Tim Ferguson's The Age Column- Weekly

[unfrufru]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...879369316.html

Senate candidates chosen via reality TV? It may be just what politics needs, writes Tim Ferguson.

Brace yourself for a democratic rollercoaster ride. The Seven Network's Sunrise program will soon be airing its Pollstar segment. The format invites everyday people to compete, Aussie Idol-style, for a network-funded candidacy in the next federal election.

The major parties are scrambling to coerce Seven to ditch the format. The political game show, however, has every right to go to air. It may even improve public political awareness.

The concerns raised by the major parties question the show's legitimacy, message and process, its ramifications and dangers.

First, questions of bias and disproportionate attention delivered to the show's candidates have some weight. A network's love is a powerful thing. Conceivably, a chick from Moe whose only policy is beer-based will receive national, daily publicity, thanks to Pollstar. And not all of it will be policy discussion. Her garden will be made over by Johanna Griggs, Naomi Robson will chat with her about beauty products, Doctor Harry will groom her pit bull.

The Pollstar candidates' gimmicks - wacky hair, silly hats, immigration policies - will become merchandising goldmines. (The ABC and SBS will have to tread carefully. Every minute given to one candidate by the government-funded networks may be demanded by every other candidate competing in the same electorate.)

That said, a peroxided chick in moccasins touting the rejuvenating virtues of VB has every right to generous media coverage. It may seem unfair in comparison to the sound bites afforded serious candidates, but this is politics. Fairness is not in the handbook.

The Pollstar format has been criticised for sending a message that trivialises the electoral process. But in the last federal election, nearly 10 per cent of registered voters voted informally or not at all. Fifteen per cent of voters claimed to have made up their minds in the ballot box. So it seems 25 per cent of voters have been trivialising the process without anyone's encouragement for years. What's a few more?

Yes, reality TV shows have never been perfect democracies. With enough budget and digital stamina, Moe chick's mum can SMS her daughter to glory. Yet, like an opinion poll, this game show is not the poll that counts. If voters want more moccies and bevvies in Parliament House, election day will show it.

There are conspiracy theories alleging networks fiddle with reality show voting results. But why would they? The viewers get what the viewers choose - what could rate better than that? The law of commercial television is simple - that which rates, however repugnant it may seem, is good.

Besides, all television networks can influence the population of the Parliament by good old-fashioned bias - no game-show candidates required.

The possible ramifications of the change to electoral campaigns Pollstar represents can already be seen in the media. Reality TV represents the democratisation of television.

Once, the lucky few with an OzTam ratings box were in charge of network programming and personalities. Today, anyone with a phone and 55 cents can take charge. Pollstar takes the leap from democratising entertainment to democracy as entertainment.

Until now, the $750 it costs to register as a senatorial candidate has acted as a repellent to flippant hopefuls. It's the only thing standing between us and a ballot as thick as a phone book. Seven will pay this prohibitive fee for Pollstar's winning candidates. Any contestant, no matter their station in life, could find themselves on the ballot.

If Pollstar is successful (in ratings, not electoral, terms), the 2007 federal election will bring manifestations of the format in other media. Any radio station or publication with $750 to spare will be free to choose its own Senate candidate. This may lead to more average people with no political affiliations or party restraints winning seats. No wonder the politicians are aghast.

Some of the dangers outlined by politicians are credible, but only because the major parties have proven them so.

First, the Trojan Horse Theory: sinister forces may inject seemingly innocuous candidates into Pollstar, only to have them reveal their true colours upon winning a Senate seat. (For precedents, see candidates for the major parties in every election since Federation.)

Second, the Pauline Principle: a right-wing populist nutter could become a senator. (See the National Party benches.)

Third, the Piggy Fulcrum Conundrum: an unrepresentative candidate with a narrow agenda could end up with the balance of power in the Senate, holding the deciding vote on our $800 billion economy. (See Brian Harradine and Bob Brown.)

All these dangers are real but they are intrinsic to the democratic process, not specific to the Pollstar format.

The upside of Pollstar may be a greater engagement in the electoral process by those who currently take no interest. God knows, nothing else has worked up until now.

Now the people have a chance to install one of their own unstable, politically naive feet-of-clay populists in the Senate campaign. All power to them.

Melbourne writer and TV producer Tim Ferguson ran as an independent against Andrew Peacock in the federal seat of Kooyong in 1990.

__________________________________________________ ___________


Making news
July 15, 2004

There's news and there's "The News". Tim Ferguson explains how to create the perfect nightly bulletin.

Ever seen that nightly program jammed in between game shows and American sitcoms? They call it "The News".

It's been running for over half a century, on every network. And it still rates.

Producing the news is the most reliable career in television. If you're thinking of becoming a news producer, here are the basics:

First, you may wonder how producers make the news night after night. The truth is, they don't. The news makes itself.

However, no matter what has happened in the world, all events, great or small, must be tailored to fit a strict regime. The 6pm commercial news broadcasts have unscrew-able rundowns.

There are four segments. The first covers local news. Overseas news may only be included if it is horrifyingly calamitous or involves a foreigner mentioning Australia. Segment one should take about eight minutes.

Segment two highlights news from Canberra and The World, in that order. Business news follows but is kept painlessly brief. This is the "hard" news segment, other wise known as the actual news. You have seven minutes - maximum. Don't be tempted to screw with this rule. Ever.

From segment three it's all plain sailing. Sport, sport, sport and sport. (Oddly, you'll see more people accused of assault, immorality and corruption here than in any other segment.) Four minutes are allowed, but feel free to stretch.

Ninety seconds of weather come in the final segment. (Ninety seconds is, coincidentally, the preferred length of an earth-shattering international crisis story.) Finally, a 15-30 second story caps off the show. This event is either cute, freaky or funny. The newsreader ends with a pun on this story ("I guess that's why they call them huggy bears") and it's goodnight.

That's the rundown. But there is so much more to learn about the news production game. Below are the touchstone phrases you must learn to make great news.

Entertain and, when unavoidable, inform

The purpose of evening news bulletins is not the delivery of news. It is the securing of viewers. If people watch the 6pm bulletin on a particular station, they'll see promotions for that evening's viewing. The network hopes that, having seen these, they will stay for the night.

If they remain watching until 10pm, they'll see 24 ad breaks, each containing, on average, six commercials. That's 144 ads or 72 minutes of the evening's viewing.

All news is local - especially world news

The further away an object is, the smaller it appears. So it is with news. Without one thousand corpses (or one injured Aussie backpacker), a foreign disaster story is a turn-off.

The nation of India has more than one billion people. It is ravaged regularly by drought, flood and violent religious conflict. But when was the last time you saw a news report on India that didn't involve a cricket ball?

India only becomes segment two-worthy when it threatens nuclear war with Pakistan.

A hydrogen bomb on Delhi would send clouds of radioactive fallout over Australia. It may even knock India out of the Test for a season.

No news is bad news

Well, not for long, anyway.

During the darkest days of the Iraq war, every nightly news bulletin (even on the ABC) ended with a cute/freaky/funny story to soothe our troubled hearts.

As a producer, you will come to love the Melbourne Zoo. Just as the world looks bleak (as shown by that poor injured Aussie backpacker), a chimpanzee gives birth. Your news can end with a smile. The anchor chuckles, "Cheeky little monkey." Your audience's emotional equilibrium is restored. They're hooked for the night - 126 ads to go.

The news must be new

On September 11, 2001, nearly four thousand children died. It was a terrifying, tragic event. Worse, more children have been dying in similar numbers every day since.

The killer was world hunger. The commercial news reports on this tragedy on that day numbered zero.

Presumably, if the starving millions wish to receive nightly recognition from network news bulletins, they need to work on new material.

Trust me - I can read Autocue

Reading the news is more difficult than it seems. All right, your news anchor only has to turn up at three o'clock, scan the reports, complain about the theft of the Monte Carlos, dawdle into the studio at 5.30pm and spend three to four minutes actually on air. (The ABC is very different - anchors have been known to arrive for work as early as two o'clock.)

Sounds easy, but reading an autocue without looking like you're reading an autocue is very difficult. Particularly when everyone knows you're reading an autocue.

And appearing convincing and trustworthy is a task beyond most politicians, church leaders and Australian Rules players. Your newsreader must do it every night. Your job is to bolster them with constant praise, professional support and Monte Carlos.

One news anchor told me of a recurring nightmare where the autocue was blank. Read into that what you will.

Every tragedy is an opportunity

What can I say? It's a dreadful business.

So, those are your mantras.

As for the non-commercial networks, the ABC reels out the same "all news is local" stories, commonly in the same order, as the commercial stations. So much for editorial independence.

SBS presents the only news worth watching. It rates a 2.

Some days, nothing of interest happens. On other days, the world goes bananas. One would hope that, on quiet days, more remote yet pressing issues would prevail. This might occur if those damn monkeys at the zoo kept their hands off each other.

As a news producer, the most important thing you must remember is that TV journalism is not a sacred flame. It is a flame lit to attract moths. Millions of them.

The drive to bring news to people, to discover the truth and reveal it regardless of the consequences, is an ideal held by all journalists. But it is not the principle upon which evening news bulletins are based.

It will be your job to capture the attention of families at the time in the evening when those families are at their most distracted. Fearless truth and stories without borders can't compete with dinner, homework and feeding Moggie.

That's why the news must make viewers feel a part of each story. Like the game shows they follow, news reports must engage our imaginations. They must attract us then entertain us. Their stories must play to our self-interest and their anchors must hold us fast.

Everything else, including war and famine, is just window dressing.

Tim Ferguson comes from a family of TV journalists.

[lily]

My ex-husband has just sent in his application for "Vote For Me!"

[unfrufru]

Originally Posted by lily

My ex-husband has just sent in his application for "Vote For Me!"

so because he's your ex does that mean on principle we won't vote for him? :p

[lily]

Um, I'll not be voting on principle, but not 'cause he's my ex.
I like the man, if I was planning to vote for any of the many and varied smacktards the show's bound to attract, it'd probably be for him.

[unfrufru]

i'm not even gonna watch the show, let alone vote for any of them.

in fact i was so disinterested i didn't even read the article, just saw tim's name, cut and paste and voila!

[Gutter Monkey]

Hmmm ..... should I apply?

[pixieDAAS]

My mum's dream job is to be a sentor, get heaps of money for doing fuck all!

Two words that will stop most people becoming a sentor: Hetty Johnson
(Child Rights Activist)

[Gutter Monkey]

Originally Posted by pixieDAAS

My mum's dream job is to be a sentor, get heaps of money for doing fuck all!

Oh yeah, even if you didn't get back in you'd be set for life. Well, I would.

Originally Posted by pixieDAAS

Two words that will stop most people becoming a sentor: Hetty Johnson
(Child Rights Activist)

Doesn't ring a bell. More info?

[pixieDAAS]

Originally Posted by Gutter Monkey

Doesn't ring a bell. More info?

She came up with the charity "Bravehearts", headed a campain to get Peter Hollingsworth out of the role of Governor General because of the Sex scandals in under his control of the anglican church.

She is basically a pain in the arse, when i was a kid, i had no rights, just to seen and not heard