Keywords

Televisión, quality measuring, social values, diversity

Abstract

One of the main objectives of this research has been to measure the quality of television programmes. The results that have been achieved give a symptomatic description of television nowadays. However, the most significant contribution lies in finding some specific and objectively acknowledged indicators in the field, in order to strive for and reach quality, if this is desired. The demand for better quality in television is neither new nor uniform, because different groups and sectors in society have been complaining for years against the presence of «junk television». This general dislike is addressed by the very same object -television- but with different requirements. The academic community, foundations, educational institutions as well as family associations and other groups show their concern for the kinds of representations of the world portrayed on the screen. Furthermore, mass media professionals and advertising companies also express a desire for a better quality in the products they support. Although it is hard to define «quality», as it seems a subjective term and of wide denotation, there is data that shows constant indicators and other criteria that could be complementary. Surprisingly, one of the main constants in defining television quality is that it should transmit positive values to society, such as tolerance, justice, peace (in opposition to any kind of violence whether physical or verbal), respect for diversity and protection of the weak. Other criteria emphasize professionalism (accuracy) and artistic quality. But above all, the value of diversity is highlighted (plurality in all aspects, in the content and format of the programmes). Critics are worried about every kind of distortion between television and the experiences of most parts of society, such as unimaginable situations or the massive presence of disintegrated families and magic denouement to character conflicts. Also, people without noble aims seem to cover the «real world», if the situations that dominate the screen at rating time are considered. Little time is left to display personal willingness, values that motivate action, the search for common welfare or for a fairer society. It is positively surprising that some businessmen from the mass media or advertising companies have stated their commitment to social values, even in written form, in agreements or in their business policies. Due to this, it is important and urgent not only to ask for coherence to the sectors that are responsible for the topics that are displayed on the screen but also to foster audience education so that it is the same audience that can be in charge of this demand. Many critics think that the agreement is impossible if those who produce television only consider the business and technical interest and forget two equally important aspects: on the one hand the function that television has in a democratic society and on the other hand, the consequences of a product of poor quality, beyond a high but short-termed rating. Reception research has shown that public behaves following two simultaneous logics that theyperfectly distinguish: the logic of television usage (what the public chooses to watch) and the logic of judgement (the public’s reflection on what they watch and their verdict).Hence, a programe with high rating is not a success if what really matters is the fidelity it achieves and the positive assessment of its quality. This index of television quality proposal can, therefore, be a contribution to achieve quality.

References

BLUMLER, J. (1992): Televisión e interés público. Barcelona, Bosch.

Link Google Scholar

BROADCASTING RESEARCH UNIT (1989): Quality in Television: Programmes, Programme Makers, Systems. London/Paris, John Libey.

Link Google Scholar

CEBRIÁN HERREROS, M. (2004): Modelos de televisión: generalista, temática y convergente. Barcelona, Piados.

Link Google Scholar

FABBRO, G.; FARRÉ, M.; PISCITELLI, A. y DEL BOSCO, P. (2004-2005):La calidad televisiva en Argentina. Universidad Austral, Buenos Aires. En prensa.

Link Google Scholar

FERRÉS, J. (1995): Televisión y educación. Barcelona, Paidós.

Link Google Scholar

GUTIÉRREZ-GEA, Ch. (2000): «Televisión y calidad: perspectivas de investigación y criterios de evaluación», en Zer. Revista de comunicación, N.9.

Link Google Scholar

HOFFMAN-RIEM, W. (1992): «La protección de valores vulnerables en el ordenamiento televisivo alemán», en Blumler, J. (coord.):Televisión e interés público. Barcelona, Bosch.

Link Google Scholar

LASAGNI, M.C. y RICCHERI, G. (1996): Televisione e qualitá. La ricerca internazionale. Il dibattito in Italia. Roma, RAI, ERI.

Link Google Scholar

NÚÑEZ-LADEVÉZE, L. (1991): Manual para periodismo. Barcelona, Ariel.

Link Google Scholar

ORZA, G. (2002): Programación televisiva. Buenos Aires, La Crujía.

Link Google Scholar

PÉREZ-TORNERO, J. M. (2003): «Televisión, Estado y Sociedad». Conferencia pronunciada en el marco de la XII Jornada Internacional de Comunicación de la Universidad Austral. Buenos Aires.

Link Google Scholar

ROSENGREN, K. (1991): «Quality in Programming: Views from the North», in Studies on Broadcasting, Theoretical ResearchCenter. Tokio, NHK Broadcasting Culture Research Institute.

Link Google Scholar

WOBER, J.M. (1990): The assessment of Television Quality. London, IBA Research Paper.

Link Google Scholar

Fundref

This work has no financial support

Crossmark

Technical information

Metrics

Metrics of this article

Views: 0

Abstract readings:

PDF downloads:

Full metrics of Comunicar 25

Views: 0

Abstract readings:

PDF downloads:

Cited by

Cites in Web of Science

Currently there are no citations to this document

Cites in Scopus

Currently there are no citations to this document

Cites in Google Scholar

Currently there are no citations to this document

Download

Alternative metrics

How to cite

Farré, M. (2005). Towards an index of television quality: an Argentinian experience. [Hacia un índice de la calidad televisiva: la experiencia de Argentina]. Comunicar, 25. https://doi.org/10.3916/C25-2005-154

Share

           

Post Office Box 527

21080 Huelva (Spain)

Administration

Editorial office

Creative Commons

This website uses cookies to obtain statistical data on the navigation of its users. If you continue to browse we consider that you accept its use. +info X