Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 3287 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 646Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #98581 of 98587 Old Today, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DoubleDAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Peoria, AZ (75 Ave & T-Bird)
Posts: 9,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubetwister View Post
It seems to me anyway traditional network TV and a lot of cable channels are going the cheap to produce junk reality show route and when not airing that they are going for the stereotypical low brow programming and not much caring about quality save for maybe a few shows mentioned above amidst all the garbage .

OTOH FX "The Americans" and WGN America's "Manhattan" are good examples of what is possible I may have missed some others but these are decent IMO.
It seems to me that as long as viewers watch, nothing will change, not that it necessarily should. We all seem to think that our definition of "good" is the right one and that only the shows we like should get produced/broadcast. If it were up to me, there'd only be one sitcom on and only 2 sporting events (poker and NHRA). I'm quite sure not many here would be happy with that.


And did it ever occur to you that the so-called "junk" pays for the other stuff we like?


As long as I can change the channel and find something I enjoy, I'm quite satisfied. And the DVR let's me exclude commercials, so I'm also okay with 42 minutes of actual content just as some are okay with 20 minutes of comedy. For me it's like reading a book. I don't just read the thick ones, I read the thin ones too. Enjoyment is my measure, not length.
Nayan likes this.

Cheers, Dave
DoubleDAZ is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #98582 of 98587 Old Today, 06:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 3,322
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubetwister
Hopefully at least ABC isn't giving him a pass and will let Katie Couric get hard with him .
Quote:
Originally Posted by humdinger70 View Post
Ouch! Isn't that an oxymoron?
After I posted it I kinda figured that could be interpreted in various ways so lets substitute contrarian and confrontational !

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZ
And did it ever occur to you that the so-called "junk" pays for the other stuff we like?
Sure there is business case for that OTOH with viewership declining at most networks (other than sports ) one could make a business case for better programing also . ☺It seems like IPTV and some cable channel original programming shows are showing the way but the network types may be asleep at the wheel !

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -

Last edited by tubetwister; Today at 07:10 PM.
tubetwister is online now  
post #98583 of 98587 Old Today, 07:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubetwister View Post
It seems to me anyway traditional network TV and a lot of cable channels are going the cheap to produce junk reality show route and when not airing that they are going for the stereotypical low brow programming and not much caring about quality save for maybe a few shows mentioned above amidst all the garbage .
Exactly. The programming executives have free will, and they have freely chosen to prefer bad over good. They have chosen to care about maximizing profits more than about delivering a decent product.
tubetwister likes this.
veedon is offline  
post #98584 of 98587 Old Today, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DoubleDAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Peoria, AZ (75 Ave & T-Bird)
Posts: 9,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubetwister View Post
Sure there is business case for that OTOH with viewership declining at most networks (other than sports ) one could make a business case for better programing also . ☺It seems like IPTV and some cable channel original programming shows are showing the way but the network types may be asleep at the wheel !
TV viewership might be declining, but much of that is simply because there are a myriad of ways to view things now, most of which are not part of the ratings metric, and there are so many more outlets for our attention. Quality of even the best content can always be improved, but that's no guarantee that viewership would increase and who's to say what needs to be improved or how. Some of the best shows have been cancelled before the first year was up, so it still boils down to one's definition of "good" vs someone else's. I look at the popularity ratings on Netflix and wonder who the heck is watching this stuff. What it proves to me is that someone will watch almost anything, like Syfy Saturday night movies. And cable channels don't need near the viewership numbers to make something profitable and they don't have the same constraints, but take a poll of everyone's Top 10 and I think you'd be surprised at just how many shows make someone's list. Heck, I would be surprised if some MeTV and RetroTV shows didn't make someone's list. Then too, when networks pay some bozo millions to read a teleprompter and call it news or pay someone to talk about nothing of substance for hours on end and call it entertainment, it's understandable why their dramas and sitcoms are popular in spite of quality, or lack of.

Cheers, Dave
DoubleDAZ is offline  
post #98585 of 98587 Old Today, 08:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 3,322
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleDAZTV
viewership might be declining, but much of that is simply because there are a myriad of ways to view things now,
One can view the networks on any number of devices now even more network iptv streaming is opening up every day so that may not hold water for long maybe the network execs use that excuse for a crutch to explain their decline and lack of innovation when being interviewed or talking to investors? OTOH the exigent pressure for short term profits by their investors and parent co's may not leave room for risk and innovation so they just work in circles it seems .

Most traditional broadcast network shows are available on the web the next day folks can watch them on just about anything now although they might not monetize as well there so that could be a legitimate problem for them.

Quote:
Quality of even the best content can always be improved, but that's no guarantee that viewership would increase and who's to say what needs to be improved or how.
Be that as it may they aren't in most cases attempting to make just good content so best isn't an adjective I would attribute to the broadcast networks. Nielsen ratings ,polls and measurement systems by their own admission (Nielsen's) are flawed and antiquated so the ratings networks base programming decisions may be somewhat invalid. ofc good programming should be effectively scheduled also some good shows probably got cancelled early due to
poor scheduling decisions .

Quote:
take a poll of everyone's Top 10 and I think you'd be surprised at just how many shows make someone's list.
No argument there I'm surprised at some of the drivel some folks watch but if that's all they know that's what they will watch if they watch .
Most TV programming is circling the drain but you are right people watch it so it may be around for a while .

Quote:
Then too, when networks pay some bozo millions to read a teleprompter and call it news or pay someone to talk about nothing of substance for hours on end and call it entertainment, it's understandable why their dramas and sitcoms are popular in spite of quality, or lack of.
Some of the TV and entertainment personalities and executive compensation is way out of line to what they contribute much like *some of the executive compensation in business now and then and *some TV and Hollywood stars maybe more of that money should go to better programming or the balance sheets or the rank and file.

It can work both ways the good talking heads can often be more interesting than some of the silly dramas they make now save for a few and almost all of the sitcoms ofc the 'other talking heads' (the one's I don't like) ☺☺ aren't good for much of anything !☺☺


Quote:
And cable channels don't need near the viewership numbers to make something profitable and they don't have the same constraints
It could be the traditional business model is broken and something innovative like iptv (or like iTunes did with music ) will eventually flush it out in the marketplace anyway .

Ofc these are just some of my opinions and speculations so they might not be true on some points or valid for everyone .

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -

Last edited by tubetwister; Today at 09:18 PM.
tubetwister is online now  
post #98586 of 98587 Old Today, 10:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
dad1153's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 36,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 199
TV Notes
Goodbye, Nation. Goodbye, Blowhard Self.
Stephen Colbert Prepares Final 'Colbert Report'
By Bill Carter, The New York Times - Dec. 17, 2013

For nine years, Stephen Colbert has relentlessly maintained his pompous, deeply ridiculous but consistently appealing conservative blowhard character on his late-night show, “The Colbert Report” — so much so that when he puts the character to rest for good on Thursday night, he may have to resort to comicide. The Grim Reaper is his last guest.

Devoted fans of “The Colbert Report” (the final T is silent) have dreaded this day since April 10, when their favorite late-night star announced that he was leaving to become the successor to David Letterman on CBS.

Mr. Colbert has steered clear of commenting on his plans for the last show, other than on-air comments that the end is near. But whatever comic exercise Mr. Colbert devises to end his multi-award-winning run on Comedy Central, including perhaps some symbolic hara-kiri for the character he brought into American homes four nights a week, he has left an indelible mark on late-night television comedy.

And he did it in a way almost no one thought was possible, or sustainable: as a fake host, a fictional character using Mr. Colbert’s own name who was an elaborate parody of a bloviating political talk show host.

Jimmy Kimmel, the host of ABC’s late-night show, with whom Mr. Colbert shares a manager (James Dixon), said he had been concerned when Mr. Colbert announced his intention to create the parody show in 2005.

“I remember pleading with Dixon to tell Stephen it was a terrible mistake to do a character the whole time,” Mr. Kimmel said. “That it wasn’t going to last, and also not to name the show ‘The Report’ as a joke. It was just going to confuse everybody. And he did, anyway, and of course, it was a smashing success in every way.”

Mr. Colbert appeared in character not simply on his show, but in appearances elsewhere, including a memorable knockout performance at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in 2006. (He stirred Bush administration outrage with comments like: “I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least, and by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.”) He even remained at his blowhard best when he testified before Congress in 2010. (Before a Congressional subcommittee on immigration issues and farm labor, Mr. Colbert’s character said things like, “Maybe the easier answer is just to have scientists develop vegetables that pick themselves.”)

Mr. Colbert has worked with many of his late-night colleagues, including Conan O’Brien and Jimmy Fallon, appearing in character, of course. (He showed up on Mr. Fallon’s debut “Tonight” show on NBC, pouring a bucket of pennies down the host’s collar, then welcoming him with a colorful phrase.)

Like other competitors, Mr. Fallon professed unabashed awe that Mr. Colbert could sustain this performance at such a high level for so long. “Before he won the Emmy, I had been preaching that people had to recognize what he was doing: He’s faking a person,” Mr. Fallon said. “I was one of those who said, ‘He’ll do it for six months and then he’ll move on.’ Imagine if you were still trying to do the Coneheads on ‘Saturday Night Live.’ It’s gets old. But not this. He’s a genius.”

Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
But for all the effort and talent Mr. Colbert has invested in keeping the character going, he appears resolute in his intention to allow him to pass into comic history. This decision, Mr. O’Brien said, reflects tremendous confidence. “There is something really cool about Stephen saying, ‘This needs to stop at some point, so let’s stop now,’ ” he said.

In some cases, a classic comic creation defines a performer for life. Jack Benny was long associated with being a cheapskate, butchering his violin playing and lying about his age. Classic comic characters are often too fully realized to abandon.

Mr. O’Brien said that hanging on to a persona was an American convention, while British performers seem willing to walk away from their signature creations. He cited John Cleese’s Basil Fawlty and Steve Coogan’s Alan Partridge (a narcissistic media personality), though Mr. Coogan has resurrected Partridge a few times.

Ricky Gervais has also recently revived David Brent, the bumbling manager he portrayed on the British version of “The Office,” in live concert performances. “I did consider not bringing him back to life,” Mr. Gervais said. But in a new context — Brent as would-be rock star — the character could be seen as realistically having moved on.

“What’s interesting about what Colbert is doing,” Mr. Gervais said in an interview, “what’s brave and possibly confusing about it, is that he’s always used his own name.” He added: “It can be a dangerous game to play. He presented himself as the character, and now he’s not going to be it. And people are going to miss the character. It’s a joy to watch someone do a really great parody with a character saying the opposite of what you know is right.”

That is the essence of what is upsetting so many of Mr. Colbert’s fans. While moving up to a bigger stage is in the tradition of late-night stars pushing their careers forward — as Mr. Letterman, Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Kimmel have all done — none of those moves have required a singular comic character’s disappearing forever.

Some who have worked on “The Colbert Report” have said that Mr. Colbert was tiring of the demands of constantly staying in character, and that he had subtly been doing pieces that did not depend on it. (His recent skewering of sweep month excesses by “Good Morning, America” was a comedic tour de force with little connection to his character.)

Mr. O’Brien commended Mr. Colbert for breaking what he called the American tradition. “Our system is, if there’s another nickel to be found in it, you keep playing that character,” he said, “just beat it to death — and then do it another 10 years.”

He added: “You always have performers saying, ‘I think I’ll go out on top, while it’s still great.’ And then it’s a sitcom, ‘Who’s the Boss?,’ and it’s the 18th season, and you’re like: ‘Tony, I like you, but ... .’ This is one of the few times when a performer is saying, ‘I want to get out while it’s still great,’ and it’s actually true.”

But going out on a slab — if that’s Mr. Colbert’s plan? “I think that’s a really funny idea,” Mr. Kimmel said. “And it would make it clear to people that he’s not that character anymore.”

Mr. Gervais agreed: “As surreal as that would be, it does make people get it. ‘I was that character, and that character is dead now. Do you get it? This is me now.’ ”

And then, presumably, Stephen Colbert can turn up next September on CBS as Mr. Letterman’s successor and be quickly accepted as a real talk show host.

“I think he’ll be great and funny, and people are going to still enjoy him plenty on that level,” Mr. O’Brien said. “And then, every now and then, there’ll be a cooking segment.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/bu...elevision&_r=0
dad1153 is online now  
post #98587 of 98587 Old Today, 10:51 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
dad1153's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 36,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 293 Post(s)
Liked: 199
TV Notes
BET veteran Stephen Hill promoted to president of programming
By Greg Braxton, Los Angeles Times - Dec. 17, 2014

T Networks have named BET veteran Stephen Hill as its president of programming, signifying an apparent change in leadership strategy for the cable network that targets African Americans.

Hill, who has been at BET for more than 15 years and most recently was president of music programming and specials, will succeed Loretha Jones, who departed in September following a six-year stint as head of original programming, news and development.

In the newly created position, Hill will oversee original programming, music programming, specials and BET news divisions. He will report to Debra L. Lee, chairman and CEO of BET Networks, and will continue to be based in New York.

Hill has been credited with developing one of BET's most popular shows, "Real Husbands of Hollywood," a mock-reality series starring Kevin Hart.

His appointment may indicate a change in direction for the network, which had brought in two Hollywood insiders to help BET become more prominent in the crowded network arena.

Jones, who was a former movie exec and producer, was instrumental in developing BET's first scripted drama, "Being Mary Jane," which is preparing to return for a second season.

Her predecessor, Reginald Hudlin, who was a director and writer when he was brought in to BET as president of entertainment in 2005, was fired in 2008 despite an aggressive programming agenda.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...217-story.html
dad1153 is online now  
Reply HDTV Programming

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off