Originally Posted by rebkell
That is what is wrong with TV now, IMO. We get more and more stations and they all try to appeal to everybody. Seems like no matter what the station started out as, in time it tries to appeal to the masses more and more, maybe the reason people spend all their time multitasking is because nothing on tv is really worth investing time in.
The problem is, it's one of those circular situations. The less people pay attention, the less attention the shows require to watch to compensate for the lack of attention. The less attention the shows require to watch, the less people pay attention....
And if shows don't get good numbers immediately, then the show will get shuffled around or dropped completely, once a network starts fiddling with a show, they have given up and almost assuredly make sure of it's demise.
The biggest issue now that we didn't have years ago is that viewers now often know whether a show is doing well or not. So, when a show doesn't start out well, people figure it will be cancelled anyway and stop watching. That makes the numbers go down even more, which causes the network to dump it.
Years ago, viewers didn't have access to that information, so those that liked the show continued to watch because they liked the show. They went on happily watching a show, not knowing or caring if they were the only ones watching. The result: Years ago, aside from the obvious bombs right out of the gate, low rated shows normally didn't shed viewers the way they do now. That low, but steady viewership often allowed the networks time to tweak things a bit to get more people to notice it.
Don't forget, in the 70's and earlier, most people not only had no way to record a show, but few TVs had a factory included remote control. "Turning the channel" meant literally turning the channel knob. That meant, unless the lead in show sucked, many people would let one channel ride until something was bad enough to turn the channel - assuming there wasn't a specific show on another channel they really wanted to see.
Now, our DVRs record shows and allow us to watch them independent of the network and time slot it's on. Fewer of us are seeing the lead-in show than we used to. That means we often judge the show worthy of our time based on how long it sits on the hard drive before we watch it. It's buzz from the internet or our friends that makes us choose to watch a show sooner rather than later.
CBS is the one exception to the above. They have a lot of older skewing viewers that watch the way they always have: they tune in and tuck in for the evening. The lead-in, leads to the next and the next until the local news comes on. Not only that, but they are less likely to time shift, which means they see more commercials. Now, some would say that those people are usually set in their ways and are less influenced by the ads, but I say bull. I know quite a number of people over 55 that will try a product they saw on TV if it happens to go on sale one week or if their normal product isn't as good as it used to be. If older viewers aren't being swayed by ads it's because they aren't selling them in a way to appeal to things like economy, durability, reliability and ease of use. Instead, they sell everything as fast, flashy and does everything - and use technical terms that confuse them.Edited by NetworkTV - 5/7/13 at 9:48pm