|
 A member profile by Chris Davison, davison@intellcap.com
Jim Paratore is of President of paraMedia, Inc. Jim began his career at a local affiliate in New Orleans and has since worked in many areas of the business, from broadcasting to production to distribution, also serving several terms as an HRTS Board member. I recently had a chance to interview Jim to discuss fear, synergy, and TMZ.
Q: Can you tell us about your background and what made you want to work in entertainment? How did you get involved with the HRTS?
- I backed into the entertainment business, I was in college taking business courses and I saw that they had a television program. Since I like watching TV I went into the communications program at Loyola University in New Orleans and then after college I got a job at a local affiliate in the 182nd market. I worked my way up through local TV stations and then I came out here to Los Angeles about twenty years ago, my first job here being Vice President of Production with Lorimar-Telepictures. As for the HRTS, when I got out here, I went to one of the events and met some people, I found it a great way to network with everyone and to stay abreast of current events via the luncheons, and I’ve been involved ever since.
Q: With your background in television, what were some of the factors in your decision to start TMZ online versus on-air?
-It all started with a show called Celebrity Justice, we developed and launched that show when I was President of Telepictures Productions. While president on the production side I additionally took over duties on the distribution side, serving as Executive Vice President of Warner Brothers Domestic Television Distribution. So at that point I was not only doing creative on the show but also the business side, working on how to distribute it and make it profitable.
It was difficult to put together a viable lineup for Celebrity Justice. We had created a real brand, we were doing about 15 hours of content a week on average - talking head content on basic cable and network morning shows, promoting our stories. I could not capture any real value from that promotion for CJ because the lineup was not good enough. I stepped back and looked at it and realized I could not keep that show on the air but it made me think about how I could create another version - a little broader with entertainment coverage, with celebrities as real people, and do it on the Internet. We’ve always known what the audience wants, and with CJ we covered celebs in trouble in a fair way, by applying the principles of Journalism 101 to it. Harvey Levin created CJ for us, and when we canceled that show I took the idea for what became TMZ to him, figuring we could capture the audience 24/7 on the Internet and do it with a lower overhead. Less overhead reduced our risk, we generated publicity and built our audience and one day planned to take it from online to on-air.
Q: Online properties expanding onto television has not always gone well, how did you manage to do it so successfully? Any advice for others who may be considering a similar expansion?
-it was harder for us to go to online because we are television people. When we started TMZ we struggled as TV people trying to figure out how to program a successful website. After we got things going on the web it was then easier for us to come back to television. At first we had to deconstruct our television material to make it work on the Internet, then later reconstruct it again for television. As for why the TV version has been successful, going in we said “let’s make a successful show and let’s not worry about creating ‘synergy’ for the sake of synergy”, we didn’t try to force synergy but rather we let it evolve naturally. We are the only large media company that has established and created a successful website and we are the only website that has successfully translated to television. As for the website, once I had Harvey on-board for TMZ.com, I did go to AOL and create a partnership with them, it gave us access to their huge user base and they also brought a certain amount of technology and expertise to the project.
My advice to others is to take it one step at a time, and make sure that whatever it is you’re doing is focused on the audience, that you deliver what the audience wants. You have to concentrate on it one step at a time - serve the audience, build a brand, and always understand your customers and what they want as you later expand across new platforms.
Q: In what ways do you think that new media have change how television is written, produced and marketed?|
-the biggest effect it has had is that it creates competition for viewers’ attention. New media has eroded a lot of television’s audience and in so doing it puts pressure on us in TV to do better, to focus on our audience more and service them better. We in television were the gatekeepers with the monopoly on viewership and new media has given viewers choices and control, so now we have to be that much better.
I remember reading a book called “An Empire of Their Own” by Neal Gabler, about how European Jews established much of Hollywood, I found it an interesting tale about people with a retail background and a customer-focused skill set that they then applied to movies and entertainment. Because of their backgrounds in retail, they always focused on customers and what they want, they established exactly the right mindset for show business. As choices multiplied for the consumer, the industry itself began to consolidate and vertically integrate in a way that made it slower to react and I think that’s a real challenge for media companies today. The scale of these companies is so large now, can they move quickly enough to respond in this environment.
Q: How do you see the industry changing over the next few years?
-if I had a crystal ball, I would sell stock or buy stock, I don’t know other than that we have to be willing to experiment, to take risks and move fast because there is no clear answer. The business is realigning itself and you have to be able to adapt with it, companies that can do this will find the new business model. The successful companies will be those that will be able to create a culture of creativity versus a fear-based culture. We must create the momentum for people to be creative and take risks. I think the companies that do this will find the answer. This is one of the reasons that Warners has been so successful, they have a culture that encourages taking risks and possibly making mistakes, this is empowering to people and so it’s a major reason we have had such a successful run at Telepictures Productions.
Q: Anything you would like to add?
-it has to be fun. If we’re not having fun making these shows then no one will have fun watching them. We work too long and too hard for there not to be some fun in the process.
|
