[TV] South Park - Page 112
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Gosi
Sweden9072 Posts
| ||
Butterednuts
United States859 Posts
| ||
Xenocryst
United States521 Posts
On October 09 2012 15:11 GhandiEAGLE wrote: This shouldn't exist. It really shouldn't. This is so fucked up.... and the fact that they put them on TV for America's amusement, disgusting. | ||
Digitalis
United States1043 Posts
On October 11 2012 22:24 Xenocryst wrote: This is so fucked up.... and the fact that they put them on TV for America's amusement, disgusting. I agree that these shows are indeed disgusting, but I tried watching it myself and I found myself strangely captivated. Watching 'trash' for some reason is very.... interesting to say the least. Shows like this and Jersey Shore exist because people will watch them, maybe we should discuss the psychology to watching trashy shows like this? | ||
Littlemuff
United Kingdom301 Posts
Ya'll better redneckonize! | ||
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
| ||
Supert0fu
United States499 Posts
On October 11 2012 22:48 Digitalis wrote: I agree that these shows are indeed disgusting, but I tried watching it myself and I found myself strangely captivated. Watching 'trash' for some reason is very.... interesting to say the least. Shows like this and Jersey Shore exist because people will watch them, maybe we should discuss the psychology to watching trashy shows like this? It's not really that people will watch them; it's that they make a higher margin compared to a more expensive show. These shows have extremely low costs; even if they get a moderate amount of viewers, less than what they could have in a better quality program, they will use the shitty show because it's all about money. Same thing goes for tv news. Tv news viewership as declined greatly, because news has gotten shittier and shittier. It's easy to run a herr-derr health segment about how eating cheeseburgers is linked to heart failure, than it is to do any actual reporting (i.e uncovering corporate practices, discussing the middle east, you know actual news.) More people will watch the news about the in-depth, high quality news than they would the health, celebrated, faux-news; but making faux news is cheap and doesn't lose as many viewers. Thus people go on to the internet for news and entertainment as the t.v gets shittier and shittier (although the shittiness of t.v is probably a direct result of people using the internet more and more.) | ||
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
| ||
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On October 11 2012 23:24 Supert0fu wrote: It's not really that people will watch them; it's that they make a higher margin compared to a more expensive show. These shows have extremely low costs; even if they get a moderate amount of viewers, less than what they could have in a better quality program, they will use the shitty show because it's all about money. Same thing goes for tv news. Tv news viewership as declined greatly, because news has gotten shittier and shittier. It's easy to run a herr-derr health segment about how eating cheeseburgers is linked to heart failure, than it is to do any actual reporting (i.e uncovering corporate practices, discussing the middle east, you know actual news.) More people will watch the news about the in-depth, high quality news than they would the health, celebrated, faux-news; but making faux news is cheap and doesn't lose as many viewers. Thus people go on to the internet for news and entertainment as the t.v gets shittier and shittier (although the shittiness of t.v is probably a direct result of people using the internet more and more.) The news hasn't changed much. It's always been a pile of crap. The reason why people tuning into the news has declined is because of new media and technology like our phones. If there's a program you want to watch you just dvr it. Last bit has to do with the direction of the networks and cutting down costs. On October 06 2012 07:29 Fueled wrote: Its $40k now :O Last time I checked it was $20k. Holy hell Brings me to my next point. The prices for reality stars are escalating because that's what they're doing. Turning them into the celebrities. Anyway, there's a whole whack of sitcoms and other crap out there that lots of people don't know about because of the networks and the fact they aren't on at prime time. Thank the studies for that. | ||
Supert0fu
United States499 Posts
On October 11 2012 23:38 StarStruck wrote: The news hasn't changed much. It's always been a pile of crap. The reason why people tuning into the news has declined is because of new media and technology like our phones. If there's a program you want to watch you just dvr it. Last bit has to do with the direction of the networks and cutting down costs. Brings me to my next point. The prices for reality stars are escalating because that's what they're doing. Turning them into the celebrities. Anyway, there's a whole whack of sitcoms and other crap out there that lots of people don't know about because of the networks and the fact they aren't on at prime time. Thank the studies for that. No the news hasn't always been crap. News was amazing 1910-1980, then people realized money could be made off of news, so they bought news companies and cut back on the quality, making more profit. | ||
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
![]() | ||
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
![]() | ||
Highways
Australia6098 Posts
| ||
Brutaxilos
United States2622 Posts
| ||
Zoraque
Canada120 Posts
edit: scratch that, bad episode ![]() | ||
Chanted
Norway1001 Posts
| ||
S_SienZ
1878 Posts
loved the jennifer gardner burn at the end though lol | ||
HeroHenry
United States1723 Posts
| ||
duckmaster
687 Posts
| ||
| ||