Slashdot Mirror


You're Watching Less TV

NickFusion writes "With a plethora of online games, chat, IM, email and, well, Slashdot, who's got time to watch television? Evidently, not men ages 18-34. The NY Times (free reg, etc) takes a look at the issue and comes to conclusions that will shock, I say shock, the average Slashdot reader. Meanwhile, Fox Broadcasting Corp. is calling for a recount. Disclosure: I'm quoted in the NY Times article, and so is one Rob Malda. Mom will be so proud!"

84 of 769 comments (clear)

  1. No hurry.. by mr.henry · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As a guy in the 18-34 bracket, I find it more convenient to just download commercial free SVCD episodes of TV shows I want to watch. You can usually find them a couple hours to a couple of days after they air live. I usually let a couple weeks worth of episodes build up, then just have a mini-marathon of Alias or Simpsons or whatever.

    It's cheaper than a TiVo and I get to keep stuff permanently. Also, I can enjoy The Sopranos and (before it was canceled..) Jeremiah without having to cough up $$$ for the expensive channels.

    1. Re:No hurry.. by nightsweat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Now I know you're lying. No one enjoyed Jeremiah.

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    2. Re:No hurry.. by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No hurry indeed.

      Not only do I lack the time to watch TV, I dont have the time to watch the shows I download!

      I've got a piles of CDRs that are THIS HIGH, waiting to be watched.

      Feels like I'm starting to have a mindless collection habit, like those people who collect beer bottle caps or something.

    3. Re:No hurry.. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Funny
      Now I know you're lying. No one enjoyed Jeremiah.

      Thanks...

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:No hurry.. by javatips · · Score: 3, Funny

      THIS HIGH

      On my screen (1400x1050 on a 15.1 laptop screen), this is about 2 CD high... Unless these CDs are DVDs, that not a very impressive number of episodes!

    5. Re:No hurry.. by B'Trey · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is not theft. It is copyright infringement.

      Both are crimes, but theft is the illicit transfer of value from one person to another. The thief gains and the victim loses by the same amount. In copyright infringement, value does not transfer. They are fundamentally different. If you must use an analogy, copyright infringement is more akin to trespassing than it is to theft.

      --

      "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

    6. Re:No hurry.. by Sapwatso · · Score: 3, Informative

      Courtesy http://www.m-w.com (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

      Take:
      1 : to get into one's hands or into one's possession, power, or control: as a : to seize or capture physically <took them as prisoners>

      One can not "Take" intellectual property, one could take the media it is on but the IP itself can only be copied. If it can not be taken then by your definition above, there can be no theft.

  2. Online by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, lets see: with my research occupying upwards of 80-90 hours a week working, including some time posting on Slashdot :-), who has time for TV?

    Seriously though, I mark my time online historically with the first major news announcement I heard online before I heard it via television. That news item was the Oklahoma city bombing of the Federal Building. Since then I have received most of my news items online rather than through traditional outlets. Even as a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, I get most of my content online.

    Additionally, with the increasing productivity of the average American worker just trying to keep their jobs, one might suppose that the Internet provides for a more flexible media resource outlet allowing folks to customize their news searches without having to wait through the tripe and entertainment garbage that Fox News and more recently CNN et. al. have been delivering.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Online by Stargoat · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Good point. News on television is laughable. Why bother with that pointless medium when you have the news you want on the Internet? You get newspaper quality coverage 24/7 and you don't need to deal with the folks who can't seem to make up their minds about what is important and what isn't. I certainly don't watch television so I can see a pixilated breast at the superbowl.

      TV has to make itself more relevant if it is to survive. Sure, the Simpsons and 70s Show makes me laugh, and I might occasionally tune in, but otherwise I'll just flip it off and listen to some tunes. So basically, there's nothing good on.

      So what does television need to do? Experiment. I want to see stuff on television I haven't seen before, not some dumbass sitcom that's revolutionary because it has a gay person. Real life is far more interesting. Until television takes risks that might let it fail and produces the amazing goods that result, we're not going to bother watching.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    2. Re:Online by sc00p18 · · Score: 5, Funny

      So what does television need to do? Experiment. I want to see stuff on television I haven't seen before, not some dumbass sitcom that's revolutionary because it has a gay person. Real life is far more interesting.

      Wait a minute, did you just make an argument for reality TV? Nooooooooooooooo!!!! ;-)

  3. TV isn't worth it anymore by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For my wife and I, high-speed Internet access is half the price of cable TV. We can get news and weather in an instant with my Internet connection. The only compelling reason we have for getting cable is Comedy Central, and while I miss South Park and The Daily Show, they sure as hell ain't worth over $50 a month.

    We still watch good ol' broadcast TV every now and then, and we still have favorite shows, but we really don't watch much TV, simply because TV has been replaced by the Internet for instant-access news, information, and interactive entertainment. Cable just isn't worth it anymore.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:TV isn't worth it anymore by 4of12 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we really don't watch much TV, simply because TV has been replaced by the Internet

      We don't watch much live TV, simply because TV has been replaced by agonizingly long stretches of shrill inane advertisements with interruptions of what passes for programming.

      Everything we do watch comes off the TiVo, and still it takes 75 channels to find worthwhile content.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  4. It's a time waster. by yebb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a product of the fact that people want to be able to reclaim their time. That is to say, letting a box push information to them at it's own speed is a waste of time and doesn't give them exactly what they want.

    TV isn't going anywhere though, as soon as the TV companies get off their collective butts and get more and more on-demand TV then viewers will return to that medium (even if it is through their computer/digital entertainment unit).

    The days of people flipping through channels are ending, and the days of people flipping through menus of available media better be coming soon, or else they risk alienating a generation of people who don't have the time/desire to waste their life waiting for a show to start.

    1. Re:It's a time waster. by October_30th · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Agreed. I'd just like to subscribe to Discovery and History Channel and I might even pay-per-view for high-end Formula 1 coverage or stuff like Sopranos or Band of Brothers but no. It's either a package deal of mostly-crap channels I'd never watch or no deal at all.

      On a similar note, I've just got to wonder about the digital TV and how it's being crammed down our throats.

      Where I live the transition to digital TV is supposed to be over by 2008 when the last of the analog channels is scheduled to be taken off the air.

      The only problem the corporations (and the government who fully backs the digitization) have is that the consumers aren't really buying into the digi-tv thing. Ok, so we would get an order of magnitude more channels but so what? There isn't enough quality or even mediocre stuff for the existing dozens of analog channels. Moreover, consumer organizations have also succeeded in getting the message about how the fair use is in danger ("What? I can't videotape my programs anymore?!") if everything goes digital and according to the plans.

      For once (OK, the big stinking "no thanks!" to G3 was another sweet moment) I am actually impressed by what the watchdog organizations and the mere consumers have already achieved: they're not even trying to sell the digi-tv anymore; the ads have become almost desperate pleas and/or threats recently.

      Maybe, just maybe there is still hope.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
  5. Well... by Demanche · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know about the other guys in that age range - but who wants to watch all these reality shows? I had hard enough time keeping up with season 10 of a normal show, now theres season 5 of ppl doing weird stuff on tv.

    --
    Mod me down im a newf (wiki)
    1. Re:Well... by stephenisu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You read my mind.

      The male demographic is sick of being pushed utter crap. Just when I start to think "Reality TV" is dying, I see a commercial for THE BEST SURVIVOR EVAR!! right before the tube cuts back to American Idol.

      I promptly want to throw up, and hit the power button on the ol' PS2 (among other consoles)

      Then again I wonder if they are producing this crap for girls KNOWING guys are watching less.

      --
      Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
    2. Re:Well... by DroopyStonx · · Score: 5, Funny

      but who wants to watch all these reality shows?

      Middle-aged office secretaries. Every office has a gaggle of them where all they do is talk and gossip about who's getting voted off, fired, etc. The thing is, they think everyone watches it, as if it's really something to do.

      "OMG, you DON'T WATCH JOE MULTIMILLIONAIRE?!"
      "Uh, no. You ask me this every week."
      "Yeah, but that show is GOOD."
      "...you're lonely, aren't you?"

      Basically it gives them something to look forward to in their otherwise meangingless lives.

      --
      We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  6. Mr. Spector's a w... by lovebyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    Quoting the penultimate paragraph:
    Mr. Spector sees things a little differently. The missing men grew up with a joystick in hand, he said, and computer games have grown up with them.

    No comment necessary.

    --

    I'll do it for cheesy poofs.

  7. I can agree by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Speaking from the middle of the 18-34 set (I'm 25) I can agree that most of us guys are watching a lot less boob tube. Partially because hardly anything worthwhile comes on (teen dramas and reality shows. And that's IT) the networks, and partially because a lot of us are pulling long hours at our jobs/universities trying to get our respective shit together, and when we get home, it's to watch the news or a freshly Tivo-ed basketball game or episode of the Sopranos. (Or Pr0n. Sweet, delicate pr0n). Then right off to sleep.

    When I was in high school, I had much more free time to just veg out in front of the TV AND there seemed to be a better selection of things on (ST:TNG...BUFFY!). Cable networks are where it's at for decent entertainment.

    Then of course the problem becomes the exorbitant rates cable companies want ($72.50/month for basic "digital" + HBO where I'm from. Fuck all that). But that's a rant for another time.

    1. Re:I can agree by Loconut1389 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      True about the reality thing... ever since big brother, the number of shows that are 'reality tv' have increased dramatically.. including a bagillion new shows and some older ones that have sort of intertwined with the reality tv format.

      Back when i was in high school i used to watch X-Files and that was about it. When I got to college I watched a lot of simpsons and futurama. Then I discovered the campus network and realized I didnt have to turn on the TV at weird hours to watch my shows. Then I got further into my major and my tv became disconnected from everything but my home theater setup.

      I'd rather be -in- the simpsons with Hit and Run on gamecube or watching the simpsons episodes with commentary or being able to pick an episode i like than having to watch it on tv when they tell me and sit through the ads.

      Most of the time, even if i like a series on TV, ala West Wing, Alias, Osbournes, etc., I wait until they come out on DVD so I can watch at my leisure. I could buy a tivo, but the initial cash output is too high. Id rather have the special features, plus DVD sound and progressive scan is the only way to watch.

      The day they have HD TV on Demand, where a show becomes available to watch at X time and Y date, and then you can pick from available shows any time, day or night (even if you have to sit through some commercials), I'm in. But I think theyll ultimately need to go commercial free subscription service on a pay per viewing scheme or an ulimited scheme for more money. Maybe pay by airtime. That way if I have a busy month and watch an hour of TV i only pay for an hour of TV plus some base monthly rate. Then if i watch a thousand hours, i fall into the X hours and over group and pay some flat rate.

      The TV Industry and the music industry have a lot to learn and fast, about what the people want and what the people will tolerate and for how long.

  8. Fox... Why am I not surprised by red+floyd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wasn't it a Fox exec who commented that not watching the commercials was theft?

    Obviously we must ban video games and the Internet because they are stealing potential revenue from the media companies!

    --
    The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    1. Re:Fox... Why am I not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This isn't a far off concept. It wouldn't surprise me to see media companies begin to find ways to attack broadband companies. The National Association of Broadcasters (which is the radio industry trade group) has begun to attack satellite radio providers (XM, Sirius) both on the air (Entercom is airing anti-satellite propoganda on their affiliates) and within the legal system. For example, the NAB is seeking to prevent satellite radio broadcasters from airing local traffic reports. The idea being that, basically, the only thing people listen to radio for anymore is traffic. And if satellite offers tons of channels, no commercials and now... TRAFFIC... guess who suffers? Traditional media outlets are under attack from new technology and they can't cope. Not entirely unlike the RIAA and MP3 fiasco.

    2. Re:Fox... Why am I not surprised by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      I will, sadly, correct you - it was a Turner executive (or a Time Warner executive, depending how you look at it).

      Sadly because I work for a Turner company. I will say this - we were all embarrased when he said it.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:Fox... Why am I not surprised by Strudelkugel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interesting to note how many times TiVo is mentioned in the posts. I bought one three years ago, and can honestly say watching TV w/o a DVR is almost impossible for me now. That's not to say I don't watch ads anymore, either. A few will actually capture my attention as I fast forward, the rest are ignored. I've always thought DVRs could be really good for advertising, once ad agencies figure out how to exploit their characteristics. But as usual, big media reaches for the lawyers instead.

      The networks views of video games sure miss the mark, too. TV companies have been flailing around for compelling interactive TV shows, yet the obvious success story is online gaming. Seems to me online games certainly qualify as interactive television. The "tuning" process and consoles are a bit different from TV sets, but in general games are broadcast content produced by studios for distribution.

      Possibly the next Ted Turner will be someone who starts a "game" channel. Maybe the prototype is what we find in hotels and on intercontinental flights today.

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    4. Re:Fox... Why am I not surprised by the_weasel · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because you are sitting in your car, and CAT5E in lengths of several hundred kilometers is prohibitively expensive?

      I want to know what the traffic is when I am driving. That generally happens in my car, not at my desk.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
  9. Obligatory reg free link by hyperherod · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...can be found here.

    1. Re:Obligatory reg free link by kiwimate · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's against posting this in the main article?

      Copyright?

      And if anything is, can't slashdot make a deal with NY times?

      Of course not, because God forbid Slashdot should make a deal with someone -- that might involve that nasty money stuff, and we all know (chant it with me now) that information wants to be free. (Glassy-eyed sheep mode off, now.)

      Ironically enough, roughly half the people who complain incessantly on Slashdot about registration-required sites have registrations on Slashdot. The difference, I quite realize, is that it's optional on Slashdot. But what are you worried about? Think the NYT is going to sell your information? Make up a silly age and name and use a throwaway Hotmail account. Are you in paranoia mode? Please...I know I trust the NYT with my information far more than, say, Slashdot's Michael.

  10. Does it count all the episodes I download. by Tatarize · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't get me wrong, but I fit smack into that bracket and I don't get cable or sat. I just use my broadband connection to download all the shows I need.

    Few bittorrent sites, supranova.org, torrentz.com, and an irc.irchighway.net network later and I've dropped completely off their "This group watches TV" radar, when the fact is I have over half a terabyte of TV.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  11. TiVO Effect by nightsweat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You'd think TiVo and other PVR's (Replay, Myth, Sage) would lead to increased TV viewing, but I would argue it keeps you from watching that piece of junk between two shows you actually care about. That gets you out of the habit of just mentally grazing TV and into the habit of active viewing

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    1. Re:TiVO Effect by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's interesting... I had a friend who I consider to be pretty intelligent (hey, he's a .com millionaire now and I'm still working "for the man").

      I was discussing the signifigance of "lead-ins" and commercial breaks. Specifically I mentioned that Friends was used by NBC to get people to watch whatever came AFTER it...

      How? By having NO commercials after the credits and going directly into a non-critical few seconds of the next show.

      He didn't realize it until I mentioned it to him that he was the "victem" of that practice and didn't even realize it.

      You are right - Tivo lets you be more discriminating. Bodies at rest tend to stay at rest, and lard asses with their fat asses on the couch tend to stay with their fat asses on the couch - until the tape ends. With live TV, the tape never ends. With Tivo, when the show's over, the show's over.

      I'll admit that, when I was younger, I'd tune in right after dinner and sit there until bedtime. Even when I played with my Atari computer, I'd also be watching TV. Mostly watching TV.

      And yes, I'd admit to once being a fat ass.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  12. TV Shows on DVD by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Honestly as more and more TV shows make the transition to DVD, there's even less reason to watch TV, especially with the arsenal of inane reality-based shows bombarding the airwaves. I can play program director at home and put on the re-runs I want to watch rather than having some person who doesn't know me try to make programming that matches my tastes. TV is going to have to morph into something REALLY compelling for me to turn it on anymore, and once the Simpsons goes off the air, they'll have to work damn hard to get me to use a TV tuner again.

  13. Demographics... by Frennzy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm turning 35 in a few months...does that mean I'll have to start watching more TV?

    1. Re:Demographics... by nightsweat · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, but voting Republican is still optional until 57.

      --

      the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    2. Re:Demographics... by thefirelane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm turning 35 in a few months...does that mean I'll have to start watching more TV?


      No, but you will bring these habits forward into more demographics until it becomes the norm.... which is what they are afraid of.

    3. Re:Demographics... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Funny

      And then at 70 you start accidentally voting for Pat Buchanan.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  14. What should they expect? by waynegoode · · Score: 5, Interesting
    What should they expect with the programming offered these days? Television's line-up is becoming more and more dumbed down with reality shows and the like. This alienates the more "enlightened" viewers who want more participation in their entertainment than just pushing buttons on a remote control. These dissatisfied viewers are also the ones who are more likely to spend time on the Internet or other non-TV activities. The shock is that it's taken this long for viewership to drop.

    Give people TV programs worth watching if you want them to watch TV.

  15. I bet same thing happened to newspapers... by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...50/60 years ago when TV started to get mainstream and people started watching more TV than reading.

    And the same will happen when a new medium appears.

    Number of entertainment forms increase while number of hours per week stays the same, therefore average number of hours spent on the old medium per person decrease as number of hours spent on the new medium increase said Dr It'sFuckingObvious in a press release today.

    --
    "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
  16. Lots of reasons... by myg · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As a male in that age range I've completely given up on TV. In my area I can't get any kind of reception and cable is too expensive for the few channels I would watch (TLC, Discovery, Comedy Central, etc).

    Its more cost effective for me to not buy cable; which is about the cost of two uncapped DSL lines both with static IP's in my area. Instead, I buy the occasional DVD when I'm in the mood for a movie.

    Another reason is that during the winter when you can actually go outside and not die of heat exhaustion I can sit on my patio with my laptop and wireless and use the net. If I want to watch TV then I'm stuck inside watching it inside.

    I think the media companies are going to have to deal with this trend. As much as they would like to turn the Inter-web into a one-way communications medium like TV, its just not going to happen. Thats one of the big draws. I don't have to view your crappy commercials or just be a passive consumer of information.

    If nothing else, the blogging fad is a big validator of the fact that people like to speak out in communications as much as absorb (well, most of us).

  17. It's a cultural change by capz+loc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With the introduction of broadband internet and wireless networks to which you can connect from anywhere, we, as a society, have come to expect on-demand content. Television, with the exception of TiVo, does not fit into this new view of how we like to be entertained.

    I have noticed that I have almost stopped watching TV altogether not neseccarily because I don't like what's on, but because I don't feel like planning my day around what I want to watch. Sometimes, when I happen to be doing nothing, I will watch the Daily Show, but even a show as funny as that isn't really worth planning my evening around it.

  18. Oh really, swan? by strictnein · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I love these TV execs who are whining. "The numbers don't add up!" "How could they not be watching are ever-wonderful "Ass Crap Reality Show"? Everyone loves it!"
    Give me a break. As a geek who doesn't even own a tv right now I don't miss watching TV at all. When we moved into our house I had to sell my TV (65in Sony HDTV - boo hoo) and the only reason I want a new TV is for three things: DVDs, XBox, PS2, all of which I have hooked up to old 20in computer monitors.
    The message is clear, your shows suck, and while watching drama queens fight over getting to stay on the island might interest younger women, it does absolutely nothing for young men.

  19. TIVO gave me back control. by qbert911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to plop down on the sofa at night afraid I'd "miss something", I would watch my favorite shows (simpsons,futurama,poker) and usually flip around while waiting for the next one.

    Now that I have a TiVO (with dual tuner of course), I can look through all of the movies that will be on in the next three weeks and see if I want to watch any of them. I can tell if next week's poker game is one I have seen already, etc.

    With sufficient planning, I can come home and play UT2004 or with the wife (no really!) all evening, without the nagging voice in the back of my head saying "there is media you want to be absorbing, and you're missing it!"

    I suspect TiVO, by giving people the ability to plan and schedule their own viewing lets them cut out the crap they would usually sit through in the middle of the evening.

  20. Mom will be so proud by tagishsimon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mom does not need an endorsement of the fact that you've wasted your life to date on this interweb thingie. All she wants is grandchildren, Timothy. When are you going to deliver on that?

  21. Maybe if TV wasn't directed towards women by xutopia · · Score: 5, Funny
    All I see on TV nowadays is crappy shows for teenagers and women. Everything is a disgrace to men. Where are the gladiators, the boxing matches and the explosions? TV is now geared towards a woman's desire. I want blow em up stuff with the least possible emotions. That's right. No emotions at all!

    Big stations thought they had it right with reality TV but that certainly drove more women to the small screen but moved men away from it. Now we're playing more video games than ever and hating TV. At least there aren't ads in the middle of my game.

  22. What is this "t.v." you speak of? by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I fondly remember the day I discovered Farscape while in the middle of of season 3. I spent a month watching one or two episodes a day, living and breathing the stuff.

    It's a truly heady experience and one I heartily recommend. Being able to pull down the entertainment you want, when you want it is going to change the way things work at a very basic level. Media executives should be scrambling to figure out how to switch to a subscription model before their ad dollars dry up.

    1. Re:What is this "t.v." you speak of? by Jerf · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've done this on Stargate SG-1, and more recently my wife has as well.

      A well done "alternate world" show (more general then sci-fi, and there are some sci-fi shows that IMHO wouldn't qualify, most notably Star Trek) benefits amazingly from the immersion you can do if you want.... if it doesn't scare you too much.

      Television shows on DVD are two or three times better then TV shows on TiVo, which are themselves three or four times better then the TV show broken up by commercials all the time. The ability to watch, uninterrupted by more then a few seconds, three or four episodes in a row is awesome.

      One particular Stargate arc that is really enhanced by this is the one that starts with Upgrades and ends with Divide and Conquer (3 episodes total). Much more compelling drama as a ~2 hour single event then three seperate episodes.

  23. Mythtv is where I waste my time by Chang · · Score: 4, Funny

    I waste a lot of time tinkering with my MythTV box (thank you Isaac and team!).

    I spend so much time making my TV and video viewing time more productive that I don't have much time for actually watching TV.

    As a side benefit when I do sit down to watch some boob tube it's on my terms (no advertisements) and on my schedule.

  24. Television sucks by cubicledrone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Face it, folks. Television is 99% crap.

    At least one-third of the daily broadcast schedule is infomercials. Most of the "cable" channels run only popular shows from other networks, or heavily edited movies over and over and over again, basically just to fill time.

    Television advertising is grating, patronizing, lowest-denominator sludge which subtly insults as it offers suburban paradise with five-figure price tags to minimum-wage consumers, and interrupts the crappy programming eight times an hour to do so.

    Sitcoms aren't funny. Dramas are political speeches. The local news is a carnival barker, and reality programming is nothing but a metaphor of a society fascinated by the misfortune of the powerless.

    There hasn't been a meaningful sentence spoken on television in decades.

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
  25. Sad by Brad+Mace · · Score: 4, Insightful
    TV executives are so delusional that they can't even consider the possibility that a ratings drop could be due to their crappy shows. It MUST be a problem with nielson's measurements.

    What a pathetic group of people

  26. Re:Software by lambent · · Score: 3, Informative

    I use GNU VCD imager (http://www.vcdimager.org/) under linux (I believe it also works in Windows with Cygwin). It's as easy as 'vcdimager -t svcd input.mpg', then you burn the resulting bin/cue. Of course, the inputs have to be in the correct mpeg formats, so I tend to spend more time reencoding AVIs than actually watching them.

    Pretty much all DVD players will play s/VCDs, as long as they're built to spec.

    While we're on the subject, what's the deal with these dinks cropping the top and bottom of 4:3 vids and calling them 'widescreen hdtv' encodes? Pisses me off no end, since my DVD is not smart enough to recenter the picture, and it only uses the top half of my TV.

  27. I concur by turtles11 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You know, I gotta agree. I'm in that demographic range and I sure don't watch half the TV I used to. I attribute this to two things:

    1)Reality TV

    2)Scifi cancelled Farscape

    --
    "According to the Turtle" www.paperbackreader.com
  28. Not suprising by wazzzup · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With T.V. I can have tripe like "Yes Dear" forced upon me or I can view meaningful content on demand via the internet.

    For example, I can pay $80/mo. for standard, no movie channel cable from Time Warner and get news fed to me in 30 minute bursts or I can pay $8.95/mo. for internet access and read in-depth studies from sites like foreign affairs. I can be a better parent and read about my gifted son's condition and learn from it on the internet or I can sit on my ass and watch Temptation Island.

    T.V. no longer consistently delivers meaningful content (if it ever did). Heck even formerly great channels like TLC have relegated themselves to regurgitating reruns of While You Were Out.

    The entire media industry is sooo out of touch with the populace and clearly have no clue how to react and change to an increasingly digital lifestyle so many of us are adopting.

  29. What needs to happen, IMHO. by gfxguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What broadcasters need to do, IMO, is simply cut back on the costs of programming, then they wouldn't be whining and complaining that we're off doing something more useful (yes, at least playing games is more interactive).

    The biggest problem I have with TV is commercials. Cut down the commercials, and I'd watch more. I realize that's how they make money, but it's beyond my ability to see as many commercials as there are for the precious little content I'm getting.

    So: quit paying people Jennifer Anniston and Matt LeBlanc millions of dollars per episode, cut back on the commercials, and you'll get more viewers.

    I'd even equate it with taxes: by lowering taxes the government is making more money per capita then it was before. Sure, revenues are still down, but not as much as the tax cut was. I'd say cutting commercials would not hurt television as much as it would immediately seem to - because more people would watch and they could charge more for commercials.

    I suppose, then, they'd start getting greedy and we'd repeat the whole process all over again...

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
    1. Re:What needs to happen, IMHO. by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > quit paying people Jennifer Anniston and Matt LeBlanc millions of dollars per episode

      No kidding. Bring back ugly people!

      Remember Taxi? Mash? Cheers? Heck even Archie Bunker. These shows were all high quality programming. Great writing. Lines that were funny without a laugh track telling you so. And the best part.. I could relate to the characters. Karla from Cheers wasn't hot, but we all knew somebody like her.

      Taxi.. If Danny Devito tried to start his career in a sitcom today he'd be lucky to be doorman at Phoebe's apartment.

      So I think that's the answer, PUT UGLY PEOPLE BACK ON TV. Pay them less, make up for the $exy body factor with (GASP) good script writing, and everybody will be happier.

      --

      Operator, give me the number for 911!
  30. Meanwhile in Norway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... we are seeing the very same trend! TV is down, Internet is up but so is also radio.

    I guess the sheer stupidity of TV programs and the TV hosts in general (sure, there are exceptions) have finally taken its toll in the TV business. Personally I hate having my intelligence insulted (mmm, make sure there are no typos there now...) and so do many others.

    The trend started a few years ago, as trends are want to. Prior to a media conference there was a poll where people were asked if given the chioce of dumping either the TV or the PC, what would they chose? The majority would dump the TV.

  31. It's the price, stupid by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful
    For my wife and I, high-speed Internet access is half the price of cable TV.

    That's enough to explain it. Simple price competition. High-speed Internet penetration is growing rapidly and is expected to pass cable TV in about two years. Cable has been stuck at 66% for years, while broadband is already somewhere in the 45% range.

    Not having cable TV, I had no idea people were paying $79 a month for a basic tier of channels. I thought it was still around $18.

  32. Re:Tivo... by w3weasel · · Score: 5, Informative

    Build your own... I did, and despite the fact that it can cost in excess of $500, it is well worth it. SageTV offers predictive recording, which is quite excellent, and the real bonus is that using DScaler and FFDshow, you can render the analog TV signal at near DVD quality, far more clear than is offered by TiVo.

    --

    Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy

  33. Solution by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All you need is a package with the various Discovery, History, TLC and sports channels for $20 a month. It would sell like crazy. Beyond these types of tv, men in that age bracket like myself just don't see the appeal. Here's a thought for you tv people that might be reading this. Stop bashing men and stereotyping them and men might might be more inclined to watch. If portraying Blacks, Women, Arabs and so on stereotypically is unnacceptable, why should portraying men that way be acceptable?

    Of particular disdain is that in order to have the programming loud enough to hear, the commercials are so loud they hurt your ears. Or you can have the commercials at the right volume and strain to hear the programming, if at all. Pop ups killed themselves when they were abused, and thats what tv does with commercials that are significantly louder than the programming. Whatever happened to sound leveling technology?

  34. 30 and no TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm 30 and I junked my TV at my last apartment in 1998. I think the weirdest thing is trying to watch tv when I'm visiting other people or sitting in a waiting room. It's the same thing as not eating sugar for months/years then eating something like a cookie and thinking: what the hell is this revolting shit that I used to consume by the bagload?

    I don't really understand the emotional backlash from tv-viewers who think the non-tv people have a superiority complex but I suspect it's similar reaction with smokers vs non-smokers, fatties vs exercisers, SUV-drivers vs non-SUV-drivers and all the other great emotion-laden topics of this world that require masses of cognitive dissonance to justify expensive and unhealthy weirdness to calm an overy-anxious soul: excessive spending, tv-watching, eating, smoking, drinking just to calm down and forget about "the crappy universe" that's out to get you.

    For the record, I used to be most of these things which probably makes me even more annoying than an ex-smoker. All that stuff you don't have time for (preparing food, exercising outdoors, enjoying nature, sex, talking, reading, thinking) you now have time for.

    As for the trollers who say reading Slashdot takes up time... hm. Yes, about 20 minutes to read newspapers and slashdot online and make a comment. Not exactly in the same realm as tv-watching.

    Talking to people whose lives revolve around work and tv is like talking to a Pepsi vending machine.

    1. Re:30 and no TV by Morris+Thorpe · · Score: 3, Funny
      I used to be most of these things which probably makes me even more annoying than an ex-smoker

      After reading the above, I'd say you're being modest.

  35. Re:Tivo... by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If cost is an issue, then build your own is probably the way to go. There are some interesting projects out there like MythTV that look pretty impressive.

    With an Internet connection and some scripts I think you can download programming schedules that make the home-brew devices as useful as a TiVo. Believe me, having reliable scheduling information and automating the recording is useful. It was bliss moving from stacks of tapes, pre-recorded with 10 minute slop intervals on the end, poor quality, to the TiVo.

    I paid US$250 about 3 years ago for the service and invested more money in bigger harddrives, time in upgrading, to get my TiVo adequately useful for me. I didn't mind throwing the money to TiVo at the time for the lifetime service; I don't think they were making huge amounts on the hardware sales and they did a pretty nice job with the software.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  36. Bring back BayWatch by chiph · · Score: 5, Funny

    BayWatch knew what men in the 18-34 age group wanted... big breasted women running down the beach in skimpy swimsuits.

    Plotlines? Well, if you insist, but they aren't central to the show. Try and limit it to stuff like: "Pam gets injured while undergoing a bikini wax. Other cast members lend support."

    Chip H.

  37. Books by suman28 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Too bad the article does not talk about any youths reading books now-a-days. Is this really true. Are video games and porn really taking over their lives that much?

  38. If they would stop cancelling my shows... by pogle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...I'd watch more. Family Guy, Firefly, even Seven Days; all shows that I loved watching that got nixed at various points before their time. They kill a good show, and 4 reality shows arise in its place. Its the nastiest hydra the industry has come up with in a long time.

    As it is now, I've got FG on dvd, I've recorded every ep of Seven Days, I've seen every ep. of ST:TNG multiple times, and I'll be getting the Firefly dvds as soon as monetary situation allows. So why should I keep watching TV? Enterprise is utter crap. Reality TV is of course abysmal and should just go away entirely. And I've never liked a sitcom really. They all annoy me. The really creative/funny shows are marginalized and replaced to pander to the demographics, and when the demographics dont like whats being pandered to them, the producers just don't understand why...

    Its the same reason I don't even bother going to the movie theatre anymore. Went to see LotR, and thats the last movie I see myself paying for in theatres for a long time. Even Pixar's newest offerings will probably be relegated to 'wait for dvd' status. I'd rather spend $15 on a dvd than go see a movie in theatres, as its not much more pricewise and I can then view multiple times. And since 90% of my favorite tv shows are either on DVD now, or coming to DVD soon, why should I keep watching it live with commercials?

    Sorry, wandered around a bit there, but just felt like ranting some.

    --
    http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
  39. Trolling? Or just thieving? by vaporakula · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading the parent made me wonder if a lot of mod's had the wool pulled over their eyes... Sounds like trolling to me. But, since it's +4 interesting... I'll feed. Who do you think pays for those high quality Soprano's productions? The suckers who don't have broadband + a burner? What happens when they dry up, no one subscribes to HBO, and we all want our entertainment for free? Guess what... no Sopranos. Yes, the entertainment industry needs to grok the net and it's capabilities / appeals. But don't kid yourself - as a pirate, you are violating copyright laws and contributing to the decline of quility programming on TV. Less cash from the customers = less output, plain and simple (Enron economics aside).

    1. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What happens when they dry up, no one subscribes to HBO, and we all want our entertainment for free? Guess what... no Sopranos.

      And no more van Goghs... oh, wait. He didn't make any money.

      These are the fears that have been expressed over every popular entertainment medium since the advent of the printing press.

      The best art IMO comes from the desire to entertain, innovate and make great art; when art that exists solely or primarily to make a profit fades away will we really be worse off as a society?

      as a pirate, you are violating copyright laws and contributing to the decline of quility programming on TV.

      Doubtful, or at least questionable. The pirate is not taking revenue from HBO and it is uncertain whether he/she would purchase HBO were the option to pirate it unavailable. Where information is concerned, a freeloader is not necessarily parasitic.

    2. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by Jaysyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK, I subscribe to Cartoon Network (thru DirecTV). I cannot stay up late enought to watch ATHF. I download said episodes from the P2P of the day so that I can watch them later. Time shifting is legal & I've paid for the programming, so what is the problem?

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    3. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by Blic · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Just to play devil's advocate... =)

      And no more van Goghs... oh, wait. He didn't make any money.

      Not necessarily a valid comparison. There's very few prohibitive costs associated with painting. Maybe a few hundred (if that) on brushes, paints and canvases. A TV show requires a bit more capital... =)

      The pirate is not taking revenue from HBO and it is uncertain whether he/she would purchase HBO were the option to pirate it unavailable.

      Hard to say. If I couldn't download the episodes I *might* subscribe to HBO. Though probably I'd just rent them after they came out on DVD... =)

    4. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      TV shows might turn out to be economically unsupportable. If that's true, it's no reason to artificially prop them up with oppressive laws. I'd rather have reasonable laws, and whatever can thrive in those circumstances.

      Certainly my plans for moving stars around to form a picture would produce some great artwork -- but is it really reasonable of me to demand that copyrights be changed so as to make it profitable to do? If not, then the same could be said of big-budget TV.

      It doesn't bother me. Shakespeare had a stage, no lighting, no backdrops, a few props, costumes that were just ordinary clothing donated to the theater company, and he produced some of the best plays ever. If you're a good storyteller, you can always manage somehow on a low budget. If you suck, a big budget won't make your work any better.

      So don't knock low-budget TV.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    5. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by Progman3K · · Score: 5, Funny

      >as a pirate, you are violating copyright laws and contributing to the decline of quility programming on TV.

      I feel *so* guilty thinking that the networks soon won't be able to produce shows like Survivor, the Bachelor, Train 48 and that show with the toupeee guy... Donald Trump.

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    6. Re:Trolling? Or just thieving? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 3, Informative

      First, why are you downloading it off of P2P when a taped- or digital-recording is *much* better quality since it's direct from the source?

      I disagree about the quality. I do a fair amount of recording from tv to computer, and I don't think a blanket statement like this can be fairly applied. There's quite a few factors that need to be taken into consideration. Firstly, the actual recording medium. If it's a vhs tape, then there's a few negatives there right from the start. Unless it's never been used before, there's already going to be some degradation of quality right there. And if he wants it stored digitally, then that's going to be increased in the transfer, on top of the additional noise from the compression. The quality of his capture card is another thing that has to be factored in. If that's not a high quality device, then he's looking at another minus. I don't care how high a bitrate someone's encoding at, if they have a bad source the end result is going to suffer for it. On the other hand, if someone's recording to a high quality digital format, and then compressing it to a net friendly size isn't going to hurt it that much. I don't think there's going to be much difference in an ATHF episode encoded at 900kbs or one encoded at 5000kbs. So, depending on the equipment available, there very likely could be a gain in quality of end product from downloading off of the internet. As long as we're talking about a source that knows what it's doing, not some 10mb encode off kazza.

      Though, on the other hand, in the case of ATHF he'd also be missing the Adult Swim cards - a pretty big loss in my opinion, but oh well.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
  40. Business Opportunity by pavon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If any big media people are out there, take this as indication of a new opportunity for revenue. I too am a 18-34 year old and don't watch TV. I don't have time on weekdays to do that, and given the small amount I would watch, cable just isn't worth it. Furthermore I am not such a fan of most of these shows that I would buy the DVD. Lastly while finding episodes to download can be inconvienient, not to mention illegal, it is the best option right now (but just to clarify, I don't - I have good reason to stay clean right now).

    What do I want? I want to drive down to the video store and rent these. I heard "24" was good, I wouldn't mind renting the first season over a couple weekends. I never got to see Dr Who as a kid - I would love to rent those. I have seen a few series in the rentals (like south park) but not that many. Of course blockbuster only has so much floor space, and can only have so many DVD's, so why don't they have one megawarehouse per city that is full of all sorts of hard to find movies and episodes. Advertise it in the normal outlets and work it like inter-library loan.

    Of course, another solution would be a legit download service, but since there is no way to inforce the rental concept, it would be purchase only if they were willing to do it at all, and at that price point it wouldn't earn my business. So mega-rentals.

  41. Ah the irony by fishdan · · Score: 4, Funny
    Complain about Jeremiah being cancelled, but contribute to the bad numbers by downloading?

    Not that I think this is a bad strategy. I'm ripping and distributing 7th Heaven in an attempt to get it off the air. So far, no luck. No downloads either. I think the ideal TV audience is the techno-illiterate.

    The Boob tube indeed.

    --
    Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
  42. Speaking of trolling.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's debatable whether a few people downloading episodes of their favorite TV programs can significantly impact the entertainment industry. If it does so in a negative way, so what? The overall market is driven by what consumers want. If people don't think television shows are good enough to pay for or to wade through a bunch of ads then there's no real loss to begin with. Maybe more people will go outside for a change if the current industry folds. Or, god willing, we'll start seeing some really innovative stuff from other people...

    In any case, it's just irresponsible to call something like this "thieving." We have different laws for theft and copyright infringment for a good reason - they're different actions with different consequences. Our ideas and intuitions about whether it is right to take an object away from someone else don't directly apply to making a copy of something. If you don't think infringing copyright is a good idea, that's fine, but I strongly urge you to not to resort to appeals to emotion by calling it "thieving." It just makes you look like you have an agenda.

    1. Re:Speaking of trolling.. by robertsloan2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Matter of degree too in my view -- many people would take a different view of office pilferage (office supplies and other minor pilferage) versus cash embezzlement, versus minor borrowing out of petty cash and replacing, versus serious embezzlement. Scale really does matter in these things and that includes how big the margin is for the petty stuff. Pirates who make a substantial profit distributing under market without paying royalties, that's serious problems. Individuals downloading is probably more comparable to walking off with paperclips or pens, but that's not my legal decision to make. The big companies are usually a lot more resourceful in defending their rights than individual or independent artists, and often defend bad contracts against real artists -- so who's thieving and who's getting away with theft isn't always the little viewer against the big companies. Overall where legal aid comes in, big companies afford bigger nastier lawyers. Naturally, I'd take the side of the creators though, because I'm a writer. But I'm enough of a geek to prefer open sourcing to paranoia about theft, trusting that if I write well enough to make a hit, it'll sell because it's good. Robert and Ari >^..^

  43. Everything you need to know about television: by LMCBoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In TV economics, you are not the customer, you are the product. Corporate advertisers are the customers, and they pay big bucks for your eyeballs.

    Makes me feel dirty every time I think about it. I stopped watching shortly after this was pointed out to me.

    --
    Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
  44. I do by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I try to seek out commercials. Why is AdCritic (or something like it) not free, sponsored by the very ads they offer? You'd think advertisers would be keen on having people download and view the ads, much less knowing exactly how many people have done so... I actually enjoy watching a good commercial, but you'd think distributing them was a crime. Pretty much my only source is P2P.

    I don't like commercials in the middle of shows so much, but can tolerate product placement. I think more shows will head that way. They pretty much have to!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  45. Thank God for TV!!! by Bluesman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any time I turn on the TV, I love to see the brilliant women triumphing over idiotic men who couldn't possibly understand the nuances of daily life half as well as a woman. Those stupid husbands. All they do is burn food on the grill and screw up the DirectTV satellite. Of course, I feel like I need to watch more of this sort of thing to figure out how women and kids got so smart.

    And thank GOD for gay men who are perceptive enough to tell us what to wear. Men's fashion has been in such a rut before these shows came along, Since Mr. Rodgers died, I didn't know WHAT sweater vest was in. Now, thanks to the "fab five," a hapless modern bozo like me can wear clothes that will look hopelessly outdated next year, just like the smart, professional women do.

    But for the really hetero alpha males, we have shows about "Beer" and "Women with Tits." These cater to my testosterone tendencies without insulting my intelligence or sense of chivalry at all. It's enough of an outlet for me that I don't feel like I have to run through Circuit City anymore with drool trailing behind me, even though my wife will let me do that on occasion.

    I hope they make more shows with the twenty-something male in mind. I'd like to see more obnoxious behaviour, especially related to beer and sports, which pretty much are the only things to occupy my consciousness, being a man and all. And plenty of sex, but please, only sex with strippers and ditzy sluts with huge boobs. Real women are intimidating to me.

    Keep it up, guys! You'll never lose me as a viewer.

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  46. Demographics by Kombat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Then again I wonder if they are producing this crap for girls KNOWING guys are watching less.

    You've unknowingly hit on a very fascinating sub-world of advertising, the "target demographic." If you want to know who the networks think are watching, then pay attention to the commercials. This is actually one of my morbid curiosities. I sometimes get a kick out of flipping to some outrageous, twisted show, just to see the commercials and see who the network thinks is watching. Sometimes its funny, sometimes its scary.

    For example. What kind of commercials do you see during "The Apprentice?" I would think that a show like that would appeal to men, so I would expect to see manly commercials. Yet if you notice, you'll see that there are a surprisingly high number of commercials for feminine hygiene products, cleaning products (whose commercials always feature women, exclusively, by the way - so much for equal contributions in the home and eliminating stereotypes, eh? Where are the men in those commercials? At work? Is that what we're supposed to conclude?), and vaccuum cleaners.

    Now flip over to SpikeTV. I guarantee you'll never see a maxipad commercial there. :) However, you do notice some other disturbing things. Pay attention during the "Power Block" on Spike. Of course, you see commercials for car products, tools, and whatever, but notice the way the commercials are pitched. Lots of special effects, shouting, and flashing lights. The same type of visual stimulation you'd use to capture a child's attention, or people with short attention spans and stunted maturity. Even more disturbingly, you see an unusually high concentration of commercials for credit counseling. Apparently, SpikeTV thinks its viewers are young, poor, hyperactive males with little earning power. In order to afford the expensive "car-toys" on their shows and commercials, they offer them credit and bankruptcy help. Hmm. And we wonder why the country's average personal debt load is so frighteningly high. They are pushing a culture of borrowing and short term vision for immediate gratification.

    Finally, one last, even more revealing example. I was home sick from work the other day, and had the TV on. To entertain my little voyeuristic interest, I had it on FOX for a while. Examining FOX's target demographic is among the most easiest, funniest, and scariest, all rolled into one. You can immediately tell that FOX caters to the heavily conservative, religious audience, with low income and a very gossipy nature. The shows they run during the daytime are trashy talk shows and court "reality" shows with lots of yelling. The commercials are even more revealing. Lawyers come on once or twice every commercial break asking if you've been injured. Apparently, if you've been hurt, even through your own stupid fault, they'll find someone else to blame (and, of course, to sue).

    Scads of credit counseling/consolidation commercials. Lots of ads pitching trade school or diploma programs. Apparently, the demographic that is home during the weekdays, watching FOX is poor, uneducated, conservative, voyueristic, and looking to get rich quick.

    I don't do it often, but when I do watch TV, I enjoy trying to read between the lines and see what networks and advertisers really think of their viewers. It can be quite enlightening.

    --
    Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    1. Re:Demographics by Zigg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While there's certainly some truth to the target demographic angle, it must also be considered that a lot the ads you're going to see on cable, especially smaller cable stations, are after the cheap rates more than the target demographic. Target demographics are for much more for million-dollar Super Bowl ads than they are for buying cheap spots in bulk (ever notice the same ad gets run on almost every break on some channels?)

      Also: cable providers also sell ad spots on some channels to local advertisers. I suspect these are done with no concern for targeting at all, given I've seen the same spot everywhere, and again, several times an hour...

    2. Re:Demographics by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Informative
      Actually, you may not know it, but you've hit on one of the key reasons why the male 18-35 demographic is disappearing. Donny Deutch, who owns the Deutch advertising agency had the editor of TV guide on his show and the guy basically said the following:

      Women have all the spending power these days, even if its their mans money they're using. Advertisers want to sell to these women, so they make ads for the women. TV stations want to sell ad time so in an effort to increase advertiser interest in an already cutthroat market, they put on more and more shows that would attract female viewers. This has the obvious side effect of alienating the male 18-35 demographic.

      And these execs wonder why Sopranos has the ratings it does, or Adult Swim on Cartoon Network. Jesus. I'm in advertising/marketing and this is the most obvious problem in the world, especially since I fit into the "missing" demographic.

      We are entering a world where the old solution of casting out a huge net and seeing what you get is no longer nearly as effective as it once was. The future is in niche market advertising and those who adopt early will reap the rewards.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  47. Free PORN for all by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Advertisers money would be better spent operating porn sites.

    The NYT article states that
    "ComScore also collects data on Internet pornography-viewing habits, although that was not part of the online publishers' report. According to the company, more than 70 percent of men from 18 to 34 visit a pornographic site in a typical month, and those men make up 25 percent of the visitors to such sites."


    TV networks are expensive, actors, satellites, cameras, etc all paid for by advertising, having to buy a TV to watch it all, etc, yet it's all free to me the consumer.

    Porn sites are much cheaper to run and seriously less to produce content. I doubt any porn star gets a Million a pop.

    OK, so we know where the guys are, it's cheaper to operate, plus you can even determine if they saw and/or clicked on your ad.

    QED

    Advertisers should pay porn sites and they should all be free. Free porn brought to you by Doritos, Mountain Dew, and the new Mitsubishi.

  48. What does TV offer? by yoshi_mon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. Entertainment -- Questionable at best sometimes. And rivled strongly by other media and the now very strong gaming industry.

    2. News -- Nearly a joke at this point. I cringe at the thought of watching any TV news and do so at this point only when I don't have control of the remote. (Normally I still have control of my feet luckily and proceed to leave the room at that point.)

    3. Ads -- Wow, here is a big suprise. People don't care to subject themselves to countless ads about stuff they may or may not want to buy. Small wonder TiVo and the likes do so well.

    4. Sports -- While this catagory could be lumped in with entertainment and news it really can be considered almost seperate to a degree. It's one of TV's few saving graces as sports fans can watch things that might otherwise not be able to see.

    --

    Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
  49. What's on TV? by mabu · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why would people be less interested in television when there's so many good things on?

    * Real World - network executives get young kids to the point of alcohol poisoning and videotape them for your amusement

    * Fear Factor - out-of-work hollywood actors line up to eat bugs for your amusement

    * Tough Crowd - Colin Quinn and his buddies validate your racist tendencies

    * The Apprentice - A dozen yuppies compete to get close enough to see if Donald Trump's hair is actually a new, sentient life form.

    * American Chopper - All of America tunes in each week to see if this will be the show where Paul Jr. hits Paul Sr. over the head with a tire iron.

    * Rush Limbaugh - Only in America can the Vice Presient of the United States be seen calling in to an Oxycotin addict's tv/radio show.

    * Seinfeld - A "show about nothing"; of course it will be a huge hit. Each week we anxiously look forward to an entirely new paradigm shift in obsessive-compulsive behavior.

    * The Osbournes - Watch burned out rocker being slowly driven crazy by his own family.

    * X-Play - This is a show that's all about Morgan Web's sweater pies, but I think there's a side theme of gaming, but I'm not sure.

    * Almost everything on WB - Lame urban sitcoms that have revitalized the laugh track industry.

    * Survivor - Amuse yourself by watching Mark Burnett dangle rice and toilet paper over the heads of starving, back-stabbing media-whores on a deserted island.

    * Law and Order: SVU - It's like Dateline NBC with worse acting.

    * Will and Grace - Yet another show about 30-something beautiful single people. I just can't get enough of homo/hetero-erotic lust triangles. Rumor has it, Mr. Roeper will return during sweeps week.

    * CSI: Miami - Someone died; someone's hiding something; someone's an arrogant/evasive prick; someone's hair is in the wrong place. Not since CSI: Topeka, CSI: Fargo and CSI: Van Nuys has CBS come up with an intriguing, compelling and creative series.

    * American Idol - Innovative show involving no-talent hacks (who have slept with the right people) criticizing no-talent hacks.

    I'd write more but it's time for the Jimmy Kimmel show.. gotta go.

  50. The big picture... by drdink · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think somebody is missing the big picture, here. The Internet is not taking TV viewers away. TV viewers are being forced away by the continual drivel being produced by TV content providers. How many Law & Orders do we need? Oh look, now we have 2 CSIs! Oh, can we have some more generic cop/laywer shows, please?! Oh, here's a lawyer show that takes place 100 years in the future! Okay, you don't want to watch the cop/lawyer show? How about this nice helping of fake "reality TV"!! WOO!!! About the only things I watch on TV anymore are West Wing and The Daily Show. West Wing because it is different from anything else being shown on TV right now, and The Daily Show because it applies comedy to this progressively dumbed down society to show you how dumb it really is.

    --
    Beware, Nugget is watching... See?