Is it really true that television stations are really empty?

In terms of logic, Wang Mingxuan believed that although the separation of production and broadcasting works well, allowing TV stations to “destroy the use of drugs for program production almost like drugs” does not “encourage TV stations as the vitality of the industry’s main body”. Therefore, Teacher Wang thinks that the whole is now "Industry structure has begun to be unbalanced." As a beneficiary of the market economy since the reform and opening up 30 years ago, Xiaoyue believes that although Wang Mingxuan’s perspective is high and his vision is long-term, he is admirable; however, the proposal to “limit the proportion of self-control” is entirely based on the perspective of the Department of Radio Television. It is a customary use of government power to monopolize the market.

In fact, even if the "provision for restraining self-control ratios" was actually introduced, what would happen? This restriction may limit Canxing, but it can limit the most promising social production companies in the future, such as "Wanhe Tianyi" and "Huayi"? They do not rely on television stations to supply blood. Human genes and model genes do not originate from television stations. Recall the various cultural groups, comic dialogue groups, art troupes and the like. They perform for the audience, but instead of standing on the same footing as the audience and serving the audience, they are educating and guiding the audience in a condescending manner. They are all cadres at department level, department level, bureau level, etc. This kind of "official vs. people" attitude certainly will not arouse the interest of the audience, nor will it force the practitioners to make every effort to create good works and strive to satisfy the audience. In the end, although they were limited to protection, they were still eliminated by the people.

It is hoped that every individual in every industry of our country can live in a society where there is no power to intervene. We hope that every serious worker in our country will not be forced by others to benefit from the “industrial height”.

This sentence is the heartfelt blessing of yulezibenlun.

The following is the text of the "Guangzhou Star" CEO Wang Mingxuan's original "Caution! Television stations are being decomposed! 》:

Recently, due to lectures and interviews with colleagues of many TV stations, many TV programs were outsourced to social production companies. In fact, this is a serious problem.

First of all, let's take a look at what the TV station once had. Content, channels, media, and audience are the four major elements that it has as a media agency.

First, what can the television station control? In the four elements, "media" and "audience" are never controlled by the television station and can only be indirectly affected. What is really being controlled by television stations is the "channel" and "content" of television broadcasts.

Second, what is left of the TV station now? Although the two channels of wired transmission and wireless transmission frequency are still monopolized by us, Internet technology has already had its substitutability. The value of our monopoly channel element is rapidly declining. At this time, if the outsourcing of the main program is excessive, it seems to have shifted the risk, but it will seriously degrade the program production capabilities of the television station. Once all of these two elements that we can control are lost, the consequences will be the complete emptying of the TV station.

We must see that the current TV stations are being severely affected by the Internet technology. Everyone is trying to integrate into the new media. In fact, the transformation is good and the fusion is also essential. The essence is a game of social forces. Once the TV station Empty shells, what else do we use as a game's capital? Afterwards, the capital that we used for the game may only be left with licenses and call signs. So, how valuable is this license? Look at the paper media. Now there are many half-lived newspapers and magazines that are locked in drawers. Twenty years ago, even just ten years ago, they were extremely rare paper media licenses!

Some people say that entrusting the show to the production company is not the separation of production and broadcasting that is now advocated? Isn't it time for separation between production and broadcasting? In fact, the person who puts forward such a problem has not correctly understood the separation between production and broadcasting.

Separation of production and broadcasting has arisen in Europe and the United States and has been widely practiced in Asian countries or regions. Its cause is that television at that time quickly occupied the dominance of various media as a force of sudden emergence, and large-scale television stations soon formed a monopoly to prevent monopoly. The entire video market is in a state of healthy competition and healthy development. The separation of production and broadcasting has been promoted. The biggest characteristic of this kind of separation between production and broadcasting arising in Europe and the United States is the mandatory distribution method, which stipulates that a television station must ensure that the number of hours of programs on a daily basis must be produced by a social production company. It is not possible for all programs to be completed by the television stations themselves in order to mobilize each A variety of social forces participate in the television market and guarantee that those who participate will have food.

Our separation of production and broadcasting in China was first proposed at the end of the 1990s. It was later halted. It was only raised in recent years. I think that apart from the reasons mentioned above, I would like to solve the problem. The loss of innovation caused by aging, and the lazyness and stagnation caused by worry-free food and clothing for many years, are focused on stimulating the vitality of the system. The uncontrolled outsourcing of current programs seems to contravene our original intention of implementing separation between production and broadcasting.

Do not think that I say this is opposed to the separation of production and broadcasting. In fact, I am a firm supporter of the separation and production and separation policy, and even the earliest propagandist and practitioner of separation. I particularly like the production companies Tianzhuang, Canxing and Shixi. We can say that they are the squid of our entire television industry. With them, they have stimulated our industry to maintain its vitality. TV stations have had the goal of catching up and setting an example. . The problem is that some TV stations simply rely entirely on outsourced programs, which means that foreign programs do not stimulate them at all. On the contrary, their dependence on drugs almost abolishes the martial arts of program production. There are even people who are undaunted to say: We are actually Is a broadcast channel.

This is very much like a disgruntled farmer. He inherited the ability to plant land (doing shows) and an old horse (playing channel) from his ancestors. But he was lazy and simply stopped farming. He rented an old horse and mixed it. Eat food. You know, this old horse is aging and it will die! Think about how long our broadcasting channels can be supported as mainstream channels.

A television station, if it is not to be eliminated in this round of games, must of course introduce a program optimization structure, but it must also maintain its own self-made program capability.
The separation of production and broadcasting policies has not yet triggered the vitality of television stations as the main body of the industry (at least not stimulating the majority of television stations), which in turn has made the program production companies profitable.

With rapid development, a large number of talented people and income have flowed out of the TV station, which further stimulated the development of the production company. This has led to an unrestrained production company and an unbalanced industrial structure. Therefore, in the end, we would like to give our management department a suggestion. We must stand at the height of the national cultural industry and also issue a “restriction of the proportion of self-control”. (Anyway, we have already issued so many restrictions, and one more is not counted. many).

It is only this restriction of our order that is contrary to the restriction of foreign countries. What foreign countries restrict is that the proportion of content produced by social companies should not be lower than what, and what we want to emphasize is that the proportion of self-produced content of television stations must not be lower than what, otherwise, the proportion of self-produced programs Too low, you don't have the qualifications of a media agency. In this way, the ratio of the two parties can be relatively controlled within a reasonable range, so that the two can develop together and stimulate each other to form a benign industrial structure, chain, and ecology. It can also ensure that our television stations have the power to transform their own destiny, rather than being passively integrated.

In fact, the passive integration of empty shells, it was melted away by others!