Too many channels

[b]Is it just me or is the abundence of TV channels the reason that there is hardly anything worth watching?
Apart from BBC 4 every thing seems so boreing.In the days when we had only two channels then later three, we used to argue about what to watch.
Now they want you to pay to see what you saw free years ago.Another plus to just a few channels was most people watched the same things,
so at work next day you could chat about what you saw.Now if you say did you see so and so,most say never heard of it or I was watching something
else or the snobs say Oh I am too busy to ever watch telly(that 40" screen thing in the corner is just to fill a space)Having said all that less than 200 channels would do my head in.

Well, I can't really say I would want to go back to 2 or 3 channels. I agree that with so many channels there really doesn't seem to be a lot I want to watch, but going back to just a few channels means even more annoyances. For instance, having your shows preempted due to a presidential speech or a news event ("We now return you to your show already in progress") or having entire blocks of time used up by banal sit-coms, sports events, and highly edited and shortened movies you've already seen.

Cable television could do better with programming, though, especially now that, here in the States at least, just about every channel is showing mostly scripted reality shows that are almost carbon copies of each other.

For instance, the History Channel, a channel I've pretty much written off as useless, aired a show called "Swamp People" which is about people living in the deep south hunting alligators with their hands. Because that was successful, they produced another show called "Hillbilly Hand Fishin'" which is about people in the deep south catching fish with their hands. And that, in turn, spun off another show called "American Hoggers" about people in the deep south hunting wild boars with their hands. I mean, seriously ...

The competitive scripted reality shows - the kind where people are voted or judged off the show - are even worse. There is actually a scripted reality show where people compete to be the host of the next scripted reality show!

The problem for the lack of options on cable television despite the number of channels lies with the viewers, not the cable companies. The cable channel producers gravitate toward the shows that generate the highest advertising revenue, and the more popular a show, the more the producers can charge businesses for advertising. Therefore, if a monumentally stupid show like "Swamp People" generates high advertising revenue, you're going to see a hundred clones of that show all over the airwaves. Plus, scripted reality shows are cheap as dirt to produce. You don't have to pay big bucks to high-priced talent every episode. Instead, you get the general public to do all the work and pay them little or nothing. They're just ecstatic about being on a television show.

You must have missed "Watchdog" and similar intellectual stimulation.

Ney lad,I never miss watchdog.I do think they have spoiled it by combining rogue traders.It was best when Nicky Cambel did it.

Martin Lewis is the most knowledgeable and informative of the current team of Presenters.

I have noticed lately that ITV,during the breaks are putting on trailor after trailor.This must mean that they have no adverts to show.That means they have no money comming in.That means,before long,no more ITV.

Quote : "That means,before long,no more ITV"


We can but hope.......

But people have been conditioned to pay Sky £300 a year to watch adverts.

I like Swamp People actually, and shows like it.

I like Swamp People actually, and shows like it.

The shows themselves aren't the problem for me. It's the fact that they're being shown on the History Channel. As someone with a passion for history, it would have been nice if they stuck with shows and documentaries with historical relevance and let other channels carry the reality shows. I'm waiting for ESPN to stop showing sports and instead air sports-related reality shows LOL!

I agree. It is not history. But I do not agree that it is "monumentally stupid".

TV these days is more like a magazine rack...specialty channels everywhere.

What I meant by "monumentally stupid" was the stupidity in letting the show infiltrate a channel where it didn't belong. I've never actually watched the show, so I have no idea if the show itself is stupid, but I do find the invasion of reality shows to every channel "monumentally stupid." I think it is even MORE stupid that scripted reality shows keep cloning themselves. They're like a virus that multiplies copies of itself. Just look at the sheer number of pawn shop and auction shows that have exploded onto the scene all because "Pawn Stars" was successful.

I don't mind "Pawn Stars" too much since at least there is a little history involved with it, but do we really need 10 more shows just like it on 5 other channels? I freely admit I find it highly irritating.

Since the explosion of channels, quality has gone down the drain, and the reason is because there is only so much advertising revenue out there.

I can vividly remember been told by both British people who visited the United States, and by Americans visiting this country, that although we only had 3 or 4 channels and the Americans had dozens, if not hundreds, there was nothing to watch, and that the quality of British TV was far superior.

In the 1970s and 1980s we had a proper local TV station, with local news, regional sports programmes, regional documentarys with continuity announcers that talked about your area, your town or city, we were always on the boundry between Tyne Tees and Yorkshire.

A typical nights viewing (ITV) 5.45 ITN News 6.00 Regional News 6.30 Celebrity Squares 7.00 Bless This House 7.30 Coronation Street 8.00 Tommy Cooper 8.30 World In Action 9.30 George and Mildred 10.00 News At Ten 10.35 Film 00.00 Big Match Highlights 00.45 Close

A typical nights viewing (BBC1) 6.00 Evening News 6.30 Local News 7.00 Tomorrows World 7.30 Top Of The Pops 8.00 Angels 9.00 BBC 9 O Clock News 9.30 Not The 9 O Clock News 10.00 Panorama 10.45 Sportsnight With David Coleman 11.30 Late Film 0100 Close

Today every other programme has the word "celebrity" in the title and features people who you have never heard of, but who are apparently celebreties.

The quality of TV output today compared with 30 years ago is absolute rubbish, until the late 1980s most programmes on British TV was home made in this country, and quality, today programmes are either cheap imports or cheap made here, or in the case of Sky and Gold, simply repeats from last week, last year, 2 years ago or 20 years ago.

The best thing that could happen would be to get rid of Sky and reduce the number of channels down to around half a dozen, or 10 at the most, there would be a return to good quality TV because revenue would not be so thinly spread.

Nobody seems to have noticed that the biggest single beneficiary of the change from analog to digital broadcasting has been Richard Murdoch.

The quality of TV as gone down the drain since the advent of multie channels.
Take a look at this masterpiece from 1973.
It was made by the BBC just for tv.
To my mind it can hold its head to most west end shows.Enjoy.

We can't say we weren't warned. Mass Popular entertainment has followed the American pattern since the 1930s.
When there were only three television channels in the UK, people like David Frost who regularly commuted to the US told us how there was a multiplicity of channels there which were totally in thrall to advertising and "market share". If one broadcaster had a success with a particular format, all the other competing channels would put on a similar program at the same time.

If one broadcaster had a success with a particular format, all the other competing channels would put on a similar program at the same time.

This is one of the major downsides of capitalism and profit motive. Success creates a shark effect, and all of the niche markets are ignored. So unless you're a part of the mainstream and like what everyone else likes, it's difficult to get serviced anywhere - your wants simply are not met. As everyone rushes to jump onto the newest profit bandwagon, all of the lesser profitable endeavors are tossed into the bin.

I have no clue what programming is like in the UK, but of course in the USA, everything is about reality programming. Even the documentary channels have switched to a quasi-reality format involving "teams of experts" doing real-time experiments to confirm historical facts that - well - we already knew. But the point of putting in these "teams" is so there is room for drama, disagreement, and in-fighting among the team members because that's what it's really all about, not the information.

The movie industry has settled into endless remakes of movies that aren't even that old - and if I were a child of the 80's, I'd be a little miffed that the movie and music industries are doing a damn fine job of erasing the 80's culture and supplanting it with today's culture. So, in another 20 or 30 years when the next generation decides to watch Footloose, they're going to get today's music, today's lingo, today's culture, and if they ever hear about the 1984 original version, they'll say, "Wow, I didn't know the 2011 version was a remake!"

Music has been stuck on hip-hop for the last 10 years in addition to the standard "pop diva" fare.

Even video games have all moved to MMOs once they saw World of Warcraft receiving 11 million subscribers, all paying $10/month. Hmm, $110 million per month is huge for a gaming company. So now most companies are dedicating themselves to MMOs and first person shooters. All other genres are hard to come by.

It wasn't always this way ... everyone wasn't such a sell-out. But with the economy as it is, everyone is looking for the biggest - and safest - dollar.

Well to be honest apart from a couple of sports,,and a few soaps(that my missus forces me to watch),,i have little time for tv and see it as nothing more than the lefty socialist propaganda machine that it is,,the BBC'S disgusting promotion of lesbianism and homosexuality coupled with their promotion of multiculturalism and political corectness,,are simply too much of a burden for me to carry,,their so called flagship soap op (eastenders) winning all these awards for it's portrayal of real life,,yet my local boozer closed down with the smokin ban,,yet the queen vic remains unaffected,,my local area is now flooded with east europeans,,yet not 1 single east european lives on albert square,and there are more homosexuals living on albert square than their are in real life,,the other night it put up a telephone number asking people who had been affected by christians dilema to phone them( i guess they are paying these people who man the phones),,anyway i thought,,well do i know any homosexual men who are about to marry a homosexual muslim and adopt a baby,,but then whos ex-wife and real child has turned up, while at the same time an underage homosexual who slept with his own underage blood relative fancied said gay man and then accuses him of being a paedo because he didnt fancy him.........and then i thought,,,,,no i dont know anyone like that at all and also thought that the scriptwriter must be one of those really dirty minded strange gay people who would have gay sex in front of your kids or something and then say to you "yeah what you looking at?),,

the news..load of rubbish..all left wing propaganda


films..music..and games

well if after i have illegaly downloaded one of the above and it proves to actually be good,,then i may pop down the shops and buy it..as i could never live with myself if i went out and bought SHIT.

some people will think that is wrong,,,but i dont

what i do think is wrong is that someone like subo and jedward are able to rake in $200 million record deals,,for being so shit.

All those pointed hats have not been manufactured in vain.

[b]To day Freesat got 5 new channels,new to them that is.Great,I am a Freesat user and am pleased to see it expand.
The thing is who the hell watches CH5 let alone it,s repeates.
What we really want is ITV1+1 ITV2 and ITV3 in HD.
By the way as anyone watched the CBS channels?
Great adverts and trailers,only spoiled by the odd prog.

Richard Desmond, the owner of the Daily Express and Daily Star, bought Five Group from entertainment network RTL for £104m earlier this year.

Mr Desmond made his millions from "Top-shelf" magazines.

Give it time for Channel Five to change focus.

[b]A few days ago I became a senior citizen.
A few weeks ago I became a second class citizen.
Why? Because of where I live.
The town I live in is surrounded by moors on one side
the north sea on the other.
Because of the moors we cannot receive a TV signal from the
main transmitter for our area Bilsdale.
This means we have a relay mast to serve the town.
All parts of Britain who have the same problem are in the
same boat as us.Less channels.
At digital switch over those of us with relay masts were only
allowed the basic channels.
Yes all BBC but only a limited service from the others.
No ITV3 or 4.no film4 no Sky news etc.
Why when these channels are on the same main transmitters that
relay the ones that we do get?
This smacks of discrimination to me.
Over to cutting edge think tank.

Yes oftenwrong.I know all about Freesat,I have had it since it came out.
The point I am making is why can some have something and not others.
By the way allthough there are more channels on Freesat.Freeview has 8 channels that Fsat does not have.

True Socialist principles, deployed in complaining on behalf of others less fortunate.