Read on Twitter
The reason I defend linear television is because I think the idea that "here's what's important, right now, that you can share with others" is a worthwhile thing in its own right.
Streaming means you need fewer channels doing that, both now and in the future.
But I think some form of the above will always be important. And we lose it at our peril.
But I think some form of the above will always be important. And we lose it at our peril.
And you can see that streaming services think some form of that is important too, with things like viewing parties. Disney+ telling us all to watch Inside Out at a certain time, for instance.
I know I'm biased. I make my living through this stuff, I'm emotionally attached to it. I deny neither.
But I still think it's true in its own right. I work in this industry *because* I care, not the other way round.
But I still think it's true in its own right. I work in this industry *because* I care, not the other way round.
But the onus is on linear channels to actually provide a *better*, more thoughtful service than ever.
You only stay relevant by... staying relevant.,
You only stay relevant by... staying relevant.,
Complacency is the death of anything, even things that should by rights exist for decades to come.
One final thing: in a world where the human touch is surely still valued, the TV channels I work on are touched by numerous grubby little humans every second of the day.
For me, it makes the channels feel alive. It costs time and money, and I think it's 100% worth both.
For me, it makes the channels feel alive. It costs time and money, and I think it's 100% worth both.
(God, I have an article I'd love to write about this, but unfortunately, I'd need to use specific examples that I'm not comfortable with using, for various reasons.)
Suffice to say, if you're trailing a live event... it might be an idea to actually tell people *when* that live event actually is.
