Slashdot Mirror


Wanted: a Real Science Channel

You ever thought about what a real science channel would look like? Something to counter fakers and disinformation? Maybe it can happen.

2 of 408 comments (clear)

  1. I hope it will fly, but I have doubts by nystul555 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This sounds like a great idea. I would LOVE to have a true science channel - it would be enough to get me to finally purchase cable!

    But would it work? Most of American knows nothing about science. They are far more likely to be entertained and interested in psychics, the paranormal, and well, science-esque stories that they can understand.

    Lets look at what popular now. Reality TV. Does it get any more mindless than that? Sitcoms are still popular, even though 95% of them are almost identical to eachother, and they repeat the same plots and stories that they have for years. Most movies that come out are unoriginal, and often the ones that do the best are the ones that stray the furthest from scientific fact.

    It seems that people do not want to learn any longer. They do not want to be challenged. They just want to live in their shells, believing what they have always believed, thinking what they have always thought. And I'm afraid that for that reason, a science channel might not go over very well.

    However, on the other hand, maybe having a good science channel would help to draw interest to science and facts. Maybe it would help to disprove psychics and other con-artists, maybe it could help teach people about how our world really works, and how things really are.

    I hope so. But I kind of doubt it. I'm afraid most people would rather watch the same reruns of the same mindless crap over and over again.

  2. No, I wouldn't. by MagikSlinger · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wouldn't you love to sit in on some of those presentations rather than waiting to hear about one of them in a 30-second encapsulation on network TV?

    No, I wouldn't. Most of these presentations are duller than paint drying, and I've seen video of ones I was interested in. Also, Michael sounds like he wants it to be the Skeptics Network. I think the Skeptics movement are their own worst enemy. They sound as shrill as the people they're attacking.

    I would love real science on the Discovery channel and TLC (back when it used to do that occasionaly), but you know what needs to happen first? More content. More production. That costs money. Real money. Horizon by the BBC kicks Nova's ass most of the time, and when it doesn't, it's because Nova is actually showing a Horizon documentary with Peter Coyote narating instead.

    We need documentary makers who'll make interesting documentaries about math, physics and other hard sciences. I'm sick of the "animal/nature" specials that are nothing more than an hour of "Awww! Look at the *cute* animals!" Feh! At least Steve Irwin makes it interesting.

    If you want to do an animal show, do it like Sir David Attenburough and make it about the science. I want the details. I want the cold, rational view of things that teaches me things I didn't know. You can talk about the philosophical or subjective aspects of it too, but it's first about the science, then the human side. Example: Industrial Revelations with Mark Williams for Discovery Networks Europe. All too often (like in Horizon/Nova's doc about Fermat's Last Equation), it's only about the human side.

    Balance, people! Is that so much to ask for?

    --
    The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com