4 ms·

>this is very much still a thing for a large population No, it's so radically different that while there is still zeitgeist related to TV, it's not wrong to sa

>this is very much still a thing for a large population No, it's so radically different that while there is still zeitgeist related to TV, it's not wrong to say the "tv zeitgeist" is dead. Following a TV show used to be even more in the moment than following sports are today. Either someone saw last night's game, or they didn't and you can't have a meaningful conversation with them. They might catch up watching the highlight reel but conversations will be shallower, and talking about one game becomes near-irrelevant by the time the next game airs. These days TV shows have the zeitgeist pattern of a recent video game release. Everyone works through the release at different paces, conversations are bounded by seeing how caught-up everyone is before getting into details, and the material has long enough shelf life that conversations can happen with months - or years - between different conversation participants seeing it.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
msla 7y ago
After a certain point, the more well-off could own a VCR and record off TV; that is, time shifting, which is something Universal made a Federal case out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting Incidentally, the practice of time shifting is a reason VHS caught on and other home video formats didn't: LaserDisc didn't offer time shifting at all, so it wasn't even in the running here; as a result, its pitch wasn't as compelling. Betamax did, but its tapes only held one hour to begin with, which isn't enough for a sports game or a TV movie. It was only arguably of higher quality on the TVs of the era, and the fact its time shifting capability was half of what VHS could offer in the same time period made it a less attractive option. (Both Betamax and VHS increased recording times as the format war wore on. However, after a certain point, merely being the entrenched winner has an impact on how the competition goes.)

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

msla 7y ago

After a certain point, the more well-off could own a VCR and record off TV; that is, time shifting, which is something Universal made a Federal case out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting Incidentally, the practice of time shifting is a reason VHS caught on and other home video formats didn't: LaserDisc didn't offer time shifting at all, so it wasn't even in the running here; as a result, its pitch wasn't as compelling. Betamax did, but its tapes only held one hour to begin with, which isn't enough for a sports game or a TV movie. It was only arguably of higher quality on the TVs of the era, and the fact its time shifting capability was half of what VHS could offer in the same time period made it a less attractive option. (Both Betamax and VHS increased recording times as the format war wore on. However, after a certain point, merely being the entrenched winner has an impact on how the competition goes.)