TV is not your friend.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-08-2013, 09:31 PM
RE: TV is not your friend.
The examples that you used that do not show up on television sound like an incredible bore... maybe that's why they don't exist. Advertisers for sure have a huge influence. Product placement aplenty. But I think your rant is borderline conspiracy theory.

When I watch TV (which is seldom), my brain checks out. When commercials come on, I do something else or channel surf. I have never asked for a pill based on one I saw on TV. TV does control the masses, but that's because the masses unfortunately are way too gullible.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2013, 11:32 AM
RE: TV is not your friend.
(11-08-2013 05:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(11-08-2013 04:31 PM)I Am Wrote:  Why did US tax dollars pay to upgrade 2 TVs per home? Rather than, say, letting consumers purchase these things on their own, like every other tech change?
To try and make things easier for people. Wild, I know.
So... let me get this straight. The US government, which has a great deal of trouble passing any budget and prefers to rely on "continuing resolutions," and nearly always buys military hardware rather than funding social programs, out of the goodness and kindness of their hearts, decided to fund a $1,300,000,000 program just to be nice to TV owners, with no self-serving motives.

And you think it's unrealistic for me to believe that, instead, TV is very special to our government, and keeping people watching is a high priority.

Okay... maybe we can agree to disagree here. Surely one of these positions is unrealistic.

Quote:Of course it doesn't create new options (at the point of decision...). But you can only sell adspace on something people are watching.
Yep, that's the goal. Selling ads is much, much more important than creating valuable content.

Quote:Therefore it only makes sense to create things people will want to watch
It makes sense to create things that keep people watching. It makes sense to write shows that are unsatisfying, so a viewer will seek out another show. It makes sense to lower expectations throughout the medium, so viewers aren't in a position to be demanding.

Quote:Does the media selection affect consumers' opinions and outlooks? Absolutely. But a top-down one way process? That's a rather demented assertion.
Is it? How so?

I AM he who is called... cat furniture.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: TV is not your friend.
If you'd just said "most TV is stupid", I'd've wholeheartedly agreed. If you'd been saying "most TV is stupid on purpose", then there's truth in that too, since due to the proliferation of media channels (and the resulting stagnation or outright decrease in any TV viewership numbers) the lowest common denominator is the only safe market left.

But saying "most TV is stupid because government-corporate collusion at pacifying mind-numbing propaganda trololol sheeple" is just silly, and you should know better.

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  So... let me get this straight. The US government, which has a great deal of trouble passing any budget and prefers to rely on "continuing resolutions," and nearly always buys military hardware rather than funding social programs, out of the goodness and kindness of their hearts, decided to fund a $1,300,000,000 program [citation needed] just to be nice to TV owners, with no self-serving motives.

The changeover to digital TV was mandated for various reasons, which are a matter of public record. The program was to ease and simplify the transition. All else is supposition. Which you have no shortage of...

Where is that figure from? I'm simply curious, I've never seen an after-the-fact cost analysis. It is also a tiny, tiny figure as far as government expenditures go...

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  And you think it's unrealistic for me to believe that, instead, TV is very special to our government, and keeping people watching is a high priority.

Yep.

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  Yep, that's the goal. Selling ads is much, much more important than creating valuable content.

Except that the two are not separable. And also the fact that home video sales are, and have been for years, far more profitable (and DVDs don't have commercial breaks).

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  It makes sense to create things that keep people watching. It makes sense to write shows that are unsatisfying, so a viewer will seek out another show.

These two sentences are directly contradictory.

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  It makes sense to lower expectations throughout the medium, so viewers aren't in a position to be demanding.

Viewers are in a position to be demanding, thanks to a thing called the internet, among others. It makes no sense to write a show that people don't like watching, because you will sell neither ads nor box sets.

(12-08-2013 11:32 AM)I Am Wrote:  Is it? How so?

Now you're just being fatuous. Consumer goods need to appeal to the consumer or else they don't make money (generally considered a high priority).

If no options are compelling then people will choose none of the above. I mentioned the US auto industry as a salient example of a complacent industry whose attitude amounted to, "people'll buy what we sell 'em, damnit"; worked out real well for them, if I recall correctly.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2013, 07:20 PM
RE: TV is not your friend.
Note: This is a response to the original post as I have not read anything after that.

While I agree with you that some television shows are utter garbage (e.g. “reality television”), there are still television shows that are in a way, art. Television shows allow us to escape from this reality into another one. That reality can take place in many different forms. The setting could be in outer-space looking for new species, new lands. Or the settings can take us back in time – the wild west or even in the days of Caesar. Sure, “reality television” does this too. However, it lacks the art, intelligence, and structure of story-based television.

Television is not the only thing that allows us to escape from a seemingly boring world (boring as in, for most people, it lacks a true essence). Books, music, art are all forms of this. They can introuduce messages to us, either good or bad, but they are there to-for lack of a better word-feed our “souls”. Souls as in what we are consciously – our conscious selves.

Your view that television is not for us, but for the advertisers is a mistake. Sometimes, shows that are great (Survivors [BBC]) get canceled for being unable to generate revenue. Also, shows that are utter-garbage are too canceled for having the same problem. Television, movies, novels are created to please today's audience. For example, a show like Star Trek was created in a time where space exploration was on everyone's mind. Today, as we live in a business/money world we have shows that pop-up that are based around people who have glorious lives because they have money. Also, to be honest, a show that is based around a labour union or a co-operative sound's pretty lame. [I personally do not seek out television shows that are trying to teach me something that I already know of and have my opinion of them already.]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: