4 ms·

Maybe that's one of the reasons cable networks can get away with all that crap: you Americans love your TVs (five TVs in a house? That's just crazy to my Europe

Maybe that's one of the reasons cable networks can get away with all that crap: you Americans love your TVs (five TVs in a house? That's just crazy to my European taste) so the demand is inelastic. It's not like you're going to substitute TV with books, games, hiking, or going to cinema, so they can squeeze as much as they want.

scarface74 8y ago
How large are the houses? The average size of a house in the US is 2500 square feet. The average number of TVs is 2.3 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=30132 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=30132). But then again, it would be normal for everyone in the house over a certain age to have their own “screen” - a phone, a cheap tablet for young kids, etc. What’s the difference between the accessibility of screen that’s stationary and people being on their phone all of the time? In my own house, we are a bit extreme with six - our room, son’s room, gym, game room, living room and guest bedroom. Sitting down and reading bores me. I’d rather listen to an audiobook while I’m commuting or working out. Since I workout at home, I seldom just sit down and watch TV by myself. I catch up on TV while I’m working out.
- lambdadmitry 8y ago
  I guess the difference between "being on a phone" and watching a TV is the passive consumption of content owned by huge oligopolies that directly influence the laws to control its distribution. In that sense it's completely unlike chatting with friends on WhatsApp or playing CS, at least while there is some modicum of net neutrality. The type of content, the culture around it and the laws intertwine and create the perception that one has to have multiple TVs around home, all hooked up to some monopolistic content distributor, so they can "catch up on TV" and avoid FOMO. I know plenty of people around who don't have a single TV in their 2br flats. A few have TVs that they use solely to play PS. That's why I suspect the culture is a big reason why American cable can be so user-hostile.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    I guess the difference between "being on a phone" and watching a TV is the passive consumption of content owned by huge oligopolies that directly influence the laws to control its distribution How many hours per day does the average kid spend watching YouTube (controlled by Google)? Of course FB is for old people but people spend hours a day on and off FB. For a lot of people FB is the internet. (https://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-idea-theyre-using-the-internet/ https://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-id...) And my son has a Playstation. Guess what he spends a lot of time doing? Using it to watch YouTube videos of other people playing video games. Yeah that’s a thing.
rayiner 8y ago
> substitute TV with books Books are so boring. Like snooze.
dctoedt 8y ago
> substitute TV with books [etc.] Not to be snarky, but it's "replace TV with books"; to use substitute, it'd be "substitute books for TV." (Yeah, I know language evolves, but Humpty Dumpty had his head, such as it was, in a warm dark place — '"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."' [0]) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_Looking-Glass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_L...
- dctoedt 8y ago
  On further thought: "Substitute X with Y" should be accepted as OK, because: 1) If a new use of language is clear, that's what really matters. And if the new use makes it easier for writers / speakers to use the language with confidence — especially when it's not their first language — then so much the better. 2) To paraphrase a well-known saying: Language was made for man, not man for language.
- lambdadmitry 8y ago
  Cheers! I'll keep that in mind. As a non-native speaker I sometimes miss the finer quirks of English, especially when it's subtly different from my mother tongue.

scarface74 8y ago

How large are the houses? The average size of a house in the US is 2500 square feet. The average number of TVs is 2.3 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=30132 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=30132). But then again, it would be normal for everyone in the house over a certain age to have their own “screen” - a phone, a cheap tablet for young kids, etc. What’s the difference between the accessibility of screen that’s stationary and people being on their phone all of the time? In my own house, we are a bit extreme with six - our room, son’s room, gym, game room, living room and guest bedroom. Sitting down and reading bores me. I’d rather listen to an audiobook while I’m commuting or working out. Since I workout at home, I seldom just sit down and watch TV by myself. I catch up on TV while I’m working out.

lambdadmitry 8y ago
I guess the difference between "being on a phone" and watching a TV is the passive consumption of content owned by huge oligopolies that directly influence the laws to control its distribution. In that sense it's completely unlike chatting with friends on WhatsApp or playing CS, at least while there is some modicum of net neutrality. The type of content, the culture around it and the laws intertwine and create the perception that one has to have multiple TVs around home, all hooked up to some monopolistic content distributor, so they can "catch up on TV" and avoid FOMO. I know plenty of people around who don't have a single TV in their 2br flats. A few have TVs that they use solely to play PS. That's why I suspect the culture is a big reason why American cable can be so user-hostile.
- scarface74 8y ago
  I guess the difference between "being on a phone" and watching a TV is the passive consumption of content owned by huge oligopolies that directly influence the laws to control its distribution How many hours per day does the average kid spend watching YouTube (controlled by Google)? Of course FB is for old people but people spend hours a day on and off FB. For a lot of people FB is the internet. (https://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-idea-theyre-using-the-internet/ https://qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-id...) And my son has a Playstation. Guess what he spends a lot of time doing? Using it to watch YouTube videos of other people playing video games. Yeah that’s a thing.

rayiner 8y ago

> substitute TV with books Books are so boring. Like snooze.

dctoedt 8y ago

> substitute TV with books [etc.] Not to be snarky, but it's "replace TV with books"; to use substitute, it'd be "substitute books for TV." (Yeah, I know language evolves, but Humpty Dumpty had his head, such as it was, in a warm dark place — '"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."' [0]) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_Looking-Glass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty#In_Through_the_L...

dctoedt 8y ago
On further thought: "Substitute X with Y" should be accepted as OK, because: 1) If a new use of language is clear, that's what really matters. And if the new use makes it easier for writers / speakers to use the language with confidence — especially when it's not their first language — then so much the better. 2) To paraphrase a well-known saying: Language was made for man, not man for language.
lambdadmitry 8y ago
Cheers! I'll keep that in mind. As a non-native speaker I sometimes miss the finer quirks of English, especially when it's subtly different from my mother tongue.