The explosion of cable networks since the early 80’s was supposed to bring a cornucopia of choice to US TV audiences, but plenty of cable networks that started by aiming at narrow audience niches have remade themselves to grab for the big general interest audience that has been migrating away from broadcast television for more than a generation. What was hoped to be a diversity in programming has become a vanilla soup of reality and broadcast repeats.
This isn’t a new trend, but it was highlighted again this week by discussions about SCI FI changing its name to Syfy. One stated reason is so they could have a trademarkable name, but their intent to shift away from their science fiction, fantasy, paranormal programming roots towards more general interest fare is likely the biggest driver.
Bravo was originally dedicated to indie film, drama and the performing arts to reality, makeover, fashion and celebrity. Six of the top 10 audiences on the network last week were for Real Housewives of New Jersey.
TLC, originally The Learning Channel, began as “a place for learning minds”. Is now featuring “life surprises”. Like the surprise of an overexposed mediafied family imploding in public. Jon & Kate Plus 8 had 8 of the top 20 audiences on the network last week.
A&E, no longer Arts & Entertainment, ceased being about biographies, documentaries and drama some time ago. Now it’s all reality and broadcast reruns.
The four networks I highlighted in the graphic above were just the first that came to mind, they’re certainly not the only ones. As I said in comments on the Syfy press release, I can’t fault these networks for grabbing for bigger audiences on business reasons. That audience shift away from broadcast networks is a once in an industry trend. Once it slows down, it’ll be a lot harder to gain audience share.
But where do the niches go now? Smaller cable networks? Hulu? You Tube? Digital multicast channels?
Great article! Growing up, I remember watching A&E with my grand-parents. And you’re right, it has changed so much.
Same with TLC.
By the way, Bravo in Canada has managed to stay in its roots. We don’t get most of your reality shows on that channel. The network however airs repeats of great dramas like Law and Order, Without a Trace, Dexter, Mad Men, and Southland. But those aren’t during primetime, they are either during the day, or after midnight.
So Bravo in Canada atleast has stayed the course.
A bigger problem is that all these cable nets were sold to the providers on the basis of their original promises.
Now the are all basic net, being subsidized, for the most party, by people who never watch them but are forced to pay nonetheless.
It is a mess and only an a la carte system,, or some version of bundled cable networks, will ever heal it.
Or else we will end up with 25 channels of “general interest” — all paid for by people who don’t have a choice to opt out.
Too bad GM and Chryslar didn’t figure o0ut a similar business plan.
I think this is only an issue for those with only basic cable. Once you go to expanded cable and digital cable, specialized cable networks are plentiful.
The cable networks that by hook or crook (literally if you think about those two words!) are sort of the broadcast networks of cable TV. They’re the most carried cable TV networks. They have the best shot of getting the general audience because of this.
For those that got into the basic cable TV packages, they feel that their place in them is assured. Even if they got into basic by being a niche channel (the cable TV carrier wanting to offer variety in their basic packages), they feel now that they’re in, they can do as they like. They feel entitled to their spot. However, the only thing it takes is for the major cable TV carriers to go, “Oh, you’re no longer a niche channel? Then we’ll replace you with one that is doing what you were saying you were going to do.” One major cable TV carrier do that and I think all the “expanding base” formerly-niche cable channels will pee in their pants, scream, and run back to their niches like the little girly girls they truly are. But will any major cable TV carrier do that? If Robert or Bill were to ever interview the CEOs of the major carriers, that would be one of the questions I’d love them to ask.
Well Mtv tried MTV2 and we all know how that turned out…i say there is no hope
TLC is slightly different. Wasn’t TLC and Discovery Channel owed by different companies? Then Discovery bought TLC and changed it around.
The worse one right now for me is Cartoon Network, who would prefer to call itself CN because it doesn’t want people to know it’s a Network for Cartoons.
Can you post some of the ratings for Cartoon Network, and how well their new live action shows are doing?
Aren’t most of these cable networks owned by the major networks or their parent companies? It seems like a big ruse to get more bang for their buck…cheaper to re-air old shows than to shell out bigger bucks for original programming. Seems as though USA is the only major cable network to come out with original programming. Then they overexpose by having their “marathons” every other day. Bottom line-we get the shaft.
When Cable TV arrived in my hometown in the Detroit area in 1980 we were promised two things if we subscribed.
First of all we were told there would be a mich wider variety of programs to watch, whatever your interest, there’d be a Channel that specialised in it.
Second, since we were PAYING for the “Priveledge” of watching these channels, we would not have to watch as many Commercials as we would with the Over-The Air Channels we watched for free.
30 years later and what do we have, Dozens of channels that basically show THE SAME STALE PROGRAMS over and over again, with over 20 minutes of each hour consisting of Commercials (Mostly for products I have absolutly NO interest in purchasing). 30 months ago I decided the $65.00 I was spending each month was a waste of money. I cancelled my Subscription and now use that money to seek my Entertainment elsewhere.
Well, Comcast dropped Sci-Fi from their basic cable package a few years ago, though I’m not sure if it had anything to do with their shift away from science fiction.
Anyway, I have to say that the current state of cable sucks. I can’t think of too many cable channels that I watch more than one show a week on. I remember I used to love watching Cartoon Network. It used to be a place where people of any age could enjoy animated programs. Now, it’s become a generic kids’ network with reality shows.
Isn’t everything a niche now?
Sci-Fi was NEVER dropped on Comcast around here…in fact it’s still there!
@bill,
Seems as though USA is the only major cable network to come out with original programming.
Assuming you are talking about scripted programming (since most have “reality’ shows), you are forgetting TNT (tying USA with 6), TBS (5-6), and SyFy with 4 (5 if you count Sanctuary).
I think they will go to the smaller cable networks which are still niche – I recently found the crime and investigation channel because they were showing reruns of 24, and found that they run their channel really well and have great niche programming. Now I check that to see what’s on when I check my channels.
Who says there has to be only 4 networks competing for a big audience? Why not 10, when as everyone says “there’s a million channels and nothing good on” – if there’s a million channels, you can find something you like somewhere, just most people don’t look, or most people aren’t willing to try something new. If people want niche networks, they’re still definitely out there, but I don’t see the problem with more competition among general audience networks, since at times, it very much needs it.
@ Holly – don’t forget about FX and AMC which have in my opinion, the best original programming on television right now… they’re kind of the HBO and Showtime of basic cable, and their shows are so good it’s a shame to see so many people overlooking them
I also would like to know how Cartoon Network’s new reality shows are doing. I love Chowder and Flapjack, and am really looking forward to Adventure Time, so I’m hoping the reality shows are failing hard.
@ Holly & Jeff
oops!
Haha! I stand corrected!
Funny that all 3 examples are just Moars Reality.
USA might be the only cable network w/multiple adult hits though.
Jeff, I didn’t include AMC because they only have 2 original shows, but FX should have been included with 5-6. I also overlooked ABC Family, Disney, Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network…
More on topic, networks aren’t loosing their identities because of the lack of scripted programs.
Cable actually has more original scripted shows than ever, and they help define the networks. TBS is comedy, USA is characters, TNT is drama, etc. I don’t think any of that runs counter to the identities of those networks from 5 years ago. The scripted shows on AMC are actually new.
A&E, TLC and Bravo never really had scripted fiction shows (as opposed to documentary-type shows).
Great article, but you left out a couple channels with major shifts in programming.
CourtTV became TruTV – it’s basically all stupid criminals, COPS, high speed pursuits, etc…
History Channel – Still has some history documentaries (hard to find ones that aren’t reruns, though). It’s now started playing Tougher in Alaska, Ice Road Truckers, Ax Men, Gangland, etc… Now they may be good shows, but they don’t belong on a network that’s supposed to be the home of history programming.
Just thought I’d throw those out there.
Nicole, those are two very good examples.
Niche networks include Sundance Channel and IFC (indie and foreign films along with documentaries) MTV Hits for music videos, History International airs history programs although they deal with usa more than international it seems, BIO airs mainly biographical stuff. I could go on but there are tons of small cable channels that air niche programming that the mainstream cable networks once aired.
Another example would be G4, which is a merger from G4 & Tech TV. TechTV was originally dedicated to technology while G4 was a channel for video gamers. When Comcast purchased TechTV they merged it with G4 to create G4TechTV which was supposed to combine the best of the two together. Then it became G4 again but now it is a channel for males 18-34 with the one gaming show (XPlay) remaining (which ironically was from TechTV).
The local dish network out here in the sticks rotates four or five new channels free for a brief period, then changes over to four or five different ones, etc, before arriving back at the original few and starting the process over again, so that I sample some smaller niche channels. Even some of them, like WE and Oxygen , depend much more on reality shows and network reruns than they used to; others, like Fusion and Documentary, are truly niche. Actually, I feel the dish is a ripoff even by basic cable standards, but that free sample stuff isn’t bad – it breaks up the monotony. BTW, the History Channel example Nicole brought up is not only a good example, but the most egregrious. HC was never PHD level history, but currently the constant stream of UFOs, Mafia and ( most dumbed-down ) Hannibal the Annihilator, showing Hannibal as some kind of videogame 300 style robot dodging sword slashes to the neck like Bruce Lee and slicing up Romans and growling like a bear as he does so … what a disgrace, and a perfect symbol of the dumbing down aned selling out of TV in general, and basic cable in particular. ( I also remember when Bravo had decent, thoughtful,documentaries; not Repulsive Housewives of Des Moines or whatever. If TV is dying, I say, hurry up and die already. )
As mentioned, there are some solid premium stations like IFC servicing the “niche market”, but with the current state of the economy, their ability to generate enough of an increase in revenues to serve their targeted demos in a way that trumpets the size and appeal of that demo with respect to a nonpremium platform is limited–especially with internet streaming services doing things like negotiatig licensing fees with companies like Criterion.
A lot of people also get basic cable in a broadband internet bundle (like the comcast ‘triple play’) that’s often the raison d’etre behind their subscription in the first place. If and when (and it’s only a matter of when) there’s a competitve mixture of cost effective wireless services that don’t present consumer significant bandwith and upload speed issues, people are going to flee cable en masse–especially if the cost of a collection of Mad Men or Breaking Bad or Burn Notice episodes is cheaper on the Internet than the subscription fees Not that all of those people are all watching Hulu or Fancast yet, but they will be once it proves to be more cost effective. (Oddly enough, this could be salvation for the Big Four.)
Not all niche cable nets have lost touch with their original focus. Lifetime is still
the divorce-women’s-man-hating channeltelevision for women. ESPN is still sports. The Weather Channel, Food Network, and Comedy Central are all still pretty true to their roots. (Food Network doesn’t have as many how-to shows any more, but their other shows still feature food as a focus). The you could look at the Nickelodeon/Nick-at-Nite channel either way (Nick-at-Nite doesn’t fit the Nickelodeon brand, but considered separately, they’ve stayed true to the original). Disney has expanded, but they still cater to kids. Animal Planet is still mostly about animals.Discovery is harder to classify because they have so many different niche Discovery channels that air all the documentaries, etc. that the primary used to air. I love Dirty Jobs and Mythbusters, but they aren’t exactly the kind of thing Discovery was airing 10 years ago.
TVLand still mostly airs classic TV, but the prominence their reality shows like She’s Got the Look and Cougar are in line with this article. So they’re kind of in the middle on this.
David brought up MTV hits, but really, that only exists because MTV, the network created for music videos, stopped dealing with videos and music. VH1 is the same way.
@Bill, Robert, or Julia–Can you close that tag for me? Thanks!
How long til C-SPAN starts pre-empting subcommittee meetings for reruns of The West Wing?
TV Land has to be the saddest case of a network heading towards the wrong road.
G4 is Spike jr. CN wants to get some Disney/Nick action by going with live action-animation mix.
The majority of cable channels have dumped their normal programming to run the usual suspects of movies. Think about how many times BET runs Matrix or CMT runs non-country movies. MTV doesn’t care about music anymore. They’re all turning into USA networks.
The Soap Opera channel has discovered the two things that get them ratings are Beverly Hills 90210 marathons and movies. They don’t see much of a future in rerunning Soap Operas. Think about how Headline News no longer gives us the world in 30 minutes around the clock.
Bravo’s change of programming can be blamed by NBC buying the channel back in 2002. Bravo Canada is not owned by NBC.
The niche programming is seen merely as a way to get on the cable carriage – afterward, you got to grab the eyeballs or you’re gone like Trio (which still hurts). The future of “niche” will be bleak and low budget when compared to the “USA Clones” that dominate the dial.
Holly:
MTV / VH1 / CMT basically show videos every morning.
just looked at mtv schedule apparently they show Scrubs and Hollywood theatrical movies now quite often now haha
Knew this would happen to Scifi; my cable company thinking of creating package deal were you can choose each channel you want, they had a survey about it last week, they would be scared shitless if that ever happens, that would force them to get better programming, if a person can dorp each channel.
At least the Travel channel is still good….
oh wait, they’re showing poker now…darn!
I think the lesson here is that niche cable channels don’t last long, if you happen to see one now…it won’t be the way it is probably 8 years later.
History channel still does show a lot of history related things. granted their primetime stuff like Ice Road Truckers and Ax Men have nothing to do with history (and aren’t that interesting anyway) the vast majority of stuff on the channel still is. Today I flipped to the channel and they were talking about the Lincoln Assassination. And I always love catching an episode of Modern Marvels (which isn’t always your usual textbook history, love the history of cheese episode for one)
Really though, it’s only natural for channels to evolve. More niche channels will pop up as the older cable channels become more broad spectrum. I personally don’t have a problem with it. Although I would like to get Sundance and IFC from my basic cable…
its really true
theres a bunch that have changed in just the last 5 to 10 years
i used to look at nickelodeon and find rockos modern life, angry beavers and a billion other cartoons now all i see is icarly and spongebob
G4 used to be nothing but video games and it was great, now its basically spike tv(which used to be nothing but star trek)
Animal Planet used to be just basically animal documentaries now you find most extreme and dangerous and uncut
even a lot of the expanded cable channels are doing this to
MTV, VH1, Food Network, HGTV, CMT, etc… Only a few channels have stuck to their roots; Lifetime comes to mind. However celebrities that appear on those lifetime movies are one step away from being a reality show contestant. In other words they’re D-listers.
Cartoon Networks used to show cartoons exclusively, now they’ll have live action stuff. CNN used to focus on the news, but now they’re all about non-news Twitter, and stuff that one would find in tabloids.
MTV created MTV2 so they could focus on music more one MTV2, while regular MTV does the reality stuff Then MTV2 started to air reruns of old MTV shows. Then there’s MTV tr3’s which is the black, brown, and old version of MTV, where it’s essentially a mix of MTV, MTV2,ABET, and some Carlos Mencia.
Wingsabre – MTV tr3’s – sounds like a good format for the CW – just add more 90210 cleavage and the “vroom, vroom, party starter!” and they’re good to go
As of now, there really isn’t much on cable that I would pay anything for:
TNT
Lifetime (I don’t like it since Dawn Ostroff cancelled the five shows that my wife and I loved to watch together, and it is “television for women (who enjoy being emotionally and sexually abused by cable television executives)” – but it would be cheaper to have this than a divorce…)
TCM (and even that’s going a bit downhill…)
…
…
…I can’t think of any other channel that I would pay even .02 cents per decade for…except for the new interactive network, “Just Shoot Me – I Work For The Cable Company!”
what gets me about Bravo is that their movie selection rarely meshes with the audience they attract to their original programming. They’ll have a marathon of Top Chef followed by Steven Seagal films.
although there is a space where the niche rules – the sports channels like MLB Network, NFL network, NBA Network and NHL network.
There is a lot of talk about forcing the cable TV carriers to offer their channels a la carte to their subscribers. There is also talk of the satellite TV carriers doing likewise and some speculation that they might do it first and thus force the cable TV carriers to follow suit. I think if this development happens, niche channels will come back into high fashion. Some networks will die a long overdue death (Home Shopping Network and C-Span) and others will gain massive amount of new subscribers (Science Channel and DIY)
What I find odd is that the cable TV carriers pay the cable channels and it isn’t the other way around. The channels need the carriers more than the carriers need the channels. In communities, there is only one cable TV carrier. As for programming, there are usually at least two channels going doing the same theme (for example, Lifetime, Oxygen, and WE). If I was a cable TV carrier, I wouldn’t pay but put up for bid spots in the basic channel package after laying down some ground rules. “One channel devoted to women, one channel devoted to…” I don’t really see any must-have channels aside (for me) the History Channel … and even that less than I used to feel due to the crappy non-History reality shows they now run during prime time (Ice Road Truckers, Ax Men, etc.).
Oh, and if any screaming about the cable TV carriers should be forced to go a la carte, do realize that they are a government-sanctioned monopoly. There is no free market of cable TV carriers. In fact, if it wasn’t for satellite TV, they won’t even have any real competition.
Oops. In the above post, “any screaming” should be “anyone screams” and “should be” should be “shouldn’t be”. Sorry.
I was listening to an interview with Rick Kushman of the Television Critics Association, and he said the same thing. The niche channels can’t grow their niche, so they only have two choices: spend a LOT on scripted shows like Mad Men, which the smaller channels cannot afford; or go reality, like Jon and Kate + 8.
Funny that all these channels are trying to go more mainstream at the same time that the 3 cable news channels (Fox, CNN and MSNBC) are throwing out the concept of reporting actual news, by instead trying to attract a rabid niche.
As for me, I will never subscribe to the wasteland called cable tv until they give me an a la carte option. The only stuff left I like to watch is either on Hulu or some shows that only get shown at odd hours, so I DVR them.
@Scott, That depends on where you are. In smaller towns there is often only one cable provider, but in bigger cities, you have more than one cable company. A company may have a “monopoly” in a given town, but the same could be said of a lot of companies and stores in smaller towns.
Even Lifetime has changed: no more the mytical Meredith Bexter!
The cable carriers and cable channels were both in on the devil’s deal known fondly as the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which a small cadre of libertarian-style congressmen on both sides of the aisle threatened to hold up, and Clinton even pretended to want to veto, but which passed easily and was signed by Clinton into law. Part of that sweetheart deal made cable a la carte and bundling locally a virtual nonstarter by allowing Comcast, Cableone, Cox etc monopolies in local markets similar to what power, water etc companies have. They operate legally like utilitties – for pragmatically cable is considered a necessity and not a luxury by many people.( I’d say states will soon tax transactions conducted on the Internet because the Net has become a functional necessity to so many people – Hilary brought this up in her senate debate with Fazio in 2000; and I think both HRC and Obasma are on record as favoring this.) The FCC supposedly is studying allowing customers – ie, forcing local cable providers to offer – the option of bundled programs according to different formulas deemed in demand by a sufficient number of current customers. Obviously, the dickering among channels over who will be left out in the cold and who will be part of the bundles will be intense and likely delay if not sabotage this proposal … As for each channel, we all will decry either sellouts or applaud survival of the fittest according to our own taste in entertainment. I could argue the channel most nominated here as sticking to its roots (Lifetime), has replaced much of its ” manhating” or “Hubby-bashing” programs with innocuous sitcoms like the Nanny, Less than Perfect, etc. MTV added Scrubs – boo-hoo – but added Futurama – yay! – then took it off again, boo-hoo again. Who’s sticking with their roots? That seems to depend on which month it is, or what day. The most honest answer is, except for channels ( like Weather, CSpan, Food ) who are marginal to begin with: None of the Above. But even that’s just opinion …
When I was a kid, I thought cable was a necessity. Whenever I heard someone say they didn’t have cable, I assumed they were poor or something. But as an adult, and I couldn’t imagine paying for cable. It seems like such a waste of money. The only channel I find even half interesting is Comedy Central. Everything else worth watching can be found on a network.
It amazes me how many people call cable tv a wastland and that it is all the same. There are so many unique series like Dexter, Big Love, Breaking Bad, and so many others. Shows like these never aired in the 80’s and 90’s. It is like tv has finally been liberated from boring heavily censored broadcast network shows and yet people complain tv now is boring. I suppose people can have their own view but even if you do not like those shows I mention I think it is difficult to argue that at least some cable tv channels are offering programs that are different from what has typically aired on tv.
In my eyes, TCM is the one cable network that has always remained true to its original intent – everything is related to classic film, and the people who run the channel really seem to “get it.” Obviously it’s a bit easier for them due to having easy access to studio vaults, but they keep airing great films (including many not available on DVD) and use their late-night hours to air niche programming.
As for the constant debate over ‘a la carte’ cable, I just don’t think it would turn out as well as people think. Even if I whittled down my cable options to 5 channels (let’s say FX, AMC, Food Network, Bravo and ESPN) I doubt I would come out (much) ahead costwise – the cable companies aren’t going to be giving individual channels away for pennies, and you’ll still have to pay some sort of cable service fees. And even there, I’m only interested in most of those networks when the shows I like (Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Top Chef, etc.) are on. I doubt the cable companies would let you turn channels off and on at will, and if they did they’d find a way to charge a premium for it.
Building on what others have said, a la carte programming is pointless when pretty much everything ends up available through other means (DVDs, streaming, downloads) if you’re willing to wait a few months.
I miss Trio.
Folks are holding up Food Network as a channel that hasn’t given in to the vanillifying of cable networks. But if you’ve watched the network over the last few years, they’ve kicked out their actual chefs, and it seems like half their fare is Reality Shows. Really a crappy channel to watch now if you want to see shows about cooking.
“One stated reason is so they could have a trademarkable name, but their intent to shift away from their science fiction, fantasy, paranormal programming roots towards more general interest fare is likely the biggest driver.”
I suspect actually it’s more “their intent to shift away from their science fiction roots towards more general interest fare, especially fantasy and paranormal programming.”
The problem with Sci-fi is that there really isn’t that much actual science fiction on it. The network is named after a small part of the genres that the network wants to cover.
I wouldn’t assume that just because in the US, The X-Files and Fringe are considered “Science Fiction” and are on the same DVD shelves as “The Omen” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” that this somehow means that any of these fairly described by the science fiction moniker, or that these don’t have a general audience. Part of the reason why there have been a thousand vampire TV shows since Buffy is because the genre is more “general interest” than speculation on the social affects of certain hypothetical but possible technologies, or images of the future.
I don’t expect Syfy to change their programming mix at all. I think their content is already, for the most part, a mix aimed at general audiences. I think the name change reflects both the fact that they are having trademark issues, and that they feel that people who would be happy watching much of their content aren’t going to even look for that content on a network named for science fiction.
but at least their reality and competition shows are about food. it’s not like they’re running wrestling – although Jell-O wrestling would get me to watch
>> In my eyes, TCM is the one cable network that has always remained true to its original intent – everything is related to classic film, and the people who run the channel really seem to “get it.”
Sort of like AMC used to be, until they changed format (adding commercials, losing the host, and switching over from “American Movie Classics” to the same movies that every other channel was airing) some years back – ten years maybe?. It went to hell in a hurry.
The Nashville Network turning into Spike has to be the most dramatic cable channel programming shift of recent times. It’s at least got to be on the short list.
“Sort of like AMC used to be, until they changed format (adding commercials, losing the host, and switching over from “American Movie Classics” to the same movies that every other channel was airing) some years back – ten years maybe?. It went to hell in a hurry.”
Actually, AMC went to the top twenty-five cable networks in a hurry, as the Media Life Magazine 2009 2Q charts show for both prime time and total day. Somehow those “same old” movies get a much bigger audience than the – what would you call them? – “not same old” movies.
I agree with a poster early in this thread who said that plenty of niche networks exist on digital tiers for slivers of the audience. But it’s always fun to complain about cable outlets “abandoning” their audiences. Makes ‘em sound like runaway parents dumping babies on doorsteps. Meanwhile, those networks pick up more viewers, who apparently don’t feel so abandoned.
I found it so refreshing when I got an expanded cable package featuring Chiller, Slueth, the Science Channel, etc. These are entirely niche networks that provide exactly what they say they do.
>>>Actually, AMC went to the top twenty-five cable networks in a hurry, as the Media Life Magazine 2009 2Q charts show for both prime time and total day.
I was talking about how AMC radically changed formats virtually overnight about ten years ago (late 90s? early 2000s?).
They’ve moved away from THAT format (the same 80s movies everyone, including your local independent station, was showing) in the years since. Now they’ve settled somewhere in-between; more original programming, and a film library that’s a fair bit more balanced old/newer than that initial format swap.
In my opinion, as soon as people can sign up for individual TV shows & series via the Internet for viewing, most people will drop Cable/Satellite TV. Commercial supported TV doesn’t really work with very many networks/channels – the pie is sliced too thin. Plus once you aren’t locked into watching a show at a certain time, which is already happening with DVRs, the whole channel line up falls apart.
Networks can’t produce quality programming (non-reality) unless they’ve got a decent slice of the pie. Too many channels means that there are too many slices of the pie, thus lower viewers for everyone. And viewers are ticked off with the amount of commercials.
I know I’m showing my age but I remember when the broadcast networks didn’t air anything in the middle of the night but just during certain hours. They only had so much original programming and they didn’t have enough of an audience to do otherwise. If you tune into cable in the middle of the night, you don’t get much real programming even now. It seems like half the stuff airing on cable and a large chunk off-hours on broadcast is nothing but infomercials. And that DISGUSTS me to be paying for cable service that is airing infomercials disguised as regular programming.
A channel line up used to mean something when you had to physically get out of the chair to manually turn the channel on the TV set. Now with remotes, it’s not very likely that people are too lazy to flip to another channel from their seat when the program they’re watching ends (or during commercial breaks).
If you go back and watch some old DVDs from the 50s/early 60s they had 8 minutes of commercials per hour for primetime compared to 18 minutes per hour for primetime today. 10 more minutes of commercials has been added per hour.
I don’t think that I’m alone in that I’d rather pay or rent the TV series DVD and watch it commercial free than bother watching it when it originally airs with commercials. I rarely watch live TV anymore. I either watch DVDs or record the show and watch it later skipping through the commercials. If I do watch live, then when a commercial comes on I change the channel to another and flip back when the show is back on. I don’t really care if I miss something because I refuse to watch all those commercials.
Since the commercials are what’s paying for most TV, I don’t see it being able to be sustained in its current format. I’m guessing that in the future people will either have to watch their shows online via a video stream where they can’t cut out the commercials or pay a fee to watch their show commercial free.
In my opinion, networks as we know them will go away. People could pay a fee to access various video libraries and pick and choose what shows they want to watch and what episodes. That would definitely work for any show that would essentially be a rerun.
Once we can get cable channels a la carte, the niche network will return. Then I don’t have to pay for 80 reality channels lumped into my current cable bill, I can support the few cable nets that I still watch.