Do you watch TV?

Jesus Caissa, does your employer know how much time you spend babbling from work?  (confession...mine doesn't)

No i dont watch tv anymore. I hate the corporate messages. I dont want crap filing up my mind.

My relationship with TV has been up and down.  As a kid, I watched tons and tons and tons of TV, probably way more than was good for me.  Every night after school, straight to the television until supper, then television until bed. 

When I went into high school, my TV viewing dropped by a huge amount because I got involved in extra-curricular activities every weeknight.  I watched on weekends, but even weekends were generally filled with activities with friends and with bands I was in.

When I left high school, I got a minimum wage job and couldn't afford cable when I moved out on my own.  I thought I would miss it terribly, but surprisingly, I didn't.

When I got married, we didn't have cable either. We used rabbit ears because we couldn't afford cable.  Just before I had my baby, we ended up getting cable - I think because there was a deal on, or whatever.  That was the first time since living on my own that I had cable.  I went from about 18 years old to 26 years old without it, except for a couple of brief stints living with my parents during that time, when they had it.  My reason for wanting cable was to watch Newsworld, believe it or not! I'd become addicted to it while living with my father for a few months before getting married. :)

I watched television relatively regularly after that.  I watched cooking shows on PBS on Saturday mornings and early afternoons.  I watched Newsworld - in fact, CounterSpin with Avi Lewis was always re-run at around 4 a.m. which was perfect for middle-of-the-night baby feedings!

When I moved to Kingston to go to university, I think we got cable because we were used to it, and we also got cable internet.  When I separated and got my own place, I got cable internet and then just the very basic cable added on, which was an extra $10.  I didn't watch a ton of television, but did watch the "educational" kids tv channels with the little one.

When I moved to Toronto, I didn't get cable TV, but I did get cable internet.  No extra money for TV and didn't feel like I needed it.  Then I moved into an apartment where the cable was included, so I had cable, and ended up watching more TV again. 

In December, I moved in with radiorahim, who doesn't have cable tv but uses rabbit ears.  I didn't think I'd have a problem with going back to no cable, but thought my son would have a problem with it.  As it turns out, it doesn't bother my son at all - he doesn't miss it, because like me, he spends more time on the internet.

So, I don't watch much TV now and don't have cable.  Most of my screen time (and way too much of it, I think) is spent in front of a laptop monitor.

There is nothing inherently wrong with TV. It can actually have an educative nature. Our sons watch Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy every weeknight. Wheel has helped our younger son (8) to develop pattern recognition and his predictive reading skills. Jeopardy has provided our older son (13) with new trivia and a sense of pride when he does know the answer.

I got a satellite dish cause it was the only way I could watch Canadian channels (I live in Virginia) and my wife likes watching international soccer games that you can only get on satellite. That said, aside from news and sports (and Sesame Street now that we're parents), we don't watch a ton of TV. At least in the normal way. We tend to get DVD box sets of shows and watch a whole bunch at a time which I find way better than watching one episode per week at a set time. Oh and if anyone is looking for a good show to watch, you have to see Breaking Bad. We're hooked on it.

I'm with Caissa on this, more or less.  *Good* TV can be very good.  I love intelligent drama and well done news - though there is a decided lack of quality news and current affairs programming on TV, cable, satelite, or over-the-air.

Having said that... I don't watch TV.  There's isn't a set in my house.  I do watch a lot of video online, and I'd watch more TV generated programming online if I could get true high speed.

I've been without TV for nearly ten years. 

I have a sat dish and receiver, and my subscription ($90/month)  is for roughly 35 English and 20 French channels, along with roughly 20 all-music channels, and I think 15 all-radio channels, and roughly 40 PPV channels.   I doubt I've used more than 20% of my entire satellite programming, and I'll use PPV maybe twice a year - in the past I watched the Harry Potter series on PPV until they were released for free on The Movie Network. The Movie Network, included in the numbers I listed already, gives me seven full time 24/7 movie viewing, which is clearly ridiculous. In addition, there are two classic movie channels, focusing mainly on movies released between say 1920 and 1960, and many in black and white. I live in a very isolated area, and televisions with sat dishes are a lifeline here. Occasionally the sat dish gets out of kilter (as during my recent renovations) and it's a pain getting it back in sync with the satellite signal.

Really all of this reality can be boiled down to we are being told that we need to keep on "killing ourselves to live"*.

That is what the G8 and G20 leaders actually discussed, last week end and what we are actually told by the media, and others. every minute of everyday.

The protestors, no matter what action they took, really are stating they do not support "killing ourselves to live". The police on the other hand think they need to kill us in order to live, and do not realize they are killing themselves to live too.

* Black Sabbath

I'm not sure if it was on CBC radio's "Quirks and Quarks"  or on "Spark" but a guy was interviewed about his hypothesis that the human brain is changing, or our thought processes are changing due to the interpipes. (geez, Skadl, everyone knows it's interpipes) 

He says that the kind of thought process that is required in reading, where we concentrate for long periods on a string of letters and words on a page is very different than the kind of flitting about we do on the internet.   And, he went on to say that the kind of thinking we do on line, reading a bit, clicking a link because such and such interests us, and going hither and thither is probably the natural state of the human mind.    He compared it to living in the natural world where we'd be walking through and environment, constantly shifting our attention to look for food and for predators.  

The kind of thought process where we concentrate for long periods on one thing is an "unnatural" state.

The program began by the interviewer-- now that I think, it must have been "Spark"-- remarked how reading had become difficult, that sitting down and losing herself in a book had become a thing of the past.

And, here, I thought it was just me.  The very same thing has happened to me.  Thankfully, I find that when I do sit down and spend a bit of time to "get into"  a book, my brain seems to settle into the old pattern and the skill comes back.   But, it's not like the old days when it was so automatic there was no effort for me to settle into a book.

I wonder if the same can be said for turning away from T.V.?  Yes, I still have programs I like to watch.  Many of them are information based documentaries.  Some are for turning my brain off-- like "Robot Chicken" or lately, "Futurama" before bedtime.  

But on documentaries.... I've been critical here and other places about documentaries on the History chanel or Discovery that seem rather padded to me.  Reviews of the previous segment after a commercial break, repetitions of neat computer graphics or things blowing up.   While I do think it's a cheap pretext (hey, I wrote essays in high school, you can't bullshit a bullshiter) to draw out a half hours worth of research into a hour long or sometimes two hour documentary, but maybe...maybe my brain has changed to and I don't have the patience that I had before.  

On the interpipes, information flows to me at my pace, and if it doesn't, I'm off to where it does in a second.

Back to the issue, I agree with Tommy B.  For what I need and use T.V. for, I seem to be paying way too much for it.   And, while I agree with Michelle that the very inappropriately named "Family Chanel" can be used to dissect the messages in the same way that Roadrunner cartoons can be used to teach physics, I still find it disturbing.  

But the "Spark" interview has made me wonder how much of that decision making is based on a re-evaluation of what T.V. brings to the table, and how much might be due to the fact that our brains have changed.   We no longer have the ports to download that obsolete information provider properly.

When I was a kid, my dad used to watch tv with us and point out the "American and capitalist" propaganda in pretty much everything. I do something similar - I constantly analyze what I am seeing (ideology, propaganda, etc.) and I think this actually sharpens my critique and my critiquing, while giving me some awareness of what people around me are taking in. 

(Yes, I like mythbusters, too .)

Hey, there was a recent show where I got ALL the answers right.  However, there were shows in the past where I didn't fare so well.  I think the questions were easy that day.  

What do you think of the host, Boom Boom?  I think he's a bit of a misanthropist, to be honest.  I don't watch the show very often because of that.   Not anything he's ever said, it's just this wierd unfriendly vibe I get off him.   Maybe because he's got to host the show while driving in Toronto?

Yeah, Spark is kinda more miss than hit with me, too.   And yes, it was Spark.  

I've been at the NFB site to watch some shorts and cartoons. (eg, "the big snit")  It's not as user freindly, say, as youtube, but for the few extra mouse clicks that it takes, it's easily worth exploring.

I tried hard to find the Spark broadcast on line to link to it, concerning the story, and I'm sure it's there somewhere, but I ran out of patience trying to find it.

flit flit flit.

Wow, 30 posts in and nobody will admit to watching trashy USian t.v. shows?

Fine, I'll be the first, with a caveat.

My (now) ex and I, when we moved in together 3 years ago, had basic cable paid for by our housing co-operative. We decided to pay for a "top up" of the magic PVR machine and 1,000, yes, one-fucking-THOUSAND channels. Ok, one of those channels is for the laundry room to see if there are machines vacant, but COME ON. I affectionately blame my ex who's a documentary editor and all-around media hound. I certainly don't need 1,000 channels to watch "Seinfeld" reruns. I rarely clicked higher than 80 or so anyways.

And yeah, a few times over the past three years there's been NOTHING ON.

But the PVR thing is way cool, it stores up to 30 hours of shows, including ones to watch again. I saw this squirrel documentary that we recorded by accident which was hilarious. Filmed in Toronto, the premise was people trying to keep squirrels away from their gardens, bird-feeders, etc. Spoiler alert: the squirrels won.

And the best thing about the PVR is zipping through commercials. My ex and I had an expression: "Real time is for chumps".

So we were able to watch bad, trashy USian t.v. without the added insult of the commercials. And what did I watch? The "Law and Order" series, especially SVU; the "CSI" series (especially "CSI: Miami" for Horatio and his unique delivery of his lines) until it got too gruesome, sadly not as soon as one would hope; reruns of ""Friends" and "Sex in the City", and "Extreme Home Makeover".

There, now my secrets are out.

If I ever happened upon a show in real-time, I would forget, and be poking futilely at the FF button when the commercials came on, then laugh at myself. 

I'm changing apartments in a couple of months and the 1,000 channels will not be coming with me. Nor will the gigantor t.v. that was jointly purchased that I have no use for. Like Michelle, I hardly watch t.v. these days, and I won't miss it.

The only thrashy American TV show I watch over and over is Seinfeld - I guess I'm addicted to it, and I always know the jokes before they're said. That said, I guess 99% of the movies I watch on The Movie Network are American, but I don't find many of the ones I watch thrashy at all.

I gave up my cable 5 years ago when I moved. However, there was one of those old antenna towers so I hooked up to that and get about 10 Cdn stations. Used to get PBS until it went digital. So, I will admit to watching some USian shows - Heroes in particular but Lie to Me is sort of entertaining. I periodically visit a friend who lives in the 1,000 channel universe and have watched Treme on HBO as well as Spartacus (wow - talk about spectacles). 

One thing I should confess to -- and if I don't, Catchfire will call me out on it, although then I'll get to call him out too -- and I'm dying with shame here, too -- I want you to know that ... I follow Britain's Got Talent and the X Factor while they're running. Obviously I can't follow them on TV here, but you can usually get the vids at YouTube within 24 hrs (the British sites block Canadians from viewing vids on site, something to do with their licence).

I tried watching the Merkin equivalents but ... feh. Those don't work for me. They seem to work for Simon Cowell, who is now obscenely rich, and yes, I know what a bastard he is. For some reason, though, the British shows get me feeling all sobby when someone with terrific talent suddenly gets a chance.

Go ahead. Cast nasturtiums. I can take it.

I make tv.  Consequently, much of the time I spend watching television is work time for me.  I need to know what a network is programming if I'm going to pitch the right projects to the right people, or to shape projects for potential licensors.  So I have all the channels, pretty much, and I watch a little of this and a little of that.

Discovery, btw, is the channel that we in the biz call "toys for boys".  They've captured a largely male demographic from about 30 up.  There's some female crossover, but they're programming is largely targeted to that group.  History is a slightly older male demographic.  Now that they've started using a new method for ratings and who's watching what, they're finding that more men are watching HGTV and Food Network, and more women than they thought are drifting into History's demographic...  Basically, one turns to the channel and the spouse doesn't necessarily leave - so they're looking to build on some of that.

But enough business talk...

On the rare occasions I watch for pleasure, I love HBO and we watch Desperate Housewives because it's just plain escapist fun.  I also have a fascination with some of TLC's programming.  I watch CBC for docs, both in terms of business and pleasure.  Since we got an HD television, we've started watching the HD channels like Equator, Treasure and Rush.  Some good international programming and the picture...  Sorry, not going to get that on a dinky computer screen.

Although I will watch programming online that I can't get on the telly...

Ya this tiny 21" LCD screen is hard on my eyes. I might need something bigger in future to watch video over high speedy internet, like they are able to in Japan and other countries.

George Gilder, 2000 wrote:

The Law of Television Obsolescence

Television, high powered and low choice, will die. It is rapidly giving way to the Internet's low-powered bandwidth with myriad choices. A corollary of this law concerns advertising: TV advertisements are not adds; they are minuses. Most Internet banners are not adds either. They will give way to informational and transactional ads that people want. The Internet empowers the customer; in the future companies will not be able to tease or trick their customers into reading their ads.

I hate ads. They're minuses.

LOL, if we are all coping to trash tv- i will 2- we watch our fair share - namely mtv, like shot of love 1,2,3, the city, and ugh....can't believe i'm admitting to this (don't judge me too harshly) jersey shore- where both of watched in gasp-faced silence; sharing looks of horror- but unable to look away. Also Housewives, nothing better than Real Housewives marathons when u're sick and  feel like $£%*:P

Oh, I definitely watched Sex and the City when I had cable. And even worse -- I watched it on the Cosmo channel every Saturday night when they had about 10 episodes in a row -- because I always had my son with me on Saturday nights and he went to bed around 9 or 9:30, so that was my Sex and the City time until just past midnight. :)

st_zed wrote:

LOL, if we are all coping to trash tv- i will 2- we watch our fair share - namely mtv, like shot of love 1,2,3, the city, and ugh....can't believe i'm admitting to this (don't judge me too harshly) jersey shore- where both of watched in gasp-faced silence; sharing looks of horror- but unable to look away. Also Housewives, nothing better than Real Housewives marathons when u're sick and  feel like $£%*:P

A lot of those shows I can only watch in small bits, but I like to keep tabs.  

Years ago, I was surfing around late at night and I caught a show called "Cheaters".  As sucintly as I can, the show is about spouses who think their wife or husband is cheating on them.  They hire the show to follow the suspect spouse.   If they confirm that they are in fact cheating, they arrange a surprise confrontation between the three, while the cheating spouse is with the person they are cheating with.

It's painfull to watch.   Even more painfull is when you find that the show targets working class/working poor people.  They do this because if you contract with them, but it gets too painfull for you to go through with the confrontation, you are on the hook for the cost of the survelance and all those costs.   Few, I bet, can afford that, so there are many reluctant people who go through with the grotesque confrontation.

And, the producer of the show is a real sleazoid who eggs people on and does what he can to provoke violence during the emotional turmoil.

Being a person with shred of decency at least, I confess to watching a few episodes just to see how nasty this was.  Then I found myself watching a bit more, hoping that someone would pull a knife or a gun on the host producer.  It was at that point I realized the "hook" for people like myself and I haven't watched an episode since.  They'd never show something like that.   But, in fact they did.   Unfortunately the host producer made a full recovery.   The show has been criticized for hireing actors, scripting stuff and presenting as unscripted, and various members of the production company have been in and out of court on one charge or another.

But that's the hook, even if wallowing around in the misery of other people isn't your thing, there's also the hope that there will be some kind of rough justice against the depravity you are watching.   

Similarly, I would think "Real Housewives of..." would itself provoke a revolution.   I mean, for the most part it's women who's only skill in life is marrying well, and living high on the hog.  I wouldn't think it would play very well to women who are working two jobs in Middle America to make ends meet.

But, I think it does.   Instead of outraging people, it makes them feel better about themselves.  They see these women who have everything behaving, in many instances, rather shabbily and shallowly to their "friends", and it makes Ms. working her fingers to the bone in Ohio feel better, validated even, about her lot in life.

I'm watching True Blood season 2 right now via DVD... it's an absolutely amazing TV show.

500_apples, just wait until they unmask maryann- its @#$%^& 'ing crazy!!!- season 3 is turning out EXTREMELY homoerotic which is interesting and worth watching within itself;) lol.

Hoarders is pure exploitation. Next illness to depict will be Alzheimer's (watch the confused old man soil himself).

Disgusting.