|
Video Asylum TVs, VCRs, DVD players, Home Theater systems and more. |
For Sale Ads |
Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.
Original Message
A point of (slight) disagreement...
Posted by Jim Austin on September 8, 2009 at 11:07:55:
>>We have to remember: tv, radio, newspapers, magazines are sales
media first and foremost. Their supposed use or mission to
convey information or entertainment is but a thin veneer for their
real purpose. <<
In fact, for decades it was a decent content model: Free access to programming in return for viewing advertising. And it remains, in principle at least, a decent idea. You don't need to love television programming to agree that (eg) network news has had some great moments. That's free, ad-supported content protected by well-established (and in many media, still existing) editorial standards (specifically, a clear divide between editorial control and business interests). Of course that only ever applied to news; entertainment programming of decent quality has always relied for its existence on occasional high-minded producers and executives.
But my point is that your characterization, while it may describe the prevailing situation fairly well, is a little too cynical historically. Organizations with sound principles can still create principled content. It doesn't happen as often as I'd like, but it happens.
That said, I too find television nearly unwatchable. I despise commercials, which means that model I just defended works poorly for me. I often start watching something I'm interested in, turn the channel when a commercial comes on, then fail to find my way back to the show. The result: I just sit there flipping channels until I'm stupid.
Jim