CNET: How We Did It Then, How We Would Do It Now

How We Did It in 1994 and 1996

If you look up CNET on Wikipedia, you’ll find the published history of its start-up. Here, I’ll share some behind-the-scenes insights from those early days.

In 1992, I was Head of Production for Kevin Wendle Entertainment, where we were producing Special Report TV with Joan Lunden, distributed on laser discs to doctors’ offices. We were exploring content for non-traditional delivery platforms, like our pilot for Blockbuster, which synchronized a three-monitor display in stores with hosts introducing movie clips across different screens. We sought ways to create engaging content for both traditional and emerging platforms.

In 1994, Halsey Minor and Shelby Bonnie approached us with an idea for TV programming focused on computers. They envisioned starting with a program segment on USA Network and eventually expanding to a 24/7 channel. This led to CNET acquiring Kevin Wendle Entertainment, and our team was tasked with producing pilot episodes and relocating from Los Angeles to San Francisco.

As someone experienced in setting up production offices, my first task was to find a location in the Bay Area that suited CNET’s needs and style. After weeks of viewing spaces in Mountain View and San Francisco, I finally found the former Victoria Station headquarters—a unique space with high ceilings, an open floor plan, two levels of offices, and a train car as a potential conference room. Although it required a complete technical build-out, it was exactly what the team was looking for.

With the space secured, our team—Barry Cobbs as Head of Production, Sheila Rockenbach-Phillips as Production Manager, and Michelle Holt as Production Associate—began the massive undertaking. Sets were designed in Los Angeles and built in San Francisco to save on trucking costs, with lighting provided by John Conti Lighting, and technical support from Broadcast+, a familiar vendor from Los Angeles. This approach ensured a smoother transition, even with added travel costs.

Moving the office presented another challenge. In addition to traditional office furniture, we had $1 million worth of technical equipment, including edit bays and graphics stations. We opted to rent a truck and hire PAs to manage the move, avoiding the pressures and expenses of commercial movers.

The Northridge earthquake in 1994 briefly disrupted our pre-production as we lost access to our Los Angeles office for nearly a month. However, we forged ahead, relocating everything north once we had our shoot dates.

Inside our new office, we created a control room with a state-of-the-art flypack that required substantial power, which we had to distribute across multiple circuits. The heat generated by the equipment was significant, so we installed fans to maintain airflow. Audio became another issue; the athletic club next door had racquetball and basketball courts, and noise seeped into our setup. We initially asked them to close during shoots, but eventually, we purchased all scheduled time to ensure silence.

Crew size was substantial: we had four camera operators, a technical director, audio mixer, A2, video operator, recordist, lighting director, three electricians, an art director, utility personnel, a maintenance tech, and two PAs—totaling 18 people. Including producers, segment producers, and production managers, the team grew to about 30. Days stretched to 16 hours, and we faced the additional challenge of setting up phones, computers, and a printer network in the newly relocated office—this was pre-cell phone, so coordinating with vendors added complexity.

In 1996, Kevin Wendle reached out again. Now running my own production services company, I joined to help launch shows on the USA Network. By then, CNET had installed a fixed technical infrastructure, and we focused on staffing and setting up systems for long-term series production. My colleague, Stacey Haft, and I flew up each week, often working out of the racquetball courts. We recruited recent graduates eager to work in TV, creating a versatile team to cover all technical roles. In the end, we hired 10 people who became CNET’s core production team.

How We’d Do It Now

For a full guide to launching a streaming network, check out From Stream to Screen, available on Amazon or at www.howardbolter.com.

If CNET were launching today, we’d likely approach it as a VOD and FAST channel. Here’s how our strategy would differ:

• Office Space: We wouldn’t need large open spaces with high ceilings. We’d choose a location based on convenience and allocate a section for multiple studios. Instead of a phone system, we’d prioritize setting up a robust LAN with high-speed fiber internet.

• Technical Setup: Instead of moving massive equipment, we’d reduce our setup to a few computers connected to the LAN. Virtual sets, using screens or green screens with real furniture, would replace complex physical sets. LED lighting with bi-color options would simplify setup, especially with the skylight.

• Cameras and Audio: Multiple PTZ cameras with tracking software connected via NDI would replace traditional cameras. Wireless mics would eliminate the need for an A2, and IFB could be delivered over IP.

• Production Control: We’d go with a software-based IP control system like vMix. Although cloud solutions are great for established workflows, we’d avoid them for pilot production due to the flexibility needed. The show would be ISO recorded for post-production, allowing a single person to handle switching, playback, and graphics.

• Crew Size and Workflow: Today, a team of five to seven people could manage the workload that once required 30. Recorded content would be instantly available as files, eliminating the need for physical tape stock. With fewer scheduling constraints and daily rental costs, we could spread production over more days, potentially increasing content quality by reducing time pressure.

Summary

In 1994, we rented all equipment for pilot production, while the full launch in 1996 required purchasing complex broadcast equipment. Today, we could buy everything necessary and keep software updated over time. Smaller teams, fewer restrictions on office space, quicker setups, and digital content handling would streamline the process significantly. This approach not only reduces costs but could also enhance content quality, as production teams work in a more relaxed, flexible environment.