Whose responsibility are TV listings?
On our daily TV page this week, we eliminated the listings for the premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.). By dropping them, we were able to expand the space in the grids, making the other 60+ listings easier to read and follow.
Some readers objected and asked for their return. When we explained why we did it, some understood. Others disagreed.
I've suggested to some that their complaint is with the cable company. Can you imagine providing a service, without providing a guide to the service? That's what the cable company does -- as do individual television stations, for that matter. And when you pay extra for premium service -- buying HBO, for instance -- wouldn't you expect to get a guide to what is coming on? My understanding is that the cable company will provide one, for a fee. (I don't know. I have cable, but don't buy HBO.) My suggestion was usually greeted with laughter.
It's true that over the years we have trained readers that they can find listings in the paper. But in recent years, we haven't been able to keep up with the explosion of different channels. As a result, I am pretty sure that we haven't provided complete listings of what's on television for several years.
I have also suggested people can get the listings online or by using their remotes, if they have expanded cable. But, really, if I wanted to know what is coming on HBO at 8 p.m. tonight, I would call the cable company, rather than the newspaper.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
All good points JR and I tend to agree with all.
I think what would be INCREDIBLY helpful for readers who are interested in TV would be a comprehensive list of what shows are available online for free.
After recently moving, I tried to do no cable and used various websites to watch most shows I cared about.
But this was incredibly hard to pin down and remember as some shows are on some websites (Network vs. Hulu vs. some other strange sites) and not others. Also some are there for only a few days and appear online a day after the airing on TV. (it's very confusing, but well worth it if you can figure it out.)
I think a comprehensive list of shows by network (maybe? -- limiting it to the top 20-rated shows -- maybe?) would be very valuable to readers -- as I said it's very hard to figure out and remember...but rewarding once one figures it out.
This could easily be content that is shared among Landmark papers, thus making it more worthwhile to the entire group and could cut 'costs' for assembling the data... (a group for now, at any rate...)
The added side benefit for this is that it could help hasten TV viewers' move to network WEB sites for their viewing -- thus actually 'cutting out' local over-the-air affailite web sites or on-programming on local stations (the BIG, HUGE, GIGANTIC fear among local TV stations).
Posted on October 5, 2008 5:45 PM
So when I pay for my subscription I should realize that if you don't have it(premium cable) the newspaper will stop reporting/listing it? This sort of limits the use of my subscription to being a reflection of your tastes or purchases.
Posted on October 5, 2008 9:09 PM
Kill your TV.
Posted on October 6, 2008 4:59 AM
Amen, brother!
Posted on October 6, 2008 2:20 PM
Blow up your TV
Throw away your paper
Move to the country
Build yourself a home
Plant yourself a garden
Grow a lot of peaches
Try to find Jesus / Allah
On your own
John Prine
Posted on October 6, 2008 4:21 PM
Maybe Jeff Weeks wasnt so bad afterall... judging from these comments..
Posted on October 7, 2008 4:02 PM