Media Mayhem. And Then There Is...

C-SPAN. Yes, C-Span

Sam Feist is the newly appointed CEO of C-SPAN , recruited from CNN, where he was the Washington bureau chief. His career in public affairs programming began, he says, when as a ninth grader in Ridgefield, Connecticut, he organized a candidate debate for the town’s first selectman on behalf of the League of Women Voters.

C-SPAN leadership is a natural career pinnacle.

In a conversation as he was settling in, we focused on three issues that will shape the future for an enterprise that for forty-five years has been supported by cable companies. C-SPAN now consists of three television networks, a radio channel, and a website that maintains a vast archive of material — all available for free.

(1) Funding and Distribution. How to enhance the resources and reach of C-SPAN. The cable companies have provided almost 100 percent of C-SPAN’s revenues, and with the rise of competing streaming services, the viewership available to C-SPAN through cable has been reduced by as much as 40 percent.

(2) Programming. How to make best use of the 24/7 broadcast schedule — with live programming, events, documentaries, and interviews developed and hosted by C-SPAN staff. Full coverage of the Senate and the House of Representatives is, of course, the primary content when they are in session and was the initial reason for C-SPAN’s creation in 1979.

(3) Content Moderation. All callers to C-SPAN are screened before they get on the air. Now that Facebook, X, et al., have decided that anything goes when it comes to people’s comments, what will happen to C-SPAN’s discourse? Can it maintain logic, common sense, and accuracy?

************************

“Cord cutting from traditional cable and satellite companies has had an enormous impact on our distribution,” Feist says, “particularly as so many cable customers switch to YouTube TV, Fubo TV and Hulu, which don’t currently carry C-SPAN.”

From the outset, the cable industry has seen a benefit to broadcasting the sessions of Congress, where members can reach constituents directly — and without commentary, a political plus for them.

The owners of what are known in technical lingo as vMVPDs — “virtual Multichannel Video Programming Distributors” — like You Tube TV, Fubo TV and Hulu are all purely profit-focused. C-SPAN, by contrast, is considered a public service and not a financial asset.

So, why bother to carry it? the owners ask.

FAST channels — “Free Ad-Supported Television” — are the latest approach to streaming. From the earliest days of broadcast, viewers got whatever was on air without paying for it, and endured advertising in return. This has now become accepted practice in streaming as well. Today’s streaming behemoths like Netflix and Apple TV+ have vast numbers of paying subscribers and now seek growth by offering lower monthly fees to those viewers willing to watch ads in the middle of their programs.

If C-SPAN were to create a FAST of its own, would it for the first time in its history use advertising to pay for it?

C-SPAN’s challenge — and Feist’s immediate objective — is to persuade vMVPDs and FASTs to include C-SPAN in their packages to subscribers. There are two ways to do this: Start selling advertising would be the most dramatic change, or lobby members of Congress to take action, reminding them that C-SPAN covers what they do.

Politicians are always attuned to their self-interest, and Feist believes they may advocate for all streaming platforms to include C-SPAN. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Rep. Mike Flood (R-NE) are the first members of Congress to publicly make that case.

Feist is also exploring ways to add revenue in the manner of other nonprofit media outlets: subscriptions, donations, paid events, and philanthropic grants. He says that C-SPAN will not ask for government funding, as NPR and PBS still do — and which makes those networks subject to political pressure.

To repeat: C-SPAN is and never will be a government enterprise, but its purpose is conveyed in this motto: “Democracy Unfiltered.”

So, what all these acronyms and money issues mean for C-SPAN is this: The “good old days” of a single funding and distribution source (the cable industry) has to be reinvented for the digital era.

Now.

*******************

On the question of programming — what brings viewers to C-SPAN’s networks — Feist wants to emphasize live programs: news as it is being made. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News do that, surrounded by commentators describing what is happening and telling viewers what they should think.

C-SPAN can let viewers decide for themselves. But that means being present at those events, which in turn requires staff and cameras — back to funding.

My greatest personal interest is the programming that C-SPAN itself creates. For years, Booknotes, Brian Lamb’s Sunday evening interviews with authors, was C-SPAN’s most popular show. (C-SPAN does not collect audience ratings. But when I published books based on those conversations, they were national bestsellers.)

Lamb was insistent that he was not the “star” of Booknotes, but he definitely was, for his distinctive style of preparation and questioning. Like him, NPR and PBS hosts do not come draped in the glamour and paychecks of commercial newscasters. Their fans are drawn to the style they project — less bombastic, less opinionated, curious rather than pontifical.

Identifying talent is an art. There are many people with the right talent in the broader media world for C-SPAN to hire. Sam Feist and his colleagues need to look for them.

As a publisher, I have watched with interest and admiration the weekend programming of “Book TV,” two days during which nonfiction books are featured at events or interviews. The audience for book programming is significant; stores like Politics and Prose in Washington draw good-size audiences for their events and then stream most of them, which can attract thousands of views.

Feist intends to help venues improve their setting for events (lights and sound quality, for example). Making the authors and locations partners in production would enhance the experience for all concerned.

C-SPAN’s documentary series on presidents, first ladies, and other historical figures and periods have been very good. Again, the goal is programming that is absorbing, without becoming so expensive that it is out of reach.

So, this is the programming objective: Do more with what is already there. The memorable line from the film Field of Dreams applies: “If you build it, they will come.”

********************

How the viewer call-ins will evolve — the open lines for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are a unique feature of C-SPAN’s programs — in a world of social media free-for-all remains to be seen. In live programming, fact-checking isn’t feasible. When a caller descends into rants, conspiracies, or insults, the hosts have always had the prerogative to end the call.

Free speech and censorship are especially sensitive topics in this era. Maintaining standards is another of C-SPAN’s goals in our time of media mayhem.

When Sam Feist learned that C-SPAN was looking for a new CEO, he knew immediately that he wanted the job. Predictably there were those in the commercial media who said that he would be consigned to a niche.

Maybe, but what a classy niche to be in.

*********************

Two of the Platform Books books previously available in hardcover have now added paperbacks available by order wherever books are sold. They are: An Especially Good View: Watching History Happen (978-1735996875) and Would You Believe…The Helsinki Accords Changed the World? (978-1735996882).