-thumb-110x110-461780.jpg)
Simply Wrong Food: IHOP's Holiday Pancakes
Eat My Blog: Blogger Bake Sale Will Benefit LA Foodbank
-thumb-110x110-461916.jpg)
Alice Cooper, Ace Frehley @ Nokia Theater 10/28/09
DVD Review: Kobe Doin' Work
Review: Living In Emergency
Because it's Sunday and because I want to make it to the line before Our Commander-In-Chief, it's time for a little editorializing about TV.
The WGA strike that will be ending soon has shed a light on how vulnerable TV (and LA) is to disagreements about how this industry should function. While movies have always benefited, unworthily (Meet The Spartans anyone?), as art that exists at a level separate from commercialization, TV has always been the stuff that you watch in between the commercials. It's because of these commercials whose cost is incorporated into the price of the products and services advertised, and their competitors, that justifies the idea that watchers of television are direct payers for the programming that is broadcast, not to mention your cable box charges, etc. Unless you are on some kind of commune or are some kind of anti-car vegan (read: anti-American) fascist, you help pay for what's on TV, therefore you have the right to demand better product for your dollar and that's what I'm doing here.
After lambasting yet-another crappy Academy Awards ceremony or a decidedly sub-par offering from Aaron Sorkin you gentle readers have counseled me to "just don't watch it" but to not comment on the investment of my funds seems like a cop out to me. It's my pledge to you to not roll over and just take it because it's all that's on. Because of the WGA strike and the hold on production we're in for a rough Spring and Summer. If you thought we were in a reality-TV Hell already, then, my friends, we've descended a few more circles because that pathetic excuse for programming is going to take up even more real estate. Also, the networks are desperate to proclaim every minute as "new" by resorting to such charades as bringing over dumbed-down versions of programs from their sister cable networks. [I'm prepared to issue a fatwah for every adulterated episode of "Dexter" that appears on CBS this year because that show is just too good to eff around with.]
Yes, we are headed for an economic recession but we're also headed for a recession of good content on TV. All we have to look forward to is shortened seasons of "Lost" and other good programs, lots of reality programming, and a much smaller selection of new shows this Fall. We're here for you, we will hunt down new shows and reveal the best moments of TV to watch each evening but now it's a lot more difficult - the networks certainly aren't doing anything to staunch the flow of their annual loss of +7% of viewership. It's enough to make you buy premium channels like HBO.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Hi there - I'm anti-car and vegan... why does that make me fascist?
I don't need a car, and don't see why I should support the oil industry in driving where I can walk or bike. I'm vegan because I like saving 1,000 animal's lives every year, plus an acre of trees and some billion gallons of water. And I know nothing bled to death while fully conscious just cuz I couldn't pick out the Gardenburger riblets instead of the fleshy animal ones at the store.
Last I checked, fascist means a system of government marked by centralization of one authority, hmm.. like the USDA or US dept. of energy?
You don't really state why anti-car vegans wouldn't have TV, but for the record, I am anti-TV too. I do rent some shows and movies, however, so we have at least one thing in common - an appreciation for Dexter :-)
> Unless you are on some kind of commune or are some kind of anti-car vegan (read: anti-American) fascist, you help pay for what's on TV
Slow down there... I think you mean "Unless you don't watch commercials, ...".
Dear fascists, thanks for taking the bait ;-)
Essentially, I'm saying that if you take yourself out of mainstream purchasing, you shouldn't really have a voice about what's on non-PBS, non-premium channel TV because you are a non-participant in the system.
I wrote it mainly to take on the persona of a fictional TV exec like Alec Baldwin's Jack Donaghy from "30 Rock" who really doesn't care about these first two commentors. If you think the real thing is a big jump away from that then you're naive.
"Dexter" is one of my favorite programs but it's not wholly exempt from this due to some of the not so subtle product placements in the show. If you're not in the market for the products getting hawked on TV, then why would the networks care about how you feel about their programming?
Networks don't care if you're in the market for whatever's being advertised. They care whether or not they get ratings, and whether or not advertisers buy airtime.
As for the ratings....networks don't really care whether or not you watch unless you're a Nielsen home. If you're not sure whether or not you're one, you're not.
Advertisers are going to buy based on ratings. A few smart advertisers may try to make a correlation between how much they spend on advertising and what the return is, but most of them are just looking at how many rating points were delivered in their ad buy.
I wouldn't say TV viewers are direct payers for the programs. Advertisers pay for programs. The government provides broadcast airwaves for free, which is why the FCC is allowed to regulate them what's on TV.