TiVo Community Forum banner
4981 - 5000 of 5068 Posts

·
With an "L"
Joined
·
4,127 Posts

·
Happily Vaccinated!
Joined
·
62,819 Posts
If only they could produce shows that were actually "Must see TV"
I hate to say it, but right now, the only thing that "saves" the linear networks is relaxing/eliminating the FCC rules around nudity/profanity/violence (which in today's climate will NEVER happen). The advantage that cable and streamers have is they can write whatever stuff they want because there is absolutely no constraints. It's exponentially harder to write compelling shows in this day and age for OTA TV that doesn't have any of those elements and younger, talented writers don't want to have those constraints. And in reality it takes much more talent to write clean than it does to write without constraints. The other things is, once the beancounters take over the streamers (and that's absolutely starting to happen) and the budgets get slashed, the quality of THOSE shows will diminish as well, especially without the revenue stream to support it (either via ads or increased subscription fees). Sadly we may be in for another stretch of "crap TV" before some network realizes that people might actually CARE if something is good or not. Larry David once said (as his character George Costanza), when asked why someone would watch "A show about nothing". And George's response was "Because it's on TV". That might be where we are heading. We are just watching stuff on TV because, well it's on. Not because it's any good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
The other things is, once the beancounters take over the streamers (and that's absolutely starting to happen) and the budgets get slashed, the quality of THOSE shows will diminish as well, especially without the revenue stream to support it (either via ads or increased subscription fees).
Realistically, it's not necessarily the beancounters, but just the fact that some of these services are spending absolutely insane amounts of money trying to produce stuff to get people to subscribe to their services. The budgets for some of these shows like the lord of the rings show, eye of the world, etc, aren't sustainable or justifiable. You just can't generate enough new subscribers to cover enough of the cost, the prices will only get higher as a result. (Yeah, people will say what I'm saying is that the beancounters are the ones that will stop it, what I'm really trying to say is that simple common sense says the current spending strategy won't work.)
 

·
tabasco rules
Joined
·
16,723 Posts
I hate to say it, but right now, the only thing that "saves" the linear networks is relaxing/eliminating the FCC rules around nudity/profanity/violence (which in today's climate will NEVER happen). The advantage that cable and streamers have is they can write whatever stuff they want because there is absolutely no constraints.
the advertisers drive the content restraints as much as (or more than) commercial networks. most of the big companies want their products associated with family-friendly entertainment, approving of "pg-13" or higher (lower?), with a limited number willing to go to "r" late night. this is (supposedly) why paid cable was born, without advertisers directing the content, producers had fewer limitations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,127 Posts
the advertisers drive the content restraints as much as (or more than) commercial networks. most of the big companies want their products associated with family-friendly entertainment, approving of "pg-13" or higher (lower?), with a limited number willing to go to "r" late night. this is (supposedly) why paid cable was born, without advertisers directing the content, producers had fewer limitations.
The other constraint with the 4 commercial networks, maybe even more important than language, is time. They have 42 minutes per week to tell their stories and I don't even know how many episodes a season is anymore - is it 22 between Sept and May? How many of those are filler?

The streamers can make every episode count in their 8-10-12 episode seasons with each episode as long or short as it needs to be. But generally there is no filler - every episode is important. I would think the 4 networks can get around the short seasons by having 2 shows of 10-12 episodes each since there are so many shows being produced now. But the episode timing is still an issue. And the language/nudity which the producers include usually for a reason.

Look at Only Murders in the Building. It's a rather "clean" show and could easily be on a network, however, without commercials the episodes are 30-35 minutes each. Too long for a 1/2 hour show with commercials and too short for an hour long show with commercials.

Other shows run 45 minutes or longer per episode without commercials. This is fine for cable networks but the big 4 cannot support odd-length shows. So even without the language or other "decency" constraints, the storytelling itself is very limited on a standard commercial network which is stuck in an outdated model.
 

·
Happily Vaccinated!
Joined
·
62,819 Posts
the advertisers drive the content restraints as much as (or more than) commercial networks. most of the big companies want their products associated with family-friendly entertainment, approving of "pg-13" or higher (lower?), with a limited number willing to go to "r" late night. this is (supposedly) why paid cable was born, without advertisers directing the content, producers had fewer limitations.
I think advertisers care about one thing, and that's selling their product. If that's having a clean show, then so be it, but if that's having whatever goes, then so be that too. They have been advertising on shows with foul language not to mention high levels of violence and some nudity. As they will be advertising on streamers that don't have FCC constraints more and more, I don't think the whole needing a PG-13 rating is all that important anymore. That's why I call the FCC rules old fashioned. Sure there were will always be people who scream about it, but I think that's less and less these days.
 

·
Happily Vaccinated!
Joined
·
62,819 Posts
The other constraint with the 4 commercial networks, maybe even more important than language, is time. They have 42 minutes per week to tell their stories and I don't even know how many episodes a season is anymore - is it 22 between Sept and May? How many of those are filler?

The streamers can make every episode count in their 8-10-12 episode seasons with each episode as long or short as it needs to be. But generally there is no filler - every episode is important. I would think the 4 networks can get around the short seasons by having 2 shows of 10-12 episodes each since there are so many shows being produced now. But the episode timing is still an issue. And the language/nudity which the producers include usually for a reason.

Look at Only Murders in the Building. It's a rather "clean" show and could easily be on a network, however, without commercials the episodes are 30-35 minutes each. Too long for a 1/2 hour show with commercials and too short for an hour long show with commercials.

Other shows run 45 minutes or longer per episode without commercials. This is fine for cable networks but the big 4 cannot support odd-length shows. So even without the language or other "decency" constraints, the storytelling itself is very limited on a standard commercial network which is stuck in an outdated model.
This is more an issue. The cable channels are less constrained by time as the OTA channels, but this could be something that could be changed if need be. But again, a good writer should be able to absolutely write to the time constraint, and how many of us have talked about the need for better editing for some of these streaming shows? The problem is, the better writers no longer want to write for linear TV because they DO have those restraints. So most of what we see on linear TV is pure crap.
 

·
I am Groot!
Joined
·
57,969 Posts

·
Registered
Ruler of an Unown UI
Joined
·
3,720 Posts
#Sad. Hope it gets picked up by others. (I reacted to your post with the Helpful check instead of the Sad face, because apparently Sad and Angry aren't included in a user's reaction counts. But I am sad for them.)
 

·
I am Groot!
Joined
·
57,969 Posts
#Sad. Hope it gets picked up by others. (I reacted to your post with the Helpful check instead of the Sad face, because apparently Sad and Angry aren't included in a user's reaction counts. But I am sad for them.)
They are...I just looked at my Reactions Received; it gives the totals for each category, and if you add them up they come to the overall total. So indulge yourself in some guilt-free anger and sadness! ;)
 

·
Registered
Ruler of an Unown UI
Joined
·
3,720 Posts
They are...I just looked at my Reactions Received; it gives the totals for each category, and if you add them up they come to the overall total. So indulge yourself in some guilt-free anger and sadness! ;)
Now hover over your avatar and look at "Reaction score". They're different, yes? That's because the Sads and Angries are not included there. Not a super big deal for me, and in fact I only noticed because I work way too much with spreadsheets (to the point of numeracy OCD, lol), but I'm offended by the underlying assumption. We are not sad or angry with the poster; we are sharing sadness or anger along with them. Discussion here:

 
  • Angry
Reactions: Rob Helmerichs

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,999 Posts
Yay! 5000!

I just can't watch the last "Dynasty". It'll be the last one.

Ironically, I was remembering that I have no memory of Sammy Jo on the original, but I didn't see that many episodes. The new "Sammy Jo" was one of my favorite characters, but the original went on to play Harley Random in "LAX". Not that I liked her that much, but it was just a name I used online when "Randomboy" left a web site like this around the time "LAX" was on the air.
 
4981 - 5000 of 5068 Posts
Top