Published On:Monday, June 21, 2010

By NOELLE NICOLLS

Tribune Staff Reporter

nnicolls@tribunemedia.net

NO ONE wants to face the possibility of unemployment, but at some point we have to stop kidding ourselves. I am willing to bet that the employees at ZNS TV themselves are desperate for ZNS to survive primarily because they want to guarantee their future employment - safeguard their ability to pay school fees and mortgages - not because they feel ZNS is something worth fighting for.

Most of the employees at ZNS have probably been frustrated into bitterness over years of stagnation or have accepted the fact that their commitment to ZNS comes at the expense of their physical and mental health. Otherwise, they are new and possibly oblivious of the rude awakening in store for them.

In its present state, ZNS is a top-heavy, gas-guzzling drain on the public purse, important primarily for the purpose of feeding our sense of national pride. I am wondering: Are we so starved of a national identity that ZNS is indispensable to who we are?

Air Jamaica lost out on that debate several months ago when the government caved in to good sense and sold the airline. Bahamasair may eventually follow suit, with private airlines now proving they can out-compete Bahamas Air.

I am all for national pride. The idea of a commercially competitive national station sounds great, but does it really work and is it sustainable? If ZNS is anything to judge by the answer is obvious. A public broadcasting system (PBS) sounds good, which is where the government says it wants to go, but unless it works in reality and is not just a figment of someone's imagination, then at some point we need to muster the courage to say, it's time to call it quits. And the question must be asked: Can the same people who have carried ZNS this far, carry it into the future?

For much of its existence, ZNS was the only player in the market. Fortunately, today, there is an entire Bahamian film and television industry, complete with trained professionals and private enterprises. The government needs to take a serious look at whether it should still be in the business of television. At the very least, it needs to clearly redefine the role of the government owned television station and prove its relevancy.

With almost a 50-year head start, ZNS is still in a struggling position to keep pace with private television stations that have emerged over the past 10 years. At the rate of growth in private TV, ZNS is on a collision course with obsolescence.

It gives me no pleasure to say that, but it is a fair conclusion drawn from an objective analysis of the actual television market place. In 1966 an anonymous government official was quoted in a special Tribune survey as saying, "If a poll were taken, it would show that given a choice, the average man on the street would prefer to see American television."

This was at a time when TV reception was considered "spotty", black and white was the order of the day, and Bahamian television was a mere proposition -- its birth was rushed in 1977 to accommodate an election. Thirty-three years later, the situation for ZNS TV has not changed. There are more than 500 international television channels available to Bahamians by way of cable or satellite and a sufficient percentage of them are better than ZNS.

In fact, if a Florida television station decided to get into the business of producing Bahamian news, ZNS would probably lose some of its viewers. This is not because ZNS news reporters are not talented or are not competent in presenting the news; neither is it because Bahamians lack national pride; this is because television viewers are generally more inclined to go for better visual quality.

The digital era is decades away from ZNS; it is still using analogue equipment. This might not sound like much, but look at it this way: If you are dreaming of ZNS looking like CNN, it is physically impossible by the very nature of the equipment they use. With the government's recent budget cut, the dream of modernization just slipped further away, because new equipment will inevitably be shelved to save more jobs.

The outdated equipment at ZNS is matched, in some instances, by its outdated employees. The average age of a ZNS employee is said to be in the early 40s. Those who have not been independently engaged in the industry's evolution, or participated in professional development, are likely to be out of touch with digital advancements, much less the converged media environment that now exists.

No one should feel disillusioned. The government knew from day one that ZNS would not be financially viable. It commissioned a study in the 1970s to determine the feasibility of establishing a television station in the Bahamian market. A team of Bahamians, including Calsey Johnson, who was to become the first general manager, travelled the world looking at television models. According to Mr Johnson, the conclusion of the study was: "In a small market like the Bahamas the station would not sustain itself; it would need a government subsidy to get on air and remain on air. From day one we knew that would be a problem."

If the government is going to have to subsidise ZNS for the rest of its life, I think it's fair to ask that the subsidies should work for the people who want to create programmes that market research indicates Bahamian people want to watch. Let the subsidies go towards making ZNS' current production facilities more accessible to Bahamian producers and film makers; towards making access to production crews more affordable. Let the subsidies go toward producing good television.

I also think it is fair to expect that if the government is going to have to subsidise ZNS for the rest of its life, then ZNS should provide a service that is indispensable. As it currently exists, it simply does not.

With its abundance of religious programming, the church community might disagree, but perhaps it could construct a good argument for the profitability of a cable channel called, Bible TV Bahamas. Church people pay to play, so it is completely understandable for ZNS to design its programming schedule around paying customers, but it leaves a lot to be desired for its overall programming schedule.

Few could argue that ZNS radio is not an essential service, profitable at that, but few could prove the same applies to ZNS TV. If ZNS shut down its TV broadcast station, most people would simply have an emotional reaction. They would long for their daily routine of watching the 7 o'clock news. That is until they got over it and switched to News Break on Cable 12 at 7.30pm, which many viewers already do.

There is very little by way of news and current affairs programming that is produced by ZNS that ZNS reporters could not produce at other private stations. In fact, they could do so with more independence and more resources.

Executives of the Bahamas Broadcasting Corporation (BCB) got a kick out of the outcry the other day, when an episode of the current affairs programme, Press Pass, was cut from the roster. Observers presumed it was blatant censorship, because the recorded show had views that were sharply critical of the BCB. Executives said the outcry was a sign that people actually watch ZNS. But I am not so sure they should be patting themselves on the back.

The people most upset about the failure to air the show were probably the people who were actually on the show. Given the fact that they are media personalities themselves, they would have had a readily available public platform to express the perceived public outcry. In fairness to the commentators, the incident is indicative of the Corporation's history of censorship and politicization. From the time ZNS became a mere proposition, this was a concern. Throughout its entire lifetime, this has been its curse. Politicians themselves admit this is in ZNS's DNA.

"Politicians have used ZNS as a conduit for their information. Politicians are concerned about one aspect, the News. They aren't concerned about programming, because most of the politicians only want to see themselves on TV. They are not interested in the other components needed for national development," said Obie Wilchcombe, opposition spokesman on business.

I have good friends who work at ZNS, who are going to have my head for this article, but for all the good that is going on at ZNS today by talented, hard working journalists, technicians and support staff, ZNS should be the undisputed leader in television, and there should be no need to justify the government's spending.

So what is the point of a televisions station if a handful of people are watching it, and no one is making money from it?

Unfortunately, the employees who are trying to transform ZNS are building on a compromised foundation. The root problems are not of their making and are largely beyond their control. As hard as it may be to swallow, I believe the only sure fix is to tear down the structure and rebuild. Perhaps there is a silver lining in the $4 million budget cut.

At this point, to restore my faith in ZNS; to inspire me to fight for its survival, someone has to articulate a vision for the national station that makes sense for the twenty-first century and beyond. Short of that, I am prepared for ZNS to die a natural death.

This is not to say I do not understand the importance of a Bahamian film and television industry. The Bahamas, as with the entire developing world, has suffered greatly under the weight of Western media imperialism. Our cultural development has been greatly stifled by the long-standing influence of American TV in the Bahamas. African people across the globe lack power in their own self definition, because they lack media control.

The Broadcasting Act says it is the duty of the BCB to "maintain broadcasting and televising services as a means of information, education and entertainment."

The purpose Bahamian television goes deeper than this. Bahamian television is essential for constructing our own view of the world; telling Bahamian stories and defining ourselves and the world through our own eyes.

The programmes we produce reflect the way we see the world.

A government owned television station is only one vehicle by which this objective is achieved. And I could very well envision a National Institute of Film and Television with a $4 million budget serving this function more effectively.

"I believe as ZNS grows in full maturity it could be a viable entity.

"But do we have any sitcoms on ZNS? No. Do we have any sustainable local programming? No. We have up to this day not been able to do so; to fill the hours and hours of airtime with local programming. There are no documentaries, no features, no sitcoms, no movies. There is still nothing being done," said Mr Wilchombe.

"I believe the BCB has a role to play. (It) has always been a vehicle for national development. We have many things to do to build this country. We still do not have a sustained number of television documentaries, on the people, on the environment that is unique to the Bahamas. We don't have a production unit producing sitcoms, movies, or any programming that allows for an absolute total fulfilment of local television needs," he said.

Mr Wilchcombe, probably unwittingly, placed the burden of an entire industry on the shoulders of one under-funded government agency with a questionable history. When Lincoln Bain, the co-host of Controversy TV, a talk show aired on Channel 12, announced the launch of a new Bahamian television channel, VTV, earlier this year, he said some of the very same things with respect to the new channel.

"Our focus is to be the home of Bahamian sitcoms, drama series, soap operas, game shows, reality TV shows, and investigative reporting with or without the Freedom of Information Act," he said.

Bahamians needed to start looking beyond ZNS and create a vision for the Bahamian film and television industry for the twenty-first century and beyond.

The role of ZNS in all of that should be clearly defined and its market specifically stated.

It should not be competing as a commercial entity, and if it operates as a public broadcasting station, it still needs a mandate that is relevant and essential.

That mandate needs to be driven by a programming vision for the future, guided by market research. Personalities and programmes drive television viewership.

Without local programming that people want to consume, neither a national television entity, nor a Bahamian film and television industry, will be able to generate the critical mass of viewers or the level of profitability needed to stay relevant and to survive.

Bahamian television does not mean programmes that are all about our national identity, as it has been in the past. It does not mean programmes that feature our nation builders, the national achievers, and all things that make us proud to be Bahamian. Bahamian television means good Bahamian produced programmes that people want to consume.

Artificially creating a sense of community by pushing information on the public that it does not want to consume in that format does not work. People usually love to feed their egos, but in the case of television, the public would much rather choose from one of the over 500-stations on cable or satellite to be educated and entertained.

Our old vision of television programming has run its course.

My vision is for the government to use the $4 million allocated to ZNS to build the Bahamian film and television industry, by supporting Bahamians interested in producing quality local programmes, and to create incentives for the continued growth of private television enterprises.

In material terms, ZNS could become more of a financier or production house, where independent producers, with an understanding of modern technology and modern tastes would have access to the facilities and the resources of ZNS to produce programmes that could be aired on ZNS's broadcast channel or sold to private stations.

The Parliamentary Channel could evolve to feature political news and other political programming from all the islands in addition to showing sessions on the House and the Senate. This would satisfy the desire for the politicians to be seen on TV, and serve an important information dissemination function.

A possible small in-house team of journalists and producers at ZNS would focus on three to four core programmes, in different programming categories, so that during at least three or four programming time slots a signature ZNS programme would be aired.

These programmes would have a clearly defined audience, and a clearly defined objective. Private stations could be mandated as a requirement of their broadcast license to air at least one ZNS produced programme during a designated national broadcast hour.

Perhaps I am giving the private stations too much credit; perhaps I am underestimating the level of professional interest amongst Bahamians in the film and television sector, but perhaps not.

The bottom line is this: We need to take on a greater vision for the film and television industry in the Bahamas. The survival of ZNS is less important than the actual work that needs to be done to achieve the industry's objectives. ZNS does not have to shoulder the responsibility on its own, and it does not have to be the entity to fulfil the mandate.

Going forward, there could be a role for a national television body, but it is not the current role ZNS is trying to play. What is clear is that ZNS has to radically, not incrementally, change its vision, structure and way of operating. Fortunately for us, the industry has matured to a point where we can now speak of the mantle being passed from ZNS to a new era of television in the Bahamas.