{"version": "1.0", "type": "rich", "title": "In LA I took a screenwriting class sequence through the UCLA Extension program. The idea was that over 2 or 3 courses you\u2019d...", "author_name": "kontextmaschine", "author_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "provider_name": "kontextmaschine", "provider_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "url": "https://kontextmaschine.com/post/92606012913/", "html": "<p>In LA I took a screenwriting class sequence through the UCLA Extension program. The idea was that over 2 or 3 courses you\u2019d conceive, outline, and complete a spec script. The program has a solid industry reputation, each section\u2019s led by a credited working writer (even successful working tv writers are only on staff one out of every two or more years of their active career).</p>\n<p>The teacher for my first class had had a decent working career, from at least Renegade through Stargate I think, maybe sold some pilots but none produced, and brought good experience to the table - asked how working writers would do something his answer was \u201cbasically, however your showrunner wants, but for a spec, here are a few different approaches I\u2019ve seen and what each one is best suited to.\u201d</p>\n<p>The guy for the second class was a pompous ass who would publicly belittle students who didn\u2019t follow his (never actually explained) style. This arrogance wasn\u2019t really accounted for by (but might account FOR) his one-season-and-out-on-Charmed work history. I noped out and finished the Veronica Mars spec (\u201cMiami Vice, Principles\u201d) on my own.</p>\n<p>The fellow students were a mixed bag of cool. There was a stuntwoman aging out of the job who, when we pressed her to, showed off her ability to do zero-momentum bicycle kicks. There was a (black) WB programming exec who explained, upfront, that the WB had been consciously following the Fox strategy of network-building of starting with few nights of programming and building an identity as \u201cthe black network\u201d (the \u201cSister, Sister\u201d &amp; \u201cLiving Single\u201d eras, respectively), then as they proved themselves discarding that for a youth identity with teen soaps (\u201c90210\u201d/\u201dDawson\u2019s Creek\u201d).</p>\n<p>He wasn\u2019t cynical about this but matter-of-fact, suits are unapologetic that it\u2019s all about money and at least TV suits take writing seriously. (Where for movies writers are the lowest man on the pole, TV is a writers\u2019 medium, and the head writer [\u201cshowrunner\u201d] has ultimate control of a production. If you\u2019ve ever wondered why a great show was cancelled after a few episodes, it\u2019s often because someone hired on the strength of their writing couldn\u2019t herd cats or wouldn\u2019t compromise vision enough to keep a schedule or budget.)</p>\n<p>The way he explained it was that there was enough of an unmet demand for black-oriented programming they\u2019d be guaranteed a survival-level audience, but given the chance anyone would prefer teen, but the specific mechanisms for this were interesting.</p>\n<p>It\u2019s not just that black wealth/income numbers were iffy - teenagers aren\u2019t that rich either. More, it was that a lot of advertisers wanted a specifically young audience - Taco Bell, Mountain Dew, lifestyle brands, Noxema, superhero movies, entry-level two-door cars - but there weren\u2019t many products with network ad budgets with a specifically black target audience. Tyler Perry movies, basically. So they were selling time on the basis of generic human viewers to generic staple products, only with a smaller (and limited) audience than the big nets, with a reverse economy of scale where the smaller the audience the less power they had to negotiate price per 1000 impressions.</p>\n<p>On top of that a black audience is harder to segment, which is where the best money is - Nielsen numbers were good enough for say black male 18-49, but when you get down to say black female 18-34, no kids, income 30k-60k, the sample size is small enough to push up the margin of error, and advertisers (with the aforementioned whip hand) would bid on the least charitable interpretation.</p>\n<p>If anything, relative black poverty was the only thing that made black-targeted programming viable at all, because there <em>were</em> advertisers (marginal finance, discount brands &amp; stores, career training, &amp;ct) that specifically wanted a poor audience.</p>"}