Likely you’ve already heard that the next season of Oprah Winfrey’s talk show will be the last. Now I don’t have a great deal of reverence for Oprah, but I have to respect the cultural force she has made herself into. And I wonder, given the tremendous changes that have happened to the media landscape in the 25 years since she began, can any one individual ever repeat her incredible rise to fame and influence? Or, have things become so fragmented that such a single source of power is no longer possible?
Oprah is on a first name basis with every A-list celebrity there is, and even the President of the United States. If she even looks at your book, you’ve made it as a writer. Generally speaking, she has the Midas Touch with anything, or anyone she endorses.
Along with the enormous ratings (and ad revenue) generated by her daily talk show, Oprah’s influence extends into a magazine, spin-off shows, films she’s involved with and all sorts of other behind the scenes projects. She is literally helping to shape the very culture we live in.
And she did all this herself, growing her unprecedented career from humble roots. Oprah’s gift for connecting with people on a genuine level was recognized early on, and she was given the reins of a low-rated local morning show on an ABC affiliate station in Chicago. Immediately, her magic began to work, the show became The Oprah Winfrey show and was syndicated, and the rest is history.
Can this history ever be repeated, though, is my question.
At least in terms of infrastructure, the career path Oprah took no longer exists. There are no longer only three major networks for us to watch. Instead there are hundreds (thousands?) of channels thanks to to cable, and who knows how many more equivalents in online content, both professional and amateur.
So let’s say there is a second coming of Oprah. Does he or she stand a chance of having themselves heard above the din of countless others? Will there even be a dominant channel, such as a syndicated talk show, for a new Oprah to have his/her shot at? If not, will it be possible to create another media powerhouse, in front of the camera/microphone, on the scale of Oprah Winfrey?
A platform such as a top-tier TV network, is bigger and higher than everyone else’s in today’s market, so when you’re on it you can convince people to look at you more than at anyone else. It’s implied that you are important enough to listen to by virtue of being on the network. Without such a large platform to start from, you have only your content to draw people in. Realistically, does any individual or organization have anything compelling enough to say to garner the kind of following Oprah has? For that matter, would Oprah herself have been interesting enough to gain such strength without the opportunity to appear on network TV?
Right now, it feels as if our media is breaking off into smaller and smaller pieces, with smaller and smaller market shares. Cable channels are proliferating, and are focusing on narrower, and narrower segments of the audience. The rise of online “user-generated" content” (e.g. YouTube videos, blogs, podcast) is giving some spotlight to writers, singers, actors and artists of all stripes who didn’t have that access to the public before. Plus, there are more interesting ways to deliver content, which also detracts from the monopolistic sway TV has held over us.
The theme of our relationship with media is changing to an “on-demand” model, whereby we have much more variety in content to choose from, and a slew of more options for when, where and how we consume it. We’re no longer all just staring at the same screen waiting to see what the cultural/information powers-that-be put on for us next. Now we’re accessing things for ourselves, and even creating them.
Without us being forced, to some extent, to watch a new “Oprah,” because alternatives are limited, will we ever again give so much credence to a single media figure? And would the end of such an era be a positive or negative change?
Wordpress by the Minute
Limestone New Media Group
For Immediate Release: The Hobson and Holtz Report
Inside PR
The Canadian Podcast Buffet
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Does this count as posting last week, or this week?
I’ve got a lot of respect for Oprah’s success, but I’m a bit cautious to laud her seemingly limitless influence. As you’ve mentioned, she need only look at a product before orders skyrocket and it sells out. That kind of marketing power is unmatched by any other celebrity, but then again, Oprah’s done a good job at building her brand. Airing segments such as Oprah’s Favourite Things, as well as author interviews relating to her personal Book Club, make Oprah the best infomercial known to man. In the end, that’s what Oprah is, a talking head who sells better than anyone else.
Oprah will retire, but keep in mind that she owns her own mini-media empire. Harpo brings us Dr. Phil, Rachael Ray, Dr. Oz etc.., all of which have a following. I expect these, specifically Rach Ray, to increase her reach once the O-traing leaves the station. Regardless of whether that prediction comes true, I think the infomercial format/brand Oprah perfected will be copied for ages, and eventually surpassed by the next great schlep’r of cheesy wares.
On that note about her mini-media empire, Harvey, I think I was remiss in not highlighting the fact that she’s “retiring” only to delve into running her own channel, The Oprah Winfrey Network (or, so cleverly, OWN). In reality, this makes her “end” of the talk show a false bottom, and really just publicity for the launch of her bigger and broader project.
Do you really think, though, that there’s opportunity for someone to come along and copy her successfully? My feeling is that there isn’t enough attention span left in general for anyone, Oprah or not, to command for themselves. There’s simply too much media competition, to my mind. Could it be done, though, through social and traditional media channels?
There are some other questions her media trajectory raises: could another African-American woman, or a Latino woman, or for that matter, a woman in general, reach that level of media influence in the new diversified playing field? Oprah is indeed a woman who has played her cards very wisely. She’s also been a living example – day in and day out – for women from various class backgrounds and ethnicities, that there can be a “route to the top”. When she disappears from screens, what will happen to that influence? What will happen to the women who were so heavily emotionally invested in “Oprah” as not just a woman but the embodiment of women’s aspirations?
Symbols are powerful, especially for those who do not have equal access to political power. Though we must be wary of reifing Oprah, she is a human being, not some conglomeration of endorsements, products and publicity appearances, we should ask how her status as a symbol of powerful African-American womanhood may change. The upside to all this is that she’s not the only figure to whom women in American can look for inspiration – Michelle Obama is also a very inspiring person – and Oprah will still remain visible through her magazine and other media.
But, the road Oprah travelled is now gone, as you’ve noted, Francis. Also, there are new routes to media stardom that have appeared through social networking. However, for now at least, I’d argue that these are roads to celebrity, not influence, which is something that has set Oprah apart from many other talk show hosts. Whither influence, and what new strategies might women pursue if they wish to achieve it? After all, most of us don’t want to pursue the Sarah Palin strategy of talking like a fool and making pretty grins and winks.
Yes there is. In our celebrity obsessed culture we need an Oprah – someone the masses trust and look to for advice on how to live their lives. Such people existed long before Oprah and will continue to do so long after she is dead and gone. Attention span isn’t an issue as this is a basic need for our society. And yes, the next Oprah will appear on commercial, non-cable TV. The truth of the matter is that reach is everything and you can’t beat the reach of network TV for a phenomenon like this. Once upon a time the best medium for an Oprah was a syndicated newspaper column, then it was radio and now it’s the idiot box. Cable is too fractured to produce a bona fide hit. Shows like Mad Men, The Sopranos or Six Feet Under that become hits on cable gain a significant portion of their viewership through DVD sales and rentals, which can’t work for the new Oprah as the issues are too current (today’s famous face is tomorrow’s “where-are-they-now?” and the “must have” item right now will be gauche in a couple of months). The Internet does hold promise for the future but right now the reach isn’t there. Even the most viewed viral video, listened to podcast or visited website has only a tiny fraction of the views of network TV. In the future that will likely change (as it did for print and radio) but not for the next Oprah, and perhaps not even for the one after that.
Agreed, Gord; newer channels have far less reach than network TV at the moment. Things are changing faster and faster, however. It hasn’t taken the Internet as long to spread as it took TV or radio before that, has it? Might it be possible for network TV’s market share to erode faster than expected given the rate new and influential online technologies/locations are emerging?
Sandy, you make some important points about the need for someone like Oprah. It was an oversight for me not to mention the immense contribution she’s made as a role model for women and minorities in the United States, and beyond. I wonder if there’s a place for such inspiration in a world of fractured, hyper-targeted media. Is the “mainstream” dying, and with it the chance for marginalized audiences to break into it?
Yes and no. While network TVs market share will continue to erode vis-a-vis the Internet I don’t see there being a few dominant content providers in the digital realm who will have significant and sustained enough reach to give the world the next Oprah. The democratizing aspects of Internet communications (i.e. anyone can put together a fairly credible website for a couple of thousand bucks vs. the multi-millions it costs for a conventional TV station) means more voices can be heard but too few people are listening to any one of them in any sustained fashion to give them the critical mass they need to be Oprah 2.0 (sorry, couldn’t resist). How many bloggers or podcasters have you followed that have eventually had to quit because they no longer had the time because their jobs made it impossible? You can’t become Oprah without staying power. After all, Oprah wasn’t Oprah the Powerful from day one. It took her years to get where she is. Most Internet phenoms are measured in weeks, or maybe months, but not years. However, I will concede that it is possible that some one who gets their start filming a YouTube chat show in their parents’ basement (Wayne’s World! Wayne’s World! Party Time! Excellent!) does become the new Oprah, but it can only be through the help of network TV.
Gord,
I’m not sure that I agree there won’t be only a few dominant players in the online content provider market. Political endeavours such as ACTA, and our seemingly natural tendency to want/need elite leaders and entertainers just might conspire to make the Internet a little less democratic, and a lot more business friendly. The online of today is not necessarily what we’ll be looking at in five to 10 years. I think we may even have to consider the possibility of paid-for-use Internet period, let alone pay for specific content.
There are a lot of things present day content providers can work with to ensure their survival, and even dominance, in the future. This includes the second coming of Oprah, should there be one.