4 ms·
"one person = one vote is a fairly primitive and inefficient system." In this case, it is much more efficient than letting the viewers vote on the show. The ha
by dwwoelfel 16y ago
"one person = one vote is a fairly primitive and inefficient system."
In this case, it is much more efficient than letting the viewers vote on the show. The handful of executives make their vote based on long-range criteria. They want a show that has staying power, is attractive to both advertisers and viewers, and fits in with the rest of their lineup.
The viewers aren't as savvy. Their vote will be based on how much they like a single episode. Viewers only see one side, they don't care about how much money the network can make from advertising.
The people picking the shows should be the people who can balance the needs of the viewers with those of the network. Those people are the executives.
- philwelch 16y agoThe executives also have experience judging how much work a pilot needs to become viable--if a pilot is pretty boring in its present state but has a lot of promise, they can think of things to change to make it better. Of course, just as often as not, this is how executives ruin otherwise promising shows.
- nazgulnarsil 16y agoinstead of a counter-point, you're making a completely different point. the point here is prediction. networks want to be able to predict which shows will do well so they can draw advertising dollars. to do this they hire people whom they think will be able to make this prediction. It is unlikely, however, that these people can do better than a prediction market.