And deeply regrets it.
It's very sad. I remember when cable TV was new, and had such promise — there would be channels dedicated to specialty disciplines, that would pursue a niche doggedly for a slice of the audience. The History Channel would be about history, not von Daniken and Nazi UFOs; Discovery would be about science, not motorcycle enthusiasts and bargain hunters; the Learning Channel would be about learning, not octuplets and hoarding; the SciFi channel would actually present decent science-fiction, instead of schlock horror, ghost-hunters, and fake wrestling. Garbage conquered all, didn't it?
(Also on FtB)
- Log in to post comments
More like this
In today's fragmented media environment, how do we actually reach "mass" audiences with science-related content? Or similarly, if you are a company or organization trying to promote your science credentials to a diverse audience, what is the best outlet for doing so?
Well it appears that the…
It's because it is the absolute bottom floor of any descent into crepitude. That's all I can conclude from looking at the fate of various cable television channels: they all seem to start out well with commendable goals, and pretty soon they're all selling out to the cheapest, sleaziest advertisers…
Over at SciFi Wire, the house magazine of the Polish syphilis channel, Wil McCarthy has a piece with the eye-catching headline "Is Mysticism Overtaking Science in Sci-Fi?"
What really excites me right now--and not in a good way!--is the recent spate of superficially sci-fi movies that are not…
And now, a guest post from a regular reader, Pierre in D.C.:
Sci-Fi channel. Its name evokes Star Trek reruns, Battlestar Galactica cliffhangers, a forum for sometimes innovative television but also mediocre low-budget series shot in Vancouver. But for some, it also means something else entirely…