Yet, you can make statements about people's intellegence?Goes to show that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.Disclaimer - I have never watched "The Walking Dead", so I have no idea why it's popular.
Yet, you can make statements about people's intellegence?Goes to show that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.Disclaimer - I have never watched "The Walking Dead", so I have no idea why it's popular.
I'm not sure I understand the point of your reply.Goes to show that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
It has not, and I'll bet won't happen.
Only that scientific programs shown on NatGeo, Discovery, etc. are generally more intelligent than zombie dramas. Having said that, there are plenty of dumbed down shows on NatGeo and the other so-called scientific networks too. Again, programming to the taste of the masses.I'm not sure I understand the point of your reply.
Certainly, the original programming on AMC (Mad Men, The Killing, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead, etc) is more intelligent than that of TV Land (Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, etc), SyFy (Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus), MTV (wall to wall retards), and even much of Comedy Central (other than Daily Show or Colbert), and Animal Planet (mostly stupid reality-type shows now).
There are only a handful of non-premium cable channels offering quality, intelligent programming. And, AMC is easily among that group.
It needs to be...to pay the ridiculous contract they inked for Mad Men.The Walkind Dead has become a serious money maker.
"Plenty" is an understatement. There is more dumb crap than quality, intelligent, programming on any of the science/learning channels. If you remove all of the reality programming, all of the shows about blowing stuff up, flinging stuff, families with too many kids, or diving in sewage, there is very little left on those networks.Only that scientific programs shown on NatGeo, Discovery, etc. are generally more intelligent than zombie dramas. Having said that, there are plenty of dumbed down shows on NatGeo and the other so-called scientific networks too. Again, programming to the taste of the masses.
They also make big money with Mad Men. It ain't just ad dollars, you know.It needs to be...to pay the ridiculous contract they inked for Mad Men.
You'll need to show me that's true. It's ratings are just Ho-Hum, and they cut WD's budget to compensate for it's disproportional cost. There was a lot of furor last year from the WD camp.They also make big money with Mad Men. It ain't just ad dollars, you know.
For a totally objective poll, the choices should be 1) Yes, 2) No 3) Not sure with no qualifiers or addendum. Otherwise the choices are biased by the commentary. For example, "Yes, definitely" implies that the person asking the question is pushing this answer, especially since there is no direct opposite choice such as "No, definitely". The no in this questionnaire is conditional and that condition points to the questioner's preference for the "yes" answer as there are, as you mentioned, dozens of reasons to say no. Downgrading package or watching programming via other media is irrelevant to many so this no answer is incomplete making people not answer or answer something else.
This is one of the ways polls are skewed to get an answer they want. Question and responses wording is critical to getting an objective answer. This is why whenever I see a headline about a poll result I insist of looking at the wording of the questions and responses before I give the headline any weight.
Even with that, 2/3 of respondents have voted for the biased conditional no so there is your answer.
Funny thing, it is going the way dish is thinking. Most won't really care, lol.
You'll need to show me that's true. It's ratings are just Ho-Hum, and they cut WD's budget to compensate for it's disproportional cost. There was a lot of furor last year from the WD camp.
Plus DVD's/Blu-Rays. Plus Amazon On Demand for current episodes. (I had to buy an ep the other night when the Hopper f-ed up, and didn't start recording it until half way into the episode.) Plus syndication. Plus international.I know they made a nice chunk of change with Mad Men from Netflix.
GaryPen said:Plus DVD's/Blu-Rays. Plus Amazon On Demand for current episodes. (I had to buy an ep the other night when the Hopper f-ed up, and didn't start recording it until half way into the episode.) Plus syndication. Plus international.
Most broadcast network shows don't make a profit, or much profit, during their initial network run. The real money is made in syndication, DVD/BD, streaming, International, and brand licensing. That is why Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld were willing to pay the Seinfeld cast astronomical amounts upfront, but keep the back end for themselves and the studio/network. (Of course, the actors get residuals according to union agreement. But, it pales in comparison to actually owning a piece of the show.)
Based on this poll, 30% of the customers will definitely or potentially consider terminating their service. At 14 million current subscribers that's roughly 4.2 million subscribers who would consider leaving E*. This number should certainly be cause for concern. The only channels most people really care about are ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, ESPN/2 and their local sports network. Everything else is a niche channel.
I was going to say that people on this site are more apt to switch due to being more informed about their options, but then on the flipside, being more informed about the competitors would also preclude others from switching in the first place. But no, the poll itself is not scientific enough for any kind of meaningful correlation, and it never was intended to be.so you really think that this poll on this site is a real correlation to the actual views of the dish population!?!?
But no, the poll itself is not scientific enough for any kind of meaningful correlation, and it never was intended to be.