RTV Theory and Practice - Special Issue

А few decades ago radio and TV workers were not asked to use radio and television as means to discover better commumcation methods and new forms of culture (widely popular and highly creative at the same time), forms which radio and television could cultivate and so construct bridges to reach everyone. These and similar attempts to »take off« on the part of radio and TV were weighed down with the leaden bahast of heavy routme ploddmg work which leaves its clumsy traces in even the tiniest section ot programming and which pohutes the rivers of radio and TV with its debris. These floods of information items (unrefmed by human wit or hand) make the listener/viewer punch-drunk, rockmg him back and forth on his feet from one dull programme to another where nothmg happens and no one gets anywhere. These lazy spirits, devoid of daring and courage, with all their phony casualness and nonchalance, insert in the programme plan some tartedup matenal which serves as a cover up for their dubious talent. Тћеу clmg o slogans like a blind man to his cane - thus contradictmg the very principles behind the slogans which are aimed precisely at people such as themselves. The auestion is - how сап we assess all this (both good and bad) and comment on it in such a way as to encourage those elements which offer some conviction that broadcastmg will satisfy audience needs. FIREWORKS AND DREARINESS Certain personalities fmd the radio and TV media very seductive. Through their vain and conceited display, they have a decidedly deadening effect on the production of quahty programmes. Red human expression comes from personalities who wm the affecUons of their audience with warmth and humamty, who treat the senous seriously, light entertainment lightly, and who show genume concern for an intelligent search for truth. If there аге to be more and more of those programmes which search for the truth and fewer programmes mtended to be taken at face value, and if, instead of a soothing of conscience, we have an awakening of consciousness of the universal need to seek out better sdutions and broader horizons, then this will be the ch.ef importance of radio and television programmes. This common teature, »the i ea of a common search«, is of far more value than the more number of ■ outstandingly successful programmes. However, this can onl>' be acldeved by raising the cultural ievel of programmmg ш general. Ву what standards can we judge radio and TV J^tTdono question lack.ng sufficiently reliable answers. We stiH do not havc our own theory of radio and television commumcauon no sure criteria of programme-making nor adequate onUcal ' one has yet defmed them or worked out a possible theory. We have. - only some programming pnnciples - and some ехрепепсе

174