Network TV won't be endangered because there's an audience for what network TV provides - and there still will be, for the forseeable future. But that audience will be different, and want different things, compared with the cable audience. There will be overlap of course, but the two audiences will grow ever more distinct and the content will follow suit (altho it's a chicken and egg problem whether the content is dividing the audience instead.)if cable television has a better financial model than network television, and is more convenient for the consumer, I don't see why network TV won't end up extinct, or at least heavily endangered.
That's exactly what networks are doing "right" - those types of shows don't compete with cable (which is already serving the audience who wants the niche shows) and they do have a sizable audience. Just check the ratings sometime.I don't think there's anything "wrong" with network TV other than the stupid creative decisions that they are making. Their quest to produce cheap programming and gather high ratings has a resulted in a plethora of awful reality programs and generic cop procedurals.
Where networks often stumble is when they attempt shows that are more the cable type - Pushing Daisies or Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles. They fail because they don't have the dual revenue stream of cable shows, yet still have all the expenses, and being on a network rather than cable means that their natural audience may not even know they exist. And when shows like that fail while dull, derivative fodder like The Mentalist succeeds, networks get the message loud and clear.
That won't happen. Scripted programming has a long life after initial airing, and a hit show can generate hundreds of millions of dollars in syndication and DVD sales (and sometimes merchandising). Reality TV is transitory. It can get big ratings when it airs, but it generally doesn't generate much revenue thereafter. It doesn't have the shelf life that scripted programming does.It's much easier to churn out cheap reality programs than it is to churn out more expensive dramatic programs. I think this mentality, which you are frustrated with (as am I), could ultimately push dramatic television off of the networks entirely, as long as our society continues to tune into reality programs in droves.
Reality TV also can't be sold overseas because foreign markets are all glutted with their own local reality shows and many American reality shows actually came from foreign markets to begin with. International revenues are still a big business for American networks, and for that they'll need scripted formats.
There has been a great deal of discussion in this thread why networks don't make Mad Men and Breaking Bad type shows. Cable can afford to cater to niche audiences; networks can't.I don't know what's going to happen to Network TV but I wish NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox would make shows the way AMC and USA do. That is, "cleaner" versions of shows the way HBO and Showtime make them.
That wouldn't have the slightest impact on anything, because "quality" is not the issue. And that's assuming fewer episodes would automatically result in better quality, which I have my doubts about. I think it would just result in fewer crappy episodes, but they'd be as crappy as ever. The problem is if you have bad writers, you have bad writers. Don't give them less work, give them NO work - fire them and get good writers.What the big networks need to learn is that sometimes less is more with scripted shows. Reduce the number of eps and increase the quality of the production...
Let's find a bad series to use as a test example, how about Heroes? Would fewer episodes make that show better? I seriously doubt it. What's wrong with it is that the writers have no direction and don't seem to know what they are doing. That's not a problem that's caused by overwork, it's caused by incompetence, probably starting with Tim Kring since he is supposed to be the guy with the eye on the ball. If your problem is overworked writers, why not hire a few fresh writers and let the old crew take a breather? Every day new writers hit Hollywood hoping to break into the biz. There can't be some kind of writer shortage in LA.
The technology exists for near 100% accurate accounting of what shows are being watched, recorded, etc... if the public and FCC will allow cable providers to collect this information from all of their subscribers.
I dunno, I think people might be too paranoid for that. Also, you'd still have to use Nielsens to collect data from non-cable, non-TiVO using households, because those demographics are bound to be very different from cable/TiVO households.
Last edited: