October 17, 2003
Cable Science Network
Is a cable channel for real science
an idea whose time has come? I think it's obvious. We have so many lame channels, why not an informative one? But I fear that, no matter how it begins, it will end up in sensationalism. It seems that every other "educational" channel on cable goes that way.
Posted by James at October 17, 2003 10:40 PM
Thems smart folk don't none watch that picthur box too much.
While you're at it, see if you can lobby some network into creating a channel that plays music videos. I think it would be huge.
Anyone remember "Friday Night Videos"?
It was music television for people without cable. They'd show a half hour of videos late on Friday night. Circa 1982.
I remember it well. They played a lot of Devo videos because Devo had videos for all their songs while most bands weren't doing them regularly yet.
I liked Night Flight (and Radio 1990, if you remember that), but by the time I had USA, I had MTV too. Which brings us full circle to the radical idea of having a cable channel that plays music videos...
I don't want this to come across as snotty, so keep that in mind when you read my words:
James: "We have so many lame channels, why not an informative one? But I fear that, no matter how it begins, it will end up in sensationalism. It seems that every other 'educational' channel on cable goes that way."
This is why I don't regret not installing cable. What's the point? More TV would take away from time I could spend reading.
Except for the local news & weather, I get my news from print and the radio (find _your_ local NPR station at
http://www.npr.org/stations/index.php). I once had a journalism professor who said if you took away sound, pictures, and commercials from TV news, you'd have about 10 minutes worth of news.
TV is overrated. I'm not a "kill your TV" person--the box has its place. I'm just not interested in being a slave to what my mother always called "the boob tube."