Research Proposal on Quality
Q: Different ideas of "quality" in television have played an important part in recent debates over the future of broadcasting in Britain. Discuss what kinds of services and programs in your view make for "quality" television.
To understand "quality" in television we need to know, firstly what quality actually is and secondly we have to understand why quality is needed in television, if indeed it is actually needed. The government decide what we can and can't see. As much as we like to think we have a free press, the state still intervenes on some aspects of modern media. All media is regulated by laws set down by the government with regards to obscenity, defamation and incitement. And it was the government who installed the institutionalized idea of a national public service broadcasting company, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The first director general of the BBC was John Reith a man who's vision it was to create an " independent British broadcaster able to educate, inform and entertain the whole nation, free from commercial pressure and political interference." (BBC.co.uk, 2003). But this wasn't to be the last time the government would have an influence on the media, the Thatcher and Major governments were to have a huge effect in the way our media is made up to this very day. So we have our very first notions of "quality" within television but to understand what "quality" is actually deemed as we have to understand why we need, if indeed we do, "quality" television. So the main aspects of this research proposal concern what quality is and whose responsibility it is to deliver quality television.
We have briefly looked at the BBC, which was set up in 1922. It was extremely unique in that the Post Office set up a licensing fee of which half went directly to the BBC, so already the BBC is not dependent on the government nor is it dependent on commercial revenue. Already we can see that the BBC is going to have certain responsibilities compared to commercial stations because of the unique way in which it is funded. According to the Broadcasting Research Unit a public service broadcaster should have these eight principles; "Universally available, universality of appeal, universality of payment, distanced from vested interests, especially government, to recognize national identity and community, minority representation, focus on good programming rather than audience share and finally public guidelines should not restrict program makers". (Broadcasting Research Unit, 1993)
The BBC and later ITV held a massive duopoly in the television world and it was not until the Thatcher government of 1980's that this duopoly would be challenged. In 1982 Channel 4 was introduced in a bid to rattle the industry. "Quality television did have a place and it should be protected". (Russ J Graham, 2003) Before Channel 4's introduction ITV were keen to make hard hitting television to educate, inform and entertain in a public service style. But still the main emphasis was to make a profit. The directors, producers and managers who made these public service style programmes were offered an escape to Channel 4, as ITV was interested in money first, quality second. Channel 4 became a haven for quality directors, producers and managers who were far more interested in television the "art form" and those left behind at ITV were those who made television for profit and were not convinced by public service or quality programming. "They were not making art, they were making money". (Russ J Graham 2003)
At around about this time there were major changes in public attitude. Firstly there was a collapse in welfarism and the general public began to lose faith in public services and privatization was becoming more and more regular. Globalisation was another factor in people's attitude to media, the world was becoming a close-knit community. All this was occurring when Margaret Thatcher was in power. Thatcher's conservative government were very much against public service broadcasting and the BBC in particular. Due to the changes in public attitude and Thatcher's hatred for the BBC the 1988 Conservative White Paper came about which aimed to bring more competition, more choice and more quality to our television screens. It introduced plans for new 5th, 6th and 7th channels and heavily promoted new technological developments in cable and satellite television.
There were many arguments surrounding this White Paper. Rupert Murdoch argues "Much of what is claimed to be quality television here is no more than the parading of the prejudices and interests of like-minded people who currently control British television." (Rupert Murdoch, 1989). He was very much in favour of cable and satellite television and the name of the speech quoted he made at the Edinburgh festival was "Freedom In Broadcasting". He strongly argued against the notion that more channels equals less quality television for the viewer. On the other side of the scales however was Dennis Potter who was against Murdoch and his "Freedom In Broadcasting" ideas, he argues "Our television has been ripped apart and falteringly reassembled by politicians who believe value is a monetary term only, and that a cost-accountant is thereby the most suitable adjudicator of what we can and cannot see on our screens." (Dennis Potter 1989.)
He also called for limits on cross-ownership and claimed that key players like Murdoch tried to "gobble everything up in there path".
So how do we define quality? Well obviously this is easier said than done as different people have different ideas of quality. McGuigan and Mulgan have come up with seven aspects that make a quality program which I am going to attempt to assess and analyze. Producer quality and professionalism, I think this is referring to the actual production values of a piece. I think this is an important part of quality as it is rare to see a program that is deemed as quality or makes good viewing with poor production values. Consumer quality and the market, this is quite a confusing term but I think it refers to the quality of television companies competing with each other, the more competition there is the consumer is obviously going to come out on top. Quality of the medium, television's aesthetic, this refers to television as an art form in itself rather than just mediating other art forms. I think this is quite an interesting point raised as it takes a lot to make a television program and is a completely different and extremely powerful medium. Television as ritual and communion, this just refers to the fact television is practically universal. In terms of quality I think this signifies the importance of being able to get into the routine of watching a certain program. Television and the person, I think this refers to the fact that the audience are not just passive viewers of television. It is closely linked to the previous point. Television ecology, is a term reflecting on the balance of television programs on a station. McGuigan and Mulgan explain this statement more clearly by saying they are concerned that "commercial entertainment might reduce the public service and public information content." (McGuigan and Mulgan, 1996.) Quality as diversity, basically means that a catering for minorities. Something that I think is vital for a public service broadcaster. It is good to have a definition of quality, although it is not quite crystal clear what quality is. Quality programming is in the decline and therefore it is a positive move to recognize the framework behind the idea of quality.
Let us take a look a programs that fulfill the aspects of quality. Looking at today's listings I think it is a lot easier to find programs that meet the criteria on the BBC channels than it is the others. This is because of the fact that it is a public service broadcaster and has to provide a wide variety of programming. It is hardest to find programs of "quality" on ITV, this is because it tends to stick to easy to digest light entertainment programming. I think "Question Time" on BBC1 is an example of quality television. It informs and educates as well as trying to entertain at the same time. It meets all of the framework I have previously mentioned for quality, especially for television and the person, as it is a highly interactive program. It gives the chance for ordinary people to voice their opinions to top politicians and celebrities. An example of quality television in the satellite field would be "The Discovery Channel", this is a channel devoted to educating and informing viewers whilst obviously entertaining them at the same time. My only concerns with this channel from a UK perspective is that most of the programs are imported from the US and so it lacks in the "national identity" department. I especially like the BBC's policy towards children's programs. You do not really find children's television programs that meet our ideas of quality anywhere else. "Blue Peter" and "Newsround" are superb examples of quality programming, and even lighter programming such as "Byker Grove" and "Grange Hill" fit the quality bill, as they deal with issues very important with their audience as well as being entertaining. An example of quality programming on Channel 4 today would be "The Queen's Uncle", a documentary style program (which are often seen as quality), but Channel 4 always seem to go for a more entertaining angle on their programming, the uncle in question was a homosexual drug addict.
In conclusion as technology is ever changing and the modern day audience will much prefer entertaining, easy to digest programming rather than more complex quality television. This is proven with the rise of Sky television. The role of the BBC is slowly diminishing. Especially with the new technology that enables to effectively create your own TV channel by choosing any program from any channel you have and playing it at any time you wish, pretty much laying to rest TV listings. But we are yet to see the full implications of this technology and whether or not it will actually be popular. In the modern market if you want quality television then you have to pay for it, it is a pay per view culture in which we live. Free competition equals higher quality, or so we're told. A little thought experiment suggests that it might well: two car manufacturers produce roughly equivalent family cars; they're much the same in performance, equipment, prestige, reliability and so on, so each has around 50 per cent of the market. To get the edge on the competition, one manufacturer adds in a satellite navigation system at little extra cost. As customers go for the new equipment, the other manufacturer is forced to add something similar. So in principle the free market can work to ratchet up quality and value for money. Choice, quality and control are the new key aspects when it comes to television.
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
_______________Enjoy our custom research proposal writing service!________________
To understand "quality" in television we need to know, firstly what quality actually is and secondly we have to understand why quality is needed in television, if indeed it is actually needed. The government decide what we can and can't see. As much as we like to think we have a free press, the state still intervenes on some aspects of modern media. All media is regulated by laws set down by the government with regards to obscenity, defamation and incitement. And it was the government who installed the institutionalized idea of a national public service broadcasting company, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The first director general of the BBC was John Reith a man who's vision it was to create an " independent British broadcaster able to educate, inform and entertain the whole nation, free from commercial pressure and political interference." (BBC.co.uk, 2003). But this wasn't to be the last time the government would have an influence on the media, the Thatcher and Major governments were to have a huge effect in the way our media is made up to this very day. So we have our very first notions of "quality" within television but to understand what "quality" is actually deemed as we have to understand why we need, if indeed we do, "quality" television. So the main aspects of this research proposal concern what quality is and whose responsibility it is to deliver quality television.
Order a custom research proposal on Quality now!
We have briefly looked at the BBC, which was set up in 1922. It was extremely unique in that the Post Office set up a licensing fee of which half went directly to the BBC, so already the BBC is not dependent on the government nor is it dependent on commercial revenue. Already we can see that the BBC is going to have certain responsibilities compared to commercial stations because of the unique way in which it is funded. According to the Broadcasting Research Unit a public service broadcaster should have these eight principles; "Universally available, universality of appeal, universality of payment, distanced from vested interests, especially government, to recognize national identity and community, minority representation, focus on good programming rather than audience share and finally public guidelines should not restrict program makers". (Broadcasting Research Unit, 1993)
The BBC and later ITV held a massive duopoly in the television world and it was not until the Thatcher government of 1980's that this duopoly would be challenged. In 1982 Channel 4 was introduced in a bid to rattle the industry. "Quality television did have a place and it should be protected". (Russ J Graham, 2003) Before Channel 4's introduction ITV were keen to make hard hitting television to educate, inform and entertain in a public service style. But still the main emphasis was to make a profit. The directors, producers and managers who made these public service style programmes were offered an escape to Channel 4, as ITV was interested in money first, quality second. Channel 4 became a haven for quality directors, producers and managers who were far more interested in television the "art form" and those left behind at ITV were those who made television for profit and were not convinced by public service or quality programming. "They were not making art, they were making money". (Russ J Graham 2003)
At around about this time there were major changes in public attitude. Firstly there was a collapse in welfarism and the general public began to lose faith in public services and privatization was becoming more and more regular. Globalisation was another factor in people's attitude to media, the world was becoming a close-knit community. All this was occurring when Margaret Thatcher was in power. Thatcher's conservative government were very much against public service broadcasting and the BBC in particular. Due to the changes in public attitude and Thatcher's hatred for the BBC the 1988 Conservative White Paper came about which aimed to bring more competition, more choice and more quality to our television screens. It introduced plans for new 5th, 6th and 7th channels and heavily promoted new technological developments in cable and satellite television.
There were many arguments surrounding this White Paper. Rupert Murdoch argues "Much of what is claimed to be quality television here is no more than the parading of the prejudices and interests of like-minded people who currently control British television." (Rupert Murdoch, 1989). He was very much in favour of cable and satellite television and the name of the speech quoted he made at the Edinburgh festival was "Freedom In Broadcasting". He strongly argued against the notion that more channels equals less quality television for the viewer. On the other side of the scales however was Dennis Potter who was against Murdoch and his "Freedom In Broadcasting" ideas, he argues "Our television has been ripped apart and falteringly reassembled by politicians who believe value is a monetary term only, and that a cost-accountant is thereby the most suitable adjudicator of what we can and cannot see on our screens." (Dennis Potter 1989.)
He also called for limits on cross-ownership and claimed that key players like Murdoch tried to "gobble everything up in there path".
So how do we define quality? Well obviously this is easier said than done as different people have different ideas of quality. McGuigan and Mulgan have come up with seven aspects that make a quality program which I am going to attempt to assess and analyze. Producer quality and professionalism, I think this is referring to the actual production values of a piece. I think this is an important part of quality as it is rare to see a program that is deemed as quality or makes good viewing with poor production values. Consumer quality and the market, this is quite a confusing term but I think it refers to the quality of television companies competing with each other, the more competition there is the consumer is obviously going to come out on top. Quality of the medium, television's aesthetic, this refers to television as an art form in itself rather than just mediating other art forms. I think this is quite an interesting point raised as it takes a lot to make a television program and is a completely different and extremely powerful medium. Television as ritual and communion, this just refers to the fact television is practically universal. In terms of quality I think this signifies the importance of being able to get into the routine of watching a certain program. Television and the person, I think this refers to the fact that the audience are not just passive viewers of television. It is closely linked to the previous point. Television ecology, is a term reflecting on the balance of television programs on a station. McGuigan and Mulgan explain this statement more clearly by saying they are concerned that "commercial entertainment might reduce the public service and public information content." (McGuigan and Mulgan, 1996.) Quality as diversity, basically means that a catering for minorities. Something that I think is vital for a public service broadcaster. It is good to have a definition of quality, although it is not quite crystal clear what quality is. Quality programming is in the decline and therefore it is a positive move to recognize the framework behind the idea of quality.
Let us take a look a programs that fulfill the aspects of quality. Looking at today's listings I think it is a lot easier to find programs that meet the criteria on the BBC channels than it is the others. This is because of the fact that it is a public service broadcaster and has to provide a wide variety of programming. It is hardest to find programs of "quality" on ITV, this is because it tends to stick to easy to digest light entertainment programming. I think "Question Time" on BBC1 is an example of quality television. It informs and educates as well as trying to entertain at the same time. It meets all of the framework I have previously mentioned for quality, especially for television and the person, as it is a highly interactive program. It gives the chance for ordinary people to voice their opinions to top politicians and celebrities. An example of quality television in the satellite field would be "The Discovery Channel", this is a channel devoted to educating and informing viewers whilst obviously entertaining them at the same time. My only concerns with this channel from a UK perspective is that most of the programs are imported from the US and so it lacks in the "national identity" department. I especially like the BBC's policy towards children's programs. You do not really find children's television programs that meet our ideas of quality anywhere else. "Blue Peter" and "Newsround" are superb examples of quality programming, and even lighter programming such as "Byker Grove" and "Grange Hill" fit the quality bill, as they deal with issues very important with their audience as well as being entertaining. An example of quality programming on Channel 4 today would be "The Queen's Uncle", a documentary style program (which are often seen as quality), but Channel 4 always seem to go for a more entertaining angle on their programming, the uncle in question was a homosexual drug addict.
In conclusion as technology is ever changing and the modern day audience will much prefer entertaining, easy to digest programming rather than more complex quality television. This is proven with the rise of Sky television. The role of the BBC is slowly diminishing. Especially with the new technology that enables to effectively create your own TV channel by choosing any program from any channel you have and playing it at any time you wish, pretty much laying to rest TV listings. But we are yet to see the full implications of this technology and whether or not it will actually be popular. In the modern market if you want quality television then you have to pay for it, it is a pay per view culture in which we live. Free competition equals higher quality, or so we're told. A little thought experiment suggests that it might well: two car manufacturers produce roughly equivalent family cars; they're much the same in performance, equipment, prestige, reliability and so on, so each has around 50 per cent of the market. To get the edge on the competition, one manufacturer adds in a satellite navigation system at little extra cost. As customers go for the new equipment, the other manufacturer is forced to add something similar. So in principle the free market can work to ratchet up quality and value for money. Choice, quality and control are the new key aspects when it comes to television.
__________________________________________________________________________
This is a free research proposal on Quality topic. Keep in mind that all free research proposal samples and examples of research paper proposals are taken from open sources – they are totally plagiarized! If you need a quality custom research proposal on Quality for your college, university, Master's or PhD degree – you are welcome to contact professional research proposal writing company to have your paper written online by academic research proposal writers.
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
_______________Enjoy our custom research proposal writing service!________________
