New and Different
Those two words are, apparently, what defines HBO programming, and if true, undoubtedly explain much of Treme’s existence. Those words comes from a mildly lengthy 2007 piece by a former HBO employee. So does this:
My boss and I were attempting to pitch her a series of short bio-pics about R&B legends like Sam Cooke and Jackie Wilson. Potter got it immediately, and spent time exploring the idea, its possible permutations and overall potential, before telling us bluntly that while it might be a good project, it wasn’t a good HBO project. It’s the quintessential HBO experience for visiting producers, a kind of Socratic dialogue:
What’s a good HBO project?
Something new and different.
Isn’t our project new and different?
Not enough for HBO.
So what’s new and different enough for HBO?
We know it when we see it.
The difference between HBO and conventional television starts with a business model that doesn’t rely on advertising. You pay a monthly fee to your cable system if you want HBO; and if you don’t want HBO, you don’t pay. Every month, some people pick up the service, and some people drop it. Cable executives call this “churn.” The goal is to have positive churn rather than negative churn—to give people a network of shows worth paying for.
Much of the criticism leveled at Treme seems to stem from the fact that its “different” than what we expect from other, good television shows. Namely, a driving plot. A show should not be excused for eschewing the demands of storytelling simply in the name of being different. But it appears that HBO, perhaps with good reason, has decided that different sells, perhaps even better than good. Of course, being different will often mean that you stumble upon good things more often than others.
I happen to think that Treme is both different and good, and am prepared to deploy all the italics in my arsenal to argue as such. More to come.
