What I Learned at Workplace

Until I retired last year, I worked for a broadcasting company for over 40 years.

Shortly after I joined the company, we went through some orientation training.

We were taught much about the basics of broadcasting there, but I think some of it was inappropriate with the benefit of hindsight.

What are ratings?

For example, the lecturer that day was the deputy director of the TV programming department. He walked into the conference room and suddenly said, “What are ratings?" He took a long pause here, then said, “Ratings are everything”.

I was still fresh out of college and couldn’t figure out what the problem was at the time. But later, after spending a total of 10 years in the TV programming department, I realized that what he said was completely incorrect.

If you ask me, one thing can’t be everything. If checking the ratings was the only thing needed when you decide whether to continue or discontinue a show, then even a part-time college student could do the job.

But actually, TV programming department members have much more in mind as follows:

No matter how high the ratings are, this show is getting too vulgar to continue. We had better terminate it early.

Although the ratings are low, this program has social significance and is highly regarded among critics and viewers alike. Therefore, we should continue broadcasting it with confidence.

Even with low ratings, the sponsors are satisfied, and the program is very profitable, so it should continue.

The ratings are low, but it is not desirable to discontinue the show immediately because it will have various adverse effects under the current circumstances.

The ratings are high now, but analyzing the data suggests that this will not last. We must prepare the contingency plans as soon as possible.

The ratings are low right now, but this show seems to have something groundbreaking. It will take a little time before it is accepted by the masses, but in several months, it will start to break out. We should be patient and wait and see a little longer.

This program has not been successful at this broadcasting time, but higher ratings might be expected if the show is moved to another slot.

…etc.

It is the responsibility of the TV programming department members to contemplate numerous factors and make decisions about whether to continue or discontinue a TV show.

If we could judge things by only one indicator, life would be so much easier. But the reality is not that simple.

It’s not just about ratings. You can’t judge something or someone by one thing.

Someone might say, "Money is everything." In that case, you only have to go after what is profitable and cut out what is not. But you know it won’t work because money is not always everything.

Someone might say, “I don't accept anyone who is loose with time” or “I don't trust people who don't greet people”.

But I know a TV show director who is hopelessly loose with time but always makes extremely interesting programs and a director who is always grumpy and doesn’t even greet people but has tons of unique ideas for TV shows.

It is our task to find these people out and entrust them with program production.

The deputy director who coolly mentioned "Ratings are everything" at that time really should have said, “Ratings are the main thing, but not everything”.

Do you read more than 100 books a year?

Take another lecturer for example.

The lecturer that day was the deputy director of the TV production department and the drama director. He walked into the conference room and suddenly said, “Raise your hand if any of you guys read more than 100 books a year”.

There was only one person who raised a hand among us. (She later became a translator of English literature.)

Then the director looked around at us and said, "I'm sorry. I despise people who don't read 100 books a year”.

I was astonished to hear that. He says he judges a person by the number of books that person has read. Does he despise the person who reads 99 books a year, and respect the person who reads 101 books?

Certainly, reading books is a good thing. If you read a lot, there will be a certain amount of learning accumulated. But what about saying that whether you read or not determines the value of a person?

My feeling after years of working is that people, life, and society are not that simple.

This deputy director was a well-known eccentric in the company. Why was such a person able to be involved in the drama production? I think it is because the company did not judge him on one thing.

It is cool to be clear. And it is often the case in the workplace that cool discourse moves subordinates and superiors.

However, if we are to do things justice, I believe it is not appropriate to simplify everything.

One thing can’t be everything.