[wplug] [OT-but-eventually-converging-on-topical] ooh ooh ...

[Chester R. Hosey]

On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 23:30 -0400, squeegy-wplug at squeegy.org wrote:
> >
> >
> > Think of television as a means to sell attention to advertisers, and
> > you'll understand much better why they really honestly "aren't in favor
> > of TV that's actually good". The customers most likely to respond to
> > advertising and the customers most likely to watch good television are
> > in generally disjoint sets.
> >
> > I actually hate television since this realization, since it really helps
> > to explain why the established franchises are crap and the good shows
> > don't last. Add in the fact that sit-coms which at one time were
> > somewhat ironic reflections of society (Married... With Children and All
> > in the Family spring to mind) would now be condemned as being too racy
> > for prime-time viewing, and it makes total sense that modern shows are
> > superficial and bland.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Chet
> 
> I feel the same, so much so that a few years back I turned off cable and gave away my TV.  My household has been TV free for years.  I have never seen a realityshow.  Don't really care to either.  What do we do?  Read, make and enjoy live music, go to plays, talk, play baseball.  you know the things our grand parents did before they invented TV and everyone started watching instead of doing.

It occurred to me over the weekend that the business model of
advertiser-sponsored television has effects beyond selection of which
programs to produce. I've often been disappointed that the few
worthwhile programs haven't been released on DVD (I avoid most
television because it's rarely on my schedule).

I think the major roadblock has been the suspicion that DVD sales would
reduce viewing of re-run episodes. I'd imagine that media companies are
reluctant to try anything which might reduce advertising revenue.
Initially it's hard to estimate what profits DVD sales might generate
(since the market isn't known), and what loss in the potential audience
for re-runs would result.

In that light, it's not surprising that many massively popular shows
haven't been released in DVD form. If you can charge top dollar for
advertising each time you re-run an episode of the Simpsons, why risk
losing that revenue stream just so some viewers can pay a one-time fee
for unlimited viewing?

All of this leads to two conclusions:

1) Widely viewed garbage will proliferate and be cloned.
2) Shows with a niche audience are more likely to hit DVD in the near
future than programs with a more diverse viewership.

I'm led to a more on-topic question: has anyone set up a MythTV box and
been happy with the results? I've been trying to convince myself that a
cheap box with a hardware codec would eventually pay itself off as
opposed to Comcast's DVR fees, but I haven't spoken with anyone who's
personally used it.

Another question is whether the audio quality matches commercial DVR
solutions. I'm not an audio junkie, but knowing that I wouldn't be
limiting my options for a higher-quality n-speaker (n|n>2) setup in the
future would tip the scales further in support of Myth.

Chet