Ratings - McGrath writes,
The average PBS show on prime time now scores about a 1.4 Nielsen rating, or roughly what the wrestling show “Friday Night Smackdown” gets.
But what he doesn't tell us is anything about how those ratings numbers change over time. Do they show a steady decline to this 1.4 million number? Or are there peaks and valleys? It's entirely possible that he has picked the lowest number of a valley and claimed it as representative of PBS's ratings--just as it's equally possible that he picked the highest number of a peak. There's no way to tell from this article. (And of course I'm altogether too lazy to go and find out.)
So on the question of ratings, I can only look at my own experience. Yes, there was a long period when I watched very little of what was on PBS. Cable channels had indeed stolen my attention away. But the funny thing is that lately, I've been finding my way back (which is probably why I chose to write this today). It wasn't a conscious decision--it just happened on its own. I would flip through channels looking for something interesting, and more and more it would be something on PBS. Not new shows, either, so I don't think it's a result of programming changes to attract bigger audiences, I think it's just that my own tastes have brought me back to what was always there. This is why I ask what the ratings trends are, since I clearly see in my own viewing habits just the sort of valley and peak I was talking about. And as far as I'm concerned, PBS is on the uptick.
Content - After a quick survey of PBS's involvement in the culture wars, McGrath writes,
Scanning the PBS lineup, in fact, it’s hard to detect much of a bias toward anything at all, except possibly mustiness. Except for “Antiques Roadshow,” all the prime-time stalwarts — “The NewsHour,” “Nova,” “Nature,” “Masterpiece” — are into their third or fourth decade, and they look it.
Funny thing, though: "NewsHour" is one of the programs I've recently rediscovered. True enough, the program looks like a dinosaur in the modern visual age, with a complete absence of the sort of visual flair you can find on even mid-market local newscasts. But that's exactly why I've rediscovered it: I've been watching more news programming, what with the presidential campaign and all, and it took very little time for me to grow--well, disgusted is the only word I can use for network content. I used to be a big Peter Jennings fan but of course he's gone, and even on the best of the current crop, NBC's program with Brian Williams, the news floats by like that paper bag in American Beauty: beautiful in its strange little way, but as soon as the wind dies down it's just a scrap of trash again.
No, NewsHour, with musty old Jim Lehrer, is news for adults. It covers more in sixty minutes than CNN does in 24 hours, with no frills, just a whole lot of content. And on Fridays there is the best public-affairs program on television, Bill Moyers Journal. The other night, Moyers did an eye-opening interview with former NPR journalist Sarah Chayes on Afghanistan that would, if there was any justice at all, entirely change the conversation on what's happening over there. An overview, plus a complete transcript, can be found on the Journal's website, and is completely worth your time. Believe me: if you want to know what's actually going on in the world, Bill Moyers is your man. (Which is of course exactly why the conservatives in power hate him so much.)
McGrath also takes a potshot at what used to be called "Masterpiece Theatre" but is now simply "Masterpiece," writing that PBS is "so strapped for cash that ['Masterpiece'] has pretty much settled into an all-Jane Austen format." Which is, again, a cherry-picking of a single recent offering, a slate of Jane Austen adaptations, some new and some repeats like the fabulous Pride and Prejudice adaptation of ten years ago with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. But of course "Masterpiece" also ran, about a year ago, a brilliant BBC adaptation of Bleak House that in fact entirely undercuts McGrath's argument--because this Bleak House ran on PBS, not on its cable competitor BBC America, which you would think would be a natural conduit for BBC content such as this.
Similarly, just this past week I've been engrossed by Henry Louis Gates, Jr.'s African American Lives 2, which is not on BET or any other cable channel, but on PBS. I'm grateful to have it on any channel--but here, once again, is PBS bringing me something incredibly enriching that I didn't even know I wanted to see till I saw it.
The glaring omissison - I can't quote what he gets most wrong, because he simply never touches on it at all, even though it remains PBS's greatest, most enduring strength: Sesame Street is simply not mentioned. Which I think speaks for itself.
On the other hand - McGrath also notes,
"...and that’s not to mention pledge programs, the fund-raising equivalent of water-boarding."Granted. No argument from me there.
Added, ten minutes later - Just as I finished revising this entry, my iTunes library (which has almost 9,000 tracks) randomly chose to play "The Prince of Denmark's March" by Jeremiah Clarke, which of course happens to be the music used as the intro for "Masterpiece Theatre." Weird.
No comments:
Post a Comment