5 ms·

>For an idea of what will happen just look at the History Channel. The History Channel did what most media does and started to appeal to the masses to make mon

>For an idea of what will happen just look at the History Channel. The History Channel did what most media does and started to appeal to the masses to make money. They're literally producing what people want to watch. It's like when people complain about shows like American idol, or Honey-Boo-Boo, all the while the shows are crushing the viewership ratings.

celticninja 11y ago
Yes they did, they were making money anyway in their own specific niche, they just wanted a piece of the larger pie and for that they thre out any ideals they had. I am suggesting that NatGeo will go the same way, instead of documentaries on Hyenas or the lifecycle of turtles we will get the history of dragons, the lifecycle of griffins or even the dietary habits of werewolves.
- blumkvist 11y ago
  So what? Just because you have sentimental feelings towards NatGeo doesn't mean they have to adhere to what you seem suitable to be their business model. If they leave a void of unfulfilled demand, it will be filled and quickly, don't fret about it.
  - celticninja 11y ago
    Not at all, but I can lament the potential loss of what has been a great resource to date.
  - celticninja 11y ago
    Not at all, but I can lament the potential loss of what has been a great resource to date.
adamc 11y ago
Right, they chose profitable crap over quality.
arca_vorago 11y ago
That's such a self-fulfilling prophecy and dangerously close to circular logic and victim blaming. The people want this crap, that's why we give them more crap! The people are getting stupider because of this crap, so that's why they want more, so lets give it to them! Before you know it if nothing stops the spiral it's going to be fucking idiocracy controlled by the oligarchy! Is it just me or does this mentality totally forget that the airwaves were public and we gave the companies access to them in exchange for a public service (which started out as nightly prime-time news.) The airwaves belong to us, and if the corporations are so enamoured by pure monetary/viewership gains, and have forgotten the original edict and goals, not to mention potential uses for good of such widespread communications, we need to remove their right to the airwaves and bring them back under the public sphere. Our population is being dumbed down by the media, while it could be doing the opposite. I'll say it again, the airwaves should belong to the public.
- madebylaw 11y ago
  Reminds me of a favorite Steve Jobs quote: “When you’re young, you look at television and think, There’s a conspiracy. The networks have conspired to dumb us down. But when you get a little older, you realize that’s not true. The networks are in business to give people exactly what they want. That’s a far more depressing thought. Conspiracy is optimistic! You can shoot the bastards! We can have a revolution! But the networks are really in business to give people what they want. It’s the truth.”
  - arca_vorago 11y ago
    I would say Operation Mockingbird never went away and the conspiratorial view is the correct one. Media was never just about giving the people what they wanted, it was about telling them what they wanted in the first place, with a side effect of mass control.

celticninja 11y ago

Yes they did, they were making money anyway in their own specific niche, they just wanted a piece of the larger pie and for that they thre out any ideals they had. I am suggesting that NatGeo will go the same way, instead of documentaries on Hyenas or the lifecycle of turtles we will get the history of dragons, the lifecycle of griffins or even the dietary habits of werewolves.

blumkvist 11y ago
So what? Just because you have sentimental feelings towards NatGeo doesn't mean they have to adhere to what you seem suitable to be their business model. If they leave a void of unfulfilled demand, it will be filled and quickly, don't fret about it.
- celticninja 11y ago
  Not at all, but I can lament the potential loss of what has been a great resource to date.
- celticninja 11y ago
  Not at all, but I can lament the potential loss of what has been a great resource to date.

adamc 11y ago

Right, they chose profitable crap over quality.

arca_vorago 11y ago

That's such a self-fulfilling prophecy and dangerously close to circular logic and victim blaming. The people want this crap, that's why we give them more crap! The people are getting stupider because of this crap, so that's why they want more, so lets give it to them! Before you know it if nothing stops the spiral it's going to be fucking idiocracy controlled by the oligarchy! Is it just me or does this mentality totally forget that the airwaves were public and we gave the companies access to them in exchange for a public service (which started out as nightly prime-time news.) The airwaves belong to us, and if the corporations are so enamoured by pure monetary/viewership gains, and have forgotten the original edict and goals, not to mention potential uses for good of such widespread communications, we need to remove their right to the airwaves and bring them back under the public sphere. Our population is being dumbed down by the media, while it could be doing the opposite. I'll say it again, the airwaves should belong to the public.

madebylaw 11y ago
Reminds me of a favorite Steve Jobs quote: “When you’re young, you look at television and think, There’s a conspiracy. The networks have conspired to dumb us down. But when you get a little older, you realize that’s not true. The networks are in business to give people exactly what they want. That’s a far more depressing thought. Conspiracy is optimistic! You can shoot the bastards! We can have a revolution! But the networks are really in business to give people what they want. It’s the truth.”
- arca_vorago 11y ago
  I would say Operation Mockingbird never went away and the conspiratorial view is the correct one. Media was never just about giving the people what they wanted, it was about telling them what they wanted in the first place, with a side effect of mass control.