I think the easiest way to fix that "you'd never know about any new channels" issue is to make it like pay per vue. They already advertise other channels - that's how I found out about the Science channel in the first place. I was watching Dirty Jobs and there was an advert for 'Wreckreation Nation' (or something like that) on the Science Chan - they were going to drop an 'ex marine' into what looked a lot like a Darkon scrimage. That caught my attention and I actively sought it out. Now, if I had to call some operator and place an order for the channel and have my bill increase next month I might not have bothered. But things don't have to be that complicated.
The digital cable boxes are capable of a whole hell of a lot more than what they're used for now. There's no reason why they can't do channel adverts or have preview times where you get a sneak peek of some content - say a minute or so to hook you. If you then want the channel you then just click 'Buy' or something and it's added to your bill for 30 days or something.
To continue your democracy analogy, just because it's broke doesn't mean we have to just accept the fact that it's broke now and not do anything about it. If we do that, nothing would ever change because nobody's trying to force the issue. Innovation is one of the things that makes this country great - and it's something I give both corporations and government cred for - a lot of innovation comes from. Nobody wanted HDTV or Blueray when it first became available ten years ago because it was too damned expensive for one - but nobody saw a utility for it. A lot of people didn't want digital cable either - now the regular OTA channels are going digital and your old school rabbit ears style TV's are supposed to stop working in February.
Things can change and they can change for the better. All it takes is motivation and that's part of the problem. I think what is stifling innovation is not the price to start a new channel - hell a college student with a decent enough mac can create his own channel on one of the live streaming services for free and have ten million people watching his show a year. That's the kind of coverage that networks dream about. What stifles innovation is that there is no actual competition between content carriers so the same people offer the same BS year after year. Since there's no real competition between carriers content creators can create thirty seven versions of the same bullshit. All the decisions on what shows to carry and cancel end up being made by the same cabal of idiots in a boardroom based on their own prejudices and preconceptions. The same thing happened in the auto industry.
I give you exhibit A. Reality TV.
How many "eat gross shit" shows do we really need? How many 'dancing/singing B-lister' shows do we need? How many "drop some dork into the jungle" shows do we need? How many meat market pseudo dating shows do we need? How many 'Top Model' or 'Top Chef' shows do we need? How many asshole drunken celebrity family shows do we need?
You may say "They make them because they're popular", which was true in the beginning when you only had a few. Now the market is so diluted that the market share of any one content provider is shrinking rapidly. It's like being McDonalds and then having McHuges', McDade's, McDougals and McDonough's all opening up in the same market. With the market so saturated people are starting to get sick of it so they're turning out. But people are still making these stupid shows.
Another possible solution is to offer more packages. Instead of just "You get a choice of HBO, Cinimax or Starz", you pick a package of "Discovery, Science, Military, HBO and The Crappy Reality Show network along with the local channels for $40 a month". I could deal with that, they'd just need to provide a package closer to what I like. I could take 10 or 15 extra spam channels to get the 20 I want. But what I'm getting is 870 spam channels (a good many I can't even access if I don't pay an extra fee anyway) for the 20 I do want and I'm being reamed on the price as a result.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Response Part I
Date: 2008-12-31 11:49 pm (UTC)The digital cable boxes are capable of a whole hell of a lot more than what they're used for now. There's no reason why they can't do channel adverts or have preview times where you get a sneak peek of some content - say a minute or so to hook you. If you then want the channel you then just click 'Buy' or something and it's added to your bill for 30 days or something.
To continue your democracy analogy, just because it's broke doesn't mean we have to just accept the fact that it's broke now and not do anything about it. If we do that, nothing would ever change because nobody's trying to force the issue. Innovation is one of the things that makes this country great - and it's something I give both corporations and government cred for - a lot of innovation comes from. Nobody wanted HDTV or Blueray when it first became available ten years ago because it was too damned expensive for one - but nobody saw a utility for it. A lot of people didn't want digital cable either - now the regular OTA channels are going digital and your old school rabbit ears style TV's are supposed to stop working in February.
Things can change and they can change for the better. All it takes is motivation and that's part of the problem. I think what is stifling innovation is not the price to start a new channel - hell a college student with a decent enough mac can create his own channel on one of the live streaming services for free and have ten million people watching his show a year. That's the kind of coverage that networks dream about. What stifles innovation is that there is no actual competition between content carriers so the same people offer the same BS year after year. Since there's no real competition between carriers content creators can create thirty seven versions of the same bullshit. All the decisions on what shows to carry and cancel end up being made by the same cabal of idiots in a boardroom based on their own prejudices and preconceptions. The same thing happened in the auto industry.
I give you exhibit A. Reality TV.
How many "eat gross shit" shows do we really need? How many 'dancing/singing B-lister' shows do we need? How many "drop some dork into the jungle" shows do we need? How many meat market pseudo dating shows do we need? How many 'Top Model' or 'Top Chef' shows do we need? How many asshole drunken celebrity family shows do we need?
You may say "They make them because they're popular", which was true in the beginning when you only had a few. Now the market is so diluted that the market share of any one content provider is shrinking rapidly. It's like being McDonalds and then having McHuges', McDade's, McDougals and McDonough's all opening up in the same market. With the market so saturated people are starting to get sick of it so they're turning out. But people are still making these stupid shows.
Another possible solution is to offer more packages. Instead of just "You get a choice of HBO, Cinimax or Starz", you pick a package of "Discovery, Science, Military, HBO and The Crappy Reality Show network along with the local channels for $40 a month". I could deal with that, they'd just need to provide a package closer to what I like. I could take 10 or 15 extra spam channels to get the 20 I want. But what I'm getting is 870 spam channels (a good many I can't even access if I don't pay an extra fee anyway) for the 20 I do want and I'm being reamed on the price as a result.