We've never been big on snarky. Sure, we can be critical of people sometimes, but snarky? Not our style. We spend most of our posts giving our take on things happening in the media and techosphere. We criticize angles or points, but rarely do we take on an entire article for being off base.
Why did I feel the need to disclaim? Because today, we take The New York Times to task. As we've mentioned, we eagerly await their advertising and media coverage each Monday, but lately, the coverage has been rather lackluster. Exhibit A is this article on cable vs. network TV. This is a topic that has The Baron fascinated so you can imagine we get uber-disappointed when the story flops. And this one did. The first third of the article discusses Kimbo Slice, who made his mixed martial arts debut nearly 10 days ago and was widely panned as being a one-trick Internet pony. OK, I guess leading with something that hasn't been water cooler conversation in more than a week isn't terrible, but it's not the best start either.
My main problem with the story is that it would have been more effective if it had been written in 1993. The author goes on and on about how cable has long been disrespected and is rarely seen as having top-notch programming. Let me tell you this: That perception is so hopelessly out of date, the guy might as well have been talking about what it would be like if we ever landed on the moon. More people watch cable in primetime than network TV, TV news is an absolute joke (which the author correctly points out) and there have been several successful cable shows over the last several years. There's a reason CBS wanted to put Dexter on broadcast TV.
Cable is not king. It does not bring in broadcast-like ratings, but no one views it as the poor step-child. If anything, cable is a great testing ground that has pushed the broadcast networks to take more chances and in the end, improve their own programming. Long live the long tail.
No comments:
Post a Comment