• Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    169
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Cable execs: I see your point. In 2024 we’ll be introducing trash reality shows that feature the weather.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t even need to feature the weather. TLC stands for The Learning Channel and no one learns anything from their shows.

      • Bonehead@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s absolutely not true. I’ve learned that I may be messy sometimes, but at least I’m not walking through goat paths of garbage. I’ve learned that I may be a bit of a fuck up that enjoys recreational drugs, but at least I’m not walking on sunshine. And I’ve learned that I may be bit overweight, but at least I’m not bed-ridden and disappointing my doctor. I always feel better about myself after watching a TLC show.

      • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’ve definitely learned how exploitative it is to force people in terrible life situations, many suffering from mental illness and/or some sort of past trauma or are just in a bad spot all around, to broadcast their lives for all to see and gawk at.

        Oh you have a severe eating disorder that is extremely dangerous to your health? What a Freaky Eater you are! You also clearly have your Strange Addiction so we can exploit you twice for the same effort! Oh you’re not even living paycheck to paycheck and are dumpster diving behind the grocery store to feed your family? We got an Extreme Cheapskate over here!

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Cross it with Wizard of Oz, and you can get: Tornado Alley Trailer Park Wives on Survivor Island

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago
      • db2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        58
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nope, you neglected the worst offender… SciFi, that they renamed to SyFy (and I pronounce “siffy” or “siffylis” now) that used to have good science fiction but decided WWE and ghost hunting was the way to go.

          • zod000@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            1 year ago

            Or Dark Matter!

            The full list of good shows they cancelled or cut off early is long and painful to read.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know, but the rest of the history of the show is kind of bleak. They had two Netflix seasons before Netflix shitcanned them, then crowdfunded a successful (and terrific IMO) 13th season. This year, they had another crowdfunder, but they did it outside of Kickstarter and put minimal effort in, so it failed. I have no idea if the show will continue at this point. There is Rifftrax and The Mads, but they aren’t really the same. I need my puppets at the bottom of the screen!

        • credit crazy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Man last I recall checking up on them is when they were just replaying star wars between random episodes of star Trek

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            NOw it’s Disney+ for Star Wars and Paramount+ for Star Trek. I was excited to find the trove of new Star Trek series the Pat for various reasons I didn’t watch in several years

            I’m kind of afraid to know the answer about whether I was fooled by marketing …… when CBS tried to kick off their own personal streaming service with the new Star Treks, I refused to play that game. You’re not getting a subscription for every tv network. Now that the service is Paramount+, I’ll pay (for a while) to also get a studio’s worth of new and old movies. Please tell me there’s a real difference, and I wasn’t just fooled by re-marketing the same old shit

  • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cable shifted to low information viewers across the board decades ago. Dumb people watch commercials I guess.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re making people watch commercials on the streaming services now too. There’s really only one solution left, matey.

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      All the people watch commercials, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a correlation between the kind of person that can watch stupid reality shows for hours on end and the kind of person who watches those ads and it actually translates into them spending money on the things in the ads.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Probably so. I don’t know if home shopping channels are still on the air, but there were people who watched those religiously. I remember when TV switched over to digital broadcast, there was a big to-do in the town I lived in because a bunch of people watched a low-power broadcast station that broadcast a home shopping channel 24/7 and they wouldn’t be able to watch it anymore since it couldn’t afford the upgrade.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      Jesus Christ, I just looked at their schedule there’s a total of 7 hours of TTG per day. Where’s the Adventure Time? Where’s the Billy and Mandy? Where’s Ed, Edd, n’ Eddy!?

      • littlecolt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s seriously infuriating, the catalog they have at their disposal and they just rerun TTG, a show that at the time caused TT fans to be legitimately upset. No one wanted TTG.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        there’s a total of 7 hours of TTG per day

        Holy shit, I’ve seen the memes but I just naturally assumed they were exaggerated… That’s actually ridiculous

      • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is actually a lot of nuance to this.

        1. If TTG stops producing content then their rights to the IP can expire, same reason Sony had to make new Spiderman and X-Men films every other year last decade.

        2. Changes in leadership and management to Cartoon Network are frequent and often produce a more straight-cut and less innovative direction for the network, the sort of people that institutional stock holders and WarnerMedia management think are the safe options: data analysts, cost minimizers, tough negotiators.

        3. For the above reason and more, many artists stopped wanting to work with the corporation, and new artists are aware of the issues plaguing the company so they also don’t want to touch it. For example, Rebecca Sugar faced a struggle just to continue Steven Universe, one of their more successful titles, but eventually she was forced to wrap it up and leave. Twice.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          For example, Rebecca Sugar faced a struggle just to continue Steven Universe, one of their more successful titles, but eventually she was forced to wrap it up and leave. Twice.

          A big part of this was Garnet and international markets. What with being an open lesbian relationship it had to be…edited for some markets. Which was a cause of struggle and tension. The wedding episode supposedly is what killed it.

  • Mike D.@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reality TV is cheaper to produce than scripted shows. Profit is the reason all they show is reality shows.

      • Meron35@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s also really funny how many people are putting out trash reality show quality output on YouYube

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t have a problem with the concept of reality shows, I have a problem with reality shows being like 90% of all content.

  • TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    TV in the US is so weird. I mean, we’ve got all of that in Europe too (on some channels), but whenever I watch American TV, everything seems to be cranked up to 11. The aggressive of your news shows, the quantity of your advertisements, the weird rules from the middle ages (no swearing or nudity on certain channels), etc.

    • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And the Pharma commercials?! It’s insane, if I want a pill I go to the doctor/pharmacy say I have a headache they will prescribe some shit and I will pick it up, why would I need a commercial for that?

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      American here. I stopped watching “TV” about 15 years ago, and have streamed just about everything ever since. I’m also exposed to a lot less advertising now and my life is better for it.

      Watching television at family/friends house feels like traveling to a foreign country. It’s exactly like you describe. I don’t recognize any of it anymore.

    • TV shows produced in my country are reaching cringe-levels, especially the TV mag show KMJS. I lost my trust in watching TV. And noontime shows are spewing cringe and usually controversial remarks.

  • Norgur@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    MTV has been all over those “reality” shows and candidate shows since at least the late 90s though.

    Hey, I’m Bam Magera and this is Jackass Roomraiders where Xibit builds flat screens into your entire house for no reason after we had a hot girl go through all your embarrassing shit while you waited in a car of some kind outside watching together with your adversaries who go absolutely apeshit about anything that happens, also UV sperm detection light.
    NEXT

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep. Although it still did music videos for at least a few hours a day until the 2000s. VH1 was a holdout for a longer time. Does that Canadian MuchMusic channel even exist anymore? We got that when I used to have DirecTV. It had a fun early low budget MTV feel to it which I knew was not destined to last.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It was a fun channel. My favorite memory is having the lead singer of Barenaked Ladies come in and play foosball with the VJ. They said he could request any video he wanted, so he requested Mr. T’s Commandments, which is an (I think unintentionally) hilarious video where Mr. T does a Christian rap about honoring your parents while beating people up.

    • sangriaferret@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      MTV invented the reality format. The first few seasons of The Real World were innovative and novel. Then the execs realized how much cheaper reality was to produce and flooded the market with garbage until it was all we had left.

      • Banzai51@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        MTV’s downfall started when they got rid of all the Music freaks in the C suite that liked music and hired TV producers. Then we got Remote Control. We didn’t realize it at the time, but that was the downfall of MTV. Once those TV execs realized they could make non-music content, we got The Real World. It was OVER.

        • sangriaferret@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Remote Control was probably the first program not about music (I remember LL Cool J quipping that they didn’t have questions about the radio) but I think it was still in the spirit of the youth culture and edginess of early MTV. But, yeah, it likely marks the time at which the execs decided they had to “innovate” new programming that strayed from the format that made people watch MTV in the first place.

          That said, I don’t think they knew the monster they were unleashing when they created The Real World.

  • plenipotentprotogod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Youtube in has done a remarkably good job carrying the torch of high quality documentaries and educational content beyond the realm of traditional media. Science, art, technology, history. It’s all there, and much of it meets or exceeds the quality of anything the old guard of cable TV channels ever managed to produce.

    I’m actually only now realizing that some of the most established channels have been reaching a wide audience with consistent and high quality content for the better part of a decade, and yet I can’t think of any who have successfully broken into more “traditional” media such as television or or even streaming services. That seems exceptionally strange to me. I mean, last month there were headlines about Netflix giving $55 million to an unproven director who proceeded to blow it all on expensive cars instead of filming the show he was hired to make. Who decides to hire that guy over any number of youtube creators who have spent the last ten years cranking out a short video a week along with occasional longer form projects, all with a small crew on a shoestring budget. I can imagine three possible reasons for this. No idea which one(s) could be the real reason, or if there’s something else entirely going on.

    1. Hollywood1 is so insular that they don’t even realize these people exist.
    2. Hollywood is so stuck in its ways that they refuse to believe these people could be successful running a larger production.
    3. Offers have been made, but those offers have been so restrictive that any number of youtubers have turned them down despite, one would assume, a large amount of money being on the table if they go along with it.

    That last one in particular seems unlikely, but I do recall that the popular Primitive Technology channel went quiet for a year or more before abruptly coming back to life. Rumors swirled that he had been hired to turn the concept into a TV show, but the production company kept trying to change things and he eventually gave up and went back to doing it his way on youtube.

    1 used here as shorthand for the more corporate and structured entertainment industry at large.

    • Smokeydope@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nickelodeon gave Fred their own TV show+movie and YouTube bankrolled some popular creators to make a few YouTube red originals, that’s about as far as I can think of

    • Enigma@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      It happened during the 08 writers strike. Reality Tv is cheap to produce and requires minimal writing.

    • Letto@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have a feeling it has more to do with low production cost than anything else sadly :/

      milleNNialS Are kiLLiNg cAblE

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        No doubt that’s the main thing but how are there enough people to watch all these channels of garbage?

        • CitizenKong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s so cheap to produce that it doesn’t need as many people watching it to be deemed profitable. And many people watching it probably just let it run in the background because it doesn’t need any close attention. Basically like soaps, but soaps need writers so are more expensive.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, that’s my brother. Every time I visit, he seems to have some new reality show he watches. Somehow he’s always surprised I’ve never heard of I t and am not interested in it.

            It’s always on in the background and no one pays attention unless the ice starts cracking under the truck, or the survivalist misses his airdrop, or some manufactured drama hit the fishing boat or whatever. He’s a pretty active guy, so I’ll bet most of the time these reality shows are going, there’s no one even in the room

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe no one is actually watching, the TV ratings system is crooked somehow, and TV advertisers are getting screwed?

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lowest common denominator does better, casts the widest net and the morons eat it up