[Drabdr]

This link from another site, prompted some questions from me.

NOTE: It's kind of a long read (3 internet pages). But I felt it was very well-written, and worth the read:

How Uncle Sam invented television

In short, it provides a brief history from the early 1920's to present.

This from former FCC chair Michael Powell (beginning of Obama Administration):

"In my opinion, this country is way overinvested, spectrum-wise, in broadcasting," he declared, and called the gradual recovery of some of that band "a slow and cumbersome process" that needs to be accelerated.

Ninety percent of Americans subscribe to cable or satellite-based television, Powell observed. "You really have to ask yourself why so much valuable real estate is being held back."

So if the vast majority of America does not rely on broadcast television, why does it seem that we are hanging on to that dinosaur? Is it time to be dismantled, or, is that going to be exceedingly difficult with how deep the tentacles are intertwined with the FCC?
****
It would seem (from the article) that Nixon was a champion for Cable TV (from the article):

The president had already channeled considerable thought and emotion toward the goal of bringing down the networks and their news departments. The logic of giving new freedoms to the cable industry cannot conceivably have been lost on his ceaselessly strategizing mind.

1. Is there a problem with current broadcast TV? Are you OK with broadcast TV, and should the major networks keep its protected industry?

2. If there is a problem, what is going to be done about it? Frankly, I'm not sure if another president will have the ability (approval ratings, congressional support, time on their hands, etc.) like Nixon did, just to take on an industry like this.

Me? I don't know. I know I don't like broadcast TV right now. I was as mad as a hornet with NBC Christmas Eve. I just wanted the kids to see It's a Wonderful Life, which they had not seen before. 3 hours long!! It was so krapped up with commercials, most of the theme and feel of the movie was completely lost; I was losing interest. I'm OK with some advertising, but pluueezze. That was ridiculous.

So the problem seems a bit more than taste/distaste with a particular program, network, etc. The ability for any potential business to bring us choice and diversity is hampered by regulation of TV broadcasting. With current regulation in place, are we getting anywhere NEAR the choices we can have as consumers, especially for free?

Anyway, I have certainly thrown a hodgepodge of thoughts together here. So feel free to go with any of my questions, take it a slightly different direction, or whatever. Just seems like a fruitful area to hash out a bit.

[Drabdr]

From Newton Minow's 1961 speech (from the link):

"When television is good, nothing—not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers—nothing is better," Minow began. "But when television is bad," the FCC's new boss said, "nothing is worse."

I invite each of you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.

You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials—many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you'll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it.

Ya know... throw in Reality TV and remove the station signing off, and 50 years later, I don't see anything that is not spot on.

I know there are some who don't watch any television. But running the numbers, most all watch at least some. Are we really that bored (or uncreative, or whatever) that we cannot find something else to do? Or is there something else to the allure of television, that transcends the Vast Wasteland impression?

[Stoner]

Actor and writer strikes along with increasing high production costs and a dwindling viewer base have certainly lowered the quality of broadcast TV. Cable, too.

Personally, I think making children watch It's a Wonderful Life is equivalent to child abuse. Hell...it's even adult abuse

Is there a problem with current broadcast TV? Are you OK with broadcast TV, and should the major networks keep its protected industry?

There's a new technology out called cable TV ( )........( )
Give it a shot.
Or buy a DVD player and rent/own or borrow from a library a wealth of viewing pleasure for all tastes.
Or, shudder, read a book ( )
Feeling adventurous?....take up motorcycling.

Are we really that bored (or uncreative, or whatever) that we cannot find something else to do?

No problem here, but then I don't live in Texas

[valis]

television? Isn't that what people did before the internet?

Seriously, though, about all I watch on television is History channel, discovery science, and some random sports stuff. And Formula 1. Gots to have my F1........

[Paquadez]

As a product, Television has outgrown its early product lifecycle.

All products go through various stages of market development: until they mature and head towards what is called Sunset Phase.

One of the core problems has been the competition between Terrestial (i.e.broadcast) TV, Satellite, and what was called originally "Q" TV (Or cable).

Right now we see the first phase of what is called "Convergence": this is the roll out of entertainment, communications (Both Voice and Datacom) and the internet into one delivery channel. Multiplex cinemas will shortly all be fed product via very wide data pipes and content streamed.

An unfortunate reality of the early competition is simply the lack of quality content: there is a finite resource of good actors, writers, presenters, directors and producers: and simply, there was insufficient to feed all available delivery channels.

One result of this reality was TV operators vying with each other to secure properties. Their first port of call were the major movie companies for broadcasting rights to the libraries.

With absence of quality content, then in their need to fill airtime, TV companies resorted to cheaply produced rubbish: which simply drove standards downwards, ever downwards.

When movies still reigned supreme, various smart people spotted the clear new opportunities offered by the new medium, TV and set-up dedicated production companies to feed the new market. Lucille Ball was one of the first, along with David Niven, Dick Powell, Ida Lupino and Charles Boyer, who started Four Star TV in 1952.

See here:

If you consider the topic, subjectively and look from a quality perspective, then TV has sown the seeds of its own destruction: mainly since in the near future, thanks to convergence, the viewer will be enabled to select any full length movie from a vast library and choose quality viewing: free from dumb adverts. They will simply pay-to-view.

What's more; they can start viewing at a time and place to suit themselves: be it 4.00 AM.

[Wino]

TV is no worse or better than any other media. Take what you want and dump the rest - the choice is yours.

[valis]

agreed. If you don't like it, change the channel.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by valis

agreed. If you don't like it, change the channel.

I agree guys. No argument on that. But... this is not entirely what I was trying to get at here.

The issue is that we have, as a country, created a very limited marketplace. We have limited what potential we may get as consumers, based on regulating the broadcasting airwaves.

What comes into our house (for free) and to an extent, what comes into our house (that we pay for) is regulated. Take two of your genres mentioned motorcycles and formula 1.



For the most part, you have to pay to have those services brought to you. And.... you still end up with: commercials. Reason being, there is no Free Network venue that can deliver it to you. It's entirely possible that such programming can be delivered over Free Network. But until the current model changes, we'll never know.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Personally, I think making children watch It's a Wonderful Life is equivalent to child abuse. Hell...it's even adult abuse

Grinch.

There's a new technology out called cable TV ( )........( )
Give it a shot.

I got satellite. As I said in the earlier one, no problem with paying for it. It's just that the ability to possibly deliver different (and more) Free Television is severely limited by current regulation.

Or buy a DVD player and rent/own or borrow from a library a wealth of viewing pleasure for all tastes.

Honestly, I do forget about how much is available at the local library.

Or, shudder, read a book ( )

Feeling adventurous?....take up motorcycling.

Yea, I don't know. I had the dirt bike when I was a kid, and took a fall on that thing. Still have a small scar on the back.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

When movies still reigned supreme, various smart people spotted the clear new opportunities offered by the new medium, TV and set-up dedicated production companies to feed the new market. Lucille Ball was one of the first, along with David Niven, Dick Powell, Ida Lupino and Charles Boyer, who started Four Star TV in 1952.

OFF-TOPIC... but this from the link Paq provided...

On January 2, 1963, a day after his last appearance on his program The Dick Powell Show aired, Dick Powell died of stomach cancer, likely a result of having directed The Conqueror amidst dust clouds of atomic test radiation in Utah (the United States Government had assured everyone that it was perfectly safe). Out of a cast and crew of 220 people, 91 contracted cancer by 1981, including John Wayne and Agnes Moorehead.[1]

Interesting...

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Paquadez

As a product, Television has outgrown its early product lifecycle.

All products go through various stages of market development: until they mature and head towards what is called Sunset Phase.

One of the core problems has been the competition between Terrestial (i.e.broadcast) TV, Satellite, and what was called originally "Q" TV (Or cable).

Right now we see the first phase of what is called "Convergence": this is the roll out of entertainment, communications (Both Voice and Datacom) and the internet into one delivery channel. Multiplex cinemas will shortly all be fed product via very wide data pipes and content streamed.

An unfortunate reality of the early competition is simply the lack of quality content: there is a finite resource of good actors, writers, presenters, directors and producers: and simply, there was insufficient to feed all available delivery channels.

One result of this reality was TV operators vying with each other to secure properties. Their first port of call were the major movie companies for broadcasting rights to the libraries.

With absence of quality content, then in their need to fill airtime, TV companies resorted to cheaply produced rubbish: which simply drove standards downwards, ever downwards.

When movies still reigned supreme, various smart people spotted the clear new opportunities offered by the new medium, TV and set-up dedicated production companies to feed the new market. Lucille Ball was one of the first, along with David Niven, Dick Powell, Ida Lupino and Charles Boyer, who started Four Star TV in 1952.

See here:

Originally Posted by Paquadez

If you consider the topic, subjectively and look from a quality perspective, then TV has sown the seeds of its own destruction: mainly since in the near future, thanks to convergence, the viewer will be enabled to select any full length movie from a vast library and choose quality viewing: free from dumb adverts. They will simply pay-to-view.

What's more; they can start viewing at a time and place to suit themselves: be it 4.00 AM.

Yea, I got the streaming Nexflix through the Wii thing now. Pretty limited selection, but for the price I pay and the convenience, there is little room to gripe.

But... again, I'm around to the same thing. The industry outside of broadcast TV is having to work around broadcast TV.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Actor and writer strikes along with increasing high production costs and a dwindling viewer base have certainly lowered the quality of broadcast TV. Cable, too.

No disagreement there.

I remember seeing an interview with Marta Kaufman (producer of Friends) talking about how there was an entire fleet of writers for Friends. How they would sit and test every episode, and every line, in front of a test audience.

But.. Karl Reiner wrote the Dick Van Dyke Show by himself. With most of it being impromptu and ad-lib.

The kiddos have picked up the Dick Van Dyke Show on the streaming Netflix thing, and love the show.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

..............

No problem here, but then I don't live in Texas

?

I thought you did.....my mistake.
Where are you located?

[buffoon]

Originally Posted by Stoner

?

I thought you did.....my mistake.
Where are you located?

I think Brad is an illegal and they've caught up with him, so now he's denying everything.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Stoner

?

I thought you did.....my mistake.
Where are you located?

My mistake, Stoner. I incorrectly quoted. I will fix it.

Yes, I live in the Great State of Texas.