University of Virginia Library

1. Technology

In a strict sense, technology does not regulate religious broadcasting. But technology is a powerful factor in defining the parameters wherein broadcasting operates. The growth of communication technologies permitted rapid expansion of syndicated programming, satellite transmission, personalized direct mail and telemarketing, among other things. These innovations in communications technology were the driving force behind the phenomenal growth of televangelism during the 1970s and 1980s. Television ministries became big precisely because all of these technologies made rapid growth of parachurch organizations possible.

The technological advances that spawned dozens of syndicated religious television programs seems now to be working toward the concentration of economic power in religious broadcasting. This process can be dated to April 29, 1977, when the Christian Broadcasting Network transmitted its first satellite broadcast. In rapid succession, Trinity Broadcasting Network was founded in southern California, followed by the PTL Network in North Carolina. All three networks had state-of-the-art technology poised to deliver religious programming via cable even before the wiring of the nation for cable began in earnest. That cabling process was substantially achieved in the 1980s and continues towards saturation in the 1990s.

While the cabling of the nation has resulted in a significant loss of market share for the three major television networks, the religious networks have been among the beneficiaries of this redistribution of viewers. The costs for broadcasting on major networks have always been prohibitive for religious telecasters. This option will become even more prohibitive in the future. Loss of market share by major networks has not driven down the cost of air-time, but merely reduced the trajec-


410

tory of soaring costs. Similarly, local network-affiliated stations will continue to command top dollar for the purchase of airtime.

This portends a decline in syndicated religious broadcasting on local network stations. Religious broadcasters simply will not be able to raise adequate revenues to pay the high cost of being on the several hundred local network stations. Thus, it is increasingly clear that the future of religious broadcasting is in satellite delivery via cable television. The only economically viable long-term alternative for syndicated broadcasters is to turn to religious networks and a growing number of low power religious stations. Those who have satellite delivery capability, and have established an extensive network of cable systems, to which they can deliver their programs, are in a position to dominate the future market.

At the present time there are four religious networks with significant cable access: Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), Vision Interfaith Satellite Network/American Christian Television System (VISN/ACTS), and Eternal Word Network (EWN). Pat Robertson's CBN now operates under the umbrella of the Family Channel which ranks among the largest cable systems in the nation. In late 1991 the Family Channel reached 92 percent of all cable households and 59 percent of all households in America. [46]

Of the three networks devoted exclusively to religious programming, TBN is the most viable. Founder and owner Paul Crouch has aggressively bought up small powered television stations in addition to expanding cable system coverage. While Crouch is Pentecostal, and this is emphasized in programming, he is well positioned to sell airtime to non-Pentecostal Evangelicals.

VISN is a collaborative effort of 28 main line Protestant, Jewish, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox groups. ACTS was founded by the Radio and Television Commission of the Southern Baptist Church. Neither network allows on-air solici-


411

tation of funds. Both organizations have experienced financial difficulties and in 1992 began sharing a single cable channel. EWN was founded by Sister Angelica, a Roman Catholic nun from Alabama. While both VISN/ACTS and EWN currently have significant cable outlets across the nation, these operations do not appear to have adequate capitalization or management resources to be competitive in the long run competition for cable outlets. Even now, they are dependent on free access to cable systems. This gratuitous relationship with cable owners is unlikely to persist unless mandated by the Federal Communications Commission, which appears unlikely. The unknown quotient is the potential of technology to produce unforeseen and unanticipated options for production of delivery of television.