Can the musty pages of history compete with the flash of rock ‘n’ roll?
     Apparently, yes – if primetime ratings are any indication.
    For this year’s first quarter, the History Channel and MTV were tied at 0.9, ranking them eleventh among cable networks. Some social critics may complain that people’s knowledge today is historically-challenged, but the history buffs who are out there have responded about as well to their dedicated channel as young rockers have to theirs.
    In its earliest years, the History Channel subsisted mostly on reruns, while its parent A&E waited to see if history documentaries would attract many viewers. As the response grew, money for original productions filtered in.
    At this year’s upfront, the History Channel revealed plans to bolster the appeal to its audience, a crowd gravitating toward the 18-49 and 25-54 zones, with a median household income that lands in the upper-middle range at $52,000.
    The proportion between men and women is approximately 60/40. Until now, this gender slant has been reflected in a high number of military documentaries. (After all, why else does master mob tactician Tony Soprano watch the channel?) 
    The network intends to continue mining its core audience, but some military content has receded from the screen. An attempt is being made to expand viewership somewhat.
   In the past year History Channel ratings have risen 13 percent. Similar growth in the coming year will depend upon concepts that have succeeded in the past, as well as ideas that are relatively new for the network.
   The History Channel’s strategy relies primarily on what it considers advertiser-friendly specials and a weekly program envisioned as a branding series to underscore the network’s identity. Also included in the mix is the latest addition to the most conspicuous of current TV trends – yes, another quiz show.
   The specials are part of an ongoing game plan in which the channel has highlighted one such show per quarter. This "stunting" approach, according to Charles Maday, senior vice president of History Channel programming, supplies "periodic high-visibility shows that reach out, not as a series would, but reach out to a lot of clients interested in buying on that basis."
   The specials include "The Founding Fathers," "History vs. Hollywood" and "Egypt: New Mysteries of an Ancient Land."
   It is on the series side, though, that the network is staking its highest expectations. Maday believes that "This Week in History," hosted by Josh Binswanger and Giselle Fernandez, is headed for a built-in audience.
   This optimism is based on the popularity of similar-themed columns in newspapers and magazines. The History Channel’s own web site has also provided an indicator: its "This Day in History" feature is one of the site’s most popular components.
   The network is banking on the successful transition of this idea from one medium to another. It is also promoting "This Week in History" as a branding venture, a series that says, "This is the History Channel."
   According to Susan Werbe, vice president of historical programming, the program epitomizes the channel because it emphasizes that "history is not just something found in textbooks. This show will relate it to the present."
    The network’s upcoming game show, "History IQ," will premiere in the fourth quarter this year, appearing five nights a week, Monday through Friday. It has been designed so that it can be played simultaneously at home on viewers’ computers.
   Leading in to "History IQ" will be a new version of "History Lost and Found," reformatted from an hour to a half-hour. The network’s programmers believe this show, with more of an appeal to younger viewers and families, will help grow the audience without straying far from the channel’s core following.
   Does the inclusion of the game-show format constitute a step too far beyond the History Channel’s relatively high-minded approach? Will its viewers accept a program genre that is so often associated with crass commercialism?
    "A quiz show is a natural for the History Channel," counters Maday. "The difference is that our show focuses on knowledge in a specific area while ‘Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?’ taps into knowledge that’s all over the place."

-David Everitt writes about television from Huntington, New York.

                                     Cover Page | Contact Us