD. Earlier, the audiocassette replaced the LP, which itself eclipsed the 45-records popular in the 1950s.

However, of all communication gadgets, my biggest emotional anguish was caused by the loss of the typewriter. I tried to keep an electric IBM, but it became too problematic due to its size and weight, and I was forced to dispose of it. I still do, however, keep in impeccable working order my portable Olivetti manual typewriter, which was bought in 1962, when I was just 12. Just think, this beautiful thing that was the typewriter –– which came out in 1895 –– completely disappeared by the early 1990s.

One device that I don’t really miss is the telex machine. Actually, I never liked it. It made too much noise and was too time-consuming. But I must say, it was highly reliable and its service didn’t cost too much. It came into being in 1920 and went away in 1982, replaced by the fax machine. In the beginning, however, this latest device was sort of a nuisance, especially when one had to call the recipients of messages, asking them to turn their damn machines on. Today, the fax machine is being replaced by scanned pages and PDFs sent by e-mail.

And what about film cameras and projectors? The famous 8mm and super-8! Gone with the wind by the late 1990s, replaced by inexpensive video cameras. When it disappeared, the home-film camera and projector was only 58 years old.

Also disappearing are: beepers, much treasured by medical doctors, replaced by cellular phones; the Walkman, killed by various MP3 devices; and, finally, the bulky yellow pages! It has to be noted that, even though it doesn’t make sense any longer, many hospitals in New York City, for example, still provide beepers to their doctors, who have to then run to the nearest telephones to call message centers.

Going back to the Polaroid, it is certain that digital photography will soon eclipse film cameras and that satellite transmission will be replaced by broadband networks. And it’s not only that. Broadcast television will completely migrate to broadband, rendering terrestrial frequencies for that purpose unnecessary (but desirable for Wi-Max).

Strangely enough, though, only analog radio seems to standing up to digital technology, perhaps because, in case of a nuclear explosion, it’s the only technology that will be unaffected.

Another interesting aspect of analog radio is that even those receivers built in the 1930s are not only still able to operate, but are becoming highly desirable.

Besides analog radio, paper-based publications will continue to exist, because there isn’t yet a standardized way to store information for a long time. Even today, digitalized libraries are having problems keeping up with changing storage technology, to the point that much data will be lost due to obsolescence and lack of standardization.

So, where is digital technology going to take us? In my view it will create an environment where there is no longer a need for solid-state transport (like LP records, CDs or flash drives). Also, have you noticed how e-mail has reduced usage of fixed-lines phones? The Internet protocol combined with various digital devices and broadband will make all media consumption and communication smoother, seamless. All functions will be performed by a remote data bank, and the players (computers, IPTV, mobile devices, etc.) will need only to request a particular feature (documents, photos, audio and video files, etc.), including live and on-demand film and TV programs.

In effect, we’ll be moving away from a “push” TV model (typical of cable and satellite TV), to a “pull” audio-visual system where the desired program and/or service will be requested (pulled) one at a time, towards an on-demand-only model without media technologies (DVD, flash drive, fax, etc.).

With the L.A. Screenings about to start, TV executives the world over are preparing for a TV market –– albeit an organic one –– unlike all other markets. In the aftermath of the U.S. writers’ strike, this year’s Screenings will feature fewer parties from the indies (none from the studios), and there will be fewer network pilots to be screened. VideoAge checked in with Comcast International Media Group svp Duccio Donati about his plans for the Screenings, why buyers will have more time on their hands than ever before, and whether he believes that all the excesses of Hollywood will be back come L.A. Screenings 2009.

VideoAge International: What product is Comcast International bringing to the L.A. Screenings?

Duccio Donati: This year, we’re all about our reality line-up at the Screenings. We have three great show — Living Lohan, Denise Richards: It’s Complicated and Pamela (working title). Plus, we’ve just announced a new series for G4, Hurl, a high-concept show in which guys go through a series of tests and the last one to, well, hurl, wins.

VAI: Will this year’s Screenings be particularly good for the indies?

DD: Absolutely. We’ve been talking to buyers and they’ve said they’re going to have a lot more time on their hands. They’re using it have more individual meetings while they’re in L.A. Which is good for us since we’re bringing finished episodes of both Living Lohan and Denise to the Screenings. We expect to be very busy this year.

VAI: Are you focusing on any particular territories?

DD: With our high profile shows this year, we’re looking at all the major English-speaking territories.

VAI: The Screenings are somewhat different this year as a result of the Writers Guild of America strike in the U.S. How exactly will they differ from past events?

DD: There will be lots more face time with buyers [for us]. Studios won’t be kidnapping them. They’ll definitely have lots of chances to meet with the indies. They often don’t have the time because the studios tend to monopolize their time.

VAI: Will things go back to normal next year?

DD: Things will go back to the norm with respect to pilot season, despite rumors of things continuing to change. Honestly, it really all depends on what happens this year with ad revenue. Personally, I agree with what Jeff Zucker said at NATPE, about the system being broken. But there’s still a lot of resistance to changing that. Unfortunately, the only thing that will break that resistance is the almighty dollar.

Next week, buyers and sellers will descend upon Los Angeles to buy, sell and screen programming at the 2008 edition of the L.A. Screenings (to be held May 15-23). Usually, the Screenings are all about new U.S. TV series, but this year, buyers will screen all manner of programming. John Cuddihy, president and managing director of New York-based Lightworks Program Distribution Incorporating Sandra Carter Global, will be on hand at the Screenings to showcase the company’s varied slate. VideoAge spoke with Cuddihy, and his colleague, David Nunez, director of Sales, Latin America, about why the Screenings will be different this year and why 2008 ought to be especially prosperous for independents.

VideoAge International: What product is Lightworks bringing to the L.A. Screenings?

John Cuddihy: We’re very excited that we’re bringing a lot of different types of programming to the Screenings. First, there’s Hollywood Café, a weekly magazine-style talk show about Hollywood happenings, but with a Latin flavor. Then there’s Hollywood Reporter, which is about the business of Hollywood. There’s also Red Carpet Reporter, about fashion in Hollywood. We also have Out There with Melissa DiMarco, a dramedy with an actress playing the role of a journalist on the red carpet. It’s like Hollywood Reporter meets The Office.

VAI: How different will the L.A. Screenings be this year — what with fewer studio pilots to be screened?

JC: It will be a more casual affair. The studios won’t require a full day of buyers’ time. I would hope that buyers don’t try to fill the rest of their days with fluff.

David Nunez: Buyers aren’t changing their plans. They’re still coming to review programming and they’ll have a full plate of meetings. What will be different this year is the length of screenings.

VAI: So will this be an especially good year for the indies?

JC: I would imagine. There are fewer pilots to be seen, so buyers can be more flexible with their time.

VAI: What territories will you be focusing on at the Screenings?

JC: I run the entire division, across Europe, Asia and Latin America, so I’ll be focusing on all of them.

DN: The Latin American contingent is especially important at the Screenings because very few of them attend MIP-TV.

VAI: What are you most enthusiastic about for the Screenings this year?

JC: Our new shows. We’re constantly on the lookout for new shows. In addition to the shows I already mentioned, we’re also bringing Florence Nightingale, a BBC co-production that is beautifully shot in hi-definition. It was our number one requested screener at MIP-TV.

With the L.A. Screenings just weeks away, TV executives across the world are preparing to travel to sunny California for a Screenings that, in the aftermath of the Writers Guild of America strike in the U.S., has the potential to be quite a different affair from what people remember. Saralo MacGregor, executive vice president, Worldwide Distribution, for U.K.-based Fireworks International, a division of ContentFilm plc, spoke with VideoAge about why indies might fare particularly well this year, what territories the company intends to focus on, and why, despite the fact that MIP-TV and MIPCOM are wonderful markets, there’s nothing quite like the Los Angeles Screenings.

VideoAge International: What product is Fireworks bringing to the L.A. Screenings?

Saralo MacGregor: [We’re] offering over 3,000 hours of programming. New releases at the L.A. Screenings include drama series The Border and heartwarming family drama series Heartland, both of which have been renewed for second seasons. In addition, we will be showcasing brand new U.S. comedy series The Assistants from the Tom Lynch Co.

VAI: Do you think this year’s Screenings will be particularly good for the indies?

SM: Given the reduced flow of product available due to the writers strike, the indies will have an increased presence at the L.A. Screenings. The after-effects of the strike afford us a great platform to showcase our new series.

VAI: What is Fireworks going to do in order to attract buyers?

SM: Fireworks has assumed a leading position in the international program distribution field on the strength of the worldwide success of its award-winning programming. It is on the back of this that we are able to offer our buyers the very best in quality programming — programming that can be trusted to perform well in their schedules. Our rapidly expanding catalogue offers programming suitable for every type of channel.

VAI: What are your expectations for the Screenings?

SM: With between 1,300 and 1,500 international buyers scheduled to visit the Screenings this year, the market provides a tremendously valuable opportunity to showcase our new programming. The market also offers us the opportunity to follow up on meetings held at MIP-TV and to meet with our buyers face to face.

VAI: Are you focusing on any particular territories?

SM: We appreciate the opportunity to meet with all of our international buyers. But traditionally, more Latin American buyers attend this market than MIP-TV or MIPCOM, so attendance is vital.

Gene George only joined Burbank, California-based Starz Media as executive vice president, Worldwide Distribution, in January, but he already feels as if he’s been there for years. George, who previously served as president of Regent Worldwide, is participating in the L.A. Screenings in May to promote Starz’s new and existing product, as well as to see whether or not the shorter Screenings — which came about as a result of the Writers Guild of America strike in the U.S. — will be repeated next year or will fall by the wayside when things get back to business as usual. George spoke with VideoAge about Starz’s plans for the Screenings, as well as why the independents might benefit from the fact that buyers will have more time on their hands.

VideoAge International: What product is Starz bringing to the L.A. Screenings?

Gene George: We’re bringing a couple of half-hour semi-scripted comedy shows that were produced for the Starz channel in the U.S. We currently have 13 half-hours of Head Case and we greenlit another 10 episodes at MIP-TV, so we’ll have 23 half-hours. We also have eight half-hours of Hollywood Residential. Part of our initiative with our channels in the U.S. is to move into some original programming. The Starz and Encore channels had been movie destinations. But now we’re methodically and carefully exploring original programming. We’ve also partnered with Lionsgate for a series based on the movie Crash, which should debut this fall. Starz has all the U.S. rights. Lionsgate has all international rights.

VAI: How different will the Screenings be this year with fewer pilots commissioned by the networks?

GG: The Screenings will definitely be a little shortened. There’s not as much product available as there is in normal seasons. But I spoke to a number of buyers at MIP and their impression is that this could be a positive thing for a company like ours.

VAI: Do you think most indies will benefit similarly? Will this be a particularly good year for independent companies?

GG: Well, you still have to have the right product. But the Screenings will definitely not be as focused on studio product as they usually are.

VAI: Will these shortened Screenings with fewer pilots become the norm or will we go back to the way things were before?

GG: We’ll go back to the way things were before. But it really depends on how this season works out. It’s really still too early to tell.

VAI: What are your expectations for this year’s Screenings?

GG: I’m new here at Starz, so I’m eager to get time with broadcasters so they can better understand our business plan going forward. We had a great MIP and we’re looking to keep that momentum going. I’m looking forward to spending time with broadcasters in an environment that is less stressed than a MIP or a MIPCOM.

When I used to work at Television/Radio Age, magazine publisher, Sol J. Paul, made sure that all of us editorial people would always have a copy of the magazine on hand. He even coined a slogan: “Make believe it’s an American Express card!,” a take on that famous company promo: “Don’t leave home without it!”

Nowadays, at various TV trade shows, such as this one in Cannes, we see a great number of publishers doing just that –– with wheelies in tow full of their publications. There are several reasons for this. First, they’re usually heavy and therefore carts are needed to carry them around. They also want to make sure that clients and potential clients see their issues, especially if there aren’t enough copies around.

My old boss, however, didn’t want us to carry around the publication to hand it out, but to upset the competition –– above all Sol Taishoff, founder of Broadcasting (now Broadcasting and Cable). There was no friction with Syd Silverman, the son of Variety founder, Sime. Paul did not mind The Hollywood Reporter, either. Actually, he was fond of and amused by publisher Tichi Wilkerson, wife of the paper’s founder, Billy.

Paul had an anecdote for all of them, except Taishoff. Actually, he would never talk about Sol, but Taishoff would talk about Paul very energetically with me –– despite his age and having lost one lung to cancer. Every time we would meet, he’d blast Paul, calling him names and asking me why on earth (actually, he used expletives) I’d work for someone like Sol Paul. But, he’d never explain what brought up such feelings of enmity.

It was known that when the two crossed paths on the street, one of them would walk away, so as not to meet face-to-face. Many a time I tried to bring the conversation around to the subject of this animosity, but Sol Paul would never take the bait and, it certainly couldn’t be mentioned that I was actually talking to Taishoff. He’d have seen it as the highest form of treason!

There was something there that couldn’t be revealed. Sol Paul would trust me with his American Express card, but not with the reasons for the feud. Speaking of the Amex card, I remember being considered something of a “weirdo” in the office because, during business trips, I would return the unspent portion of my petty cash. Naturally, I’d also walk around the office in my slippers and bring my lunch in a brown bag. Plus, I’d never sign in or out. Clearly I was a strange creature in the eyes of my co-editors. What made me something of a “cult” figure, however, was the fact that I could operate the telex machine –– one of those ITT units on a stand that, every time it was in use, would vibrate so hard that at times it would literally be jumping around the room! And that was another sore point with my co-workers. All were much older and had seniority and yet, I had an office (albeit windowless), while they were seated at desks out on the corridor. Plus, my job was to write some of Paul’s editorials. He would dictate the topics and I’d come up with content, not because he wasn’t a good writer, but simply because he was constantly on the phone dispensing advice, especially to radio and TV station managers and owners. Even though today there is hardly any historical accounts of his career, Paul’s life was just as colorful as those he used to gossip about. Reportedly, he left his right-hand person, Lee Sheridan, virtually at the altar to wed his secretary in his second marriage. Lee never married and remained loyal to Paul until his death in 1992. And every time she visited me, she always had fond memories of Paul.

As a TV history buff, it amazes me that the television industry in America was completely developed by Russian Jews –– some originating from the same village –– who were fiercely antagonist with each other. Just to mention a few: RCA-NBC’s David Sarnoff, CBS’ Bill Paley and ABC’s Leonard Goldenson. There were also Vladimir Zworykin, the putative father of modern television –– and the creator of color television, Peter Goldmark, both of whom I was able to interview before they passed away. Plus, Taishoff and Paul. The latter had shortened his original long Russian surname. But while Sarnoff, Zworykin, Goldmark and Taishoff were actually born in Russia, the others were American-born of Russian descent.

All the key players in the TV trade publication business started at about the same time: Sol Taishoff founded Broadcasting in 1931 at the age of 27. Sol Paul, who was 10 years younger, joined it in 1941, first as a writer, later becoming its advertising sales manager. The Hollywood Reporter started in 1930, and Variety launched in 1933.

Sol Paul started the biweekly Television Age (which later became Television/Radio Age) in 1953, reportedly with the help of Sarnoff’s RCA. This angered Sol Taishoff to no end. He would stop talking to people who left his magazine to go to work in unrelated fields, so one could imagine his fury against someone like Paul, who became a competitor. In a freakish turn of events, I left Paul to start VideoAge in 1981 with the support of various companies. However, in the beginning, he was not upset with me because he refused a partnership and because he was convinced that I wouldn’t make it.

After Sol Taishoff’s death, his son Larry sold the publication, in 1986, to Times Mirror for $75 million. Five years later, the group sold it to Reed Business (which today also owns Variety) for $32 million.

Just about the same time, Sol Paul refused an offer of $15 million for his biweekly, thinking that his publication was worth just as much as Broadcasting. A few years later, Paul engaged in negotiations with Variety’s executives who, reportedly, offered just $5 million for his magazine. But the due diligence process dragged on for a long time and the publication collapsed in 1989. One could say under its own weight, since Paul was fond of publishing 200-plus page issues that, despite readers’ willingness to read because of the interesting nature of the articles, they rarely could find the time to actually read or muster the strength to pick the issues up at markets. Luckily, in those days there weren’t any wheelies and that, perhaps, could explain why Paul did not ask us to distribute them. But he was certainly ahead of his time!

Prior to MIP-TV, U.K.-based FremantleMedia Enterprises (FME) scored a big get — securing the rights to Harpo Productions’ Oprah’s Big Give for international distribution. (FremantleMedia also represents the show’s format rights at the market.) Oprah’s Big Give is a unique reality show in which contestants travel the U.S. for eight weeks attempting to out-give each other and change people’s lives for the better. David Ellender, CEO of FremantleMedia Enterprises spoke to VideoAge about Oprah Winfrey’s worldwide appeal and why MIP-TV continues to be a must-attend market for the British firm.

VideoAge International: What makes Oprah’s Big Give (and Oprah herself) so appealing to an international audience?

David Ellender: Oprah’s positive message and strong history of giving are universally appealing themes and something that any network would be proud to have on the airwaves. She is an international icon. Oprah’s Big Give is also a totally unique concept — a competition to give rather than to get!

VAI: How did FremantleMedia manage to snag such a huge TV icon?

DE: The Harpo team recognized our strengths as the best people to spread Big Give worldwide because of our expertise in building global brands and our ability to successfully exploit both U.S. versions and localized formats on a territory-by-territory basis. They’ve also seen that we have strong partnerships and work effectively alongside other icons such as Jamie Oliver, Martha Stewart and Emeril Lagasse, amongst others.

VAI: Will your big launch of the program be at MIP?

DE: It’s a key show for us. We have such a great brand to work with. You’ll see Oprah’s Big Give in the Palais, read about it in the press and experience it at our beachfront stand. Sadly, though, Oprah’s demanding schedule would not allow her the travel time to be here with us.

VAI: What other plans does FremantleMedia have for MIP-TV?

DE: As always, we’re launching a number of fantastic new titles stretching across the drama, comedy, factual and entertainment genres. Key new shows include Australian drama Satisfaction, the recently commissioned second season of which is now available for pre-sale. We also have returning series such as The Martha Stewart Show, The Janice Dickinson Modeling Agency, Celebrity Apprentice, Anthony Bourdain’s No Reservations and Iconoclasts. Additionally, we’re offering new spins on reality programming, including She’s Got the Look, the search for the next new over-35 face in the fashion industry, and DEA, a show that invites viewers to go undercover with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency.

VAI: What do you expect MIP will be like for Fremantle this year?

DE: We are in love with Oprah’s Big Give! It’s infectious TV and it means so much to be a part of something new and important. With our biggest slate yet, this is going to be a very busy but very exciting market for us.

The 45th annual MIP-TV conference, which will be held next week in Cannes, France, is almost underway. As part of VideoAge’s continuing series of pre-MIP-TV Q&As, we spoke with Marion Edwards, president, International Television at Twentieth Century Fox, to find out why MIP-TV remains an important date on the studios’ schedules, how Twentieth Century Fox is bouncing back from the Writers Guild of America strike and, most importantly, why she’s not yet ready to give up on the pilot system.

VideoAge International: What are your plans for MIP-TV this year?

Marion Edwards: Usually, our focus at MIP is three-pronged. First, we bring our midseason shows, which we’re doing this year with such series as New Amsterdam and Unhitched. We’ll be watching to see if any of them get renewed. Second, we bring our new cable series. But because of the strike this year, we don’t have any information as far as they go. And third, we start gearing up for the L.A. Screenings, which could be fairly complicated this year, also as a result of the strike.

VAI: So it’s safe to say the strike is still affecting Twentieth Century Fox?

ME: It seems like we’re having two development seasons this year. At Twentieth Century Fox, a number of pilots were shot prior to the strike. A lot of the pilots that are getting picked up now, there’s no real time to cast and shoot them in a typical time frame. I foresee more midseason shows. Right now, everyone’s focusing on how to get their shows back on track. There is a huge argument to be made that pilot season is very wasteful. I think everyone’s struggling to see what might replace the system. But TV is a try and fail medium. It’s getting tougher and tougher to hold people’s attention.

VAI: What else are you focusing on at MIP?

ME: We’re focused on formats, in addition to our unscripted series. This year, everyone’s looking into their libraries for inspiration. Shooting a local version of say, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, might be difficult. But Prison Break and Dharma and Greg might be a lot easier. So we’re exploring that.

VAI: Why does MIP-TV continue to be such an important market for you to attend?

ME: We attend because all of our clients are there, in addition to the other studios. It’s important for us to be there representing our products, and to be able to sit down with people and discuss those products. We are, in the end, a sales business, and to be able to be in direct contact with the people we’re licensing to is really important.

VAI: Do you ever get to attend any of the many sessions offered by Reed Midem at MIP-TV?

ME: No. The reality is that those sessions are great primer for issues, but they’re not as in-depth as I’d like for them to be. It’s kind of like taking “Intro to Digital Delivery” when what I really want is to be able to ask one-on-one questions of panel members. The sessions usually offer a good overview, but there’s no in-depth analysis.

MIP-TV is upon us. Film and television executives the world over are checking their landing gear before descending into Cannes, France to buy, sell and make all manner of television-related deals. VideoAge recently spoke with Andrew Whitaker, U.K.-based president, Europe, Middle East and Africa for the Stamford, Connecticut-based World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), about his combative company’s plans for the Cannes market and why, in its 45th year, MIP-TV continues to be a force to be reckoned with.

VideoAge International: What product are you bringing to MIP-TV?

Andrew Whitaker: We have 468 first-run hours of new programming for 2008-2009, made up of our flagship shows such as Raw and Smackdown. Additionally, we’ll be delivering 15 pay-per-view specials. We also have our WWE library and we can deliver classic WWE programming on an on-demand basis in certain markets. In addition, we have a packaged version that’s also available online. In the last year or so, we developed a WWE mobile offering that we’re rolling out on a trans-regional basis. The mobile content includes highlight clips, ringtones, wallpaper and screensavers that can complement our TV offerings.

VAI: Why is MIP-TV an important market for WWE to attend each year?

AW: MIP-TV is one of the standard-bearers of the yearly calendar as far as the WWE’s concerned. We look forward to catching up with partners to build on our success, as well as building success with new partners. We hope to break sales records this year.

VAI: Did the Writers Guild of America strike affect you in any way?

AW: It didn’t really. We produce 52 weeks of new programming every year. It’s like we’re writing our own action telenovela, so the strike wasn’t a problem for us at all. Plus, as far as we’re concerned, last year was the best year ever for us. We reported our largest gross revenue ever. It’s been a great year.

VAI: Are you on the floor of the Palais?

AW: No. Actually, we had been on the floor for 10 years. Last year, we moved up to the Riviera, where we have a terrace. It was a nice change, so we’re doing that again this year.

VAI: Do you ever get a chance to attend any of the many sessions offered by Reed Midem at MIP?

AW: Unfortunately, no. We’re really too busy learning about the marketplace through meetings with people in the marketplace. It’d be great to be able to attend some sessions. But waste not, want not. We filled up our meetings schedule really quickly this year. MIP is one of the few times during the year when we can essentially round up all of our sales partners in a single week. It’s really too important to miss any half-hour.

In just a few short weeks, buyers and sellers of TV content will invade the seaside city of Cannes, France for the 45th annual MIP-TV, which is taking place April 7-11. As part of VideoAge International’s continuing series of pre-MIP-TV Q&As, we spoke with Mathieu Bejot of Paris-based TV France International, the association of French TV program exporters, about his plans for the market, why it’s better for smaller French companies to conduct business from underneath the TVFI umbrella and how new laws in France may be changing the face of French television.

VideoAge International: How important is MIP-TV to TV France International?

Mathieu Bejot: It remains one of our key markets. We don’t go to NATPE anymore because fewer French companies have been attending. We also had a hard time trying to meet with Latin Americans at NATPE. People just didn’t show up. But going to MIP-TV continues to be one of our priorities.

VAI: Tell me what TV France has planned for MIP-TV.

MB: We’ll have a fairly large booth. As of now we have about 40 companies signed up to exhibit under the TV France International umbrella at the stand, but we’re expecting our usual 50. Every year, there are a few companies that register later than others.

VAI: Why do so many firms choose to exhibit under your umbrella rather than get their own booths?

MB: Mostly because of costs, obviously. Plus, coming with us gives their companies more visibility. There’s always traffic at our booth, so it’s much easier to meet people. So, in terms of foot traffic and lowering costs, it just makes sense to come with us.

VAI: How’s the broadcasting industry faring in France these days?

MB: Not too badly. There have been some interesting developments, such as the new French government law that prohibits advertising on television in the public sector. Right now, we’re trying to define what the public sector will be and what programs will be aired. The government’s also curbing food ads in children’s TV programming. Everybody’s scrambling to figure out the impact of the measure, but it’s still too early to tell. There’s much uncertainty here in France.

VAI: Do you ever get to attend any of the sessions offered by Reed Midem at MIP-TV? Or are you pretty much chained to your booth?

MB: I’m pretty much stuck in the booth, I’m afraid. I sometimes send someone for me. But honestly, the bulk of the money we make is still in traditional TV — not mobile or IPTV — which many of the sessions are about, and which I think are overrepresented at markets like MIP-TV. I like to keep abreast of what’s going on, but most of our business is still done in traditional TV.