Fabricating Cultural Events: The Rise of International Programme Formats in Norwegian Television Production

Abstract

International trade and cooperation are increasingly affecting what we experience in the national and local media. This development is rapidly evolving with live televised events, like Idols and Dancing with the Stars, and here I pursue why (and how) this is so. I engage specifically with the ways in which licensed international programme formats intervene in existing programme traditions, and affect the repertoire and capacity of national television producers. I trace the practices of the two largest Norwegian broadcasters over the last two decades. The question is not only how licensed formats affect different industry sectors, in this case license-funded NRK and commercial TV 2, but also how different units within the broadcasters are impacted. The article calls for heightened sensitivity to new forms of control and collaboration in creative processes, and new routines for premeditating live events. It suggests that format exchange should be evaluated along a continuum from open to closed; a continuum that can bring nuance to discussions of cultural colonisation.

“Everyone Working a Little More Closely Together”: The Transnationalization of Creative Production in TV Production Conglomerates

“…With conglomeration and the format trade, concrete production practices have shifted toward increasing pooling of resources, transfer of know-how, consultation, and negotiation across national borders (Baltruschat 2010). For example, format catalogs have become key tools for finding ideas to pitch to broadcasters (Keinonen 2018), and local management and production decisions are increasingly based on international format owners (Kjus 2009). Both examples point at the importance of studying the organization of global-local collaboration and international exchange practices.…”

The power of the format catalogue

“…While serial television production was previously structured according to the values and experiences of local producers, global format actors now hold major power in defining national television practices (Kjus, 2009: 102). Kjus (2009) states that the collaboration of global and local actors in scheduling, conceptual priorities and production itself may weaken local production capacity, as their independence, know-how and creativity suffer in the interaction. Nevertheless, Kjus also admits that ideas and assistance from abroad can help local producers better understand their own situation and provide them with new perspectives.…”

“…Nevertheless, Kjus also admits that ideas and assistance from abroad can help local producers better understand their own situation and provide them with new perspectives. The crucial deciding factor, in this situation, is how the collaboration is organised (Kjus, 2009: 102). Close collaboration between the format owner and the commissioning broadcaster (or production company) allows for knowledge transfer, in which the process of adaptation is supported by the format owners, providing the production team with accumulated knowledge of the particular format.…”

“…International television executives who purchase and schedule imported programming form a unique group who receive their ideas about television as much from one another as from their domestic television cultures (Havens, 2006: 6). While the production of serial television was previously determined by the decisions and judgement of local producers, it is now increasingly determined by international format actors (Kjus, 2009: 102). As Kjus (2009: 101) states, most of the new formats increase the participation of audiences but reduce the participation of producers.…”

Global Formats and Canadian Television: The Case of Deal or No Deal

“…Whether through cross-cultural studies of formats in different settings or through comparative studies of individual programs in different contexts (Beeden & de Bruin, 2010;Hetsroni, 2005;Kjus, 2009;Moran, 1998), such work reveals the extent to which the adaptation of those programs is intimately connected to societal, cultural, and audience expectations that are, themselves, products of what Moran (2009, p. 122) has termed "national persistence." Moran's statement mirrors a sentiment now held throughout both the communication and sociological fields that even if nations are "imagined," invented, or constructed entitles, they continue to matter not only within the geopolitical sphere but also as a way of framing social experience (Calhoun, 2007).…”