May 16, 2004
What We Want To See
I'm reading this great article about integrity in television journalism, and while it doesn't make the point explicitly, it reminds me of another point I've seen before. Television producers sometimes mention that viewers will say they want to watch one thing, when what they really want to watch is something else. For instance, given the choice between "When Animals Attack" and a documentary on space exploration, viewers will overwhelmingly say they want the documentary. But they'll watch "When Animals Attack."You know, that's largely true. I don't see the point in arguing that. But the problem is, they use it as justification to broadcast "When Animals Attack." They say, "We're just giving the viewers what they really want to see."
It's really stupid. And I don't just mean that it's worthy of being vented about. I mean it's stupid from a business perspective, from their perspective. Don't they know there's a long-term marketable benefit towards appealing to our better selves?
You can already see the negative business impact in the network television entertainment schedules. All the reality shows - the quick bucks - tend to die out quickly, and many of the networks have massive holes in their schedules now, larger than in previous seasons. There's not many franchises anymore, no long-term investment, and hardly any reason for viewer loyalty. It's self-destructive.
It's too bad. It's kind of like marketing yourself as a fitness instructor, and then when you're hired, only taking your clients to the doughnut shop. They'll love you, and eventually fire you.