Mourning the Death of the Meta Media Experience

I went cold turkey on TV 5+ years ago and while there was some withdrawl. I find that I have more time for other more important things. Cut the cord, I won't say TV is evil, it isn't just after the first month or so you will find yourself better off for it.

This is one of the most thought out and well written articles I think I have read on PopSci. Most of the articles written are concise and eye-catching, but I think this is the first time I have really had to think about what I just read. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about "the death of cable" because I am a proud channel surfer and love catching obscure one-offs on channels I haven't heard of before. I am also a heavy user of online TV like hulu simply because my schedule does not always allow me to catch the prime-time shows.

All this said, I still (and will always) believe that where there is a market--and thus the almighty profit--any company will find some way to access that market.

Good article. Considering the current options I completely agree that many folks will miss channel surfing. I recently cut off cable and watch all of the shows I am interested in online.

I do believe a hybrid between traditional cable and Hulu style consumption will emerge, especially if iTunes is the catalyst for the shift from traditional to new. Basically it would be as simple as Apple using its iTunes Genius reccommendation system to suggest shows you might enjoy.

Or even, if you feel like channel surfing, a Pandora style experience. You have created a channel that suits your likes and dislikes, and can just turn it on and veg out to whatever it pulls up.

I think that the download system goes awry in a few ways
1. Channel flipping -- I (and others) often flip between shows on occasion. In my case, this is especially true for football ( not all of which is available on free local channels). Can't imagine how you'd replace that with downloads.
2. Checking for new shows. I read the tv skeds, but there are often cases where I see the plugs for a new show and give it a chance.
3. Checking for shows in general. Hulu doesn't actually have that large of a selection, but it takes me a long time to search through it. Maybe Apple will do a better job.
4. Bandwidth. Right now cable /satellite send an amazing amount of data out in a fairly efficient manner. Downloading will likely increase the required bandwidth significantly.
5. Equipment. Now I will need a computer more or less dedicated to downloads. I will also need something to connect it to various TVs -- unless I choose to watch it on my computer. Of course, I could always watch it on my 4 inch smartphone ( whoopee)
6. Industry. This won't fly unless the entertainment industry does a major shift to support it. I doubt that they will.

I think that this will always be a niche market. Yes, it can be fun, and there will be those who've cut the cable. But there are those who don't have TVs -- or even radios.

Great article Tom, but:

You say that you don't like paying for thousands of channels you don't use, and then go on to say that you do like having those channels because without them, you would have no ability to flip through channels and find something interesting on. Thats why the so called "a la cart" television will never work. The truth is people don't know what they like until they see it, people want a selection of shows they've never heard of.
Also, it used to be that everybody would together watch whatever crap is on. Now there is competition for people's time and only the best shows actually get watched as they premier on television. It also means that if you did end up watching the same show last night as the guy next to you, you probably have a lot in common, similar tastes etc. Personally I still think the best experience is watching with friends - then you all watch the same thing and it doesn't matter if you catch it live or not.
What's so great about a unified television watching experience anyway? So we could all kill brain cells and waste time the same way, killing individualism and creativity, mass brainwashing the public? I'm getting a little ahead of myself. Leave this group watching experience for the movies (which also need to get with the technology program. Why can't I download a movie directly from the studio once its out on DVD? I have to go through intermediaries like Netflix or wait for HBO to play it?)

Apple is clearly the leading company to take down the traditional TV industry with the Apple TV and all - there are so many simple improvements to TV's that are coming as soon as someone figures out how to change the industry.

Here's a few ideas to throw around:
Why doesn't my TV have a built in hard drive for recording whatever I want?
Built in internet connection too, I don't want to have to have a show running through my computer's graphics card.
Apple TV is trying to take care of both of these ideas, albeit slowly.

I like SN12345's idea about a kind of Pandora for TV, but I must also point out that whats missing right now is the shows live streaming online at the same time that they're on TV. I still don't understand why most shows to get put On Demand until almost a week after they premier, and often don't end up on Hulu or other sites until after that.

Anyway what I'm really surprised about is no mention of commercials in this article, which to me is the biggest problem facing both the television industry and its consumers. We all forgot about the days when we had commercials for a reason: to shift the burden of cost away from the public, to big companies who want the public audience. We had commercials because we didn't pay for anything! Once you hooked up your TV and antennae the only cost was electricity! Now we've got all these monthly charges, and on top of that we have to deal with constantly increasing ratios of commercial to content. Thats why the only channels I'm satisfied with paying for are so called "premium channels" like HBO and Showtime. That's also why I have absolutely no moral issues with skipping Hulu and other commercial sites and downloading the higher quality, interruption free Torrents.
Damn I feel like I just wrote a whole article. I did a paper on this topic for school and I think about it a lot lol.

One-- especially in rough economic times, luxuries will be trimmed. A near $100 cable bill will be the first thing to go for most ordinary middle class folks in a bind. Because we ALL know that the BASIC $49 package has NOTHING.

Two-- Once you start selectively paying for shows on Amazon or iTunes, you develop a more selective viewing style. I look over a show, read the reviews and have to think, is this show REALLY worth my time and my money, or do I sample it on Hulu for free, if it's available. The TV industry is gonna have a hard time adjusting to this new mindset.

Three-- Once I went to DVD sets and iTunes, I found that I could no longer tolerate commercials, especially the vapid ones. Even on Hulu, I mute the sound and do something else and reset the playback to continue watching the show. The TV Advertising industry is still stuck in the 1970's modus Operandi. If I'm watching a serious, emotional drama, the commercial interruption should be appropriately toned and
compatible: I shouldn't go from a teary death scene to a screaming Blackberry Hip-Hop dance video. It's jarring and it pisses some viewers off. So I don't even bother-- I'll pay for commercial free viewing from iTunes. Besides-- do most people even realize that back in the 70's an Hour show was actually close to 52 minutes with 8 minutes for commercials? NOW an Hour show only amounts to 40 - 42 minutes. We are subjected to 20 minutes of dreck. I call that commercial overkill.

Four-- the Channel surfing thing. Yes, once in a blue moon, I'm up late and I don't want to go to bed, but I don't wanna watch anything specific-- but since I don't have Cable (And free digital TV sucks here in B'klyn NYC) But I don't wanna watch what I already downloaded. And it's hard to 'Surf' Hulu. And that's when I come face to face with my need for what I call "Truly Purposeless TV Viewing"

I defaulted to the only reasonable options: I'll either play a game for a turn or two, or I turn off the lights and go to bed.

Oh. . .Ice Cream helps, too.

I haven't had cable in 7 years. In fact I watch my dvd's or downloads from my computer monitor. So I technically haven't had a tv in any way in 7 years. And you know what? I haven't missed much at all.

I actually stopped watching TV on a regular basis when I went to college - in 1996. I didn't have a TV in college, but I did have the internet. I didn't have TV again until 2003, when I moved into my own place in Philadelphia, and to get cable internet, I had to get some cable TV package, so I got the cheapest one, which only had local channels. That's when I first started watching 24, and even then, I taped it with a VCR. When I discovered I could download episodes of 24 through BitTorrent, I didn't bother with the TV anymore. And then I watched The Nine, Bionic Woman, and most prominently, Heroes, from downloaded BitTorrent episodes. Then I discovered hulu, and I didn't have to wait for BitTorrent anymore, nor did I have to find space for everything on my computer, or an external hard drive, or what have you. So I'm already off the TV broadcast schedule. And if the rumors of an iTunes subscription service are true, I can just get an AppleTV, hook it up to a television, and then broadcast TV is completely done for.

My husband rarely watches TV anymore. His schedule (shift work) doesn't allow for it, so most of what he watches is online. It's fine for both of us, because he doesn't truly miss the channel surfing and I don't have to fight for the remote. Now he just complains that he doesn't have time to watch all the stuff he actually Wants to watch.

As for the communal experience, that too can be shifted online. There are plenty of forums you can find that are willing to discuss whatever show you wish. You not restricted to your face-to-face contacts anymore. And just because you can watch at any time doesn't mean you will all be watching at different days or times; the movie theatre is still packed on opening night for a reason.

Having worked with the military trying to squeeze more data into its limited (but bungled) satellite spectrum, the answer to this dilemma suddenly hit me - a nationwide system that combines satellite broadcast with on-demand - and data storage sort of like a nationwide satellite jukebox.

Why in the heck are we wasting precious bandwidth broadcasting the same programs via 2 satellites, multiple cable/fiber systems and broadcast, and THEN adding all the internet based systems? A satellite network amortizes out to about a quarter per American per year.

If we got our act together and gathered up our requests via internet and then blasted them down en masse via one satellite (most programs would download while we sleep) we would turn a system trying to accommodate 300 million people all randomly yelling "I WANT IT NOW!" into a continental equivalent of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.

Satellite "providers" have pulled off what every waterworks provider dreams of - taking a ridiculously cheap and abundant but highly desired product and make great profits not by providing it, but by restricting it. Satellite should become "net neutral" system that transmits like the internet, not a gatekeeper that profits by restricting.

That's why we (my suggestion is a consumer owned corporation) should buy up one satellite system. You would pay nothing for access. The hardware would be open source. All you would pay is the price of the video you are ordering (wow, just like how you buy everything else)plus about a penny a gigabyte to support the satellite network.

Seeing how much of TV is commercial spam, rebroadcast, reruns or near useless filler such as infomercials, this would allow much of what we get on the internet (videos, podcasts, etc.) to come down via the same method - just like magazines and newspapers are delivered.

This will be in my upcoming book, the stem to stern critique of advertising based mass media “Shoot the Messenger”. I hope to have it up with my first book at www.politicalspecies.com

I quit watching tv almost 30 years ago (I was in my late teens back then). I don't miss it, and I feel more creative with my time.
Now, if I wanna watch a movie I just pop a dvd in my computer or download an anime off the net and view it at home.
I spend my time offline, and creating stuff (3D animations) more than I care to watch tv.
I don't miss it at all; but I still watch the news when I wanna see the weather reports or any latebreaking news in my area.
Otherwise, I've been better without it after all these years; and not having a tv in my home has also saved me from having to worry about making the transition from analog tv to digital buying all the crap gear just for
that needless waste-of-time.

Live sports is the only thing that has kept me on the satellite teat, and I yearn for a solution to cut that cord. As a football fan in a small market, the only way for me to see the games that interest me is through DirecTV's near-larcenous "Sunday Ticket."

I find that for the few shows outside live sports that interest me, purchasing them a la carte via XBox Live is very cost effective. I've therefore persuaded DirectV to begrudgingly "suspend" my account for the six months of the year that constitutes the NFL offseason.

I got something to say that is off topic, but needs media attention, in a technical forum. Big news today is Rupert Murdoch is saying that online news media should be paid for their content, as subscription. I contend that the Internet is a medium that grows literally by it's own access. His unwanted information is passing through my computer off and on all day, same as yours. The amount of data I can assimilate in a day is nothing compared to what my machine really transfers. I contend that if information is to be counted in bits and assigned a base value, he should be paying me. Oh, and by the way, Rupert, I subscribe to various publications, such as Pop Sci, Discover, SI, Smithsonian, and a local paper. It's quite possible I introduce more fact to the internet than you do.

I have read a large majority of the comments posted here and i think its safe to say now that there is a bigger issue at large regarding what was and what is to become. As much as the popular networks hate to admit it, it's the veiwer that controls the ratings and thusly what is broadcast and what shows are cancelled after only a season or two. Now, the issue at large i would say is that we are all now becoming more independent in our thought rather than a state of collective consciousness as far as our veiwing is concerned. There seems to be a major shift towards personal compatibility with what one wants to watch rather than what is broadcast. No one has time anymore to watch programming when the show is actually shown. long gone are the days when men were the breadwinners working 9-5 shifts and coming home by six o' clock to watch the primetime shows while the wife stays home with the kids. nowadays we have both men and women in the workplace. Add to this the internet variable, which allos us (me) to watch Heroes or (my favorite) The daily Show with Jon Stewart on a mobile smart phone. Technology has changed the dynamic of personal media indulgence. Soon we will all be able to download our favorite experiences through a mental cable wire directly connected to the pleasure centers of our brains and hopefully this will end the eternal question: "where'd you put the remote control?"

We certainly cannot afford to continue teaching our students only the literacies of the mid-20th century, or even to simply lay before them the most advanced and diverse literacies of today. No one can predict the transformations of 21st-century society during the information technology revolution. Will the literacies we teach today help them choose wisely. The semiotic capacity of human beings makes us infinitely adaptable in terms of the meanings we attach to our experience, but not all of those possible adaptations will allow our species to survive.
| Written by Dimitri from Eat Healthier Foods |

Good article. Considering the current options I completely agree that many folks will miss channel surfing. I recently cut off cable and watch all of the shows I am interested in online.

I do believe a hybrid between traditional cable and Hulu style consumption will emerge, especially if iTunes is the catalyst for the shift from traditional to new. Basically it would be as simple as Apple using its iTunes Genius reccommendation system to suggest shows you might enjoy.

Or even, if you feel like channel surfing, a Pandora style experience. You have created a channel that suits your likes and dislikes, and can just turn it on and veg out to whatever it pulls up.

Greets from Germany and a Zauberer Firmenfeier and Pianist Dirk Schieborn

Hi there... this is very interesting. Wish I would have found this webpage earlier. Regards, http://www.massagesessel-angebote.de

A very interesting site of view. I`m only watching tv during the news-break. As I`m often on the road I watch tv online through my mobile.
Greetings
Zauberer De Pasco
http://www.depasco.de

I don't watch nearly as much television as I used to and I think I'm much more sensitive to the commercials which are present in most shows on cable.

I don't watch nearly as much television as I used to and I think I'm much more sensitive to the commercials which are present in most shows on cable. arizona seo