The SABC has this funny clause in its mandate that requires it “to nurture South African talent and train people in production skills and carry out research and development for the benefit of audiences.”
Not only must the SABC plough hundreds of millions into the local industry by way of commissioned programmes, but it also appears to have to train producers as well (just read the above-mentioned clause again).
This seems a bit unreasonable. If the SABC is already paying 30 percent more than market rates for commissioned programming, surely the producers can afford to train themselves?
Well, it is not that easy. If they don’t know what skills to learn, they will fall for all sorts of gimmicks that get them nowhere, and waste their money, while the purveyors of these dubious courses get rich.
So where do the new, trained and experienced producers come from? Some believe they evolve from big companies. As these individuals get more experienced and more ambitious, they spin off into small “boutique” production houses.
But what we tend to get from this system is a proliferation of “boutique production houses” with inadequate skills and business experience.
So the theorists have invented another one. They talk about training to “fast-track the process”. I always thought that “fast-tracking the process” translated into fewer people having to sign a cheque. But no, some seem to think we can train people in a shorter time than it takes to learn on the job.
I’m a trainer, and sometimes I confess I have made that claim (with my fingers crossed behind my back, and when I am desperate for money), but I really am not sure that it’s valid. There is just no evidence. No one keeps training records in the creative arts, as it is so difficult to evaluate.
So here’s another idea: It should be the responsibility of the SABC to expand the production sector by training people free of change. But there are so many film and TV schools in South Africa. If all the schools listed produce the students they say they do, we should be injecting at least 200 highly qualified producers and directors into the industry every year.
But we’re not – because there’s a vast difference between “highly qualified” and “highly experienced”.
What we should be doing is mixing the two together, and asking how can the TV schools work together with the broadcasters to ensure that people come onto the market with at least some realistic and practical experience?
Then to complicate it further, we have the “challenge” (nightmare I prefer to call it) of the new dynamic and changing environment.
We may well have a second pay-TV provider by the end of the year. People may soon be dumping their TV sets while they choose between large screen LCDs and their cellphones.
What with “pod-casting”, “ego casting” and “brand casting”, we may soon see the disappearance of broadcasters altogether.
We really should be throwing the old curricula out of the window, and get with it!
Howard Thomas has been working in entertainment and media for 36 years. He is a media business consultant, trainer and specialist in audience psychology.