|
The
problematic posed by the organizers of this colloquium
pose a number of issues to consider when looking at the economic feasibility of
specialized and general channels. But first let me clarify the points from which
I draw my own perspectives on this issueand it is not from comprehensive
research, the data for which barely exists anyway.
Despite my title as director
of a university center devoted to a branch of broadcasting, namely television
journalism, broadcasting research is not my academic concern. I teach young people
how to practice TV journalism, not how to research it as a quantifiable social
phenomenon. Instead, my perspective is shaped by two experiences and an ongoing
association: a sabbatical year spent as managing director of ART's broadcast and
production center in Avezzano, outside of Rome; my role as a founding member of
the board of directors of CNE (Cable Network Egypt); and my association with a
number of participants in this colloquium, either in the course of placing our
graduates in the industry or by virtue of being an editor of the biannual electronic
journal TBS (Transnational Broadcasting Studies), which frequently provides me
with opportunities to interview leaders in our field.
As the problematic implies,
the pioneers of pan-Arab and transnational specialized channel pay-TV broadcasting,
ART and Orbit, have been paying a heavy price in ongoing financial losses for
their pioneering role. Certainly pay-TV in the Arab world faces some very severe
social, cultural, and political hurdles. In the Saudi and Gulf markets as well
as Egypt (and from a demographic perspective this is the heart of the Arab market),
there exists a market culture (in contrast to that of America and Europe) that
is rather antipathetic to pay-TV. Saudis, Kuwaitis, and Emiratis by and large
do not pay for culture, education, or even medical care. At a qualitatively smaller
level the same is generally true, or has been true, for Egyptians.
So why pay for something
like television, particularly in its mode as entertainment, that one is already
getting for free within the context of a broad welfare state culture? Even in
the United States when cable, the first form of pay-TV, was introduced experimentally,
the superior sound and picture quality of existing free terrestrial channels that
cable provided wasn't enough. Even Americans wouldn't pay unless they got something
more for their money than what they got for free. That subsequent rush to quickly
come up with cheap, easily available, easily assembled programming to save the
cable experiment was the defining moment in the birth of the MTV and Nickelodeon
channels.
The first of the privately
owned Arab satellite channels was of course MBC, a general channel launched from
London within a year of the Gulf War. It was CNN's coverage of that conflict,
from August 1990 when the Iraqi army rolled into Kuwait to February 1991 when
Kuwait's allies rolled the Iraqis back, that unleashed satellite dish fever in
the Arab world, which until then had been an arcane, almost esoteric hobby of
the very wealthy, the well traveled, andat least in Egypt, which was seizing
any dishes that showed up at Cairo International Airport pending legislationthe
very, very well connected.
What is now frequently
overlooked is that MBC had a resounding success in terms of quickly acquiring
a significant share of the market, not because it was a general channel but because
it offered something different, something extra, something specialized within
the overall appearance of a general channel. That something different was news
coverage, field reporting, real television journalism of the sort never seen or
heard before in Arabic. This initial phenomenon is all but forgotten today, particularly
because MBC, in its efforts to turn around and revive its fortunes, has increasingly
shifted away from its earliest self-proclaimed raison d'etre of public affairs
programming for more entertainment-oriented programming. But that in itself underlines
my theme: for with the appearance first and somewhat briefly of Orbit's BBC Arabic
TV news channel, followed in time by Al-Jazeera and ANNall providing news
coverage, field reports and lively politically oriented talk shows non-stopMBC's
news product, limited in viewing time by its position within a general channel,
was greatly eroded.
But what should not be
forgotten is that MBC rapidly acquired initially impressive advertising along
with its high ratings. The problem with its lack of profitability, while it still
had a sharp competitive edge in Arab broadcasting, had far more to do with its
expansive, one might even say royal, manner of expenditure and excessive staffing.
This is a management style it has been trying to rein in over the past two years,
while at the same time shifting program content from public affairs to content
that is as popular, as relatively mindless, but with more sophisticated production
values than its competition in the free-to-air general channel competitive field.
In contrast ART, launched
in 1993, had stabilized by 1995 as a satellite network of specialized channels
that was initially free-to-air in the truest sense of the word, just like MBC
(in contrast to the Nilesat free-to-air channels, which can only be seen by purchasing
a Nilesat decoder). Anyone who had a dish could watch ART without spending an
additional dinar or dollar. And by 1993, and even more so by 1995, satellite dish
fever was already transforming the skyline of Arabia and the Emirates, and to
a lesser per capita but still significant demographic point of view Egypt, which
has half the population of the Arab world. ART could provide its rapidly acquired
large audience with such specialized channels as movies, variety (drama and talk
shows), music, sports and children's shows. Advertising revenue, if not sufficient
to cover costs, was nevertheless significant and rising.
It was not so much that
ART's programming was that much superior in production value to the national channels,
but that there was so much of it, and in such variety, hour after hour, for the
same pricein other words, at no additional cost. In the case of the Saudi
and Gulf audiences, it was also programming with far more verve and sexual excitement
than could ever be hoped for or found on the national channels. Suddenly there
were Arab women to look at, lots of them, either singing and bouncing up and down
or just simply being seductive in that broad "baladi" style that typifies ART's
female presenters. ART's President Sheikh Saleh Kamel had occasional second thoughts
about this (on several occasions I was involved with him in drafting dress codes
that sought the best of both worlds, what might be called a seductiveness of relative
modesty) and compared to ART's free-to-air Lebanese competition like LBC and Future,
one must consider ART as a conservative force in the emerging world of Arab satellite
broadcasting. But with its backlog of Egyptian movies that had previously been
cut to ribbons by Arabian censors if shown at all, and with its pouting, prancing,
visibly well-endowed presenters, ART was, for its original, basic Saudi and Gulf
market in the mid-nineties, hot stuff indeed.
When ART went over to
pay-TV and to digital, both representing confusion and significant costs for the
consumer, and did so in that rather arbitrary manner that has until the past spring's
management reorganization almost always characterized ART's marketing, distribution,
and scheduling efforts, it failed to carry much of its free-to-air audience with
it.
In the case of Egypt one
could argue that this was because the difference in program quality between ART
and the Egyptian national channels was not that great. Indeed in its formative
years ART programs were often curiously inspired by Egypt TV's 1970s Arab perspective
on broadcast production. But in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf there was another factor
at play which increasingly haunts pay-TV specialized channels like ART, and to
a lesser degree Orbit: the emergence of privately owned competitive general or
specialized free-to-air satellite channels like LBC, Future and Al-Jazeera (which
is private in management style and strategic intention if not in actual ownership).
Future and LBC delivered entertainment with production values and sexual verve
as great or greater than ART, and Al-Jazeera delivered Arabic language news coverage
not available on ART or Orbit, and talk shows in greater quantity than Orbit and
far more directly political than ART.
Ironically, ART went into
pay-TV convinced that advertising revenues would never be sufficient to cover
its extensive costs. But instead of cutting its unproductive costs it expanded
them with highly staffed marketing and distribution operations that rarely seemed
to get off the groundor when they did, thanks to unique properties like
special sports events or dramatic subscription price cutting, failed to sustain
initial public interest. In those first years as a digital pay-TV operation, the
costs of marketing soared without any significant corresponding rise in subscription
income, and advertising revenue disappeared, except for the occasional in-the-clear
successes like the 1998 World Cup. The irony in this situation is that satellite
advertising revenue, which was analyzed as insufficient, was not in the mid-nineties
a static statistic. It has continued to nearly double in dollars-spent nearly
every year for the past five years, but little of that revenue went to ART after
it opted for pay-TV. continued
Next page: Some
light at the end of the tunnel
|
|
Also in our three-part
coverage of the colloquium "Actors and New Stakes in the Euro-Arab Satellite
Scene":
TBS Paris Correspondent Magdi Ghoneim of TV5 France, who served as seminar organizer,
reports on the event
"The Current Situation of Satellite Broadcasting in the Middle East"
An extract from a speech presented by TBS Senior Editor Hussein Y. Amin at the
colloquium
|