TV being spoilt by choice
I think with the abundance of channels TV has watered itself down too much to be a viable source of nightly entertainment.
I follow maybe, at my peak, five shows, which gives me an hour a night spread out over a week's viewing.
When you have three or four channels you can show decent stuff most of the time and cater to most people. But as channels grow in numbers, the quality content available isn't really meeting the demand and therefore more filler shows (which seem to be reality shows and talent shows at the moment) are created to justify having those channels for people to spend their money on.
With fewer channels you can put up with some fluff; you maybe watch a show you love, a show you enjoy but wouldn't record and a show just because nothing else is on at that time. With 100 channels the good stuff gets lost and you just end up seeing brain rot most of the time.
New Zealand is in an advantageous position in that we can see what is happening to American TV and we can stop it happening here.
We need to tighten up the schedules, reduce channels, improve the payment model (al la carte, anyone?) to keep relevance as we move ever towards an over-the-internet society.
Which reader's plan would you support?Related story: (See story)