…except of course for the fact that MTV has nine other channels, seven of which are MTV branded, all of which predominantly show music videos, and you probably wouldn't watch MTV if it was still playing videos today either.
Their shows are not supposed to appeal to people who watched MTV twenty or thirty years ago
Same with Discovery, all the educational/traditional shows are carted off to the sister genre channels (like Discovery Science, History etc..) whilst Discovery is male-skewed entertainment reality shows.
…except of course for the fact that MTV has nine other channels, seven of which are MTV branded, all of which predominantly show music videos, and you probably wouldn't watch MTV if it was still playing videos today either.
Their shows are not supposed to appeal to people who watched MTV twenty or thirty years ago
Same with Discovery, all the educational/traditional shows are carted off to the sister genre channels (like Discovery Science, History etc..) whilst Discovery is male-skewed entertainment reality shows.
Oh please! Just because a large company does it, doesn't make it right! They're only showing these programmes because they're easy to make, cheap to produce and keep the viewing public none the wiser. It's dross. It's a way of keeping people from knowing about what's
really
going on.
It's not exactly on BBC One primetime is it? It's an MTV show, they're free to make whatever kind of programming they want, it's not like if they weren't making it then suddenly teenagers would be really interested in the news and "what's really going on". That's a very condescending point of view to have and rather belittles those who choose to watch shows like this.
Look at it from a business sense, Geordie Shore and it's participants generate a lot of brand awareness for MTV, which equals the right demo watching MTV, alas advertising revenue for Viacom.
I'm baffled to why Love Island is on ITV2 when they have a structured reality channel in ITVBe to show it, yet I suspect it's one of those shows which has a larger budget, which is why it's on a higher profile channel, even if it's slightly off target for the current format of the channel.
It's not exactly on BBC One primetime is it? It's an MTV show, they're free to make whatever kind of programming they want, it's not like if they weren't making it then suddenly teenagers would be really interested in the news and "what's really going on". That's a very condescending point of view to have and rather belittles those who choose to watch shows like this.
The 1.115million that recently watched an edition of Geordie Shore should be ashamed of themselves. If they want to watch that kind of thing, just go out to a club every Friday or Saturday night, you'll see that kind of stuff. it isn't needed on our TV sets too.
It's not exactly on BBC One primetime is it? It's an MTV show, they're free to make whatever kind of programming they want, it's not like if they weren't making it then suddenly teenagers would be really interested in the news and "what's really going on". That's a very condescending point of view to have and rather belittles those who choose to watch shows like this.
The 1.115million that recently watched an edition of Geordie Shore
It's not exactly on BBC One primetime is it? It's an MTV show, they're free to make whatever kind of programming they want, it's not like if they weren't making it then suddenly teenagers would be really interested in the news and "what's really going on". That's a very condescending point of view to have and rather belittles those who choose to watch shows like this.
The 1.115million that recently watched an edition of Geordie Shore
Which proves why MTV keep producing the show.
Yes, I'm not defending these shows or saying they're any good, but it's silly going on some sort of moral crusade as if people are being corrupted by simply watching shows like this.
My biggest gripe, especially with the Shore series', is the insistence that the people in it are worthy of celebrity status. I still don't know what Charlotte Crosby has done of any significance besides get drunk and sleep around with people.
The 1.115million that recently watched an edition of Geordie Shore
Which proves why MTV keep producing the show.
Yes, I'm not defending these shows or saying they're any good, but it's silly going on some sort of moral crusade as if people are being corrupted by simply watching shows like this.
How about just the fact that it's making people believe such behaviour is acceptable, when it plainly isn't. There are people out there who believe because TV shows something in a documentary or reality show, that because it is shown, it is acceptable to do it. Some people consider getting blind drunk every week a right, a rebellion after a week in work, where as sane people consider it what it is, something that demeans you, something that makes you look incredibly bad, and something that shows you cannot control yourself. Yet youngsters these days almost consider it a right of passage, because it is almost glorified by shows like Geordie Shore.
Entertaining the masses by humiliating them, that's a great way to get people to watch your channel... [/sarcastic]
I was just flicking between channels and on Channel 5 between the Big Brother spin-off programme, there was an advert featuring Geordie Shore characters for a phone company where they'd give a pass to watch MTV content for going on a tariff.
Great crossover promotion for the phone company and C5's parent company Viacom.
Some TV channels, such as the History Channel, no longer live up to their name because of a total change in the type of programmes they offer. It could be argued that the History Channel just lives off it's name which is why it hasn't been changed to reflect the current output of programmes.
…except of course for the fact that MTV has nine other channels, seven of which are MTV branded, all of which predominantly show music videos, and you probably wouldn't watch MTV if it was still playing videos today either.
Their shows are not supposed to appeal to people who watched MTV twenty or thirty years ago
Same with Discovery, all the educational/traditional shows are carted off to the sister genre channels (like Discovery Science, History etc..) whilst Discovery is male-skewed entertainment reality shows.
Oh please! Just because a large company does it, doesn't make it right! They're only showing these programmes because they're easy to make, cheap to produce and keep the viewing public none the wiser. It's dross. It's a way of keeping people from knowing about what's
really
going on.
Did I say I agree with the practice? I'm just stating what they do.