Justin Scroggie has had a fairly diverse career in the television industry. He has worked on programmes, such as Gloria Live, Behind the Headlines and Don't Quote Me - to name but three. He was Head of Entertainment at Chatsworth television and was in charge of games design for Channel 4's hugely popular gameshow Crystal Maze. More recently, Justin devised the one-off BBC documentary Paul Daniels in a Black Hole - in which the famous magician travelled to America to work as an unknown magician.
Justin is currently working as a freelance games designer and author, and is often invited to speak at industry seminars on the subject of television light entertainment.
In May 2002, Justin talked to OTT about his career to date, and the current state of British light entertainment.
OTT: How did you first get into the TV industry and was it something you always wanted to do?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: When I left university, I knew I wanted to do something interesting and diverse, but like most graduates I had absolutely no idea what. I worked in finance for a while, and learnt much about defining a product, business viability, marketing and clear presentation - a background often lacking in TV production. But it wasn't for me.
I went in desperation to talk to the mother of a school friend. She'd known me for years and had good business connections. She sent me to see the Director of Programmes of a satellite channel, who suggested I write to the producer of After Dark, Channel 4's late-night talk show made by Open Media. They eventually put me on a very short contract cutting articles out of the papers. It was the most junior job I'd ever had and I was extremely happy! Over the next two series of After Dark, I read and cut 10 newspapers a day, 10 magazines a week, plus monthly digests of foreign press - a fantastic introduction to current affairs. I enjoyed the intellectual cut-and-thrust of the office, the thrill of live broadcasting, and the diversity of the subjects we covered. I stayed at Open Media for nearly three years.
OTT: What attributes does a good programme format devisor need?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: Tough question! A programme format is essentially a very artificial construct, and a format devisor needs to be able to make it seem natural. This requires the ability to get to the heart of an idea and know what it's really about, to see the "shape" of a show, to sense when a narrative is flowing and when it's not, to turn the idea into "what happens next". Above all, a formatter needs to be able to stand back and see the show as the average uncommitted couch potato will see it (like I watch drama, for example). If only I could do all this!
OTT: How did you come to join Chatsworth TV?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: At Open Media I co-devised (with David Britland) a panel game for Channel 4 called Don't Quote Me. Later, at Channel 4 as producer of Comment, I co-devised another panel show called Front Page. I knew David G Croft because he was one of the directors of After Dark, so I sent the format to him at Chatsworth. We made three pilots of Front Page, two for the BBC and one for Carlton, but ultimately it was eclipsed by the very different but also news-based Have I Got News For You. However, this began a relationship with Chatsworth, which culminated in my asking for a job (any job!) on Crystal Maze. Serendipity intervened. David had directed the first two series of the Maze, and produced the second two. Now he had been asked to produce and direct, but felt he would need to find someone else to take over the development of the games. I asked for a job at the critical moment, and was handed a much bigger one than I had expected!
OTT: What innovations do you think Chatsworth brought to the game show genre?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: Treasure Hunt, Interceptor and Crystal Maze were reality shows before their time. They created a fantasy, but not a fiction: what people did within the fantasy was entirely real. They took the game show out of the studio, and required contestants with intelligence to use their brains. They made winning the prize less important than the taking part (which appeals to the British psyche), and they emphasized the positive - contestants who won were seen to deserve their success, because they really had to rise to the occasion, dig deep inside themselves and work hard. All this was innovative at the time.
OTT: How did technology influence these formats, and how would, for example, Interceptor be made differently today?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: Technology on TV is only a tool. It is cold and inanimate, and the public do not warm to it, only to the people who use it. The helicopter on Treasure Hunt allowed Anneka Rice to get about quickly, but its real value was to show the viewer how beautiful Britain is. The fact that Annie and the contestants could only communicate on audio was part of the format - the contestants were forced to articulate their thinking, and Annie was forced to describe what she could see. The research books on set might today be replaced by the internet: but to be honest there is nothing more boring than watching someone using a search engine, and the scale and unreliability of information on the web would not suit itself to the show.
Interceptor depended on this premise - two people are trying to find each other, one has a suitcase of cash, the other has the key. The Interceptor has to find them and "shoot" them so that the key doesn't work. I wouldn't change this, because it's very strong. But I would lose the location host (played by Annabel Croft) because it is one person too many. Also I would somehow tighten up the reality of the Interceptor's challenge. He was just an actor who worked for the production, and therefore his credibility as a chaser was undermined. It's odd to think that the show got 7 million viewers on midweek ITV, which at the time was not considered enough for a re-commission!
OTT: It no longer seems acceptable for action game shows to be based around a fictional conceit. Why do you think this is?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: I don't think it was ever acceptable. Crystal Maze was only a fantasy, not a fiction. The weakest part of Interceptor was that the Interceptor was fictional. Scavengers failed partly because it pretended to be real (all those model shots!) and required the contestants to act. What killed the action adventure show at the time was partly the failure of broadcasters and programme-makers to recognize that in gameshows, an expensive fantasy set was not a film set, simply a backdrop to what had to be a real dynamic format.
As I said before, gameshow formats are artificial - they are only as real as people are prepared to accept. If the questions on ... Millionaire got easier as the money went up, you'd say it didn't work. The fact that the questions get harder is only a rule made up by the formatter. However, because it is a "natural" rule, everyone accepts it and so makes it "real".
The same applies to the latest incarnation of action adventure shows - Survivor, Eden etc. They are highly artificial, and they slip the moment the artifice pokes through - e.g. when hardened news-reporter Mark Austin started talking about symbolism on Survivor island in series one.
OTT: What next for the game show in the post-Weakest Link/... Millionaire/Big Brother period?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: If I knew that, I'd be a rich man. We've had the attack of the clones (The People Versus, The Vault, Break Out etc.) I suspect The Weakest Link, ... Millionaire will be around for a while longer, because they are genuinely strong formats that deliver. For new formats, the emphasis might shift from the size of the prize to the uniqueness of the prize: a trip into space, dinner with Russell Crowe etc. I have a pet theory that after periods of reality, whether on factual or light entertainment, the audience usually returns to a desire for glitz - star cloths, celebrities, comedy etc.
At the same time, TV formats often reflect the mood of the age (greed, travel, money), and as politics moves to the right, I see more and more formats that include elements of control, surveillance, survival of the fittest etc. Deep, eh?
I don't doubt that the next formats are out there. But I wonder who will present them. Satellite TV is a good training ground for the craft of presenting, but it's throwing up few personalities. Radio has regained its confidence, and not all radio presenters want to be on TV any more. Reality TV contestants are constantly touted as the new wave of presenters, but how many have made it (think Nasty Nick)? New shows are given to old hands because broadcasters are afraid to risk unknowns. The worlds of pop, journalism and sport are trawled to find new/old faces. It is strange to think that in a world of such cautious casting, practically every teenager wants to be a TV presenter ...
OTT: Who Wants to be a Millionaire seems to be on something of a decline. What would you do to it to win back audiences?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: Who would dare to meddle with success?! I suppose if I had a magic wand, I would get rid of the first few rounds (is it a Half Nelson, a Half of Bitter, a Halfpenny ...) Most people I know put the kettle on or the kids to bed during this bit, and the humour is wearing thin. And much as I really admire Chris Tarrant, I would have tried out other presenters by now, perhaps in the "specials". Its biggest problem, I think, is the extent the ITV schedule is dependent on it - ... Millionaire desperately needs stable mates, and the Network Centre are trying to find one.
The natural home of gameshows is on terrestrial TV because it costs money to do them well, top talent (on front of and behind the cameras) still sees terrestrial television as the only place to work, and cable/satellite/digital cannot deliver satisfying prizes - yet.
OTT: And what are your thoughts on the current state of Saturday night telly?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: I was invited to Denmark recently to lecture and run seminars on the future of light entertainment, with particular reference to Friday/Saturday night TV. I offered two thoughts:
The first is that in a world of fragmented audiences, weekend TV must look to the largest niches. These are, in descending order, people over 60, people over 40, and young people who think they should be out partying, but aren't. So many people writing TV formats don't fit into any of these categories, especially the first and largest (people over 60). The next time a broadcaster puts together a format "think tank", they should seriously consider filling it with intelligent retired people, instead of 21-year olds seeking work experience.
The second is that Event TV is the only way to get back those golden-age audiences. Pop Idol is the obvious example - more people voted for Will than for the Conservative Party. The production values told you it was something special. Ant & Dec were inspired casting. And the result said it all. The older TV audience voted for Will Young because he had a mature voice a 40-something could play on the car stereo, and the much younger pop-purchasing public bought more Gareth Gates CDs. Test the Nation is a very different form of event TV, but with the same agenda - to draw all ages and backgrounds together into a single night which is perceived to have value.
OTT: Finally, you have worked in a variety of roles within the TV industry. What's next for you?
JUSTIN SCROGGIE: I split my time between writing and TV. I've published 12 books in the last three years. I've just finished an encyclopaedia on the planet Earth and co-written my third annual of Puzzles & Brainteasers, both for Readers Digest. I've got a book on Pirates for Smarties coming out this month, and I'm just starting an interactive Maze book, also for Smarties. I write a weekly Brainteasers column for the Sunday Express. Currently I'm working for Carlton TV as a format/games designer on a commissioned network ITV action game set in space, and I have various formats in with broadcasters here and in the USA. Variety is definitely the spice of life!
WITH THANKS TO JUSTIN SCROGGIE
