Open Door Shows

Do you believe that open door shows are no longer feasible (as raised by Sootyj), that due to the internet age (being such a far and wide communication tool), and the resources of most radio shows, that writers and their submissions can no longer be fairly judged? I mean that they get so many that after a number they can't give each sketch a fair reading, and thus, it becomes more like a lottery of getting something on?

Would it be better if shows like Newsjack took a publishers approach, in that they at first, only ask for a synopsis and a short sample. Would it be better for Newsjack to ask writers to list the premises of their sketches in the email, and that becomes the first pass of the submission stage? If they like the sketch idea, they then read your attached sketch. If it's really good they read all three, and if it's really bad they email you back with "must try harder"?

Discuss!

No

Well that was a lively debate...

I'm pretty sure they read them all.

What I think I meant, was it's more work to edit a near good enough sketch then it is too write it your self.

I know they read them all but my point was, given a limited time frame and number of readers, the readers surely hit a saturation point, where sketches stop being funny. I'm not assuming that's what happens, just conjecture. And if that is so, if they do find by the 500th sketch they've read, they're sketched out, wouldn't it be better for the submitters if the premise was judged first then the quality of the sketch? So they don't read 400 subpar sketch ideas and 100 good ones, just the 100 good ideas, taking some of the pressure off of the show's sketch readers.

I guess my original question, with these shows, is it a hindrance or a help to the submitters that they read every sketch, seeing as they probably get 1000+ per episode?

Maybe that is how I should have phrased the question originally...

I'd say reducing it down to 1 sketch per submitter and a fixed number of sketches, first come, first served.

So they'll read say 150 and if you're late better luck next time.

I'd be curious to hear from someone involved in this sort of show for their opinion. The pro's and faults with an open door show. I'd love to know what they think based on their experience.

Just wait for Newsjack there's load of chances to chat with the crew and even meet up after the recordings

Quote: sootyj @ 27th January 2014, 3:47 PM GMT

I'd say reducing it down to 1 sketch per submitter and a fixed number of sketches, first come, first served.

So they'll read say 150 and if you're late better luck next time.

View original

This may be questioning numbers rather than the principle, but isn't the success rate of open submissions usually so low that 150 may only find 1 or 2 suitable sketches?

It's highly possible that such a system wouldn't find any suitable sketches and so make the idea of allowing open submissions pointless. Especially as I could imagine a lot of hopefuls quickly sending off a sketch before it's ready just to avoid missing the cut-off point.

Well virtually every sketch needs rewriting

From my forthcoming memoirs, BRAIN DUMP OF A SATIRIST:

Do you believe that open door shows are no longer feasible (as raised by Sootyj), that due to the internet age (being such a far and wide communication tool), and the resources of most radio shows, that writers and their submissions can no longer be fairly judged?

I guess it takes longer with more submissions, but I don't think it's any more difficult.

I mean that they get so many that after a number they can't give each sketch a fair reading, and thus, it becomes more like a lottery of getting something on?

It really isn't. In my Newsjack experience, the best sketches got on. Not a lottery at all. Evidenced by the fact that there was always a striking degree of consensus about what should and shouldn't be used, no matter who was s/e or producer. And the fact that there very rarely seemed to be sketches as good as stuff in the show that didn't make the recording.

Would it be better if shows like Newsjack took a publishers approach, in that they at first, only ask for a synopsis and a short sample.

That doesn't really tell anyone whether you can write the sketch or not. You're talking about sketch pitches - but you kind of need to prove you can deliver before people are happy to have you working like that. Also, you recognise the time constraints - but this seems to be increasing the workload - with back-and-forth communication with every writer - rather than anything else.

Would it be better for Newsjack to ask writers to list the premises of their sketches in the email, and that becomes the first pass of the submission stage? If they like the sketch idea, they then read your attached sketch. If it's really good they read all three, and if it's really bad they email you back with "must try harder"?

OK, but with an untried writer you're still not going to know a) whether they can deliver on the premise, b) whether they've got the selling knack to make the premise of an excellent sketch come across in an email or c) whether the sketch has a seemingly bland premise but loads of excellent gags. All in all, it seems to raise the bar unhelpfully rather than making the process more accessible. As a footnote, emailing people to tell them to try harder can unfortunately result in people emailing back saying "f**k you, your show's not funny anyway."

{quote] it's more work to edit a near good enough sketch then it is too write it your self. [/quote]
Depends. I don't think it's a hard and fast rule. In terms of time, editing a sketch is no different to writing a new one - it can take ten minutes, it can take several hours.

I know they read them all but my point was, given a limited time frame and number of readers, the readers surely hit a saturation point, where sketches stop being funny. I'm not assuming that's what happens, just conjecture.

People's mileage may vary. But I think when you've read a massive pile of so-so sketches, the funny ones stick out even more. Makes it easier to go "Yes! That one!"

And if that is so, if they do find by the 500th sketch they've read, they're sketched out, wouldn't it be better for the submitters if the premise was judged first then the quality of the sketch? So they don't read 400 subpar sketch ideas and 100 good ones, just the 100 good ideas, taking some of the pressure off of the show's sketch readers.

Yeah, but premise doesn't equal execution. You're trying to make the best show possible, and in terms of judging a sketch from an unknown, there's no real substitute for reading the sketch.

I guess my original question, with these shows, is it a hindrance or a help to the submitters that they read every sketch, seeing as they probably get 1000+ per episode?

Help. You never know when you're going to find a jewel.

I'd say reducing it down to 1 sketch per submitter and a fixed number of sketches, first come, first served.

So they'll read say 150 and if you're late better luck next time.

Makes it harder to spot talent. If someone writes three decent sketches, they've probably got promise. If someone writes one decent sketch, It could be a fluke. And of course, if someone's written three decent sketches - hooray! That's three holes in the show filled!

Also, only reading the first 150 sketches would really handicap the production team in terms of finding enough quality material to fill the show.

Thanks Mr Writer, that is a really helpful response, I guess in the back of my mind submitting to the BBC feels like that Stewart Lee quote:

"Getting stuff on the BBC is like the weather, when you get something on it's sunny, when you don't it's raining, but doing a rain dance won't help you get anything on."

I guess having mixed success, it feels at times random, that your best work doesn't get a look in. And it can feel random trying to guess what will be successful. With standup comedy you get a direct response of what's good or not but with submission, it's hard to tell what, if anything, you're doing is right.

I mean at times I would love some feedback, but wouldn't we all...

That was a splendid post, DeathbyMonkey.

Thanks Beaky! I done good

And Tim - what complaint?:
Personally I don't have any complaints, well that's not true, I am of the opinion that BBC comedy (at least TV wise) has become too constricted for the BBC's fear of causing controversy since the Sachgate incident. However that's lesser my opinion and more repeated things I've heard and seen.

Secondly we can complain that we have limited success, and get frustrated by it. But that's no reason to take it out on the producers, they are doing the job they're paid to do. They're the experts and the success with Newsjack proves that.

But the response Mr Writer gave was really helpful, it kind of reminds me if I'm not doing well it's no one else but me to blame. And I'm the only one that can change that.