The TV Industry Is in Crisis—Could This Be The Way To Save It?
The TV industry is in crisis. Disrupted by big tech, traditional broadcasters can’t keep up. Platforms like YouTube thrive on unregulated, creator-driven content, while TV is burdened by high costs and red tape. Viewers are leaving for platforms where creators don’t ask for permission—they just make what resonates. Meanwhile, TV channels struggle because the economics of commissioning content simply don’t stack up anymore.
Here’s a bold idea: Should channels stop commissioning content and move to an acquisition-only model?
It’s not a perfect solution, but it addresses issues the industry has been grappling with for years. Steven D Wright has written powerfully about commissioners playing it too safe, and Evan Shapīro has long warned that broadcasters must adapt to compete with YouTube. Yet the current ecosystem remains paralyzed, unable to act. An acquisition-only model could free broadcasters from regulation, cut costs, and unleash the creative potential of producers.
Why Commissioning Needs to Go
Let’s be honest—viewers aren’t sticking with traditional TV because the product isn’t compelling enough. If it was, they’d still be watching. Instead, all I hear people say is, “There’s nothing on TV,” despite thousands of hours of content available.
Commissioners play it too safe, turning down brilliant ideas because they’re “not the right fit.” As a former commissioner myself, I’ve been there. My team and I rejected great concepts because they didn’t fit our channel priorities. Netflix, on the other hand, rarely says no to truly brilliant ideas, and with YouTube, well nearly anything goes!
Think about it. If channels stopped commissioning they would only buy finished product. In an acquisition-only model, channels could cherry-pick completed content. Producers would take on the risk but retain ownership of their work. Competition for standout ideas would drive quality up and force broadcasters to promote their acquisitions effectively.
How Content Gets Funded
Without commissioning, how would producers finance their projects? The answer lies in blend of private equity, pre-sales, tax incentives and co-productions between funds. Independent funds, like TCG in the US (Meateater, The Goldin Touch), already operate this way.
Governments could also introduce tax incentives to attract investment. This could lead to a boom in content making, as producers would make content that could find many different outlets around the world, instead of competing for the breadcrumbs local channels throw out to them.
Channels could still invest in programming through independently managed funds. These funds would act as financiers, not commissioners, backing innovative projects without regulatory burdens. That means channels could still make money by backing great content - but they just have no say in how its made.
When it comes to Broadcasters buying content, minimum price guarantees and fair terms of trade would ensure producers are fairly compensated while encouraging efficiency. How would channels earn enough money to buy the finished content? Sponsorship, advertising and investing in funds - which should give them good returns.
What Are the Benefits to Channels?
Reduced Costs: Channels shed the overheads of commissioning and focus on acquiring the best content.
Less Regulation: With no creative control, channels avoid compliance headaches. Responsibility for content rests with producers.
Cherry-Picking Content: Channels become distribution outlets, like cinema chains, curating only the best shows.
To ensure compliance, an independent regulatory body—similar to the British Film Classification Board—could vet content for channels. This then takes another headache off a channels hands, and perhaps to help fund this body, they would need to pay a yearly fee commensurate to the amount of content they put out. This would free broadcasters to focus on what they do best: delivering great programming.
The great news for producers would be, one the content is classified, its safe, worldwide in perpetuity.Why This Model Works
Producers Own Their IP: They take risks but reap rewards.
Encourages Competition: Broadcasters compete for standout ideas, driving up quality.
Streamlines the Industry: Broadcasters cut overheads and focus on distribution.
Attracts Investment: Deregulation and fair terms open the industry to outside capital.
What Do You Think?
Could this work?