My Two Cents: Success-Stalking Executives

By Dom Serafini

The industry needs NATPE International. Take it from someone who has never been shy of criticizing the Santa Monica-based National Association of Television Program Executives. In the past, NATPE has made mistakes and VideoAge has dutifully reported them — to the exasperation of its management. But we never questioned or doubted the usefulnessness of the NATPE market and its timing. Granted, we did not always agree on the necessity of its many secondary activities (such as the academic aspect), but we stood firm on the importance of an America-based, organized winter market. In addition, our criticism has always been constructive, meant to help improve NATPE, not weaken it.

Now, however, the industry is facing a forked road and, as Yogi Berra would say, we must take it. Either the major studios return to showing their leadership to the industry, or the market (and the related Association) cease to exist.

Of late, we've been under the illusion that the independents could, by themselves, carry over the NATPE market. The reality is that neither the Association nor the independents can do without the large studios.

There is also the added reality that the major studios now view independents as competitors and no longer see them as just a training ground meant to nurture a future reservoir of sales and creative talent.

In the past, current and former studio executives were concerned with leadership roles as much as sales results. That's why so many business associations were created to address every aspect of the industry: marketing, sales, advertising, international, creative, news, etc. Plus, all the studio executives felt some obligation to "give something back" to the community by, in effect, subsidizing TV markets, conferences and trade journals like VideoAge, for the general benefit.

Nowadays, with rampant deregulation, a new paradigm is taking hold and studios have adapted quickly, while NATPE is taking a little longer (in part because its management never accepted our criticism at face value, discarding it as daringly offensive).

Nonetheless, the original purpose of NATPE is still valid and, in many ways, now more so than ever, and a pro-active role taken by the studios is so much more needed.

Just imagine the industry without a NATPE market. At the domestic U.S. level it would mean the loss of the only marketplace and forum. But the greatest loss would be at the international level, with MIP-TV and MIPCOM reinforcing their grip on the industry.

In that case, the industry would be manufacturing the proverbial rope with which to hang itself. I realize that, in this quarterly report-obsessed business environment, my argument, no matter how heartfelt, means very little, and that's why I have to appeal to the leadership factor.

I'm sure that studio executives would not like to be associated with the demise of a 40 year old institution like NATPE, and neither would we.

Dom Serafini