UK vs. US editions

[saintbacchus]

--- "GulPlum" <plum at c...> wrote:

<<
Sorry, you misunderstand what I meant (or rather, I
didn't express myself as well as I may have done).
>>

No, no, I'm sorry to be unnecessarily hard on you. I've
been in multinational-type groups before where America-
bashing was popular, so I'm a little touchy.


<<
What worries me is that (to an extent) the entire power
structure in the US abhors anything that isn't culturally
"pure", ie *American* culture. Book publishers, film
studios, TV stations, politicians et al cannot see the
benefit of opening people's eyes to an "entertainment"
which appeals to more than the lowest common denominator.
>>

I agree, but I think it's less a cultural problem than a
capitalist one. Every time a new medium appears, the powers
that already be have to figure out how to cope. The Big
Four networks have been squeezed by cable, and they've
responded by airing more and more stupid, sensationalistic
crap - the kind of thing that everyone watches but nobody
admits to watching. They appeal to the lowest common
denominator because that's the easiest way to compete with
the specialization that cable offers.

The same thing happens in politics because, when it comes
down to it, Democrats and Republicans are mostly
competing for the same votes (that is, the country doesn't
separate neatly down party lines). Their rhetoric becomes
more moderate so as to appeal to the most people.


<<
How many foreign-produced (let's just limit that to
English-language) TV shows are shown on the major US
networks? Would any of the networks consider showing
*any* non- English language show? I suspect not.
>>

Well, also consider that for every pilot that gets on the
air there are 20 more that didn't. Why buy the rights for
a foreign show when there are that many waiting right here,
with syndication and video rights also ready to be signed
over? That's my feeling, anyway. Traditionally, the Big
Four do not buy shows that have already aired somewhere,
they get exclusive rights and market, market, market.

As for foreign-language shows, I think that's business
again. The networks take pretty big losses unless shows
become hits. It just wouldn't be worth the money to air a
show whose viewership is inherently limited to a single
minority group.


<<
It's generally accepted that British TV is among the best
in the world. How much of it finds its way onto network TV?
>>

None, but again I think that has more to do with the way
those particular networks work than anything else. They
don't re-air their past hits, either, although that would
be a cheap and easy way to make a buck. Cable networks,
on the other hand, will take anything that's worked before
and even stuff that hasn't.

I'd be interested to hear about the history of television
in England, by the way.


<<
The question, though, is: what are the more open-minded
American population doing about reversing this trend? It
appears to me that the answer is "very little". Getting
rid of that buffoon you call a President would be a good
start...
>>

How? Republicans don't have sex scandals. =P It was wildly
bad timing for the Enron thing to hit right now. A year
ago would have been much, much better.

Not to be all political and stuff, but c'mon guys. Having
our president going around giving swirlies to foreign
governments during a time of serious international tension
isn't helping me sleep better at night.