LEVELS OF ANALYSIS
National and international political economy and policy
The production of particular media artefacts within specific industrial
systems obviously takes place within more general contexts. Among the most
influential works at this level are those exploring differences between commercial
broadcasting or film industries and media reliant on various forms of state support
(e.g., Blumler 1992; Katz and Wedell 1977; Schiller 1969). Although analyses of
production practices generally acknowledge such differences, broad
assumptions rather than detailed analysis commonly guide the study of the
relations between policy and production. This is so, in part, because descriptive
and source material related to media policy often focuses on generalizations
rather than cases, while detailed case studies take the constraints of political
economy for granted. Overlooked in both models is the fact that individual
productions are enabled as well as constrained by general conditions. Varied
responses to those conditions illuminate the complexity of the larger structures,
reminding us that while media production is indeed a modern, factory product, the
differences among the products are as telling as their similarities. Nevertheless, a
number of policies works provide useful contextual information for production
research. Among them, Alexander et al. (1998), Hoskins et al. (1997), and Moran
(1996) offer extensive overviews of contemporary media industry policies that
can be applied analytically.
Some studies do, in fact, bring together the macro-levels of policy and
economic structure with analyses of cases. They include explorations of the ways
in which media products are affected by social problems, such as ‘censorship’ or
‘violence.’ Doherty (1999) and Gardner (1987) provide examples of the first topic,
showing how particular American films were produced before and during periods
of heavy social control. Cowan (1979) focuses on engagements with policy by
individuals (e.g., Norman Lear) and institutions (e.g., The Writers Guild of America)
regarding sex and violence on television and shows how production strategies
were affected by congressional actions mandating a ‘family hour’ for commercial
television.
As these publications suggest, a major approach to studying the relationship
between policy and production has been historical. Boddy (1990), for example,
explores relations among television executives, the U.S. Congress, and television
critics in the 1950s. He carefully establishes how, in the struggle among these
groups, industry executives managed to secure their economic interests through
legislative and judicial decision-making. The outcome of these battles led to major
industry developments, such as the shift from ‘live’ television production in New
York to filmed programming from Hollywood, resulting in fundamental changes in
aesthetics, altered production practices, and ultimately the distinctive place of
television fiction in U.S. culture.
Methodologically, all these works have depended on the analysis of archival
data. While public policy records are usually freely available, corporate papers
have sometimes been deposited in reference archives, making access for
researchers relatively simple. In other cases, such materials may be proprietary
and access severely restricted. These records are essential for production
research, because the documents contain evidence both of conflicting points of
view and of concrete decision-making related to media artefacts.
Specific Industrial Contexts
Historical approaches have also been prominent in research examining the
institutional configuration of media industries, but here analysis is focused more
precisely on specific industrial practices. Among the strongest examples is The
Classical Hollywood Cinema (Bordwell et al. 1985), which examined the
development of the Hollywood film industry and the resulting reliance on a
particular narrative style, as indicated in the title. The study tracks the
establishment of regularized industrial strategies, consequent divisions of labor,
instrumental applications of new technologies, and other features of the
Hollywood film factories. It suggests that, after a period of experimentation, the
U.S. film industry narrowed into certain industrial operations that were developed
in the service of narrative conventions. The analysis also demonstrates how this
general pattern of regularization was realized films. The central argument points
to the reduction of possible narrative strategies and, ultimately, of the styles,
genres, and meanings within an industry that was increasingly successful on its
own terms. The ideological result was the establishment of a particular cultural
meaning of ‘cinema’ to the exclusion or marginalization of alternative forms.
Here again, researchers rely heavily on primary historical records –
contracts, inter-office memoranda, extant interviews, handbooks, production
manuals, instructional pamphlets, variously revised scripts, and story conference
memoranda recording decision-making processes. These are explored in order to
describe, analyze, and contextualize the actual production practices involved in
film- and television making. Because sustained archival research is needed to
uncover more evidence, and because the study of media fiction, in particular, is of
relatively recent development, new histories continue to refine our knowledge of
much needed background and circumstances. Hilmes (1997), for example,
provided new information regarding the shifting arrangements among media
industries, including the radio industry, which have altered the cultural definition
of ‘film’ and ‘television’ in the U.S.A.
A contemporary example illustrates how this level of analysis takes research
beyond more generalized descriptions. Montgomery (1989) focused on the
different ways in which interest groups engage television networks in order to gain
a more favorable representation. Using interview and ethnographic methods, as
well as analysis of records and contracts, she also examined individual television
texts to show how these groups variously succeeded or failed in their attempts to
alter detailed television production practices. A similar case is in progress, and
invites study, as we write. In the U.S.A., the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People has recently secured contractual arrangements
with major television networks that will lead to the employment of more people
of color in television’s executive and creative communities (Jensen et al. 2000). In
this case, as in cases studied by Montgomery, interest groups have used
strategies, such as boycotts or threats of boycotts, which recognize the role
played by political economy and government policies in media production.
