You got it, GH. Everybody wants to be a part of something that is somehow
made more interesting, noteworthy or legitimate by virtue of appearing on
TV. Those of us in the biz may seem jaded or snide because we lost our
"Wow, I'm on TV." glamour glaze years ago. Hey, it's just a job, y'know? TV
CAN do more harm than good. I've gone over that ground before on this list,
and Matt Murray reprinted one of my TV posts this week already. I will add,
however, that there are areas of the country that may want to increase their
Solo event entry numbers from time to time. If that's the case, then there
should be some cool Solo2 stock footage on file at the National office that
those clubs can buy for a nominal fee and give to TV stations as a tease to
come out and shoot a feature on a "little known sport". (We call these
kinds of features "Fluff pieces" by the way...) Anyway, the TV stations can
use the video as B-Roll in addition to anything they may shoot at the event.
Charity events work best for this kind of thing. Plus, it gives the Solo2
crowd a civic minded image, rather than the image of crazed Walter Mitty
types who could care less about burning petro chemicals and messing with the
environment... ;-)
It's all image, folks.
Rich Fletcher
Group Four Teleproductions, Inc. since 1983.
> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:21:26 EST
> From: Ghsharp@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Solo on TV
>
> OK, my curiosity has finally gotten the best of me.....
>
> To those who are certain that we can and should get Solo on TV, what
> do you see as the benefits (direct or otherwise) from accomplishing
> that goal? Benefits to the SCCA, to your local club, to yourself, to the
> Solo community as a whole?
>
> This topic continues to come up for discussion again and again, and no
> one ever gets past the argument over initial costs and who might foot
> the bill. What's our motivation for doing this? Has anyone thought far
> enough ahead to consider what the unintended consequences of
> large-scale public exposure to our sport *could* mean to its future, and
> what that future might look like? Bob Tunnell and Rich Fletcher both
> addressed this point briefly in their posts from a year or more ago, but
> every discussion since has completely ignored their comments, IMO.
>
> I have no intention of taking sides in the discussion, it simply puzzles
> me that everyone advocating putting Solo on TV seems to assume that
> nothing but good things would come out of it.
>
> GH
/// autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe autox
///
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
|