The TCA And What It Means To Be A TV Critic

The Television Critics Association kicks off its semi-annual gathering this week and it begins at a time when the role of what it means to be a TV critic has never been more in flux.

When the TCA was founded, the typical TV critic was local, generally working for a newspaper and almost certainly working for a print publication. There were a few TV critics with a national platform, but the TCA gatherings were designed to give all critics the same basic access to network stars and executives. Over the course of a couple of weeks in July (and a shorter period in January), the typical critic could sit through a bunch of panel presentations, grab a few one-one-one interviews and bank enough information and quotes to fill columns for the following months. The typical reader didn't realize that when they read those comments in their local newspaper, it was probably taken from the same transcript that was being used in fifty other local papers scattered throughout the country.

The changes in the newspaper industry and the entertainment business have changed the TCA into an organization that in many ways would be nearly unrecognizable to its founders. The TCA members are more likely to work for an online company than not, or at the very least work for a print publication with an online component. The average TV critic now wears a number of hats, from traditional news reporting and criticism to cranking out podcasts, social media updates and anything else required to grab the fickle online audience.

All of these changes have given the TCA gatherings an odd, almost retro feel when viewed from the outside. There is much less news coming out of the TCA each year and what news that does come out is instantly tweeted and then likely forgotten by the time the relevant show is nearing an airdate. In an era where critics complain that it is impossible to cover all the good television that is available, the TCA gatherings feel like a remnant of a time when everything interesting hit the screens in September and maybe in early spring.

So what is the role for TV critics and the TCA in this changing media world? Yes, the TCA has added some presentations from a few streaming TV companies such as Netflix or Hulu but that barely scratches the surface on the disruption that is taking place in the industry. And the TCA gatherings can bring out the wolfpack instinct in critics, who strive to be tough on network executives as a way of showing that they won't be pushovers like those fanboys at Comic-Con.

And now that every TV critic has the possibility of a national audience, the fight to be the first person with every mundane factoid is nearly impossible to resist. That's been combined with the intense competitive pressure between the biggest online trade web sites and traditional media outlets into a world where there's a rush for "exclusive" news that has made the slightest kernel of new information worthy of an "exclusive" banner. It's not uncommon to see a site promoting the fact that a B-list is making a one-off appearance on some mundane network show. News that barely ranks as interesting, much less worthy of hype. And then there's the common practice on sites of taking a press release, tweaking it a bit and posting it under someone's byline. With all those competing editorial and competitive pressures, it's increasingly difficult to define the role of a great TV critic.

I've written about the TCA in the past and the response from critics ranges from "Oh, you're just jealous you're not a member" to "You're just some punk who has a blind spot about the TCA." Honestly, neither argument is true. I'm fine not being a member of the TCA and the fact that I'm not may make my job more difficult at times (yes, HBO, I'm looking at you), but it affects maybe five percent of my job.

I write a lot about the TCA because I've spent much of my professional journalism life working for start-ups or for myself and in both cases I'm dealing with industries going through a massive disruption. When we changed the name of our web site from AllYourTV to AllYourScreens this spring it wasn't because I wanted an excuse to order new T-shirts. It was the recognition that while the traditional television business is still our core area of coverage, the TV business is so much more than that right now. But that change wasn't easy and it was driven more from the outside than within. It's never easy to see the path from the inside of any organization and the TCA is no different. The members of the TCA are fine people and the group includes a number of critics I really respect. But they are also comfortable with the current gathering, in part because it's a great social event and also because it reinforces to the public and the networks that the TCA is the only real group of professional TV critics that can be trusted. It's still trying to be a gatekeeper, which isn't a bad instinct. But it's the gatekeeper of a gate that is a lot less important these days.

I've spoken to a number of network executives over the past couple of years about the TCA and digital press promotion and the challenge of finding the best way to promote their new shows. The TCA members argue that these gatherings are the best way to get "real" answers from execs and stars and while that can certainly happen, that claim oversells the value of the traditional TCA panel. The TCA gatherings are as much circus as substance and you're as likely to hear critics complaining about breakfast as what's being shared onstage. And hey, that's a human reaction and probably the same one I'd have if I was there. But given the cost of the presentations to the networks and the amount of money spent by organizations to house their critics for a couple of weeks, it's a valid to ask if the TCA gatherings are the best use of anyone's time and resources.

What works for me is a very different dynamic. I moved to the Twin Cities for family reasons and on the surface covering the television and media industry from here might seem to be an insane proposition. But plane tickets are cheap and I'm on both coasts on a regular basis. Technology has made it pretty easy to talk to anyone from anywhere and while I might not have easy access to 100 percent of the executives and stars that I would have if I was at the TCA, I do just fine. Even better, the access I get is more exclusive and less likely to end up in another cookie-cutter piece drawn from a transcript or a panel presentation heard by a couple of hundred other critics. I get to as many set visits as I can and sometimes that has involved piling into my car for a 12-hour drive that results in one day on the set. It's guerrilla TV criticism at times, but I actually enjoy that approach.

What works for me is also picking my spots when it comes to what to cover. I love "Game of Thrones," but does anyone seriously need another critic writing about the show? So we focus a great deal on the shows that don't get so much coverage. Sometimes that means writing about the odd, sometimes crappy shows that pop up on the digital part of your TV dial. Sometimes that means revisiting a show throughout the season, after most critics have moved on. It means writing a lot about alternatives to traditional TV, from streaming TV companies to second screen efforts. It means be a new hybrid of reporter, one better suited to the changing landscape of the media world we live in.

Last week a broadcast network publicity head asked me what I thought of the upcoming TCA gathering and my answer was that I understand why people still think it has value. But the TCA is now just another option for readers and executives. It's a shrinking giant that still carries some weight, but is less relevant to everyone. Not being at the TCA this month means I'll miss out on some great social events and the chance to meet up with some old friends. And of course, I'll miss out on the bacon-filled breakfasts and the chance to hang to visit a few sets.

But I make a fine living not living in L.A. or being a member of the TCA and that is the real point of this piece. The TCA is one component to the answer of what it means to be a modern TV critic. But it's not the only answer and I would argue that it's not even the best one.

Update: For a counterpoint, let me point you to Hollywood Reporter Tim Goodman's piece on the TCA. I'm pretty sure that based on that piece I must fit into this category:

There will always be a handful of columnists complaining that TCA is a pointless dog and pony show. Usually one of them works for Variety, a few others don’t even come because they just mail in their columns without much information anyway; a smattering are from people the TCA wouldn’t let in their ranks and the rest have been doing it for so long they hate everything in the entire world.

I get that Tim's piece is mostly supposed to be funny and certainly his description does match a lot of the critics of the TCA. But isn't it possible to question the current framework of the TCA without being a bitter old hack? That reflexive attitude towards criticism is what keeps the TCA from evolving. I suppose I could be considered one of the people the TCA wouldn't let in their ranks if I asked. But if that's the case, it's not a decision that would be based on merit.