What Makes For Good TV?

[noman]

I fell in with a fast crowd at the local Applebee's the other night. After we watched, through the picture window, the grass grow, till the sun went down, we discussed the prospects for rain or no rain the next day.

We needed to continue our stimulation. So we watched, on ESPN, The National Soap Box Derby and topped that off with THE WORLD DART CHAMPIONSHIP(a triple 20 on the last round by "The Finalizer," Trumbleby to win!)

I learned a lot about making a quality soap box racer. And about quality made darts(feathers and all) and concentration, thrust, wrist rotation and dexterity.

Now, I'm not sure, in my too much exhilarated state, at the end of the evening, if any of it was GOOD TV or just TIME FILLING TV.(Maybe we should have watched Natasha beat Inger in THE SOMETHING 9-ball championship instead.

 

[Reachy]

It's amazing what you can see on the telly...

I was surfing Sky Digital (UK digital satelite service with about a billion channels!) and some of the stuff I ended up watching for more than 1 second included:

"Live" internet poker inc. expert commentary (I mean I could have just logged on to PokerStars and watched a random game for buddhas sake!)

Thigh master advertorial - My buns are not tight enough

African Evanglical Church Service - I'm clearly going to hell. Praise the Lord!

Booze Britain - Basically vicarious binge drinking! Cameras follow a group of mates on a night out getting absolutely hammered with a commentrary informing us on the damage they are doing to themselves. Oh to be young again!

Shedheads - Men and their sheds

Something about model jet fighters - They actually have real jet engines in them. This guy had an awesome F15!

World Eating Championship - Fat blokes eating butter and bulls testicles

World Orientiering Championships - People running through forests with maps, mostly scandanavian

Celebrity Blackjack - Munch was playing but I didn't know anybody else. Dealer had a funny haircut !

Cheers

Reachy

 

[fgk42]

Different strokes 4....

Noman,

The problem with your question is very simply this - who defines "Good"

When it comes to television (telly for our friends over the pond) defining "good" for the exec's isn't about quality, story line, learning, etc...

It all boils down to ratings. Higher ratings mean higher ad revenue.

Unfortunately in order to GET higher ratings you must put out a product that attracts the mass audience that get higher ad revenue. In America the Holy Grail for advertisers is 19-28 year old women and then men.

How do you attract this group? Many different ploys but that is why they have focus groups, numerous pilots, etc....

Now lets that this anology to the world of BJ.

I was spending some time playing yesterday while I was waiting for the airplane load (I was skydiving). People came over and saw me and the general comment was - ok, you're playing BJ. When I told them it was tournament BJ they weren't impressed.

Nevertheless other people play at PartyPoker.com and everyone is trying to tell them what to do, can I play, etc....

Why the difference? Exposure and television personalities. It will be interesting to see what happens when UBT hits CBS this fall. Not having seen the show, just the promo's like everyone else, I feel that it has potential to tap into the poker market.

My prediction however is that in order to draw more poker players they will have to switch the format to players holding cards with the pocket camera, just like poker.

Other changes to make in TV Blackjack to make it more "suspensful" and TV friendly:

1. Rotational betting on the button as is done now, Deal all players their two down cards - camera and TV audience can see but other players can't.
2. Deal the dealers up card - then allow the players to make an additional bet based on the dealers up card. The second bet, behind the original bet can be half to the same as the original bet.
3. Then as the player takes cards they can DD, split, etc... the same except when players bust they don't show their bust hands. That way other players at the table don't know if their opponent has busted or not.

That will bring some of the "poker" element into the game

Personally I wouldn't want to see this happen However I know that in order to get the commentators taking and the home audience feeling like they know something that the players don't it is likely that these gimmicks will be added at some time in the future in order to expand the viewing audience.

Then again this is just MY personal opinions and ideas

 

[AceDonovan]

Compel the viewers.

As someone who's spent most of their adult life working in broadcasting, I can say that the people that run things always use the word 'compelling'.

The belief is that one can display just about anything as long as it compels the viewer.

I think poker is a good example of this. Poker wasn't compelling before a few years ago when someone came up with the idea that showing the held cards could lead to the game being compelling. Prior to that, neither the viewers or the announcers had any idea what those cards were and it really didn't have the drama that it does now when it was shown that way. It was the same exact game with the same people, but the viewer just wasn't compelled.

Quite frankly, if done by the right production people and if it's editied correctly, almost anything can be compelling TV.

I agree that 'good' is relative, but compelling always works even if it isn't 'good'

 

[noman]

TV or not to TV

Quite frankly, if done by the right production people and if it's editied correctly, almost anything can be compelling TV.
I agree that 'good' is relative, but compelling always works even if it isn't 'good'

Ah Ace, you successful marketing pro.