Network TV really is starting to stink up the television airwaves in the United States. If a show doesn't pull in over 10 million viewers in its first two weeks, the show is generally pulled. Unlike the "Golden Age" of television in the 60s and 70s, today's television era only revolves around money. And it is wrong. Instead of well thought out shows like "Boston Legal" or "In Justice" we get shows like "My Name is Earl" and "Kath & Kim". The latter luckily was cancelled after its first season.
What's wrong with this era is that the costs of producing quality shows like "Chuck" and "Boston Legal" are high, and the ratings (roughly 6.5 million for "Chuck" and 9.5 for "Boston Legal") don't equal high profitability for the networks. "Boston Legal" was recently cancelled, while "Chuck" was brought back with help from Subway, who will pay for some production costs in turn for product placements.
Look at the following facts and give me insight on what you think about network television in today's day and age and the impact that it might have on future generations.
Fact #1: Product placements air more in more in television shows as production costs go up. Although this does cause some viewer turn away, it keeps shows like "Chuck" and helped keep "7th Heaven" on the air.
Fact #2: Cable gives shows longer longevity and better quality programming. "The Closer" and "Monk" are prime examples of giving a series time to grow. Although both debuted to high numbers, the networks have had faith in these series and let them expand and viewers in turn watched.
Fact #3: The average American viewer has gone down in intelligence since the "Golden Age". No offense to anyone in particular, but it is proven that our IQs are much lower back in those days. Maybe it is spending so much time watching junk like "I Love New York" or "The Hills" instead of quality shows like "The Mentalist" or "NCIS".
Fact #4: Jay Leno, five nights a week, in primetime. Enough said.
a "Golden Age"
Fred Friendly resigned from CBS because they chose to air a rerun of a sitcom instead of coverage of a senate hearing on Vietnam.
In the '50s and '60s, Ed Murrow had to jump through hoops in order to even get his reports on the air
The "good old days" never happened, TV has always been a business, and profit has always motivated what was aired. If one were to compare the quality in writing of a show like "The Brady Bunch" with a show like "My Name is Earl," would there really be a decrease in quality?
Unfortunately the vapid, stupid shows are the ones that bring in the numbers. There isn't a lot of sophistication going on in a show like "Gossip Girl" or "The Hills", so there isn't a lot of mental work for the viewer to deal with. If you miss an episode of one of these, I doubt you've missed much, and they all fit into easy categories like "the wedding episode" or "a relationship has ended" type episode or even very many "revenge schemes" that are basically all the same. And yet the average viewer can easily get sucked in, and not have to pay enough attention so they they'd need to get off Facebook or stop talking to others in the room in order to get what's going on on the screen.
I wish there were more "intelligent" shows and that the hour-long gab sessions with idiot girls and guys would stop. *sigh* If only, if only.