The discussion has come up, especially in the smaller centers, as to how and where to draw the line with content creation. How do you make that distinction at your center? What experiences do you have to share?
Submitted by mkgoodson on Tue, 06/16/2009 - 13:04.
If we are not, why are we here?
We are the video equivalent of a public library, except in our case we must make the paper, write the stories, bind the books, and then service the communities need for(access to)these materials...and...we must teach the public to everything we do. Access may be a conduit between people and community, but we are not a hollow empty tube. Certainly, we must use our resources to the greatest extent possible. In some cases we produce to show the community - via our channels - what they themselves may do. We lead by example. In some cases we serve the public in providing coverage of town hall or government meetings, parades, debates, and alike. It is healthy for an Access operation to allow staff to maintain some programs they feel compelled to support, providing it serves the mission of Access and fits within their daily schedules. Often time you will find, I have, that staff will take it upon themselves to do such work on their own time and their own motivation. We must be both teacher and student; we must share our knowledge and apply our skills on a daily basis. Why would any Access operation wish to sit on its hands, or dampen the creativity and volunteer spirit of which we are mandated to support? I feel the best application of this creation of content is when staff fosters a concept, creates a series, and that series sparks similar public creativity or the torch is passed to the public. The enthusiasm I feel in support of staff and creating content is only limited by time, staff, and most problematic - funding. Our ability to create, and to teach others to create, is limited by the support we or other operations are provided locally. The famous movie quote applies very well, "If you build it they will come". It is true of nearly anything from libraries to Community Media Centers. CMC's and their dedicated staffs can accomplish great things with limited resources because they care deeply about their mission. However, you cannot exist on dedication alone. Without the assistance of strong supportive Federal legislation, without strong statewide support, without a deep dedication from the local governments, and without the video operators providing a responsible return on investment to the local communities - there is only so much Access operations can achieve.
Yes, most certainly, I feel strongly that we should be creators of content. There is a caution in the concern of doing for one equates to doing for all. Then again, we are and always will be a first-come first-served operation. If we cannot provided staff support we must seek out our volunteers...and if necessary...we must point out to those we cannot help, why we can't. Then urge them to go before our councils and offer their 'public' support for Access, to make their voices heard locally. We create content shoulder to shoulder, we work with the community shoulder to shoulder, and we must all support the need and the mission of Community Media - shoulder to shoulder.
I will limit this answer to the question as it pertains to Public Access as Government and Education Access by their very nature must create their own content.
When I got involved int the creation of a Public Access center in my town I believed that it should be solely a resource for members of the community to use for expressing themselves through the medium of television. I took a purest view that our operation should be devoted only to the promotion and advancement of that goal. I felt that our facilities and personnel should not be involved in creating programming. However the reality was, getting people in the door to create their own content proved extremely difficult. Most people had no clue what could be done with this resource. So it became clear that we had to "prim the well" with content we created. Once people got a chance to see what Public Access could be, they were more open to the idea of creating their own programming.
My feeling about programming produced by the access center as an organization has evolved even beyond this notion of "priming the well". I've come realize that there are programs which are in the best interests of the community that would not be produced if it were left solely to a member of the community to step up and do it. No matter how much assistance we give that local producer, no matter how much encouragement we provide, some subjects will be left unrepresented on our channels if the center does not take it upon itself to produce it. A case in point is a program in the city of Concord NH. The Non-Profit Connection is produced by Concord TV to highlight the local non-profits in or serving the region. There was a need that wasn't being filled and CTV stepped up to fill it in the best interest of the community.
The only time I would advise against it is if a member of the community does want to produce such programming. And again I will turn to Concord, NH for an example. Senior Speak NH is a program established by CTV to provide discussion of topics aimed at the cities senior viewers. A local senior was recruited to host this program. He become highly dedicated to its production he eventually took over as it's producer. Now this is no longer a CTV program but that of the community producer who has hosted it. In my home town of Bedford, NH youth sports is a very big part of our community. A program dedicated to this is very much in the interest of the viewers in town. Our Station Manager is very sports minded and is an umpire for youth baseball. He would love to produce such a program. However there are two members of the community that does produce such a show.
So yes there is good cause for an access center to become a content provider. Whether it is to promote access by example or fill a programming need, a well produced program by the access center is a service to the community that adds value and should be encouraged. But at no time should the access center compete with members of the community in the creation of programming. Nor should it get priority access to resources for the creation of content. As long as the primary role is to assist community producers to be the creators of programming, any subject matter not being addressed by such producers should be considered if it truly does serve the community interest.
Are we content creators?
If we are not, why are we here?
We are the video equivalent of a public library, except in our case we must make the paper, write the stories, bind the books, and then service the communities need for(access to)these materials...and...we must teach the public to everything we do. Access may be a conduit between people and community, but we are not a hollow empty tube. Certainly, we must use our resources to the greatest extent possible. In some cases we produce to show the community - via our channels - what they themselves may do. We lead by example. In some cases we serve the public in providing coverage of town hall or government meetings, parades, debates, and alike. It is healthy for an Access operation to allow staff to maintain some programs they feel compelled to support, providing it serves the mission of Access and fits within their daily schedules. Often time you will find, I have, that staff will take it upon themselves to do such work on their own time and their own motivation. We must be both teacher and student; we must share our knowledge and apply our skills on a daily basis. Why would any Access operation wish to sit on its hands, or dampen the creativity and volunteer spirit of which we are mandated to support? I feel the best application of this creation of content is when staff fosters a concept, creates a series, and that series sparks similar public creativity or the torch is passed to the public. The enthusiasm I feel in support of staff and creating content is only limited by time, staff, and most problematic - funding. Our ability to create, and to teach others to create, is limited by the support we or other operations are provided locally. The famous movie quote applies very well, "If you build it they will come". It is true of nearly anything from libraries to Community Media Centers. CMC's and their dedicated staffs can accomplish great things with limited resources because they care deeply about their mission. However, you cannot exist on dedication alone. Without the assistance of strong supportive Federal legislation, without strong statewide support, without a deep dedication from the local governments, and without the video operators providing a responsible return on investment to the local communities - there is only so much Access operations can achieve.
Yes, most certainly, I feel strongly that we should be creators of content. There is a caution in the concern of doing for one equates to doing for all. Then again, we are and always will be a first-come first-served operation. If we cannot provided staff support we must seek out our volunteers...and if necessary...we must point out to those we cannot help, why we can't. Then urge them to go before our councils and offer their 'public' support for Access, to make their voices heard locally. We create content shoulder to shoulder, we work with the community shoulder to shoulder, and we must all support the need and the mission of Community Media - shoulder to shoulder.
Reality vs. Theory
I will limit this answer to the question as it pertains to Public Access as Government and Education Access by their very nature must create their own content.
When I got involved int the creation of a Public Access center in my town I believed that it should be solely a resource for members of the community to use for expressing themselves through the medium of television. I took a purest view that our operation should be devoted only to the promotion and advancement of that goal. I felt that our facilities and personnel should not be involved in creating programming. However the reality was, getting people in the door to create their own content proved extremely difficult. Most people had no clue what could be done with this resource. So it became clear that we had to "prim the well" with content we created. Once people got a chance to see what Public Access could be, they were more open to the idea of creating their own programming.
My feeling about programming produced by the access center as an organization has evolved even beyond this notion of "priming the well". I've come realize that there are programs which are in the best interests of the community that would not be produced if it were left solely to a member of the community to step up and do it. No matter how much assistance we give that local producer, no matter how much encouragement we provide, some subjects will be left unrepresented on our channels if the center does not take it upon itself to produce it. A case in point is a program in the city of Concord NH. The Non-Profit Connection is produced by Concord TV to highlight the local non-profits in or serving the region. There was a need that wasn't being filled and CTV stepped up to fill it in the best interest of the community.
The only time I would advise against it is if a member of the community does want to produce such programming. And again I will turn to Concord, NH for an example. Senior Speak NH is a program established by CTV to provide discussion of topics aimed at the cities senior viewers. A local senior was recruited to host this program. He become highly dedicated to its production he eventually took over as it's producer. Now this is no longer a CTV program but that of the community producer who has hosted it. In my home town of Bedford, NH youth sports is a very big part of our community. A program dedicated to this is very much in the interest of the viewers in town. Our Station Manager is very sports minded and is an umpire for youth baseball. He would love to produce such a program. However there are two members of the community that does produce such a show.
So yes there is good cause for an access center to become a content provider. Whether it is to promote access by example or fill a programming need, a well produced program by the access center is a service to the community that adds value and should be encouraged. But at no time should the access center compete with members of the community in the creation of programming. Nor should it get priority access to resources for the creation of content. As long as the primary role is to assist community producers to be the creators of programming, any subject matter not being addressed by such producers should be considered if it truly does serve the community interest.