That Wacky Redhead

[Orville_third]

Will butterflying "Taxi Driver" change the course of politics?

As for "Benson", how will it change ITTL? Will it be on the air? Will Benson still use the Heimlich maneuver? Will Downey and Endicott still be at each other's throats?

 

[e of pi]

Will butterflying "Taxi Driver" change the course of politics?

That's an interesting question, isn't it? I'd be interested in seeing that addressed.

 

[phx1138]

Will butterflying "Taxi Driver" change the course of politics?

Two other things: does this butterfly away Jodie Foster's career?

And does it butterfly John Hinkley? IIRC, it was Jodie in "Taxi Driver" that pushed his buttons...

As for "Benson", how will it change ITTL?

Why do you presume "Benson" ever gets made TTL? (I'd be unhappy if it didn't, mind you...)

 

[Unknown]

Tom Hanks in the Billy Crystal role, eh?

Interesting.

At least he'll avoid the slasher movie He Knows You're Alone (which he apparently isn't proud of), although the slasher movie genre will be different TTL.

Susan Anton on Three's Company? That's pretty good.

A fun fact: Susan Anton, Ann-Margaret, Morgan Fairchild, and Jaclyn Smith all starred in a Law and Order SVU episode called Bedtime. Smith played a female cop, while the first three played models for a mattress store owner (who they had all slept with, and the shots of the "mattress models" at a younger age are actuallythe three actresses when the latter were the ages of their characters).

All in all, good updates. Can't wait for the next one.

Oh, and Merry Christmas!!!

 

[Brainbin]

Thank you all, as always, for your latest responses to my update! And now, also as always, my thoughts on your thoughts...

Thank you for making my favorite sitcom central. (I did like "Yes, Minister" enormously, too, to be sure.)

The fun thing about Soap is that (as this latest update indicates) I can use it to speak indirectly about the daytime soap operas, too. And indeed I will!

I'm unaware of romance comics being much affected by the CCA. I understand they helped kill off the superheroes, tho.

Romance comics were considerably more risqué prior to the Comics Code, similar to the Pre-Code (Hays Code, that is) Hollywood films.

This would already have been happening, wouldn't it? As the usual half-hour drama was disappearing, too. (Tho I do recall "Adam-12" still being 30min into the '70s.)

No, I checked, and most of the soaps didn't make the transition until 1975 onward.

Huh. I had no idea. So you could say "Dallas" & "Dynasty", among others OTL, were throwbacks.

Remember, daytime soaps aired five days a week, whereas primetime soaps did so just once. This prevents viewer exhaustion in a twofold manner: plots get only 20% of the total airtime, and they have a six-day downtime, as opposed to two days maximum (even notwithstanding the summer hiatus, which is much longer for primetime shows).

Don't recall this one, tho Tony Geary & Genie Francis (& their Luke & Laura romance) got big, big headlines...

So they did, but they came along later... IOTL, anyway.

Really? I do (vaguely) recall the language being considered risqué.

Yes, which is why I said: "But the meat of the show was in eschewing the euphemisms of the daytime soaps and referring to everything using proper terminology."

Looking at his WP page, this risks him losing the lead in "Splash". (Unless Ron Howard offers it anyhow & they shoot on hiatus.)

I think you're missing out on the bigger picture here. What about Bosom Buddies?!

No, they won't--but they might be in the next update of "That Wacky Redhead".

Well, not the next update, unless they plan on dressing Tom Hanks in a Dorothy Hamill costume, but certainly in future updates in general, yes

Not Confused, just Impressed

Thank you, Nigel!

I can't think of an equivalent British series to Mary Hartman or Soap. There were obviously individual sketches that parodied Soaps, but not an entire series devoted to it. The closest I can think of is Acorn Antiques, which was a regular feature of Victoria Woods As Seen On TV.

My impression is that the British tended to parody more "important" aspects of life and popular culture, even if they often did so in a very silly fashion.

Brainbin, your last few updates are as well written and informative as ever. The one thing I am slightly disappointed by is the continuing parallelism rather than true divergences so late after the POD (and its huge butterflies in the early 1970s). A few more truly divergent new shows (though with familiar faces since we aren't that far from the POD) would go a long way towards increasing the feeling of verisimilitude in the timeline. Don't get me wrong; I love what you have done here, and it is the author's prerogative as to how much and when and where to diverge, but I felt I owed you some feedback and that is what I was feeling. Keep up the good work!

I appreciate your candor, Glen, and I can promise you that more shows which were nonexistent IOTL will make their appearance in the coming cycles. In fact, we're actually looking at the tail end of shows that will largely parallel those of OTL, for a number of reasons which will also become clear in the coming cycles.

I've beat the drum on Soap earlier in the thread, so obviously this was a highly enjoyable update for me. Great work as usual.

Thank you, Andrew!

I assume you're familiar with the Comics Curmudgeon? I'm pretty sure that's the only other place in the universe where you can find a vibrant discussion of Mary Worth.

Indeed I am, though I know it by the older title of "Josh Reads". (Unfortunately, For Better or For Worse didn't start running until 1979.)

If you've discussed the status of the Equal Rights Amendment and the second-wave feminist movement, I apologize for having missed it. But it strikes me that this is a pretty blank slate: on the one hand, you have generally more liberal race relations; on the other hand, the "Mini-Boom" and economic conditions you discuss in footnote 1 are culturally conservative influences. Gender equality doesn't have to track racial equality, after all.

This is a very excellent point, and something worth thinking about in regards to sociopolitical discourse ITTL, though I should make clear that the Equal Rights Amendment is one of my verboten topics, which shall never be discussed in any detail. But your analysis hammers home that this isn't a utopia, nor a dystopia... just a different world from OTL.

Actually, I wonder how social conservatism as a movement is faring; IOTL, it was Jimmy Carter who introduced born-again Christianity in the White House, only to discover that politically-minded evangelicals were using that enhanced visibility to build the alliance that would ultimately drive him from office in 1980. (The Moral Majority was founded by Jerry Falwell in 1979 IOTL.)

Here, Reagan won overwhelmingly without his own "third leg" of what he dubbed the "three-legged stool" of conservatism (social conservatives) -- or at least, without those folks organized as a political force. Reagan ITTL is likely to still be sympathetic with (and liked by) social conservatives, of course....

Now, I will be addressing some of these suppositions in my updates about 1978 and 1980, so I obviously won't say anything about them now.

I always thought that the key to Soap was that, within its own universe -- and subject to the same 'laws' that governed soap operas -- it always took itself seriously, to the point where there were genuine moments of pathos (usually centered on the characters of Jessica and Mary).

I've always noticed this about parodies, particularly genre parodies. I guess what they say is true: you tease because you love.

I had never heard the connection with Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman (and have never watched it); I wonder if naming the straightest straight-(wo)man on the show Mary was intended as a shout-out?

I didn't mean to infer a direct connection between the two shows - simply pointing out the parallels. Though I obviously agree that Mary Campbell/Graham is the "straightest" character on Soap (beyond the detached Benson, and perhaps Jodie/Joe), I don't think I would give Mary Hartman the same courtesy on her own show. In all likelihood, they went with Mary because it was a ridiculously common name, as it has been ever since the beginning of the English language (for obvious reasons).

"You want me to get that?"

Having grown up on The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, it didn't occur to me until I became aware of Soap how much of a transparent ripoff the character of Geoffrey was from Benson (with the fairly superficial twist of Geoffrey being English). Not that Joseph Marcell isn't a fine actor who did a great job with the material he was given, but I definitely think that Guillaume was simply perfect (hence why I just couldn't change the casting; I briefly considered giving Roscoe Lee Browne, his OTL replacement, the part initially).

Are there any other cast changes ITTL? I always thought Diana Canova (Corinne) was the weak link IOTL's Soap.

Virtually everyone in the younger generation is gone, actually, save for Jay Johnson. Seeing as we're now over ten years past the POD, it's hard to contrive a way to keep most of them in place. Fortunately, the anchors of Damon, Mulligan, Mandan, and Helmond all remain (along with Guillaume, of course). As good an actor as Crystal is, I would consider Hanks to be a comparative gain, which would work to cancel out any net losses from the OTL actors being replaced by inferior TTL substitutes.

I think it was earlier on this thread, but in case it was elsewhere, I'll share it again

No, it was on this thread. But hey, nobody's perfect

IOTL, Soap ran for four seasons, ending -- as with the previous three season finales -- with massive, unresolved cliffhangers. Of course, very few shows get to go off the air on their own terms....

What should also be noted is that, even today, said cliffhangers remain among the most notorious in all of television history!

I can accept Tom Baker not being the Fourth Doctor, but no American can't imagine anyone else other than Larry Hagman for J.R. Ewing. That's UNAMERICAN!!

Which doesn't hold much sway with me, considering that I am, in fact, not American

I suppose that the syndicated 1977 soap parody All That Glitters was butterflied away?

Yes, both because fewer syndication slots are available ITTL and because Lear has far less cachet to launch another show by that point.

No, not when the Television Show "Murphy Brown" was on in OTL, how long was FYI on the air *in universe* when Murphy came back from Alcoholics Anonymous? (the event that started the series as we saw it).

I'm not sure, having not seen Murphy Brown for years (being so highly topical, it hasn't fared too well in recent syndication), and being young enough during first-run that its defining storyline, the feud with Dan Quayle, went over my head entirely; but I believe that it had been on since at least 1980, as that was when Murphy supposedly did something (just what, exactly, was never explained) at that year's Republican Presidential Convention.

Will butterflying "Taxi Driver" change the course of politics?

That's an intriguing question, and one that bears careful analysis.

As for "Benson", how will it change ITTL? Will it be on the air? Will Benson still use the Heimlich maneuver? Will Downey and Endicott still be at each other's throats?

I'm afraid you're getting rather ahead of yourself in assuming that there's even going to be a Benson!

Two other things: does this butterfly away Jodie Foster's career?

No, Jodie Foster was an established child actress long before Taxi Driver, IOTL. (Her first IMDb credit is from 1969.)

Tom Hanks in the Billy Crystal role, eh?

Interesting.

At least he'll avoid the slasher movie He Knows You're Alone (which he apparently isn't proud of), although the slasher movie genre will be different TTL.

He'll also avoid Mazes and Monsters (though role-playing games will also be different ITTL), as Soap will definitely be a bigger hit ITTL than Bosom Buddies was IOTL.

Susan Anton on Three's Company? That's pretty good.

A fun fact: Susan Anton, Ann-Margaret, Morgan Fairchild, and Jaclyn Smith all starred in a Law and Order SVU episode called Bedtime. Smith played a female cop, while the first three played models for a mattress store owner (who they had all slept with, and the shots of the "mattress models" at a younger age are actually the three actresses when the latter were the ages of their characters).

Not only am I aware of that episode, it actually influenced my casting decision, and Fairchild was my second choice for the part (as both she and Anton were famous for nothing in particular in the 1970s IOTL). I think I went with Anton because she looked more stereotypically 1970s than Fairchild did.

All in all, good updates. Can't wait for the next one.

Oh, and Merry Christmas!!!

Thank you very much, and Merry Christmas to you as well! And as a matter of fact, speaking of updates, I'm hoping to have a very special gift for all of you...

 

[phx1138]

Romance comics were considerably more risqué prior to the Comics Code, similar to the Pre-Code (Hays Code, that is) Hollywood films.

Huh. They must've been better than the rare examples I ever saw...

No, I checked, and most of the soaps didn't make the transition until 1975 onward.

No, I meant the change more broadly. It appears the soaps were latecomers to the trend.

Remember, daytime soaps aired five days a week, whereas primetime soaps did so just once. This prevents viewer exhaustion in a twofold manner: plots get only 20% of the total airtime, and they have a six-day downtime, as opposed to two days maximum (even notwithstanding the summer hiatus, which is much longer for primetime shows).

Noted, & understood.

So they did, but they came along later... IOTL, anyway.

Yes, I knew that.

I think you're missing out on the bigger picture here. What about Bosom Buddies?!

Never watched it nor wanted to. I'm wondering if it means Hanks gets out of the ghetto later (or not at all). I'd hate to see "Road to Perdition" not have him in it. (I know, way, way after your "sell by" date. Just sayin'.)

Well, not the next update, unless they plan on dressing Tom Hanks in a Dorothy Hamill costume, but certainly in future updates in general, yes

I did say "might".

I just couldn't change the casting; I briefly considered giving Roscoe Lee Browne, his OTL replacement, the part

While I do agree Guillaume was ideal, this wouldn't have been a bad sub. Also, I never noticed the connection with Geoffrey, but I never watched "Fresh Prince" much.

No, Jodie Foster was an established child actress long before Taxi Driver, IOTL. (Her first IMDb credit is from 1969.)

I should have said, "her future career". (TBH, I can't think what else she did in this era, up to "Silence of the Lambs".) If you've butterflied "Bugsy Malone", OTOH...

He'll also avoid Mazes and Monsters (though role-playing games will also be different ITTL)

 

[phx1138]

Jingle Bells...

Waiting for my 1-horse sleigh... Just wanted to wish everybody happy whatever.

Also thanks to Santa Brainbin for the great Xmas gift thread.

Call this my Xmas gift to the thread.

 

[Brainbin]

The Good Old Hockey Game

“He shoots, he scores!”

– Originated by Foster Hewitt, whenever announcing a goal on Hockey Night in Canada, and continued by his successors

Ice hockey, like many popular sports, was developed in the late 19th century, from a wide variety of antecedents. Among the many competing theories of its origins is descent from one of a wide variety of obscure European games, with some of these played in Iceland and still others in the Low Countries. But the most likely ancestors were the stick-and-ball games played by natives living in what is now known as Central Canada, or the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, where the game in its modern form was undoubtedly invented. (A more direct descendant of these games was the sport of lacrosse.) The cool, continental climates in the region, coupled with plentiful small bodies of water, ensured a steady supply of iced-over playing fields every winter. As the late nineteenth century was also a time of great advances in refrigeration technology, the game was soon enough brought indoors, into the arena or skating rink (from the Scottish, which was also the native ancestry of the plurality of Anglophone Canadians – it was no surprise that curling, which also required the use of ice rinks, caught on very quickly in their new homeland). The first such game was played in 1875, in Montreal, between students at McGill University, and the first amateur club would be founded a mere two years later, as part of the organized athletics teams established at that institution. [1]

The game was so popular that it caught the attention of the Governor-General of the young Dominion, Lord Stanley of Preston (later the 16th Earl of Derby), in 1889. Two of his sons had become enraptured with the game, forming their own amateur team in Ottawa, and the fever quickly spread to their parents. Lord Stanley was such an enthusiastic supporter of the game that, in his capacity as Governor-General, he purchased and then bequeathed a trophy that was named for him, the Stanley Cup, in trust to be awarded to the finest amateur hockey team in Canada, and such teams would henceforth regularly challenge for it. It would later acquire perhaps the most colourful history of any competitive prize in the history of sport, though “Lord Stanley’s Mug”, as sportswriters could not resist labelling it, would soon enough be presented in an intent rather contrary to that of the man for whom it was named – and within his own lifetime, at that; from 1906, professional teams would be allowed to compete for the Cup. For as had been the case with baseball before it, the popularity of hockey and the opportunity for fortunes to be made inevitably attracted the attention of entrepreneurs; and the finest players found themselves making a living in the new leagues forming throughout Canada and, eventually, spreading into the Northern United States.

By the end of World War I, the premier hockey league in Canada was the National Hockey League. The charter members were the Montreal Wanderers (representing the city’s Anglophone community), the Montreal Canadiens (representing its Francophone community), the Ottawa Senators, and a then-unnamed club representing Toronto, which would eventually become known as the Maple Leafs (properly named for a regiment of soldiers who had served in the War, hence the seemingly-ungrammatical plural). Teams new and old came and went, including from other large cities in Central Canada (namely, Quebec City and Hamilton), but their first significant (and lasting) addition was also their first American team, the Boston Bruins, who joined the NHL in 1924. By this time, the Stanley Cup was open only to professional teams, at the culmination of an interleague contest between the NHL and the rival Western Canada Hockey League – an American club (the Seattle Metropolitans) from one of its precursor leagues was the first such team to win the Cup, in 1917. After the WCHL folded in 1926, the Cup became the exclusive province of the NHL, which it remains to this day. The Victoria Cougars had been the last team from outside that league to win it, doing so in 1925. The Bruins would win the Cup in 1929, by which time ten teams were playing in the league, including six American teams. By this time, all of the “Original Six” teams which would comprise the entire league from 1942 to 1967 were in place: Toronto, Boston, the Montreal Canadiens, the New York Rangers, the Chicago Black Hawks, and the Detroit Red Wings (though, at the time, they were the Cougars – in fact, by an intriguing coincidence, they were a continuation of the aforementioned Victoria Cougars). However, despite the machinations of professional play, there remained a place for amateurs on the hockey scene – in the Olympics, starting with Antwerp in 1920. As a superlative demonstration of Canadian dominance of the game in international competition during its early years, amateur teams (often of little or no distinction) would win gold medals representing the Dominion, even as the rest of Team Canada went home empty-handed. Of the first seven gold medals awarded for ice hockey, Canada won six – and even in the seventh case (in 1936) still managed to take home the silver. It was, quite literally, a Golden Age for the sport in Canada.

During the Great Depression – 1931, to be exact – hockey found itself a permanent fixture of the media environment, with the premiere of what would become known as Hockey Night in Canada, a pioneering live sporting event broadcast. NHL matches would go on over the air to Canadians – “and to hockey fans in the United States and Newfoundland”, as legendary announcer Foster Hewitt memorably put it [2] – on the public radio network, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (which was actually younger than HNiC, having assumed its present form in 1936). And American cities near enough to Canadian radio waves – including in all four NHL cities within the “Original Six” – would indeed listen to the program in droves, whenever their team faced Toronto or Montreal, and therefore warranted inclusion. Almost as soon as the CBC had expanded their operations into television, HNiC (and Hewitt) had followed them, broadcasting on Saturday nights throughout the NHL season; in transitioning to the medium, Hewitt was one of many radio personalities who were able to prove that success in the earlier of the two very often translated into success in the latter. That said, he continued to work in his beloved radio, and withdrew to the aging medium for good in 1963, by which time sports coverage remained one of the few viable programming choices available for it.

Foster Hewitt’s departure was about as ominous a harbinger as could be imagined for the NHL; by the early 1960s, even the notoriously conservative Major League Baseball had quite famously expanded into California (at the expense of their hallowed New York teams, no less!), and the NHL, reduced to only their “Original Six” teams after contracting due to the Great Depression and then World War II, was by far the smallest of the major leagues. The possibility of new leagues forming to fill the very large gap was becoming an increasingly real threat. It had already happened in football, with the AFL, which had proven a surprisingly viable challenger to the far more entrenched NFL. The six owners did their best to delay the inevitable, but by 1967 an unprecedented expansion was in place, which would double the league in size to twelve teams – the largest it had ever been.

In planning for the expansion, adding teams in other Canadian cities had seemed eminently logical – former WCHL cities such as Vancouver, Edmonton, and Calgary were all much larger by now than former NHL cities like Hamilton, Ottawa, and Quebec City had been when they had teams, even relative to Toronto and Montreal. Indeed, those Western Canadian cities would form a vital part of the Western Hockey League, considered the main potential challenger to the NHL in the 1960s. But despite a strong bid from Vancouver (the largest city on Canada’s West Coast, and the core of third-largest metropolitan area nationwide), it was not among the six new NHL teams that began play in the 1967-68 season – no Canadian team was. In fact, though the NHL did poach from the WHL, it was in California – borrowing from the MLB playbook in establishing two teams in the Golden State, one in the Southland, and the other in the Bay Area. The other four teams, granted, were in far more climatically appropriate locales: the Twin Cities of Minnesota; Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; and St. Louis – though the last of these was only chosen because of a connection with the owner in Chicago. Ironically, this expansionary phase – which continued through the 1970s, with the league numbering 18 teams by 1974 – could not prevent the rise of a competing major league in the World Hockey Association.

Established in 1972, the WHA began play with a league of twelve teams. Four of these twelve played their first season in Canada, in the four untapped markets of Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Quebec City (the Vancouver Canucks, a former WHL team, had belatedly joined the NHL in that league’s subsequent expansion in 1970, after the owners had been suitably chastened by the incredibly hostile reaction by Canadian fans, in yet another harbinger of events to come). It was unsurprisingly in the Great White North where the league met its greatest popularity – of those four original teams, three would remain in their original host cities for the entire existence of the WHA. The fourth, in Ottawa, folded after one year [3]; the league repeatedly attempted to expand to Calgary as well, but had no lasting success there. [4] WHA markets in the United States, on the other hand, were more haphazard in their selection, and accordingly saw more varied success. Right off the bat, the WHA found themselves with an overlapping presence in two markets – New York City and Chicago – and near to a third, Boston (the New England Whalers were based in Hartford, Connecticut). New York City was doubly problematic, as the New York Islanders, a second NHL team, began playing in 1972, the same year that the WHA debuted. However, the New England Whalers were one of the few consistent success stories the WHA would have stateside, lending credence to the popular assumption of professional hockey doing best in “natural” (read: cold-weather) markets for the sport. However, contradicting this truism were the Houston Aeros, who also began play in the inaugural WHA season, and enjoyed surprising popularity. Perhaps their highest-profile booster was Houston-area Rep. (later Sen.) George Bush (who hailed from New England). Nevertheless, Houston seemed to be the exception that proved the rule; high profile moves or expansions to other southerly cities, like Los Angeles, San Diego, Miami, and Phoenix would all ultimately fail. Expansions to the Midwest proved more lasting; the Indianapolis Racers and the nearby Cincinnati Stingers [5], both established in 1974, both became dependable moneymakers in the later WHA.

Although their American successes were valuable to the WHA, and necessary to keep them competitive with the NHL as a major league, their primary orientation for revenue generation was and would remain Canada. To this end, the league worked out an arrangement with one of only two nationwide networks, CTV, in 1974, through their most influential affiliate, John Bassett, who owned CFTO (the flagship station) in Toronto. Importantly, Bassett had once been a part-owner of the Maple Leafs before he had been forced out by Harold Ballard, and there was certainly no love lost between the two men. He was more than happy to produce programming that would work to undermine his former league, even if the market his station served did not actually have a WHA team. [6] The newly revised Canadian Content broadcast regulations, devised by Prime Minister Robert Stanfield himself, were considered critical in influencing Bassett’s decision. Given the name WHA Hockey Tonight, the resultant program was intended as a direct competitor to the established Hockey Night in Canada. CTV, which had largely struggled since its inception in the early 1960s, and by and large had a famously difficult time producing homegrown material, found themselves with a runaway hit in WHA Hockey Tonight (which became the subject of countless “Who’s On First” puns under its abbreviation WHAHT) which became the second-biggest Canadian-made hit on television (behind only the venerable HNiC). But most importantly, HNiC ratings were declining, even in regions with NHL teams. Many Francophones in Quebec supported the Nordiques over the Canadiens, as it was an easy way to personify the continuing linguistic divisions in the province; and British Columbians also tended to prefer WHAHT, as Canucks games were rarely broadcast on HNiC and they felt the need to show solidarity with their fellow Western teams in Edmonton or Winnipeg (as opposed to hated Toronto or Montreal). Beer, which along with hockey represented one of the two stereotypical passions of most Canadians, also had dogs in the fight: Carling O’Keefe, one of the largest brewers in the country, owned the Quebec Nordiques and was the principal sponsor of WHAHT (ironically, most games on the English-only broadcast featured Edmonton or Winnipeg, with Quebec consistently appearing only in matches against other Canadian teams, or in the playoffs). Meanwhile, Molson owned the Montreal Canadiens, and were a principal sponsor of HNiC. This distinction would prove critical in the coming years.

But long-time viability, even despite the early successes for the WHA, was clearly the league’s greatest obstacle. In order to entice top-quality players, the league was forced to pay top-drawer salaries, which cut into their revenues. New York City and Chicago had both proven that they could not compete head-to-head with the NHL, leaving them with only mid-market cities as prospects for the future. It was clear that, in the long-term, the WHA (like the other second major leagues before it) was very likely doomed. Prime Minister Stanfield, a major sports booster, and someone who had campaigned on the primacy of Canadian hockey (with many pundits predicting that his rival, Pierre Trudeau, might have held on in 1972, had the Canadians defeated the Soviets at that year’s Summit Series) did support the WHA, but he was first and foremost an advocate of their merger with the NHL, to create a juggernaut that would properly represent Canadian prowess in the field. This tied into another long-term goal of his: Canadian hockey being properly restored to its rightful place on the world’s stage. Needless to say, the upstart league ruffled his feathers considerably with their decision to court European players in large numbers. This was a necessity of the talent pool being too small for the number of teams in both leagues; at their combined height, over 30 teams saw simultaneous play between them. [7] It also gave the otherwise Goliath “bad guys” in the NHL a valuable bargaining chip, but public opinion remained largely against them.

The “glory days”, such as they were, of the NHL-WHA rivalry were briefer than most later sportswriters, mythologizing their “epic struggle”, would have it – for two seasons, from 1974 to 1976, ranging shots were fired, with both sides feigning invulnerability to the other, and seeming to have a certain edge that the other lacked. By 1976, cracks were appearing in the veneer of both leagues. The NHL was very nearly forced to contract – which it had not done in over thirty years – and the WHA did, shrinking to a mere twelve teams. This was a major morale booster for the NHL, and simultaneously a blow to the WHA. Merger talks, already happening behind the scenes in a low-key manner, escalated rapidly. By 1976, the AFL had merged into the NFL, and the ABA had merged into the NBA, so it seemed only logical to complete the hat-trick. [8]

The Parliament of Canada – by this time, under the majority control of Stanfield’s Tories, and as actively interventionist as such a government could possibly be in this matter, especially in the post-Olympic afterglow – went out of their way to promote merger talks [9], and it was a good thing too, as the owners of all three Canadian clubs opposed it (largely because they would have to share revenues from HNiC, which – even if they returned to pre-WHAHT highs – would be much lower split six ways than three). The WHA proposed importing six of their twelve teams to the NHL: all three extant Canadian teams at the time (Winnipeg, Edmonton, and Quebec) along with their three biggest stateside success stories: New England, Indianapolis, and Cincinnati. [10] Houston, though another overall successful team, was summarily rejected by both sides because of its extreme southerly location, which was deemed insufficiently conducive to ice hockey. In addition to the three Canadian owners, the Boston Bruins declined the deal, refusing to share New England with the Whalers; Cleveland, a struggling team, was loath to share even the populous state of Ohio with another club. [11] Because three-quarters of the owners had to support the merger, the five out of eighteen were enough to put a stop to them; a deal had been defeated by the slimmest of margins, or so it seemed[FONT=&quot]…

The sides in what subsequently became known as the “Beer Wars” (often pronounced [/FONT]“bee-yur wars” to form a pun with the Boer Wars, in which Canadian troops had fought) were soon fully mobilized; outraged fans throughout Canada immediately called for a boycott of all Molson products. This played right into the hands of Carling O’Keefe, whose own sales saw a corresponding boost (as did that of third-party breweries, most notably Labatt). Molson, which also had an exclusivity agreement with the Vancouver Canucks, saw their sales plummet, which forced their hand. Montreal and Vancouver switched their votes to “yes”, bringing the total to 15 out of 18. The merger was approved, and would come into effect in the 1977-78 season. Those teams who were successful enough to be considered viable despite the lack of a continuing WHA were given parachute payments and offered positions in the Central Hockey League, a minor league controlled by the NHL, but only the Houston Aeros survived for more than one season. As a condition of the merger, all six WHA teams joined the league as part of a single division in the Clarence Campbell Conference. The other three divisions would each contain two “Original Six” teams, and one Canadian team. The addition of Cincinnati and Indianapolis to the NHL bolstered the league’s strong Midwestern presence, adding to the established clubs in Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, St. Louis, and the Twin Cities. New England was redesignated “Hartford”, in order to prevent jurisdictional conflicts with Boston. [12]

As with the NFL-AFL and NBA-ABA mergers, the former WHA teams and owners found themselves at a significant disadvantage when compared to the established teams of what had formerly been the rival league, but they did now represent one-quarter of the owners and of the players in the newly merged organization, forming a bloc that – especially in the early years – allowed their voices to be heard, and mollifying their concerns about being a school of small fish in a great big ocean, as opposed to being big fish in a small pond. The merger also coincided with the rise of a new generation of players, some of whom would forever change the face of the professional game[FONT=&quot]…

---

[1] Thus hockey, much like gridiron football, owes its present popularity to roots in collegiate play. (This is true also of Canadian football, at about the same time).

[2] Newfoundland was a separate British Dominion from 1907 to 1949, after repeated talks for the colony to join Confederation in the 19th century failed; along with all the other pre-WWI Dominions (including Canada), it gained de facto independence as a sovereign state with the Statute of Westminster in 1931, but the Great Depression hit Newfoundland very hard indeed, to the point that a Royal Commission was formed, and recommended direct governance from the United Kingdom (effectively, a return to colonial status), which the legislature then supported (and therefore voted to suspend itself indefinitely). This remained the status quo until after World War II, at which time the Newfoundland economy improved, and a second Royal Commission suggested a referendum; at the last minute, an option to join Canada was added, and (after a run-off) this passed in 1948, with Newfoundland entering Confederation the following year. Up to that point, Newfoundland was never a part of Canada; hence Hewitt[/FONT]’s distinction.

[3] The Ottawa Nationals moved to Toronto in 1973 IOTL, becoming known as the Toronto Toros. Surprisingly, they lasted for three years, despite being in direct competition with one of the most popular NHL teams, the Maple Leafs (they even shared an arena). This led to disputes with the notorious “Pal Hal” Ballard, sole owner of the Leafs from 1971, and the Toros finally departed for Birmingham, Alabama, in 1976 (changing their name to the Bulls to maintain the alliteration, and actually surviving to the end of the league in 1979). ITTL, no major league, not even a second-string one like the WHA, is going to go anywhere near Alabama in this era, for obvious reasons.

[4] IOTL, one WHA team played out of Calgary: the Cowboys, from 1975 to 1977. An earlier team, the Calgary Broncos, were organized in 1972 but moved to Cleveland before playing a single match, where they remained until the Cleveland Barons of the NHL relocated from Oakland, California (where they played as the Golden Seals) in 1976.

[5] The Cincinnati Stingers, though they were established in 1974 IOTL and ITTL, did not begin play until 1975 IOTL. Among later WHA teams, they were singularly successful; they were the only club established following the league’s inaugural season to survive until the WHA merged with the NHL in 1979 (though they did not take part in it).

[6] IOTL, Bassett was the one who purchased the Ottawa Nationals and brought them to Toronto as the Toros, for much the same reason as he is instead backing a separate national broadcast ITTL; to stick it to Pal Hal. As Stanfield is in charge from 1972 onward ITTL, this butterflies the finer particulars of the CanCon regulations, allowing an opportunity for Bassett to compete with Ballard in a fashion more compatible with the focus of this timeline.

[7] Their OTL height was 18 teams in the NHL and 14 in the WHA, achieved in the 1974-75 and 1975-76 seasons (after which point both leagues contracted). This combined total, 32 teams, remains higher than the 30 maintained by the OTL NHL at present, despite an aggressive phase of expansion in the 1990s.

[8] The circumstances of the merger between the ABA and the NBA were different ITTL, which will be discussed further in a later update.

[9] Even IOTL, Parliament unanimously passed a motion urging the NHL to reconsider after their initial rejection of an NHL-WHA merger.

[10] In the 1976-77 WHA season IOTL, the following twelve teams had ice time: Quebec, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, New England, Birmingham, Minnesota, Houston, Winnipeg, San Diego, Edmonton, Calgary, and Phoenix. Of these twelve, only eight would survive the season: Calgary, Phoenix, Indianapolis, and Minnesota all folded.

[11] A moot point IOTL; though Cincinnati had lasted to 1979, Cleveland did not, folding in 1978, making it to date the last contraction in one of the major leagues.

[12] IOTL, four WHA teams joined the NHL in 1979: Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec City, and New England (renamed Hartford, as ITTL).

---

Teams in the National Hockey League, effective as of the 1977-78 season:

Prince of Wales Conference

Adams Division

Toronto Maple Leafs
Boston Bruins
Minnesota North Stars
St. Louis Blues
Buffalo Sabres
Atlanta Flames

Norris Division

Montreal Canadiens
Detroit Red Wings
Los Angeles Kings
Pittsburgh Penguins
Washington Capitals
Colorado Rockies

Clarence Campbell Conference

Patrick Division

New York Rangers
Chicago Black Hawks
Cleveland Barons
Philadelphia Flyers
Vancouver Canucks
New York Islanders

Smythe Division

Edmonton Oilers
Hartford Whalers
Quebec Nordiques
Winnipeg Jets
Cincinnati Stingers
Indianapolis Racers

---

Merry Christmas, everyone! Allow me to present this gift to all of you, my wonderful readers. Thank you all so much for your gifts of reading and commenting!

We haven’t revisited Canadian culture in some time, and oddly, it always seems that when we do, it’s through the milieu of sporting events. Probably because Canadian popular culture, as a distinct force from American popular culture, is much more visible from that angle. Technically, of course, the NHL and the WHA did very important business in the United States, and I don’t want to discount that; but it really wasn’t a matter of the same passionate intensity as it was in Canada, IOTL or ITTL. The narrator, perhaps for that reason, has some biases that he’s allowing to shine through. And, if you squint, you can definitely find some applicability to the current situation in North American professional hockey, to be sure. Mostly, though, I wanted to shed some light on how, as elsewhere, seemingly small, subtle changes can have a massive cumulative impact.

Also, I’m pretty sure I will never again start my discussion as far back as 1875 (still over a century in the past, even from our “present” vantage point). I apologize for those of you who are unaware of the rules and regulations of ice hockey that I did not elaborate on those in any fashion during this fairly long update, but the game and its variants (particularly field hockey) are popular worldwide, so I decided to take a calculated risk Thank you all for reading! I look forward to your responses, as always.

 

[e of pi]

The decision to abandon Houston in the merger is interesting--I can understand it on the grounds that it's way out of the way, but it's a big market (1.5 million in the city, 2.75 million in the metro ITOTL 1980 census, #9 and #5 in the nation, respectively), and the very uniqueness that makes their success hard to repeat across other southern means if you shut it down, you might not be able to find a way back in. That's a very calculated risk, and I can see it being a topic of discussion in the future of TTL as a "what might have been." And as a past citizen of Indianapolis and a current resident of Cincinnati, I'm interested to see we're getting our own teams.

 

[phx1138]

“He shoots, he scores!”

– Originated by Foster Hewitt

Hewitt gets the credit, but I understand this was first used several months before, in the first ever radiocast game, by a Regina announcer.

The first such game was played in 1875, in Montreal

This is the accepted date; I've seen claims for the first going back into the 1830s.

a then-unnamed club representing Toronto

Commonly known as the Maroons, no? The Toronto AAA?

Of the first seven gold medals awarded for ice hockey, Canada won six

And have not done so well in the Olympics since.

Hockey Night in Canada, a pioneering live sporting event broadcast.

So WP says, actually two: one English, one French. (In Canada, what else would you expect?) Coverage was, I understand, for the Leafs & Canadiens, quite independent of each other.

despite a strong bid from Vancouver (the largest city on Canada’s West Coast, and the core of third-largest metropolitan area nationwide), it was not among the six new NHL teams that began play in the 1967-68 season – no Canadian team was.

Welcome to the Canadian inferiority complex at work...

Ironically, this expansionary phase – which continued through the 1970s, with the league numbering 18 teams by 1974 – could not prevent the rise of a competing major league in the World Hockey Association.

Because, AIUI, they'd waited too long...

Many Francophones in Quebec supported the Nordiques over the Canadiens

Nords over Habs? I thought the Habs were a cultural icon in La Belle Province. The Rocket would be appalled. (Culture test: if you're Canadian, you get this. Or if you're a hockey fan.)

by and large had a famously difficult time producing homegrown material

Plus ça change...

to entice top-quality players, the league was forced to pay top-drawer salaries

This had to do with how players' contracts were arranged, didn't it? WHA allowed free agency, which NHL didn't. Also, WHA did something NHL had yet to figure out, despite 50yr lead: drafting players from Europe....

OTL height was 18 teams in the NHL and 14 in the WHA

Hasn't population risen enough since then to support more? (I bet the League is keeping the number artificially low. Like MBL.)

rise of a new generation of players, some of whom would forever change the face of the professional game

Notably Bobby Hull, IIRC.

I wanted to shed some light on how, as elsewhere, seemingly small, subtle changes can have a massive cumulative impact.

As interesting as it was, TBH, IDK enough about the outcome to know if it has...

for those of you who are unaware of the rules and regulations of ice hockey

Truth to tell, it doesn't matter: it's the league politics & the economics at issue, not the rules of the game. (It's not like they were debating eliminating the blue line, or something.)

 

[Glen]

The hockey update was indeed a remarkable review of the history of hockey (nice bit about the origins of the Stanley Cup).

 

[e_wraith]

Also, I’m pretty sure I will never again start my discussion as far back as 1875 (still over a century in the past, even from our “present” vantage point). I apologize for those of you who are unaware of the rules and regulations of ice hockey that I did not elaborate on those in any fashion during this fairly long update, but the game and its variants (particularly field hockey) are popular worldwide, so I decided to take a calculated risk Thank you all for reading! I look forward to your responses, as always.

Well, this is the most hockey we have had all year, so no complaints here. Remind me when the NHL signed its pact with the Devil that should it ever become too popular and financially successful the world will end and we'll all be dragged kicking and screaming down to hell? Thank goodness the owners and players have done so well in protecting us from that gruesome fate. (To the extent of hiring Donald Fehr and his brother to represent them! Good work players, that was a nice touch! Not saying the owners haven't done as much or more, but getting the man who helped destroy the Expos one chance of winning in the MLB involved must have truly warmed the hearts of all Canadians.)

Oh yeah, I seem to recall in OTL there was a movie about hockey around this timeframe, how are the Chiefs doing here?

And I see the Scouts/Rockies/Proto-Devils are in Colorado as IOTL, let's hope come 1982 they see the sense in coming East! (Rangers fan, but the Devils are at least a worthy adversary most of the time. And my high school ice rink hosted their rival's practice sessions for many years, so that was cool.)

 

[The Professor]

Wow not 1 but 2 updates!

Can't really comment much as I know little about 70s US soaps and only a bit more about Canadian Hockey (courtesy of a stint in 97 Vancouver).

Though, what butterflies will this different NHL arrangement affect other North American sports?

 

[e_wraith]

This had to do with how players' contracts were arranged, didn't it? WHA allowed free agency, which NHL didn't. Also, WHA did something NHL had yet to figure out, despite 50yr lead: drafting players from Europe....

Nah, that'll never go anywhere...

Notably Bobby Hull, IIRC.

Aren't we past Hull's time of ascendency by the time of the merger? Soon it will be Edmonton's time (let's just skip the Islander's time of dominance), and that guy who's slightly famous because Lenny Dykstra bought his house or something. (Extreme Sarcasm! I know that Wayne Gretzky is also famous for marrying Janet Jones. And, of course, his time as a New York Ranger. Did he do anything else?)

 

[phx1138]

Nah, that'll never go anywhere...

Aren't we past Hull's time of ascendency by the time of the merger?

Could be I'm thinking of Orr...

I know that Wayne Gretzky is also famous for marrying Janet Jones.

Wayne who? No relation to Peter Gzowski? Or Johnny Wayne? (Links for non-Canadians.)

 

[Brainbin]

Thank you all for your positive responses to my latest update! I'm glad that you all seem to have enjoyed this change of pace.

The decision to abandon Houston in the merger is interesting--I can understand it on the grounds that it's way out of the way, but it's a big market (1.5 million in the city, 2.75 million in the metro ITOTL 1980 census, #9 and #5 in the nation, respectively), and the very uniqueness that makes their success hard to repeat across other southern means if you shut it down, you might not be able to find a way back in. That's a very calculated risk, and I can see it being a topic of discussion in the future of TTL as a "what might have been." And as a past citizen of Indianapolis and a current resident of Cincinnati, I'm interested to see we're getting our own teams.

Some historical background about the OTL Houston Aeros: in addition to being one of the most successful teams in the WHA, they were one of just eight teams that survived until the 1977-78 season (and one of only six charter teams) - and in the first serious merger talks (roughly contemporary with those of TTL), they were one of the six teams that were part of negotiations to join the NHL (subbed in for Indianapolis - the other five all match the ones that made it ITTL). However, the Aeros folded at the end of that season IOTL, whereas Indianapolis did not (they lasted partway into the 1978-79 WHA season, during which even a promising recruit from Brantford, Ontario whose name escapes me couldn't save them). I've mentioned many times that the Midwest in general is doing much better ITTL, which is why Indianapolis narrowly takes that sixth slot of Houston. The potential for "growing the game" (to borrow an anachronistic PR term) is much greater in the Magnolia City, but (as you note) it's very far away from the other teams - Atlanta, St. Louis, and Denver (which all very far away from each other) are the three nearest to it. And remember that this is post-Oil Crisis...

Hewitt gets the credit, but I understand this was first used several months before, in the first ever radiocast game, by a Regina announcer.

It's not whether you were the first to do something, but whether you're the last to be the first to do something (see: Columbus, Christopher)

This is the accepted date; I've seen claims for the first going back into the 1830s.

See directly above.

Commonly known as the Maroons, no? The Toronto AAA?

The Maroons were the second team in the NHL to represent the Anglophone Community of Montreal (replacing the defunct Wanderers), playing from 1924 to 1938 before they were suspended in the face of the Great Depression. They attempted to restart play after the War, but the league refused to allow it. The team that would later become known as the Maple Leafs, on the other hand, were first known as the Arenas, and then as the St. Patricks, before assuming their present name in 1927.

Nords over Habs?

Believe it or not, this was apparently considered a litmus test among separatists in the 1990s. Recall that the Canadiens have a significant Anglophone following, given that (as noted above) the Maroons stopped playing in 1938 (and, indeed, it was either the Habs or the Leafs until 1970, within living memory for many of my readers).

This had to do with how players' contracts were arranged, didn't it? WHA allowed free agency, which NHL didn't.

Precisely.

Hasn't population risen enough since then to support more? (I bet the League is keeping the number artificially low. Like MBL.)

In fact, many observers believe that the NHL is stretched too thin! Of course, wags have observed that they might have more luck if they kept to traditional markets rather than expanding into... well, let's be charitable and say "markets with room for growth". Of course, this is a highly debatable issue IOTL.

As interesting as it was, TBH, IDK enough about the outcome to know if it has...

There's more to this story ITTL, which will be covered in future updates.

The hockey update was indeed a remarkable review of the history of hockey (nice bit about the origins of the Stanley Cup).

Thank you, Glen, I'm glad you liked it.

Well, this is the most hockey we have had all year, so no complaints here. Remind me when the NHL signed its pact with the Devil that should it ever become too popular and financially successful the world will end and we'll all be dragged kicking and screaming down to hell? Thank goodness the owners and players have done so well in protecting us from that gruesome fate. (To the extent of hiring Donald Fehr and his brother to represent them! Good work players, that was a nice touch! Not saying the owners haven't done as much or more, but getting the man who helped destroy the Expos one chance of winning in the MLB involved must have truly warmed the hearts of all Canadians.)

Ah yes, 1994. Looking back, it would indeed be very amusing to see the Expos win the World Series immediately after the Blue Jays win it back-to-back. I'm glad I've helped to sate your appetite for more hockey, as it appears increasingly unlikely that the NHL will not be playing this season - which, going back to the topic of my update, means that the Stanley Cup will again not be awarded! The trustees are giving no indication that they will honour their previous agreement (made during the last lockout) to pay homage to the proper intent of the Cup by awarding it to the top amateur team in Canada. Perhaps the present Earl of Derby could make an appeal?

Oh yeah, I seem to recall in OTL there was a movie about hockey around this timeframe, how are the Chiefs doing here?

For those of you unfamiliar with the film that e_wraith is mentioning, allow me to introduce you to Slap Shot, which exists in largely the same form ITTL.

And I see the Scouts/Rockies/Proto-Devils are in Colorado as IOTL, let's hope come 1982 they see the sense in coming East! (Rangers fan, but the Devils are at least a worthy adversary most of the time. And my high school ice rink hosted their rival's practice sessions for many years, so that was cool.)

Now here's where the bad news comes in, at least from your perspective. As you recall, Denver hosted the 1976 Winter Olympics ITTL. The arena in which the Rockies play is thus called the Olympic Sports Arena (instead of McNichols Sports Arena, named for an incumbent mayor), with a larger capacity and more luxurious amenities. Denver is going to be a flourishing city from 1976 onward ITTL, and one with a certain fondness for winter sports like hockey. One that won't want to part with its NHL team. In other words, there will be no New Jersey Devils ITTL. New York will have to manage with the two teams it already has, and I'll have to make sure that Kevin Smith never reads this timeline (although apparently he's a fan of the Oilers now, so I guess I dodged that bullet!). But some other hockey team might still be moving in the early 1980s...

Wow not 1 but 2 updates!

And three in one week! Thanks for reading all of them

Though, what butterflies will this different NHL arrangement affect other North American sports?

Excellent question. I wouldn't call it butterflies, exactly - a lot of the changes have already happened by this time - but I will be discussing them in the future.

Aren't we past Hull's time of ascendency by the time of the merger? Soon it will be Edmonton's time (let's just skip the Islander's time of dominance), and that guy who's slightly famous because Lenny Dykstra bought his house or something. (Extreme Sarcasm! I know that Wayne Gretzky is also famous for marrying Janet Jones. And, of course, his time as a New York Ranger. Did he do anything else?)

Who is that? I've never even heard of him

On a semi-serious note: "The Great One" is a fairly common nickname in the public sphere. But for the purposes of this timeline, there is only the Great One.

 

[phx1138]

a promising recruit from Brantford, Ontario whose name escapes me

Didn't he refuse to play for the Nords, too? (Or am I thinking of someone else?)

It's not whether you were the first to do something, but whether you're the last to be the first to do something (see: Columbus, Christopher)

See directly above.

I don't expect to change anyone's mind... Just want it on the record, should anybody see a POD in it.

first known as the Arenas, and then as the St. Patricks

I should have remembered them.

Believe it or not, this was apparently considered a litmus test among separatists in the 1990s.

Recall that the Canadiens have a significant Anglophone following, given that (as noted above) the Maroons stopped playing in 1938 (and, indeed, it was either the Habs or the Leafs until 1970, within living memory for many of my readers).

I did not know this... (Neither am I surprised you do.)

In fact, many observers believe that the NHL is stretched too thin! Of course, wags have observed that they might have more luck if they kept to traditional markets rather than expanding into... well, let's be charitable and say "markets with room for growth". Of course, this is a highly debatable issue IOTL.

It appears to be expanding into areas where hockey's appeal is on a par with, IDK, professional tiddlywinks. (TBH, I'm waiting for the Canadian coach of a Florida team to tell them to go out & practise on the pond, & for the whole team to drown.)

There's more to this story ITTL, which will be covered in future updates.

Noted. (I'll probably still feel like I really don't know what's changed, tho--but no fault of yours.)

they will honour their previous agreement (made during the last lockout) to pay homage to the proper intent of the Cup by awarding it to the top amateur team in Canada. Perhaps the present Earl of Derby could make an appeal?

Why do I imagine screaming?

Slap Shot, which exists in largely the same form ITTL.

Made, I've always thought, by people who never saw a hockey game in their lives.

And three in one week! Thanks for reading all of them

That's the easy part. (Not to mention the fun--tho the conversation afterward is great, too.)

 

[phx1138]

FYI, BB: "TWR" was just nominated, by me, for the Turtledove. Hope you win it.

 

[Andrew T]

FYI, BB: "TWR" was just nominated, by me, for the Turtledove. Hope you win it.

Hear, hear!

 

[Brainbin]

Television On Demand

“You’re watching television. We’re watching SelectaVision.”

– From a television advertising campaign for the RCA SelectaVision CED Videodisc Player, 1977 [1]

The defining technology of the modern music industry was the ability to record and playback performances. This key breakthrough was one of a succession of developments in media and communication during the late 19th century – though it was not without its growing pains. The originally dominant wax cylinders that were once known as “records” were phased out after World War I, replaced by the competing vinyl discs, which became known as such from that point forward. However, a critical advantage held by wax over vinyl was that their nature permitted overwriting, or re-recording, the information stored on them. This would have massive ramifications on the creation of future technologies and their intended uses. Magnetic tape, designed in the 1920s, would find significant usage in audio and video applications, though most of its early decades found it secondary to vinyl records and nitrate (later acetate) film respectively. What would become the most valuable application of magnetic tape – its use in video – was unsurprisingly implemented for a medium distinct from the established motion picture and radio industries, and one that also had antecedents dating to the 1920s: television.

Capturing televised events on a permanent, reviewable basis was a very tenuous prospect in the early years of the medium. The most reliable method was the use of “kinescopes”, in which the footage captured by the live cameras would itself be filmed, mostly for archival purposes. But the possibility of people watching previously televised programming again seemed positively alien to the producers of the 1940s, and into the early 1950s; even though, by this time, the practice of theatrical re-releases was well-established in the motion picture industry. Walt Disney had kept his studio afloat during an otherwise desperate period by putting such classics as Snow White into new releases every seven years. The notion was that this had been a sufficiently long interval for the rise of a new generation of uninitiated children to enjoy his cartoons; however, plenty of people who had already seen them went to watch them again, as they had repeatedly done during the original release, and as they did for all hit movies.

As was the case with so many other innovations devised for the new medium, effective change was the product of development for the pioneering sitcom, I Love Lucy, and the determination of its creator couple, Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz. At the time, most programming was broadcast from New York; this made sense, considering that they consisted largely of televised stage plays or vaudeville acts. Ball and Arnaz, however, insisted on filming in Hollywood, which would not be done live but would, in fact, be captured on film and then broadcast. The man in charge of CBS, William S. Paley, balked at this proposition, which would be a considerable investment on his part with no perceived return, so the couple agreed to carry the burden themselves (in exchange for these supposedly-non-existent revenues). Surprisingly, they had non-financial motives for doing so: “We figured we couldn’t lose,” Ball would remark, years later. “We’d ether make money off the deal, or at least we’d have the best set of home movies in the world.” Needless to say, shortly after Ball’s pregnancy necessitated the creation of the rerun, Desilu Productions became one of the wealthiest studios in Hollywood. Ball deferred any claims of genius on her own part to her then-husband, even after their bitter divorce, claiming that at the time, all she did was act. However, it was clear that she always had a remarkable knack for aligning her interests with those of the general public; this, perhaps more than anything else, explained the runaway success enjoyed by her studio.

Despite Lucy proving the viability of film, videotape largely became the standard format outside of primetime, where margins were so razor-thin that film was an unaffordable luxury; this, in turn, allowed for the act of wiping, in which the magnetic tapes would be reused, and the vintage programming formerly stored on them would be lost forever. Outcry against this practice eventually became so strong that it would come to an end by the 1970s, but not before thousands of hours of television were irretrievably destroyed. [2] At the same time, videotape also began to see wide use in primetime television production, for many of the same reasons that it was predominant in daytime and late night, along with local programming; it was much cheaper than film, and the washed-out lighting and colour palettes typical of the format came to be associated with the 1970s, a decade of muted colours and earth tones, especially when compared to the far more garish and psychedelic era that had preceded it – ironically, these new programs became ubiquitous at the time when a majority of home viewers finally had colour television sets with which to watch them, after aggressive campaigning on the part of networks and manufacturers alike… much to their chagrin. In fact, Norman Lear had even proposed that Those Were the Days be broadcast in black-and-white, to emphasize the starkness of their situation; CBS naturally turned him down flat. [3] Reruns were the final piece in the puzzle that would serve as precursor to the rise of home video in the 1970s. Magnetic tape, as mentioned previously, came of age in this decade, thanks to its widespread commercialization. This occurred in audio and video format, in which the magnetic tape was stored in cassettes. [4] This technology would provide an opportunity to end consumers not widely available since the era of wax cylinders.

The major breakthroughs in home video occurred separately, though near-simultaneously, in two different countries, using two distinct technologies, each of which yielded two separate formats; journalists (and later, historians) who followed the development of home video sometimes described this situation as “the two-by-two”. The two countries in question were, unsurprisingly, the foremost innovating nations of their time, especially in the field of electronics: the United States, and Japan. The Land of the Rising Sun, contrary to their later reputation, largely played it safe in shepherding magnetic tape to home video under the collective term of videotape recorders, or VTRs. [5] Sony Corporation, which had been established immediately after World War II, created the Betamax format, popularly known as simply “Beta”; a rival company, the older Victor Company of Japan (JVC), instead released a format known as the Video Home System (VHS). Though VHS was inferior to Beta in terms of quality, the corporate culture at JVC was more permissive than that at Sony, which was critical during the period when manufacturers in the United States and elsewhere were jockeying for position, not to mention those hoping to produce material for their respective formats. [6] This would become a decisive factor in their relative success in the years to come…

Meanwhile, across the Pacific in the United States, technological advances came in an entirely different form: optical discs (in much the same size and shape as vinyl records), as opposed to magnetic tape. This eliminated the possibility for end-user re-recording, likely a deliberate consideration by the developers, given their highly litigious society. Consequently, their formats instead made use of videodisc players, or VDPs. RCA, which owned NBC (largely as a vehicle for the sale of their radios and television sets), employed what was known as the Capacitance Electronic Disc (CED) system, under their brand name of SelectaVision. This technology, a very long time in coming, was finally released in 1977; patents had been issued in 1971, and the earliest demonstrations of the technology had been made by 1973. [7] The manufacturing process for the playback hardware had a lower cost than any of the other formats, allowing for lower selling prices with comparable video quality to the magnetic tape systems. The most drastic limitation on the part of the discs themselves was their length – in their initial release, they allowed only thirty minutes per side of footage (one hour total).

In hopes of combating this potentially fatal weakness, RCA sought to head it off at the pass; SelectaVision would offer such a wide variety of programming that there would be no need for the end consumer to seek out videotape recorders. In fact, it made more business sense, in exploiting existing relationships; RCA didn’t own any movie studios, but they did own a television network, which had worked with every television studio in Hollywood – many of which were, in fact, owned by the movie studios; though, of course, one very important studio wasn’t. RCA made the decision to approach Desilu for a number of reasons: firstly, in testing their CED technology, they had used portions of an episode of Star Trek [8] (“The Immunity Syndrome”, which was judged to have a wide variety of visual and auditory cues); secondly, they were aware of the role of Desilu in inventing the rerun, and consequently, the syndication market; and, finally, they had effectively direct access to the senior management, in the person of Lucille Ball, without having to deal with the board of directors or shareholders at the other conglomerates. Their proposal was bold: they would convert the raw footage of television episodes into CED format, and sell them directly to consumers, allowing viewers to watch them on demand; though in this fashion, it would be done legally and above-board, in contrast to clandestine taping using the VTRs. Star Trek was at the heart of their pitch; reels of virtually every episode were known to exist in circulation at fan conventions, which had not diminished their popularity in syndication one iota. It was a small and rather skewed sample, but surely it would be enough to suggest that the idea was worth a shot.

Desilu COO Herbert F. Solow was flabbergasted at the idea, considering it a waste of time and energy, given how lucrative their shows had been in syndication. VP Production Brandon Tartikoff was more optimistic about the idea, though even he admitted that it was a gamble. Lucille Ball herself personally found the proposal ridiculous, but she also remembered about how Bill Paley had thought the exact same thing of Desi’s ideas to capture I Love Lucy on film, and to rerun episodes during her maternity leave. That gave her pause. And so, a shrewd negotiator, she made a counter-proposal. She would agree, but on her terms. In addition to a flat fee for each series sold on SelectaVision, Desilu would also receive a large share of the profits from each copy sold of each episode. RCA agreed, so long as this percentage would be tied to sales prices, rendering it a licensing charge, to be treated as part of the larger selling expenses (similar to a sales commission); as opposed to adding it to the cost of goods sold, along with the other manufacturing costs. This ensured that series and episodes which did not sell would not prove prohibitively expensive to produce. Desilu also agreed to secure all third-party copyrights on their own behalf, to allow for sale on home video. For Star Trek, this amounted to the use of one song – the 1930s standard “Goodnight, Sweetheart”, which had appeared in the period piece “The City on the Edge of Forever”. It was thus not surprising that “The Best of Star Trek” was among the video series available with the launch of the SelectaVision in 1977. [9] One episode thereof, “The Trouble with Tribbles”, would prove the best-selling video for the system for the first several years of its existence. However, Desilu was just one of the several initial partners in the venture, including Columbia, Paramount, and MGM; this resulted in over 100 launch videos for the SelectaVision. Projected sales figures by the beginning of 1978 were 200,000, but they exceeded expectations, with over a quarter-million units shipped by New Year’s Day. [10]

Standing in contrast to RCA and their SelectaVision CED, which came strong out of the gate, was the Music Corporation of America, or MCA, which had developed the laserdisc format, branded as DiscoVision, in 1978, making it the last of the four major formats to be introduced. It had a singular advantage over CEDs and both VTR formats, which was far superior video quality and fidelity. But in addition to the inherent lack of copying capabilities, it was far more expensive than any of the other formats, and despite the laserdiscs having much higher durability than the CEDs as compensation, it did not attract the attention of most American consumers (beyond technophiles) as anything more than a novelty. Although MCA owned a major studio (Universal), their library was otherwise quite limited, as most of the other studios backed RCA in the VDP front of the format war (largely because they would not be indirectly benefiting one of their rivals). Thus, when the DiscoVision went on the market in 1978, one of their few hit movies available at launch was Jaws (which had been in theatres just three years before); suggestions were floated to offer copies of the film free with the purchase of the DiscoVision system as a loss leader, but these were quickly nixed. [11] Ironically, the system did best in Japan, though even there it very much remained a niche product.

VTRs and VDPs naturally appealed to similar but divergent markets, both of which came to blossom in the closing years of the decade. These were all known collectively as home video, a term so incredibly vague that it could be sufficiently all-encompassing. VTRs marketed themselves on providing the opportunity for recording broadcast television, allowing for the practice properly known as “time shifting”, which allowed home viewers to record programs they might have otherwise watched, and then see them again at a more convenient time. What was also happening – something that VTR manufacturers and distributors were obviously somewhat reluctant to acknowledge [12] – was that people were recording shows as they were watching them, and then keeping the tapes for indefinite re-viewing purposes (particularly for live, unscripted event programming like sports and specials). Naturally, the networks and studios caught wind of this, and took major steps to curb this behaviour, for what little good it did in the short-term. But that most American form of corrective action – the lawsuit – found itself moving swiftly through the courts, and would eventually arrive at its only logical destination…

---

Formats of the Home Video Wars (1978 - present):

• Home Video
  
  • Videotape Recorders (VTRs), using re-recordable magnetic tape cassettes
    
    • Betamax, created by Sony Corporation
      
    • Video Home System (VHS), created by Victor Company of Japan (JVC)
      
  • Videodisc Players (VDPs), using unmodifiable optical discs
    
    • Capacitance Electronic Disc (CED), marketed as SelectaVision by RCA
    • Laserdisc, marketed as DiscoVision by MCA
      

---

[1] A slogan used, IOTL, for the promotion of VCRs manufactured by RCA, also sold under that brand, as SelectaVision CEDs were not sold until 1981.

[2] Wiping, the greatest crime against art ever committed by the television industry in the history of popular culture, happened on both sides of the Pond, IOTL and ITTL. Doctor Who, as previously mentioned, was spared this fate by the syndication deal made with Desilu, but this reprieve sadly did not extend to virtually anything else.

[3] As IOTL, though this was frankly a pipe-dream that was only slightly more realistic than the rumoured desire by Gene Roddenberry to film Star Trek in Esperanto.

[4] IOTL, they were thus known as cassette tapes and videocassettes, respectively, though the informal term “tapes” quickly came into use to refer to both of them.

[5] As opposed to videocassette recorders, or VCRs, IOTL.

[6] One important factor to note ITTL is that videotapes have a lower maximum length at this point ITTL than IOTL; the four hours touted in late-1970s RCA commercials were in fact insisted upon by that company as a condition for their introducing the format in the United States (which they will obviously not do ITTL), purportedly because that was the average length of a football game. Thus, two hours is the standard length for both VHS and Beta, not much longer than the VDP formats (eliminating a key OTL advantage).

[7] IOTL, RCA did not have the SelectaVision ready until 1981, by which time videotape was dominant over videodiscs. This can be attributed, at least in part, to a changing of the guard; RCA was in rather dire straits in the mid-1970s, in large part due to the struggles of its largest division, NBC. So Robert Sarnoff, the Chairman of RCA (a position he inherited from his father), was ousted due to being perceived as too cavalier. His right-hand man, Anthony Conrad, was a major booster of SelectaVision and was promoted to his position – but the increased visibility forced him to take the fall when it was revealed that he had not filed his income taxes for a number of years. Oddly, he was never charged for this IOTL (the IRS had already been withholding his income, so they had nothing to lose by him failing to do so), so he likely would have remained in place had Sarnoff not been ousted. Conrad, upon resigning in 1977, was replaced by Edgar Griffiths, who failed to strike while the iron was hot, dooming the SelectaVision. Note that, ITTL, this means that RCA will not manufacture either format of VTR, whereas IOTL they played a major part in introducing both of them to North America.

[8] IOTL, a portion of an episode of Get Smart (codenamed “Lum Fong”) was used instead.

[9] In fact, a few episodes of Star Trek were available for CED at launch IOTL, as well, in 1981. This predates its official release on Laserdisc (in 1984) and on Beta (in 1985), though it appears that they were first released on VHS in 1980 (in the same best-of collection issue as ITTL), though the entire series would not be available on what ironically emerged as the victorious video format until the end of the decade. ITTL, the 1977 SelectaVision release (under the marque “RCA Presents Desilu”) is the first official, authorized home video release of not only Star Trek, but of any television series. Worth noting, and contrary to most OTL home video releases of the show in the 1980s, is that episodes are sold individually ITTL, and not two-to-a-package. (Remember: one CED disc can carry one half-hour of footage on each side.)

[10] Only 100,000 units were sold in 1981 IOTL (which were half of those projected), and only 50 launch titles were available on the initial release that year.

[11] Through the 1980s, IOTL, it did indeed take a very long time for theatrical releases to make it to video. Two or three years was considered perfectly reasonable. The idea of packaging one playable product with the hardware is generally regarded as an innovation of the video game industry, IOTL, most strongly associated with Nintendo in particular.

[12] Marketers were considerably less reluctant IOTL – though every commercial prior to Sony v. Universal (which ended the ambiguity once and for all) included fine print disclaimers about how “time shifting” was very likely in violation of copyright. ITTL, RCA (who were among the most grievous offenders IOTL) will be foremost among those leading the charge against VTR technology, largely because doing so is in their best interest. Additional emphasis will also be placed on VTR manufacturers being Japanese, exploiting the time-honoured traditions of Yellow Peril and “Buy American” sentiment – though the results will remain to be seen (cf. the automotive industry).

---

And thus ends 2012 with my very last update of That Wacky Redhead… for this year

And welcome, one and all, to a major focus of the second half of this timeline: the Home Video Wars! They started at about this time IOTL, and they will, if anything, prove even more contentious ITTL. Some of you are probably old enough to remember the rise and fall of both audio and video cassette tapes (the 1980s marked their mutual apogee following their rise in the 1970s, before their slow decline in the 1990s, to compact discs and laserdiscs/DVDs respectively). Their narrative arc is going to be quite different ITTL, as you can see! For one thing, the term “video” is going to remain a much broader one, rather than coming to refer exclusively to magnetic tape cassettes (and later, specifically those of the VHS format). Most of you will be old enough to remember the early-2000s slogan “Rent the video, own the DVD”, heralding new home video releases; this is redundant, as the DVD is a video format – what do you think the “V” stands for? (A lot of you will say “versatile”, but this usage postdates the original digital videodisc and is not universally accepted). But speaking of DVD, one of that format’s defining content innovations actually had a number of false starts IOTL, so why not take advantage of that and work on shifting a certain paradigm about a quarter-century ahead of schedule? And coming before the Supreme Court has had a chance to rule on the matter…

Finally, I would like to thank vultan, phx1138, and Falkenburg, all of whom were kind enough to independently nominate That Wacky Redhead for the Turtledove Awards, in the category of Continuing Cold War Era Timeline! Looking at the other nominees so far, I can already tell that I’ll be facing some very tough competition – but I should expect nothing less, given the high calibre of timelines on this board. When the time comes, I’ll be sure to link you to the relevant category for voting, and you’ll see for yourselves!