PDA

View Full Version : Cable & Televsion - Archaic?


Nique
01-24-2009, 01:12 AM
I've been examining cable and satellite TV companies recently.

My first issue is that these companies play dirty - reputations for garnering favor with politicians and lobbyists in order to make sure certain laws don't get passed. Just as a for instance, picking channels individually instead of packaged? Cable companies like to give the impression to the consumer that this isn't possible or that it is not cost-effective (for consumers). This is an old issue but I think people don't always realize that the company is merely filtering channels artificially.

My second irk is the lack of simplicity. I'm pretty savvy with tech stuff - I manage my computers alright, I can program a VCR. But good god you ever look at a cable remote for the first time!? I'm certain that there are better methods of delivery. Channel guides are nice but programming cable boxes when things go awry is... well, its a waste of time.

Overall the entire idea of being required to pay for any kind of media you don't specifically purchase a physical copy of is becoming more and more archaic to me. We've got great new technologies that are being applied in old ways and according to old business practices. Cable is a dumb idea overall anyway - Sitting down at TV is, in my opinion, even more addicting than a computer. I mean, the content is always there on a computer, yes. But at least you can pick and choose what you want. Most people I know sit in front of a magic video box called TV and watch the worst things you could imagine just because its in a block of shows called 'must see teevee'!

Services like Netflix are a step in the right direction - a Flatfee cheaper than most cable packages to watch whatever you want when you want. Hulu is also a good example.

I really want to see to see digital media released for free because I love Art and I'm already spending so much of my sorely needed cash on the devices with which to experience it.

Zilla
01-24-2009, 05:08 AM
I know I don't watch television, and haven't for about 3 years. I do watch the Daily Show online now and then, and I buy anime DVD's, but I haven't turned on the TV to watch television for that long. Where I am now, we don't even have any kind of service, despite having 3 TV's in the living room and at least 3 more throughout the house. The only thing they are used for is video games and DVD's.

I think Internet killed the Video star.

bluestarultor
01-24-2009, 01:37 PM
Well, if you think of it this way, by buying packages, they can offer their customers a wide range of generalized products. Cartoon Network for the kids, Discovery for the adults to make the kids watch, Travel to drool over places you'll never see in real life after work, etc. If they let their customers pick individual channels, they'd need to worry about a channel price for each channel (because not all channels are created equal), complaints over price hikes when a channel gets popular, and, ironically, people probably asking for some sort of bundle deal for the channels they want. And having worked customer service, I know how hellish it is to argue with people over such important matters as what potato salads they can get with a chicken dinner. I can't even imagine what it would be like to have to worry about having hundreds of items to argue about.

On the whole, it's just less pain to keep it how it is. Besides, cable companies are delving into web service, anyway. Look at Charter. In the meantime, there are plenty of places to get the videos you want.

Daimo Mac, The Blue Light of Hope
01-24-2009, 01:43 PM
Well I rarely watch TV. The only shows I watch are ones I don't have on DVD (like Reboot and Mythbusters)

Other then that, yeah not a huge TV watcher.

Anything I want to watch, I can either wait for it to get onto DVD, or watch it online. One of the reasons I don't watch TV these days is that for the most part, shows suck, and what ever good show is on, is broken up because of commercials. Yes I know commercials help pay for programming, but they are still a pain in the ass to watch.

I have yet to see a new show that made me go, hmm I want to watch that.

Jagos
01-24-2009, 01:48 PM
If they let their customers pick individual channels, they'd need to worry about a channel price for each channel (because not all channels are created equal), complaints over price hikes when a channel gets popular, and, ironically, people probably asking for some sort of bundle deal for the channels they want...

Somehow, I have to think that's money on the table. It seems if there's more choices, more people may cover the cost of having to throw away bundles.

Lumenskir
01-24-2009, 05:45 PM
Cable is a dumb idea overall anyway - Sitting down at TV is, in my opinion, even more addicting than a computer. I mean, the content is always there on a computer, yes. But at least you can pick and choose what you want. Most people I know sit in front of a magic video box called TV and watch the worst things you could imagine just because its in a block of shows called 'must see teevee'!
Holy crap, you mean some people enjoy things you find shitty? No offense, but a television is not a mind-controlling device, so I'm guessing if they sit down and watch the worst things you can imagine at the same time every week they actually are probably enjoying the experience.

I guess I'll be the lone troglodyte of the forum and admit that I watch a shit ton of TV because theres a shit ton of enjoyable stuff to watch, and the best part about having a TV with cable hooked up to it is that it can easily become the common room TV where you sit down with a bunch of your friends and watch a show you all can enjoy and talk about together. I mean sure, I guess we could scrap the TV, watch everything we want off of torrents and Hulu individually, and then talk about it afterwards, but having done that with a few shows it honestly sucks. I like the communal aspect cable TV offers.

Nique
01-24-2009, 07:30 PM
I guess I'm not sure exactly what you think I was trying to say.

shiney
01-24-2009, 07:38 PM
I don't believe the medium is archaic, I believe the delivery methods are. Companies have too strong a control on the individual aspect of what content they are able to deliver and I would love to see a cable company breach the market with a channel-specific delivery method. Sure channels like USA, TNT, Comedy Central blah blah blah would come at a higher premium, but if it means I don't have to pay for CNN (I never watch CNN on TV) or the countless public access television stations, then yes I'd sign up. I could probably lower my price without sacrificing any of the channels I habitually watch.

It's just not cost-effective to the companies at the end of the day, which is why I don't have this option. But I believe this is closer to what you're getting at, Nique? Or are you saying something closer to "pay $30/mo get 'on demand' for any show at any time"?

Nique
01-24-2009, 09:18 PM
I think that ultimately anything that gives the consumer more freedom is good, and that includes a price range that is a responsible amount to spend on watching shows and movies.

Having anything you want on demand would be nice. I think it's maybe something that will come with time? All these different methods of communicating are being delivered by the same device; a computer, and with enough computer, you really should just be able to watch anything you want whenever you want.

In anycase, people take it in the rear paying for entertainment. Some restructuring would be nice now, but I guess what I want to see eventually is completely free media. You should have to pay for equipment in some fashion, but thats it. Maybe this is a larger subject for me than just cable...

Possum Knight
01-27-2009, 01:55 AM
As a Mass Communications major in college, we talk about this kind of thing a lot. TV has become a bit of a tricky thing to make money with, but not nearly as much as other media that are more likely to go by the wayside. Radio for instance.

I gurantee you that the only reason radio is still around is because some people don't have MP3 players or CD players and like various radio talk shows. Also it's free(relatively). Also its a medium that doesn't require sight so its perfect while driving. Then theres the newspaper which has a whole bunch of problems of its own. it can't keep up with the speed of internet updates and the rate of which news can be broadcast to people and lots of other problems i won't get into.

TV won't be the first thing to go by the wayside, for sure. While the internet is what they call "convergence media" in that is can do news, "TV", and radio on its own, each other media has their own pros to make themselves unique just enough to save their hides.....for now.

Jagos
01-27-2009, 02:00 AM
Technology will always change mediums. From newspaper to internet, I doubt highly that other media will just fade away. Rather, they'll have to make changes based on money as well as consumer demand.