Someone think of the Children

While television has come a long way in terms of the range and complexity of homosexual characters that it offers within adult drama and soap opera, albeit not on prime-time, one area noticeably lacking in LGB representation is within children’s television. I’m not suggesting that there should be programming targeted at kids dealing with LGBT issues but that it should at least be mentioned, explored or visible within their content. The fear surrounding showing gay or lesbian parents is a remnant of section 28 which banned the “promotion” of homosexuality in schools as well as labelling homosexual parents as “pretend” (Stonewell, N.D.). Section 28 was born out of a widespread fear that a gay “lifestyle” could be chosen and was only repealed in 2003 (Local Government Act, 2003) but its legacy is still reverberating today.

Any number of kids TV shows have been accused of promoting homosexuality from SpongeBob SquarePants in Ukraine (Todd, 2012) to Winnie the Pooh in Poland (Wheaton, 2014). Yet, here in the UK with our more progressive gay rights track record (Sanier, 2013) we still lag behind in producing progressive content on children’s television for fear creating a controversial backlash (Benecke, 2014). Kids are growing up now surrounded by a multitude of screen and a wide range of viewing options and their adaptation to these new modes of access is reflected in BARB’s 2014 study into audience viewing behaviour suggesting that youth consumption is actually increasing but happening across increasingly diverse platforms (Thinkbox, 2015). It seems that the way in which kid’s content is being watched is changing at an increasingly rapid pace and ITV's just released figures reflect this change with their share of viewing on linear TV down 5% in 2014 yet their profits showing an overall 18% growth with a significant 30% increase in revenue from online, pay TV and interactive streams (Barraclough, 2015). Unfortunately there is a slower pace of change for content that reflects LGB parenting and ITV seems to have placed their emphasis on pleasing shareholders with revenue performances as opposed to focusing on their PSB responsibilities. While their remit doesn't specifically require them to catering for minority audiences, unlike Channel 4, it is important that they don't loose sight of the changing social landscape in which we live.

The New Normal (NBC, 2012-2013)

It is also important to mention the success of two American TV shows, The New Normal (NBC, 2012-2013) and Modern Family (ABC, 2009-) which portray gay parenting in a frank and light-hearted way. They revert back to the tradition of the 'nuclear family' of past sitcoms and flip it on it's head. Their success has proven that a show with gay central characters can garner such national and international success (Presse, 2013). Yet the Iranian translation of Modern Family, which un-surprisingly leaves out the gay couple, highlights the issues surrounding our new global transmedia environment and the pressures that broadcasters are under to neutralise content in order to maximise profit, although NBC announced that in this instance it was an unofficial adaptation (Vincent, 2014). It is important this content such as this continues to have a presence on our screens and although it's influence might not be immediately calculable it's importance should not be underestimated.

Bibliography:

Barraclough, L. (2015). U.K. TV Network ITV Sees 8% Rise in Revenue, 18% Growth in Profit. Variety. March 3 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/u-k-tv-network-itv-sees-8-rise-in-revenue-18-growth-in-profit-1201445854/ [Accessed 03/03/15].

Benecke, J. (2014). Why don't we see LGBT parents portrayed in children's films? The Guardian. March 25 2014. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/mar/25/gay-parents-kids-films-pixar-disney-frozen. [Accessed 02/03/15].

Presse, A. F. (2013). Gay Parents On TV: Why The 'New Normal' Is No Longer Just The Nuclear Family. Huffington Post. July 12 2013. [Online]. Available at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/07/gay-parents-tv_n_4402297.html [Accessed 01/03/15].

Stonewall (N.D.). Section 28. [Online]. Available at: http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_school/what_the_law_says/8800.asp [Accessed 01/03/15].

Thinkbox. (2014). Viewing figures for 2014 show changing TV landscape. [Online]. Available at:http://www.thinkbox.tv/viewing-figures-for-2014-show-changing-tv-landscape. [Accessed 01/03/15].

Todd, M. (2012) Move over SpongeBob – the kids' TV closet is full of gay characters. The Guardian. [Online]. Available at:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/22/spongebob-gay-kids-tv-closet [Accessed 04/03/15].

Vincent, A. (2014). Iranian Modern Family remake leaves out gay couple. The Telegraph. July 03 2014. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10943738/Iranian-Modern-Family-remake-leaves-out-gay-couple.html [Accessed 25/02/15].

Wheaton, O. Winnie the Pooh branded a ‘hermaphrodite’ and ‘inappropriate for children’. Metro. November 21 2014. [Online]. Available at:http://metro.co.uk/2014/11/21/winnie-the-pooh-branded-a-hermaphrodite-and-inappropriate-for-children-by-cruel-polish-town-4957017/ [Accessed 20/02/15].

What do we want? When do we want it?

Much of this blog so far has focused on criticising current broadcasting standards and exploring the effects of this on LGB audiences within a trans-media landscape. Now I want to take a look at what LGB audiences actually watch. For the first time in 2013, the BBC included a new question in it’s Audience Research Survey - it asked if the participant was lesbian, gay or bisexual. Out of 20,000 respondents, 1,000 answered yes to the question. The BBC then took this data and compiled a series of graphs pointing to what these audiences enjoy watching. The results didn't exactly break out of expectations with the most popular show for gay/ bisexual men in the 16-34 category being ITV’s Vicious (2013-) (BBC, 2013), a show staring two gay protagonists. The BBC were enthusiastic about the findings, writing (Ruth, 2013):

The results make for fascinating reading. They confirm that LGB audiences are drawn to LGB (or gay-friendly) talent and portrayal – whether as presenters or contestants (Great British Bake Off, Alan Carr, Celebrity Big Brother), subjects, actors or characters (Downton Abbey, Being Human,Modern Family, Vicious, Glee, Kenny Everett and the soaps).

Mark Lawson (2013) takes a more cynical approach noting that the finding “may be about as surprising as the revelation that the Pope had been caught watching tapes of Songs Of Praise.”. What Lawson does raise though are important issues surrounding how useful these findings actually are and why they were requested in the first place. The BBC claim that it is their duty, as a PSB, to serve all licence fee payers. While these findings do reveal that LGB (the BBC's decision to leave out the T due to claiming another study would be done for transgender audiences) audiences have different tastes than that of their straight counterparts, as I have mentioned earlier there is a problem with labelling a programme as LGB friendly in that a) it has the tendency to discourage hetrosexual viewers (Becker, 2006) and b) it risks narrowly defining the tastes of this varied and vast audience, many of whom may not have come-out and many not have responded as lesbian, gay or bisexual in the survey itself. Lawson brings us back to my earlier post on what I termed ‘The Paradox’ in which:

The days of "don't ask, don't tell" had many faults but a policy of "do ask, do tell" – for audiences and performers – has the potential to confine diverse subject matter to niche shows rather than the mainstream.

In the time between the publishing of these results and now there has been little change in attitudes towards on-screen portrayals of gay protagonists, evidenced by their sheer lack of them on TV (Cain, 2015) despite numerous studies pointing clearing towards an increasingly diverse and tolerant society (Reid, 2014). When on screen homosexuality/ bisexuality is approached, i.e. Captain Jack in Torchwood or Johnny Carter in Eastenders, there is still a tip-toeing around creating gay characters that are dislikable or with just as complex a personality as many characters of hetrosexual orientation within shows such as Broadchurch (ITV, 2013-), Wolff Hall (2015-) or Call the Midwife (BBC, 2012-). The finishing of the first series of Russell T. Davis’s new show last week wasn’t the ratings hit Channel 4 were hoping for (Lucas, 2015) but is this an indication that gay protagonists don’t appeal to straight audiences or has it simply highlighted the problem with targeting an LGB audience?

Bibliography:

BBC. (2013). LGB Audence Resrearch Charts. British Broadcasting Corporation. [Online]. Available at: www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01k8rjg/p01k8s8f. [Accessed 27/02/15].

Becker, R. (2006) Gay TV: Straight America. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.

Cain, M. (2015). Why is television still ignoring gay lives?. The Independent. January 03 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/why-is-television-still-ignoring-gay-lives-9955101.html. [Accessed 20/02/15].

Lawson, M. (2013). Revelation that gay audiences like Vicious, Bake Off and Splash! risks perpetuating gay stereotypes. The Guardian. October 31 2013. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2013/oct/31/gay-audiences-vicious-bake-off-splash. [Accessed 01/03/15].

Lucas, J. P. Cucumber is disappointing TV – which is why we need more gay dramas. The Guardian. February 5 2015. [Online]. Available at:http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2015/feb/05/cucumber-not-very-good-need-more-gay-tv. [Accessed 04/03/15].

Reid, S. (2014). Stigma and discrimination – are attitudes changing?. NatCen Social Research. November 27 2014. [Online]. Available at:http://www.natcen.ac.uk/blog/stigma-and-discrimination-%E2%80%93-are-attitudes-changing. [Accessed 02/03/15].

Ruth, A. (2013). What do lesbian, gay and bisexual audiences really watch on TV?. BBC. October 25 2013. [Online]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/424be06c-fa08-3409-8341-c55490f52d07. [Accessed 27/02/15].

BBC Archives

In my last post I talked about the importance of access to archive programming. Here I would like to take a closer look at a the BBC drama Christopher and His Kind (2011), an adaptation of the famous Christopher Isherwood novel, which was last broadcast on July 2011. On the official BBC website there is no information on when it will be broadcast next and only 4 short clips are available to watch (BBC). It can’t even be purchased through the BBC Store and is only available on Amazon for £11.25 (as of 25th Feburary 2015). The economic argument is reasonable and DVD sales provide an extra stream of revenue for this organisation already making tough cutbacks but they also have a successful online platform and with DVD sales declining (Dekel, 2015) it could be argued the fact the BBC doesn't have a service (whether subscription, advertising or one-time rental based) to legally view their archives is a disservice both them and to the licence fee payers. It seems to me that already marginalised audiences should be provided access to the content they they have helped to pay for, audiences that are frequently required to view content that reflects their lives in inconvenient time-slots already.

A Still from Christopher and His Kind

While Channel 4 might offer previous series of Queer as Folk for free the economic pressures placed on them to collect advertising revenue from their popular 4OD service has meant that outside of the 30-day window you must sign up to an account with them, handing over your personal details. For many closeted young people, as well as closeted adults, this is problematic. Yet of course they must fund their programmes and an increasingly important way of doing this is through the collection of user data which can then be sold on to advertisers (Channel 4, N.D.) and the recent select committee report on the future of the BBC recommended new privacy invasion measures to catch Licence-fee evaders (Swinford, 2015). They may also adopt another 4OD tactic of not allow their content to be played though a private browsing tab, which is because computer cookies and browser history can't be accessed this way, again opening the gate for more sensitive and personal information to be sent to Google and ISP providers, which Snowden helped reveal is being collected in alarmingly high rates (Kobie, 2015) without people's consent or knowledge by governments around the world.

4OD Interface

In his book 'The Business of Media Distribution', Jeffrey Ulin states in regard to Intellectual property rights and the internet (pg. 31): 

Everyone in a segment is fearful of a different right cannibalizing its space, and accordingly the language of windows and distribution is all about holdbacks, exclusivity, and the term to exploit the rights.The is the heart of the clash with Internet opportunities, for the greatest successes of the Web tend to be tied to free and ubiquitous access.

Of course the BBC need to take advantage of all potential revenue streams but just maybe we should consider the effects and repercussions of not allowing an already marginalised and often invisible community access to the small amount of content targeted to them and we should also consider the problems that not being able to watch this content privately also throws up. Despite the BBC's transparency when it comes to it's finances it is not clear how much revenue is actually generated through DVD sales as their 2014 financial statement places it under 'other income' which they state includes (pg. 17),

Revenue recognition in BBC Worldwide is complex, with a number of different revenue streams including sale of content to global broadcasters, subscription income, carriage agreements with cable operators and revenue from the sale of physical and digital products.

Maybe this is one area on which we need more clarity from the BBC and when young people are still committing suicide at alarming rates for fear that they might be gay (Youth Chances, 2014) then access to content that shows them they aren’t alone is of the utmost importance and it is time for the BBC to not let IP, copyright and the potential for economic gain to stand in the way of their duty as a PSB.

Bibliography:

BBC. (2014). BBC Full Financial Statements 2013/14. [Online]. Available at: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/pdf/2013-14/BBC_Financial_statements_201314.pdf [Accessed 03/03/2015].

Dekel, J. All formats must die: How home video is dealing with the decline of DVD and the rise of streaming. National Post. February 20 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/20/all-formats-must-die-how-home-video-is-dealing-with-the-decline-of-dvd-and-the-rise-of-streaming/. [Accessed 28/02/15].

Kobie, N. (2015). From GCHQ to tech giants: why the fight for your personal data matters. The Guardian. March 3 2015. [Online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/03/gchq-tech-giants-fight-for-personal-data. [Accessed 03/03/15].

Swinford, S. (2015). BBC could get power to access private data. The Telegraph. February 12 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/11409883/BBC-could-get-power-to-access-private-data.html. [Accessed 02/03/15].

Ulin, J. C. (2010). The Business of Media Distribution. Focal Press: Burlington.

Youth Chances. (2014). Summary of First Findings: the experiences of LGBTQ young people in England. [Online]. Available at: http://www.youthchances.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/YC_REPORT_FirstFindings_2014.pdf [Accessed 02/03/15].

PSB Archives

With the BBC future report just recently released (Plunkett, 2015) and with the licence fee coming under increasing pressure to provide ‘value for money’ (Aitken, 2015) this report has highlighted key areas that require reform, which includes the loophole allowing homes to watch television via the iPlayer and avoid paying the licence fee, legally - an option that according to Ofcom nearly a million homes have opted for (2014). Yet, on the whole it seems like a positive outcome for the corporation and the director general Tony Hall has welcomed the report, claiming that the committee has given the licence fee at least another decade (Martinson, 2015).

The BBC is a world-renowned service that caters for many tastes and while it is important that the important work the BBC does is not lost, it can be helpful to look at alternatives to this model particularly when the people who provide the most funding to the BBC, the licence fee payers, are not provided with access to the content it produces. This is particularly important for LGB audiences and the fact that LGB programming is shown with little regularity and often pushed to the fringes of the schedule, access to that content online post-broadcast is vital for this community. It is commendable that the BBC have just introduced a new iPlayer policy that opens up a window of 30-day catch up but they are yet to go as far as channel 4 who have, with 4OD, created a catalogue of programming, stretching back many years, all accessible for free (Khan, 2009).

Personally, I can remember the impact that secretly accessing an episode of Queer as Folk had in helping me to discover my sexual identity. I didn’t watch it on television, not just for fear of being noticed but also because the re-runs were on after 11pm. I could, in the privacy of my room, view a programme that I felt connected to in some way, despite the sensational and dramatic characters whose lives were far removed from my own. That is why access to the LGBT content outputted by the BBC is vital for this community. The BBC is being squeezed, cut backs are being made and it isn't an organisation without controversy (Martinson, 2015) but this is affecting the access licence-fee payers have to content. After a programme is broadcast and the 30-iplayer window is over, it must be bought either through a VOD service or on DVD/ Blu-ray. This is what we need to reconsider. There is so much interesting content that licence fee payers have missed, didn’t get a chance to see and must now pay extra because they didn’t make the time slot.

Bibliography:

Aitken, R. Why the BBC doesn't deserve to have the licence fee increased. The Telegraph. February 28 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11442130/Why-the-BBC-doesnt-deserve-to-have-the-licence-fee-increased.html [Accessed 28/02/15].

Khan, U. (2009). Channel 4 creates 4oD online back catalogue free of charge. The Telegraph. June 8 2009. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/5476217/Channel-4-creates-4oD-online-back-catalogue-free-of-charge.html [Accessed 01/03/15].

Martinson, J. (2015). BBC licence fee good for at least another decade, says director general. The Guardian. March 2 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/02/bbc-licence-fee-10-years-director-general-tony-hall [Accessed: 02/03/15].

Ofcom. (2014). Infrastructure Report 2014. [Online]. Available at: stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/infrastructure/2014/infrastructure-14.pdf. [Accessed 01/03/15]. 

Plunkett, J. (2015). BBC future report: no long-term licence fee; end of the trust; less content is more. The Guardian. February 26 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/26/bbc-future-report-no-long-term-licence-fee-end-of-the-trust-less-content-is-more. [Accessed 26/02/15].

Access for All

As I mentioned in my previous article, fear regarding copyright and the complex laws surrounding it is harming access to the wealth of information and creative programming out there. It is important to acknowledge that advertising revenue is vital for the majority of broadcasters. Yet at the same time the ‘super-platforms’ of Google, Amazon, and Facebook have gained the largest market capitalisation out of the top industry players (Accenture, 2014). These companies understand customer/ viewer behaviour in more detail than has even been possible through the measurements of BARB in the UK and Nielsen in the US. The internet is a different environment to what broadcast TV is predicated on and a vast amount of data can be collected on any one single user and then used to target ads through the use of complex algorithms. Facebook, the world’s largest social network earns $1 Billion dollars per year through it’s Ad Exchange. Amazon, the world’s largest retailer and Google, the world’s largest search engine have vast swathes of user information and viewing/ searching habits that they can offer extremely targeted advertising, the revenues of which are soon to take over that of broadcasting (Hof, 2014). Broadcasters then are at risk of losing their largest generator of income and must adapt quickly in order to keep hold of their market share. Innovations such as second screen and ‘dynamic ad insertion’ (Comcast, 2012) technology is an attempt at continuing to attract lucrative advertising deals but recent statistics have shown that digital ad revenue has, for the first time, taken over from broadcast TV (Koetsier, 2014).

What has this got to do with LGBT and television? Well, just as I highlighted in my earlier post the importance of access to content for LGBT audience who have a notoriously small airtime is great. As Netzley’s 2010 study 'Visibility that Demystifies' highlights, 7.5% of all characters coded from the 10 most popular primetime fictional network programmes studied were lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Of course the LGBT population is small, estimates sit at around 3.8% of the USA population (Howden and Mayer, 2011) while 11% admitted to having sam-sex attraction without defining as LGB or T. I would refute the argument that these figures should directly correlate into on-screen presentation after decades of invisibility. Of course in the five years since that study many developments in televisual representation have changed and with the introduction this month of the UK’s Silvermouse programme attempts are being made by broadcasters to address the issue (Campelli, 2015). But if viewing habits have changed towards a more on-demand and decentralised system, then broadcasters need to become more aware of the value of the content that currently isn’t accessible, at least legally, and that by making their archives available via streaming services, online and on-demand they have the potential to expand their current revenue streams and to capitalise on a market which is currently being dominated by super-platforms while also offering a greater range of content to LGBT audiences.

The problem then isn’t the fact that networks simply can’t gain as much information on their viewers as these internet conglomerates but what they can do to utilise the content already at their disposal. Also, as Kalanje (2005) highlights there is a pressing need for organisations to see the leverage of intellectual property beyond the ‘right to exclude’ and if broadcasters worked together we could create an environment where we would have access to content that caters for all and one that encourages exploration and discovery.

Bibliography:

Campelli, M. (2015). Diversity: indies speak out. Broadcast Now. January 22 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/broadcasters/diversity-indies-speak-out/5082054.article. [Accessed 19/03/15].

Edwards, J. (2012). ANALYST: Facebook Is Generating $1 Billion A Year From Its Ad Exchange. Business Insider. [Online]. Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/facebooks-fbx-revenues-are-1-billion-per-year-2012-11#ixzz3UF8xV5wX. [Accessed 26/02/15].

Howden, L. M. and Mayer, J. A. (2011). Age and Sex Composition: 2010. [Online]. Available at:http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf. [Access 22/02/15].

Kalanje, C. (N.D.). Leveraging Intellectual Property: Beyond the `Right to Exclude'. World Intellectual Property Organisation. [Online]. Available at: http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/leveraging_ip_fulltext.html#P8_119. [Accessed 20/02/15].

Radical TV

As Becker (pg. 389, 2006) points out, “Throughout its first four decades, television virtually denied the existence of homosexuality.” The 90’s marked a huge change in the perceptions and representations of homosexual characters on television and while there was a clearly more progressive trend, Becker also argues that “network executives have incorporated gay and lesbian material into their prime-time lineups in order to attract an audience of “sophisticated, upscale, college-educated and liberally minded adults.” (pg. 389) and in turn attracting a more financially influential audience for advertisers. The 90s posed a time of immense change for gay rights which was influenced by a monumental change for the gay community though access to the internet (Rosenfield, Thomas, 2012) changing drastically the way in which gay people interacted, communicated and came together and which many gay people still require just in order to communicate secretly within countries with strict anti-homosexuality laws (Chulov, 2014).

The new HBO series Looking (2014-) has received much praise both home and away for it’s honest portrayal of gay characters living in the USA today. Some argue this show mark an important step forward in Western LGB representation (Moylan, 2015) wherein a show can have three gay central characters on prime-time while others argue that it does little to curb the already documented fact that HBO and cable networks have more freedom to produce content other mainstream networks are reluctant to approach. As Netzley's 2010 study into gay representation on television highlights, 

[...] gay characters were more likely to be depicted as sexually active on cable television than they were on commercial broadcast television, and they were more likely to be relegated to guest star status on commercial broadcast television than on cable television.

HBO are, of course, a subscription based network therefor enjoy more freedoms from FCC regulations while advertising is still the largest revenue generator for the majority of networks (Accenture, 2014). Yet a chief concern for advertisers is the products they are seen to associate with (Freitas, 2007) as demonstrated by Bravo's accidental airing of Applebee's commercial during a reality TV show about gay weddings and Bravo's subsequent apology in 2003. So while networks are keen to appeal to an upmarket, liberal audience they also have to juggle the needs of advertisers who are wary about the kinds of products they are seen to support, reinforced by the slow and hesitant take up of advertising in an online, dynamic environment which is still yet to surpass that of broadcast advertising revenue (PWC, 2014).

What Looking does then is new - it doesn’t set out to be provocative and groundbreaking like Queer as Folk (1999-2000) did in the 90s but simply honest. While it would be positive to see a long running show that focused on homosexual characters either in America or in the UK on a major broadcast network, it seems that economical fear is driving increasingly more decisions within networks, something just last year David Abraham warmed UK broadcasters about (2014), and the increased competition from other sources of media has placed increasing pressure on networks and channels across the board (Accenture, 2014). The scale on which mergers and acquisitions are taking place (Brennan, 2014) (209 deals just last year totalling $74 billion) is an indication of an industry regressing back to the monopolisation and centralised system of television and in the era of searching, not catching, this economic fear and competition seems to be holding back the potential for truly socially progressive (and occasionally radical) content.

Bibliography:

Becker, R. (2006). Gay TV and Straight America. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.

Brennan, M. (2014). Huge media mergers are booming in 2014. CNBC. May 15 2014. [Online]. Available at: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101676246. [Accessed: 20/02/15].

Freitas, A. (2007). Gay Programming, Gay Publics: Public and Private tensions in Lesbian and Gay Cable Channels . In S. Banet-Weiser, C. Chris and A. Freitas (Eds.). Cable Visions: Television Beyond Broadcasting. New York, New York University Press, pp. 215- 233.

Moylan, B. (2015). Looking season two: TV's only gay show is growing towards greatness. The Guardian. January 12 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/jan/12/looking-review-tvs-only-gay-show-is-growing-towards-greatness. [Accessed: 13/01/15].

Netzley, S. B. (2010). Visibility That Demystifies: Gays, Gender, and Sex on Television. Journal of Homosexuality, 57:8, 968-986.

PWC, (2014). TV Advertising: Key insights at a glance. PricewaterhouseCoopers. [Online]. Available at: http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/global-entertainment- media-outlook/segment-insights/tv-advertising.jhtml 

Rosenfeld, M. J. and Thomas, R. J. (2012). Searching for a Mate: The Rise of the Internet as a Social Intermediary. American Sociological Review 77(4): 523-547

LGBT Channels - Harmful or Helpful?

American Television is predicated on an entirely different model to that in the UK. The introduction of Cable in America in 1948 (NCTA, 2010) proved highly successful and it’s popular uptake means that to this day is the most popular way of accessing television in America. This system is predicated on a subscription based model and viewers choose which channels they which to have access to and pay a fee in order to gain it (Lotz, 2007). Often smaller, more niche channels are subsidised with advertising in order to keep the subscription fees low. US television attempted to do something no other country had tried to do before by creating the first LGBT targeted subscription-based channel. It failed. How could this be when at the time there were very few programmes catering to this market and with gay men and lesbians taking up around 6.5% of the TV market in the US there was clearly a demand (Freitas, 2007).

The problem is that which every niche channel is predicated - the imagined community. But then what makes networks like Bravo or Tuff TV so successful? Well, first of all it is important to remember that during the 70s the law, as well as the social stigma attached to being gay, meant there was a much greater pressure for LGB people to stay in the closet (Rosen, 2014). The real fear of having a friend or family member flicking through your channels and coming across a subscription to a channel dedicated to gay programming could put you in difficult position. Gay people are not one single unified entity and have tastes as varied as their hetrosexual counterparts.

The age old camp stereotype of the gay man who adopts feminine characteristics is slowly beginning to erode and this is in part thanks to television programmes and channels that challenge these perceptions. To create a channel dedicated to the tastes of LGBT people as though lesbian, gay and bisexual people have similar tastes is harmful. It quickly becomes easy to forget the differences that separate gay men and lesbians are the same differences that separate hetrosexual men from women. The American free market system of television consumption might open up opportunities for these channels to exist but their creation could be damaging perceptions of LGBT people by helping to create further distinctions while alienating mainstream audiences from gay story lines and characters. Yet Logo TV, a current LGBT catering channel, have just announced their most successful year since their conception 10 years ago and plans to expand (Nichols, 2015). On their website, Logo TV describes themselves as:

[...] a gateway to a world where wildly original characters live surprising and unapologetic lives. Entertaining a social, savvy audience of gay trendsetters, Logo TV also attracts a straight audience that wants to be ahead of the curve.

It is not to say that these differences shouldn’t be celebrated or explored but the channels on which they are distributed, and the necessity to actively subscribe to them in order to view the content they broadcast, I believe perpetuate and exaggerate a divide this only helps to breed homophobia.

Bibliography:

Freitas, A. (2007) If It’s Not TV, What Is It? The Case of U.S. Subscription Television. Gay Programming, Gay Publics. In S. Banet-Weiser, C. Chris and A. Freitas (Eds.). Cable Visions: Television Beyond Broadcasting. New York: New York University Press.

Lotz, A. D. (2007) If It’s Not TV, What Is It? The Case of U.S. Subscription Television. . In S. Banet-Weiser, C. Chris and A. Freitas (Eds.). Cable Visions: Television Beyond Broadcasting. New York: New York University Press, pp. 85- 103.

Nichols, J. M. (2015). Logo TV Announces Largest Programming Slate Ever For 10th Anniversary. Huffington Post. Janurary 11 2015. [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/11/logo-programming-2015_n_6446652.html [Accessed: 12/01/15].

Rosen, R. (2014). A Glimpse Into 1970s Gay Activism. The Atlantic. February 2014. [Online]. Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/a-glimpse-into-1970s-gay-activism/284077/. [Accessed 01/012/15].