Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by mreposter, Jul 1, 2010.
They are going to rerun episodes of these shows until they are so old that they ARE history.
Another problem is the trend toward more and more reruns. Many channels drift from their original focus, but the drift is also away from original/unique programming. Star Trek on BBCA is a typical example. If it were new episodes of a Star Trek series, that would be one thing, but reruns of 10+ year old shows?
Here's another, teen oriented shows with "real people" on the Cartoon Network? What's up with that? Well, at least these are new shows and not reruns from 10 years ago...
In fairness to SyFy, they are showing a lot of low budget scifi movies, but at least these are movies that haven't been run three dozen times already on other networks.....
There really needs to be a shakeout in all these duplicated, rerun channels.
I'm not so sure. In another forum I participate in, some members regularly extol the virtues of services such as This TV and Retro. These people relish reruns. And this is not a new phenomenon.
I hadn't viewed A&E in years, but since my cable company revamped its lineup, I now surf throiugh it and see that it should be renamed, "The Dash-Cam Channel". Are there really enough people with nothing better to do to watch that stuff?
I guess I stopped watching A&E when they got rid of the Mystery Movie, which I now see on RTV on Sunday afternoon. The problem with block-programming the Mystery Movie is that there were too few of them, as they only shot typically seven episodes of each series per year.
A few comments...
So... in other words, ESPN2 started "living up to it's name"?!
I can't speak for SyFi, but SyFy does!
"Warehouse 13", "Eureka", "Haven", "Sanctuary", "Stargate Universe", "Caprica", etc... And that's just their currently ongoing original series... not their syndicated programming, reruns, movies, or upcoming series like the American-ized version of "Being Human".
Sure, they air some "reality crap" and wrestling as well, but at least they're MOSTLY on-topic...
TCM still airs uncut movies... which I THOUGHT were commercial free?!
Ditto with FMC?!
One mistake BBC America has made is selling the rights to their original programming to other networks. SyFy did well with "Merlin" this Summer... and Starz will be getting the new season of "Torchwood".
ABC Family also airs original series and (occassionally) semi-original movies.
D-list (or better) celebs have just as much of a right to speak their mind about politics as the rest of us do. Personally, I believe in keeping my political beliefs to myself, but I've often found that those who criticize "celebs" for speaking about their beliefs, often have no problem speaking about theirs. I'm not criticizing you, but you've hit upon a "pet peeve" of mine...
I can't disagree with the rest of your comments about those channels though.
I think the problem with the BET name is that there would probably be a fuss if someone were to create a WET (no jokes, please) channel. There's nothing wrong with aiming your channel toward a demographic, but I personally find a more "generic" name to be more appropriate in this day and age. Centric and TVOne are far better names than BET...
Good programming... but yes, a very good example. However, I've noticed that they refer to themselves simply as GMC instead of mentioning what it stands for... sort of like how TNN dropped The Nashville Network prior to changing their name to Spike.
To be fair, it still kind of is...
I read an article this morning that reminded me of this thread. Generification (for lack of a better term) of services to better serve a more worthwhile objective has been happening for ever, and across myriad types of services. The article this morning highlighted the changes taking place in the 'Y'. The goal of the YMCA when it was founded was to put Christian principles into practice, achieved by developing "a healthy spirit, mind, and body." Over its history, it has genericized its focus, from just Christian principles, to "Judeo-Christian principles, to being more non-sectarian; and from focusing on boys and young men, to serving the needs of both genders.
An interesting parallel, as far as I'm concerned, especially since the most commented-about genericization on television is Syfy, and about half of that is due to its change in focus from serving the interests of boys and young men, to serving the interests of both genders and all ages. And, indeed, we could draw a similar parallel between the Y's change in religious focus to Syfy's change in "religious" focus between the "religion" of hardcore SF to serving more different "religious" perspectives on genre programming, including fantasy, horror, sci-fi romance, etc.
And you can also often find AA meetings held at the 'Y', something that has practically nothing to do with their mission other than fostering revenues, parallel to Syfy's handling of WWE.
That's the BBC in the U.K. that's making the "mistake." Although it's a different division within the same organization, the BBC is under no obligation to sell programming only to BBC America; they don't even have to offer BBCA the right of first refusal. (It's the same basic idea as, for example, the fact that 20th Century Fox Television programming doesn't only sell its programming to the Fox network.)
I'm sure the British people, who pay a tax on television and radio receivers to fund the BBC, appreciate them trying to get as much money as they can when selling their programming abroad; it helps to keep that tax lower.
Yeah, I meant to say BBC... and NOT BBC America... and yes, you are correct regarding the selling rights, but my point was that by selling the rights to some of their series to other networks, it may earn them more money, but it also weakens the BBC America network.
To continue to pick on BBC and BBC-A...
The BBC has at least four major networks in the UK (BBC-1, 2, 3, 4...) plus there's ITN, Channel 4 and a others. Surely BBC America can find enough good programming from these UK-based networks to fill up most of their schedule. Why do they need to instead turn to US shows like Star Trek TNG and Hollywood movies?
Bicker1 will probably chime in and say Star Trek and James Bond movies get better ratings and generate more ad revenue for BBC-A. But ultimately, it waters down the brand image of the network and if every network ends up with basically the same pool of programming do we really need 200 of them?
Agree with everything you just said...
For as much as I've piled on at Syfy and their changes... the choices at BBC-America are arguably more egregious, because they are airing shows that we could otherwise see on other channels... instead of showing unique British programming that they might very well have the exclusive rights to air in the US.
I like Star Trek, but even if I didn't own all the DVDs already, Syfy and a couple of other channels air those shows regularly. I much prefer to see BBC-America actually be BBC-America and show us quality British programming that we wouldn't otherwise see.
I know from watching Doctor Who that I already was a fan of... I've gained exposure to Graham Norton, Jonathan Ross, and Top Gear as they either come on the same night OR run commercials. They have other shows too, but the point is I get exposed to try new things I can't see on any other channel here in the US.
I don't have a problem with duplication of programming... not everybody gets the same channel, some programs might be aired in HD on one channel, not on the other, some might come on at different time... there are MULTIPLE reasons why I don't have a problem with duplication of programming.
James Bond is a series of movies about a British secret agent... I'm fine with the occasional airing. The books and movies even have a British connection.
Star Trek is a series that happens to star a British actor... playing a Frenchman.
I'd rather they focus on bringing British programming to America... regardless if it's British films or British TV shows. What I do have an issue with is the addition of programming that is neither a British series, or a series that has anything to do with the UK.
I would also put the original Pink Panther movies that starred Peter Sellers in this category.
The same could go for the Monty Python theatrical movies.
Yep! I'd have no problem with these either...
~Alan<~~~~~~~Who has two on Blu-ray...
First of all, it doesn't water anything down, since ST:TNG features a British actor, as lead, and James Bond movies are British productions entirely. They are both absolutely consistent with the mission of BBC America, to present British entertainment to American audiences.
Beyond that, I don't need to make the point that the overriding obligation of BBC America is to its owners' best long-term financial interests, since you've already done so. The reality is that niche programming as myopically defined as you seem to want it would be poor management, since it wouldn't earn enough revenue to justify its use of resources.
To be fair, there are so many ways to get movies now (legal or otherwise) HBO, etc. need something to get you to subscribe.
Versus wants the sports ESPN has, but they can't get them...yet.
And don't forget discovery. They created 5 other channels just to make room for American Chopper.
I gotta side on this one. A lot of tv shows aren't on DVD (and probably never will be) for all kinds of reasons, securing rights the most popular. And a lot of channels show series still on network TV; great catch-up opportunity *cough*Supernatural*cough*. And movies...odds are great you're gonna find a new favorite on TV one Saturday afternoon or at least something to laugh or cry about.