• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

A MyNetwork TV reminder...

G

genius

Both Fashion House and Desire will reach their merciful conclusions this coming Tuesday, December 5th. On the the 6th, two new telenovelas will debut:

The first one, "Watch Over Me" stars Catherine Oxenberg of Dynasty fame and also stars a former Miss Universe in the lead role.

The second one, "Wicked, Wicked Games", will star Tatum O'Neal.


Boy do they know how to get Hollywood's biggest stars ;D I'm wondering if the ratings will go up for the network; they seem to have stablized after dropping and were around a .6 last I checked.
 
genius said:
Boy do they know how to get Hollywood's biggest stars ;D I'm wondering if the ratings will go up for the network; they seem to have stablized after dropping and were around a .6 last I checked.
Click to expand...
MyNetwork got a 0.6 in the ratings?! How's that compared to The CW's numbers for their shows?

That reminds me of the SNL skit in which Donahue's MSNBC show was among the VERY lowest-rated in cable in between "Eye Surgery with Dr. Elliott Nadel" and the "Black Israelites Hour."

Jonathan Allen
 
There can be no bigger stinker than McEnroe.

NBC cable: Crankin' out the hits!
 
The CW has about a 2.0 rating.
My Network at a 0.6 is a little lower than anticipated, but I suspect the network will stick with this telenovela programming for a full year to see if any of the shows hit.
 
LABreeze said:
Note to Rupert Murdoch: Unplug My Network TV. It's unwatchable and confusing!
Click to expand...

My main problem with MyNetworkTV is that it seeks to do the same thing UPN did, and that is define itself as a network for a certain racial group. Sitcoms featuring mostly blacks were ghettoized onto UPN instead of being given the opportunities Bill Cosby got, and now English programming with Hispanics is being ghettoized on MNTV. Like with UPN, there is no motivation to make the programs "good" for the suits of CBS, NBC, ABC, and even FOX.
 
I thought that My Network was branded to women, not hispanics.
 
I just saw the previews for both shows and I can truly say that the cheesiest, campiest one of all IMHO is Wicked Wicked Games. I read somewhere that Tatum O'Neal replaced original star Sean Young; after seeing the promos, I feel that this will definitely be just as bad either way. On the other hand, Watch Over Me may be the Desire of the pair as the former is the Fashion House; one might say that one show is better than the other despite both of them being pretty (no, check that, REALLY AND TRULY) awful. Pity the poor novice actors who have to spend day to day in San Diego filming a whole mess of televised trash to a rapidly splintering audience.

In parting, let me repeat my summation of this so-called "mini-network" - KILL IT!
 
Foe Paw said:
There can be no bigger stinker than McEnroe.

NBC cable: Crankin' out the hits!
Click to expand...
Hey now...let's not forget "Conversations with Michael Eisner" on CNBC. I heard one of them received a 0.0 awhile back.
 
If the television spectrum were narrowed down to 30 channels, there would be no room for underperformers. A single market should have CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, FOX, and up to four additional allotments. New York would have its existing stations from the five networks listed above, plus WPIX, WLIW and the two Spanish stations (one moving to 9 and the other to 31). With digital subchannels, there would be still plenty of OTA choices, e.g. whatever is on WWOR would move to Channel 5.2.
 
M.J. said:
If the television spectrum were narrowed down to 30 channels, there would be no room for underperformers. A single market should have CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, FOX, and up to four additional allotments. New York would have its existing stations from the five networks listed above, plus WPIX, WLIW and the two Spanish stations (one moving to 9 and the other to 31). With digital subchannels, there would be still plenty of OTA choices, e.g. whatever is on WWOR would move to Channel 5.2.
Click to expand...

Something for everything and everyone.
Isn't that the way today?
What ever happend to the idea of a 500 channel Universe anyway?
Too many shows being cancelled instead of being given a bit more of a life
on another tv station.

CBS's Clubhouse to name one. (I think it was CBS?)
 
Yeziknoradio said:
Something for everything and everyone.
Isn't that the way today?
What ever happend to the idea of a 500 channel Universe anyway?
Too many shows being cancelled instead of being given a bit more of a life
on another tv station.

CBS's Clubhouse to name one. (I think it was CBS?)
Click to expand...

The whole idea of a 500 channel universe was based on a faulty premise that there would actually be programming to fill those channels. I believed that over ten years ago. Adding channels doesn't just magically create new programming. TV would be better if the spectrum was narrowed, and there was only room for 58 channels on cable.
 
M.J. said:
The whole idea of a 500 channel universe was based on a faulty premise that there would actually be programming to fill those channels. I believed that over ten years ago. Adding channels doesn't just magically create new programming. TV would be better if the spectrum was narrowed, and there was only room for 58 channels on cable.
Click to expand...

Not to mention there channels that should be combined. What's the use if you have multiple channels endlessly re-running already terrible sitcoms to death?
 
Yes, Clubhouse was on CBS and ran ... 3 episodes about 3 seasons ago. I loved that show....except for the girl who used to be on Days of Our Lives
 
I think the demand is there and You Tube is starting to fill it. At the Public Library I see a lot of kids and they are all on You Tube (or myspace) and posting watching themselves.

It would be best for TV to go the way of on-demand. Kind of like when VCRs came out. Movies were against it till they realized the market for rentals which is a type of "on-demand."

As costs come down I can see TV unfortunately going away from free OTA to pay TV. This won't happen overnight but it seems to be the way. I expect soon TV stations will offer the OTA signal free and HDTV signal OTA scrambled as a pay per signal thing.
 
Mark said:
It would be best for TV to go the way of on-demand. Kind of like when VCRs came out. Movies were against it till they realized the market for rentals which is a type of "on-demand."

As costs come down I can see TV unfortunately going away from free OTA to pay TV. This won't happen overnight but it seems to be the way. I expect soon TV stations will offer the OTA signal free and HDTV signal OTA scrambled as a pay per signal thing.
Click to expand...

On-demand television theoretically could work at the OTA level. We do have wireless Internet towers springing up all over the place. In the future, Internet and television transmitters should be combined into one, but first the bandwidth needs to be expanded significantly in order to have quality video images. This will require many, many towers, much like with cellular phones. Once that happens, in order to watch the local news you'll go to your TV and connect with the local station's server accessed through the wireless Internet. Then, the local newscast will be transmitted from your local tower to the TV in the quality we know today. Radio will be the same way. Stations will still have callsigns, and based on markets stations will have the right to transmit on a family of towers throughout the market instead of one tower or a tower plus translators.
 
M.J. said:
In the future, Internet and television transmitters should be combined into one, but first the bandwidth needs to be expanded significantly in order to have quality video images.
Click to expand...

But remember younger people don't care as much about quality. Look they choose cell phones over land lines, MP3 over CDs, if it's convenient and "do-able" they prefer it over quality.
 
My Network TV's shows are not convenient and "do-able" - since you have to watch every day. Who wants to do that? Loosers, that is who.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom