The new faces of MTV

Perhaps MTV executives took a hint from Chang Liu’s piece, “Where multiculturalism gets airbrushed,” because yesterday the entertainment magnate announced that it will be launching LOGO, a channel that will market to queers beginning in February 2005.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation has come out in full support of what it calls a “groundbreaking” move by MTV and Viacom. According to a press release by the group on Tuesday,

We’re excited and looking forward to hearing more about the programming and marketing strategies for LOGO … This channel has enormous potential — and who better to make the investment than
the network that has brought us ‘The Real World?’ MTV has the two main ingredients necessary for success: A solid programming track record and an unwavering commitment to our stories, our issues and our lives … With this announcement, MTV is reaching out to an underserved audience hungering for quality LGBT programming.

It was, of course, only a matter of time. In the last two years, we’ve already seen the rise of cable channels devoted to blacks and women, as well as television shows such as “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” “Queer as Folk,” and Showtime’s “The L Word,” which have allegedly targeted gay audiences. Given the success of these shows, it only makes sense that MTV would try to exploit this prime market. But I can’t help but wonder. First, is the success of “Queer Eye” due to a predominately queer audience or due to an audience that is still predominately heterosexual, which watches the show because, well, it’s an entertaining reality show? If the show’s success can be explained by the latter, will MTV be able to win over the same audience (unless, of course, LOGO plans to feature the new staple of American culture — reality TV — around the clock)? Moreover, is this marketing scheme really about representing the queer communities for their own sake, or is it merely another means for a media magnate to score more cash? Finally, though LOGO’s website indicates that “Our vision is to always reflect the diversity of the LGBT experience,” will the network’s actions live up to its words when, as Liu suggests, MTV has yet to figure out how to represent multiculturalism without airbrushing away differences?

LOGO’s mission to speak to and represent diversity is, of course, a venerable one. But only time will tell how “groundbreaking” MTV’s actions really are. Stay tuned — but be sure you read between the lines.