台灣無線電視產業的政治經濟分析

Abstract

1965年國華廣告公司採行外包製作制度，成為台灣電視史上第一個外製外包公司；然由於電視產業的規模尚未形成，再加上除電視台之外，社會上並無太多電視製作人才，又因為產製設備昂貴且不易操作等高進入門檻，使得民間沒有能力成立獨立節目產製公司生產節目。 1970年代之後，中視、華視陸續開播，節目製作需求大增與電視錄製設備與器材的改良和價格降低等因素，均促使獨立於電視台之外的傳播公司紛紛成立；而華視開播初期因巨幅虧損大量採行節目外包制度，更使得外製公司成為節目製作的主力。 電視台挾其寡佔市場的優勢採行外包制度，乃是為了轉嫁電視產業原初的生產成本（包括人員薪資、製作經費、廣告業務承攬等）至傳播公司身上。1984年勞基法施行之後，電視公司更採取各種手段，包括廢止基本演藝人員制度、節目外包等，迴避因勞基法而必須增加的人事成本。 電視台取得大部分的利潤，卻未將這些超額利潤重新投入電視產製市場，造成節目製作公司利潤萎縮甚至自我剝削，在經濟條件不佳的情況下，僅能在稀少的資源環境下生存；且在產製的過程中，一方面由於所獲的利潤不足以擴大企業規模，使得一般製作公司僅能停留在小型企業的規模，時時必須面對企業規模過小可能造成的營運危機；一方面則因為利潤不足，迫使工作人員必須長期處於自我剝削的工作情境，使得節目製作公司無法長期累積經驗與專業能力。 長此以往，台灣無線電視產業面臨了節目內容品質不佳、產業無法更新與提昇的窘境，在面對其他替代性媒體競爭的局面時，只能顢頇地走向瓦解與崩潰。

In the history of Taiwan’s TV, Kuohua Communications Excellence is the first advertising agency that practiced the outsourcing system: in 1965, it took up both programming and advertising for TTV, the only TV station at that time. The emergence of outsourcing was due to the budding stage of the local TV industry, lack of programming expertise, as well as expensive producing equipments, which hindered the foundation of professional production companies. With the establishments of CTV and CTS in the 1970s, private production companies, which could afford cheaper but better equipments, sprung up to meet the increasing demands for more programs. Outsourcing was considered the most efficient solution to the problem, especially during the initial stage of CTS in which great loss incurred. On the other hand, TV stations have relied on outsourcing with an aim at reducing cost (including personnel, programming, advertising, etc.), dumping the unwanted to communications agencies. Since the enforcement of Labor Law in 1984, TV stations have adopted all possible measures to cut down expenses, including abolishing the system of in-house actors and contracting programs outside. The TV stations have greatly profited from outsourcing, but failed to invest in program production. As a result, the private production companies have been caught in a catch-22 situation: no money, no talents; no expertise, no good programs; no good programs, no big profits. This futile self-perpetuating cycle only leads these private production companies to a slow death.