- Joined
- 1 October 2008
- Posts
- 3,733
- Reactions
- 391
The TV networks seem to operate on the basis of assuming that consumers will accept what they are offered, rather than giving them what they actually want.The death of TV seems to be about 5 years behind newspapers so it's just around the corner.
The TV networks seem to operate on the basis of assuming that consumers will accept what they are offered, rather than giving them what they actually want.
It would have worked fine 25 years ago in places that had only one commercial station and thus minimal choice. Watch the ABC, watch the commercial station or turn it off. Simple as that. Likewise it wasn't too much harder in the larger cities with 3 commercial channels - that's still not a huge amount of competition.
But take Top Gear (the UK version) as a classic example of bungled programming. It had a huge following on SBS. Then it moved to Channel 9 who couldn't make their minds up when to run it, and who kept messing about with repeats etc to the point that it became a joke. I don't know anyone who still watches it, and I'm not sure if it's even still on air. Channel 9 paid enough money to grab something from SBS and then proceeded to destroy it. No wonder they're going broke.
The same applies to most of the others. If program x is on at 7:30pm on a Monday night then I may well watch it every week. Once they start changing the time, changing the day etc then I may as well just download it or not bother at all. I'm not going to spend half my life trying to keep track of what's on and when and nor are most people.
And then there's the content itself. If you can advertise it today then it's not news tomorrow. Simple as that. No wonder the ABC is doing so well when it comes to news etc - they have actual news! And no, most things that happen in Hollywood aren't newsworthy either, at least not at 6pm or thereabouts. Put them on at 2am where they belong and put proper, actual news on the program called "news".
Live sport was one of the first and most major things Lachlan removed from TEN after his glorious rise to the control room!!
The only thing left with value for TV, it seems, is live stuff like sport.
At least you’re not competing with stuff you could down load from the US 6 months ago before being offered it on AUS free to air.
Which leaves the odd behaviour of NWS booming along with its pay TV.
US cable was built on the back of pr0n! Fair bit of that for free on the net these days!
If live is all that's left then surly NWS is going to take a hit soon!?
Can't wait!
Capital raising at 20c. Surely this is getting into the territory where one of the billionaires on the register will consider taking it over?
I will consider watching Ten if they had a Big Brother Billionarie edition.
Didn't they say they don't need capital not so long ago?
You really need think skin and a poor memory to be a corporate exec these days.
Why does this always end in 0.007 cents?
Lachlan Murdoch seems like a good contrary indicator. If he thinks it's a good investment it probably isn't.
I could not believe the way TEN share price acted so positively after one of Murchochs' snivelling brats took over the controls.
I mean what the hell was good about that?
What was this leeches track record prior to being given the controls at TEN? One.Tel and gap years?
I was catching these media commentators, so called experts, making throw away lines as they talked about TEN like it was a given positive the legend of Lochlan had taken the controls.
The price has halved since Lachlan joined.
What a resume!
Where to now captain?:silly:
The death of TV seems to be about 5 years behind newspapers so it's just around the corner. They obviously can create original content which newspapers can't but at the moment everything worth watching is available on their own websites without ads.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?