I've heard this argument before. In sports, we have the vignette and mini doc. I remember back when there was a time that you couldn't see a NASCAR or Indy race flag-to-flag because the producers thought it was uninteresting to the masses. In order to have the broadest appeal, you had to show all sorts of other programming within the race coverage to break up all that boring cars going around a circle thing. Who would ever pay attention to that? Why would anyone watch? My arguments back in the 1970s about the lousy way that races were covered, my argument today about much of the Olympics coverage, is those who are interested in the subject will watch. Those not interested will not. Altering the presentation in a substantive way to appeal to the masses should not include "dumbing down" the subject matter. It insults the audience and drives away those who were initially interested in the subject. Make the show interesting, but do not talk down to your audience. I just watched "Shores of a Cosmic Ocean" (Episode 1 of Cosmos 1980) again to make sure that I wasn't just misremembering the way the science was presented. The information was almost identical. The presentation was much more mesmerizing, captivating, inciting.
Like I said, I will watch this entire new series. But, so far, it is a pale shadow of what it is supposed to be.
Like I said, I will watch this entire new series. But, so far, it is a pale shadow of what it is supposed to be.
