• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, May 3, 2019

The onset of upfront season has me contemplating no less a subject than the very definition of the word “television.”

Why? Because advertising sales, commercials, plugs and product placements (such as the “Lay’s” brand logo displayed on “The Voice” on NBC in the photo above) are the lifeblood of the traditional television business on whose sidelines I have sat (and been entertained) for lo these many years.

I find that I sometimes have a proprietary feeling about the word “television.” And although I possess no authority or influence over this issue, I nevertheless feel an obligation to air a personal opinion that the word “television” is meant to define a specific visual medium in which advertising plays an integral part.

And yet, the word has evolved into a catchall phrase -- one meant to describe and/or define all video media seen on any screen that you might categorize as “non-theatrical.” Thus, every category of video consumed on iPads, smartphones, laptops and PCs is now grouped under the word “television.”

This encompasses all of the content offered by the subscription streaming services. Their non-movie content is almost always referred to as “television.” And therein lies the conundrum: How can one word -- “television” -- be applied to two spheres of business that are so wholly different?

In one sphere, the necessity of ad sales and sponsorships has a direct bearing on the way the content is produced and presented. This is the sphere that the word “television” has come to be identified with since the dawn of the television industry in the 1940s.

The word, therefore, does not only encompass the shows and the device on which they have been traditionally watched -- a “television” (or “television set”) -- but also a business that revolves around the symbiotic interplay of content (what used to be known as “programs”) and advertising.

The shows and the commercials are intertwined. Together, they comprise a vast industry called “television.” Entire companies that became hugely successful and influential were built to support, nurture and promote this content-commercial ecosystem.

In the other sphere are companies that invest heavily in producing content in which the presence of advertising plays no part. Consumers of this content never see an ad. And they pay for this privilege by agreeing to subscribe to these services. This is a business far different than the one that we have called “television” for so many years.

By contrast, advertiser-supported television, represented principally by the broadcast networks and their local, owned stations and affiliates, is technically free of charge. This is what had been known as “television” for the better part of half a century.

To put it bluntly, by this definition, the Netflixes of the world are not “television.” They are something else. Let them get their own word.