A friend of mine in the business doesn't have a TV. But these days that doesn't mean "I'm a snob, TV is beneath me." It means "Who watches anything on an actual TV any more?" You can watch more and more stuff on your computer. If it's broadcast you're after, you can get a TV capture card. If you want to see some HBO shows, but you don't necessarily want to be on the hook for the monthly fee, you can download shows from, say, Amazon On Demand
iTunes works, too.
While the broadcast networks really haven't solved their big headache -- fewer people watching ads, which are what is supposed to pay for the broadcast -- big entrepreneurial companies like Amazon and Apple are stepping up with a simply pay-per-view model that works nicely.
Will it rescue TV? Who knows. I think so. People want to be told stories, and they'll pay for it if that's the only way to get it. We're used to getting the stories for free, but that may be a historical anomaly.
Labels: TV distribution tech
I'm also in the "Don't have an actual TV" camp, and largely watch things in some combination of Hulu, Netflix (discs and live streaming via our PS3), and so forth. I keep up with Bones and Castle on Hulu, and Hulu is the only reason I even knew about and watched Southland when it first premiered. Our household "TV" is a PS3 hooked to a projector, so we're not even in a position to watch network TV if we wanted to.
My preference is still either an advertising (Hulu) or a subscription (Netflix) model. I suspect I might adjust over time, but a la cart purchasing of TV shows currently tends to drive me away -- especially if the purchase gives me temporary access rights, yet approaches the cost of incrementally buying that episode's worth of an eventual DVD collection. In that case, I'd rather just buy the DVDs (which I've done with Buffy, BSG, Pushing Daisies, and some others).
Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.