> Mmmm, think we're getting to an age where we need to reassess > what "tv quality programming" is and what it means. We're not > heading to a TV age, so the concept of TV programming will > probably not be terribly relevant in a few years or so.
The concept of TV programming may disappear because that's distribution. The important thing is not distribution, but content. And much of that content could be expensive. There will still be demand for big budget dramas like Pride and Prejudice, for special affects laden programmes like Doctor Who. Artists and writers will still start small and start building up large followings, and then start demanding large salaries. In other words, it still costs money :) > I'm not sure what PSB the BBC offers these days ... Dr Who, > Strictly Come Dancing, running auditions for Andrew Lloyd > Webber's musicals, Planet Earth, etc, etc, have no PSB > credentials whatsoever. The issue is that the definition of public service varies between people. There's a huge amount of data on Ofcom's website about this. It makes long, but interesting reading. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/psb_review/ Most interesting is a report done for Ofcom. Annoyingly I can't find the original report, but here's an article from the BBC News website about it. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3648007.stm In a survey for Ofcom, viewers rated the following four in order of importance for public service programming. News Sport Drama Soap Operas It was an interesting result, and just goes to show... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
