Is the internet hurting the quality of TV?

But it wasn't empty. If most of the reason you're watching the programme is to talk about it online, then it makes sense that you'd keep watching in order to continue having fun. PN wasn't watching the programme for its own sake, but to discuss it. Having seen the first 9 episodes, I could believe that discussing it online was more enjoyable than watching the programme.

oh, i never doubted that. but imagine how much more magnified those Trekkies would have been if Star Trek had been on during my generation's peak rather that yours.

Calling it "pointless" was certainly empty. That's what I was referring to.

Anyway, he said it was half the fun. I wouldn't take that to mean most, or even use it as a genuine mathematical representation at all, even for him, let alone others. I mostly watched it just to watch it. The speculation was more like a bonus for me.

Not at all. I never said anything about saving TV. If it's a dying media, let it die. Onward!
I was just making a point that maybe there's added pressure on TV developers because people are taking their shows so seriously. What made me think of this is that I read about some guy who claimed he came up with The Brawler (or whatever) in Left 4 Dead 2 because he had written about it, in detail, in a thread before the game actually came out. And I figured that's gotta happen to TV also with this huge platform everyone has now.

And yes, maybe it wouldn't hurt getting off the message boards every once in a while and take a walk or something.

__________________
The Freedom Roads

Have you seen Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog?

Yeah.

Yeah, nobody's talking about Two and a Half Men. I was only using Family Ties as an example of what people watched in the old days, but you're right, people would never theorize about Family Ties on the internet. Well some would but they probably live in basements.

well, you could say that anyway, even before people started theorizing television plot points on message boards. the idea that technology has become such a major factor in people's day to day life enjoyment is a big deal now. your "take a walk" argument is valid, too. but now you're just making assumptions about people; you're basically saying anyone who enjoyed discussing Lost on the internet doesn't spend enough time doing anything "active", like taking a walk. is that your main issue with the whole thing? you think people need to spend more time off their computers and stuff? because i'd say spending time discussing and theorizing complicated television shows could be construed as a creative act in itself, which is healthy in stride.

No that's not my main thing here and I was really just taking a shot.

This. The complaints about Lost weren't caused by an audience who created an unattainable need for closure. They were caused by undisciplined writing that got away from the showrunners, turned into its own smoke monster and thrashed them. Poetic, but sort of unsatisfying for the viewers.

Lost aside though, I think the internet can be expected to raise the quality of tv. Audience feedback is, as the OP states, at an all time high, but I believe in most cases it provides support for the people who actually created the show, which they can then use as ammo in meetings with tv execs who have LONG underestimated the intellect of the viewing public.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

While I agree that Lost got a little out of control, I don't really hold it against them that they were "making it up." 95% of all shows are more or less made up as they go along. It's the odd Babylon 5 or whatever that actually lays the whole thing out in advance. I don't mind that they only plotted so far ahead in Lost, I just mind some of the decisions that led to.

Most shows are not serialized and in the case of Lost built on a mystery. They should have had at least a broad outline where it was going and how it would get there, but they didn't. It was basically one continuous story, but it was like much of the time the writers, like the audience, had no idea what would happen next.

__________________
It reminds me of a toilet paper on the trees
- Paula

i think Lost should have been held to a higher standard, mainly because it isn't the typical show that would wrap everything up within a season. the whole point of the show, and a big reason why it was so popular, was because there was so much mystery. i never watched the show, but i've heard a few Lost fans say that every episode would answer a question but also raise an even bigger question.

i think if a show's whole purpose is to slowly lead up to a final moment at the very end of the series, they shouldn't simply be writing as they go along.

maybe that was the shortcoming.

__________________
letterboxd

I believe the immediacy of the internet is hurting the quality of writing. We now have a generation of YouTube surfers, which accounts for the fill-a-house-with-Type A's-feed-em-booze-and-turn-on-the-camera- type reality shows.

Thank god for smart writers like David Milch, at least there's a few bright spots out there...

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

Nothing is hurting the quality of writing. Reality shows are not written.

Exactly.

Yeah, but, rubbish television isn't a new thing. I don't think scripted dramas/comedies have decreased in numbers, have they? They certainly haven't decreased in quality.

Also various people have said YouTube is an 'alternative' to TV now. In what way? Are there scripted shows on it that aren't depressing?

I think the problem is that there are more channels -- and therefore shows -- than ever. Which is why it can simultaneously seem as if there's more great TV and more crappy TV than ever before.