|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
If A 'Green' TV Bomb Explodes In A Stadium, Will Anyone See It? Michael Levine NBC's three-hour primetime "Live Earth" special, featuring highlights from the July 7th concerts, failed to generate much enthusiasm in the ratings.
The estimated 2.7 million audience was slightly under the 3 million viewers NBC has averaged on Saturday nights in the summer, already the least popular night of television. How could such a highly touted event turn into such a bomb? And what does it mean for Al Gore and for the Green Movement itself? It's easy to see how this ratings rout occurred. Promoters didn't indicate plainly enough what they "wanted" from their global audience. "Saving the planet" was clear, but how was not adequately defined beyond turning off lights and boycotting SUVs, nor was the message's impact made subject to any demonstrable metrics. "Increasing awareness" is difficult, though not impossible, to quantify overnight. Not doing so in this age of instantaneous feedback is a setback from the start.
Live Earth admirably tried encouraging behavioral change. We are wasteful. But behavioral change is glacial, especially in adults. Baby Boomers can certainly make a difference, but do their kids get it? We can only hope so. Does greener living resonate with the Gen Xers or, better yet, the iPotters, weaned on disposability? The entire electronics industry – today's virtual umbilical cord – is based on an economic conspiracy that actually rewards replacement over repair. Concert and coverage failed for many reasons, including a failure to connect participation to any identifiable organization and/or political initiative, as at Live Aid, Comic Relief or Live8. Al Gore created a non-profit organization to perpetuate Live Earth's goals, but I still can't tell you the name of it, or what it does specifically. Live Aid helped Ethiopian famine relief. Comic Relief helped (and still does) the homeless in America. Live8 contributed toward Third World debt relief and also linked itself to the G8 Summit two days later. Money it raised lowered debt, "raised awareness" of approximately 26 million people around the world (measured almost instantly by SMS-messages sent to a designated number), and tangibly proved massive individual support for its cause ... immediately. Compared to its predecessors, Live Earth never even got off the ground relating audience participation to any visible effect. No doubt we're all aware of global warming now. How can you tell? Well…that's a tough one. Changing light bulbs is laudable, but frankly, it's irrelevant if governments don't do something to clean up industrial waste, toxic runoff, and other remarkable byproducts of better living through chemistry. Remarkably, NBC and MSNBC failed to effectively market their own media extravaganza. Why? Perhaps because they spent their time and energies promoting another mega-concert just one week before – the concert for the late Princess Diana. NBC/MSNBC had an exclusive on all media coverage of the Live Earth concerts in the U.S. Considering the synergy of broadcast, broadband, radio and additional media under the purview of this behemoth, advance promotion of Live Earth was abysmal.
Story Continues Below
NBC committed marketing overkill for All Things Diana (with cross promotion on nearly every NBC/MSNBC program), while ignoring Live Earth almost to the point of professional incompetence. Incomprehensibly, NBC failed to "show the product." With concerts playing worldwide over a 24-hr. period, NBC elected to air only 3 hours…with much of it pre-edited. How on earth anyone at the network considers this a creative or cost-efficient use of exclusive broadcast rights is beyond my wildest imagination.
In an age of global connectivity twinned with the concerts' stated message of global responsibility, the US audience barely got a sense of connection to any other locations or participants. Poor direction also didn't help. How many people knew, or know now, that folks who sent an SMS-txt message were instantly identified by first name and city/state/country on a huge LCD crawl that ran across the stage? This may have been the sole and truest interactive marker and "reward" for viewer participation – immediate global recognition for supporting the message – and we hardly saw it. If I were a sponsor, I'd be furious. Last, but not least, NBC failed to make Live Earth coverage look "super cool." It has every trick available to make visually stimulating programming, and this just wasn't. NBC offered no meaningful incentive for a digitally informed viewer to watch this show on TV…far better to watch online with the ability to alternate between live "hot" performances than to be force fed the pabulum offered by NBC. Unfortunately, the documentary snippets that received seemingly more air time than the music (confession: my perception, not verified) only made me wonder what I was really watching. Was it a PBS-type pledge drive with interstitial music, or a concert without enough music, serving up infomercials as filler? This was not just any concert, but a global concert marathon. NBC treated it with the same narrow focus foisted on its Olympics audience (another shrinking market. Coincidence?).
Coverage was embarrassing in its pronounced bias toward US and Euro-centric bands. If I watch an international phenomenon, I want exposure to content not normally on my own radar. This should have been a splendid spectacle for listening to bands and music I've never heard. What a waste. Coverage failed for intangible reasons, too. Television has become largely a vehicle for video humiliation. "American Idol," "Survivor" and Howard Dean's "Yee-hah" moment are examples. People watch TV to see others in pain, especially from public humiliation. This is actually more important than any other reason. Live Earth provided none. There was no public humiliation, other than the occasional celebrity reading off a teleprompter. No wardrobe malfunction. Nothing to make fun of. No one to ridicule. We've become shallow. Technology has afflicted us with a form of Attention Deficit Disorder: we're "in touch," but can't connect for any meaningful amount of time or depth. Live Earth attempted to provide real substance. We, however, no longer know how to digest it.
So while producers shot impressive documentaries that were wide in scope, TV viewers only saw thin clips – and that's a pity – with instructions to visit websites for the complete story. Every time the music and message started to merge, NBC Television actually encouraged viewers to switch to the Internet! Dismal ratings? Go figure. What does this mean for Al Gore? Nothing, really. Gore's been promoting public responsibility about climate change for 30 years. He was ahead of his time when he started; his cause has become popular in his lifetime. That's an admirable achievement. According to the former Vice President, Live Earth is a long-term campaign and this was only the beginning. Ironically, the Live Earth concerts may have finally exhausted a tried-and-true formula for fundraising and community building. Two huge televised concerts in one week simply burned out viewers.
Moreover, the cost of producing Live Earth in terms of its own generated carbon emissions has prompted a backlash against performers and producers alike, leaving many to question not only some artists' sincerity, but also the authenticity of the Live Earth concerts as a responsible vehicle for conveying global warming issues. Gore could have asked producers and artists to participate according to even "greener" standards than they did. Conservation-minded musicians might consider committing to a "Climate Change Performance Pledge." If musicians are to become change catalysts themselves, they must address their own carbon footprints from touring, set-ups for concerts, busses, private jets, packaging of their CDs and DVDs, and the merchandise that is sold where they perform, for starters.
In other words, if it's stars and bands and celebrities we glorify and emulate – if they are role models as we insist – then, in the words of Peter Frampton, "I want you/to show me the way/day after day." The Inconvenient Truth is that when it comes to global warming and conservation, we don't want to be inconvenienced.
Michael Levine is the founder of the prominent PR firm LCO-Levine Communications Office based in Los Angeles http://www.lcoonline.com and is the author of 18 books.
Editor's note:
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2008 NewsMax.Com |