XPost: rec.arts.tv, alt.tv.scifi.channel
From: sorta@so.so
Jim Gysin ::
> Because SF fans gravitate to shows like LOST and THE X-FILES while
> running away from the likes of DEFYING GRAVITY and CAPRICA.
Well, um, no. This may be your feeling. It might even be
your impression. But what numbers we have don't support it.
The numbers suggest the opposite, in fact, in that many sf
fans will endure a show simply because it's sf, and thereby
it's giving them at least some of what they want (or,
failing that, they can rewrite the stupid bits in their
head, or complain about them to others).
> I'm talking about the SF-loving subset of television viewers. As soon
> as you start talking about wrestling fans, you're changing the
> discussion to something that I'm not talking about.
The discussion was, I thought, how to get a TV network that
showed mostly or entirely science fiction, to do well. Which
requires people to watch it, and choose it over other things
airing at the same time. While damn near any SF show will
draw a small number of hardcore fans, in terms of the entire
TV audience, fans aren't common. So either the network
makes shows that can slipstream other viewers in, or makes
shows that cost so little that the small fan audience is
enough to make a profit off of. "Fans exist" isn't a
viable marketing strategy.
> I'm talking about SF *fans*, so once you start talking about people who
> don't like westerns not watching westerns, you're going off-track.
I think you're not grasping analogy, but if it's not your
cuppa, I won't try to reason with you.
> Because it's not done well.
No, no, no. You're saying that, in some magic realm where a
TV network could produce a dozen hours of science fiction a
week, with the appeal of summer movie SF blockbusters on a
basic cable budget, there'd be lotsa profit to be made. I'm
saying that that's not going to happen on three or four
separate levels.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
