TV. Television. Do you watch it? Or are you embarrassed to say you do? Instead, do you talk about streaming, PVR and DVR, time shifting, downloading and only then get to the rehashing of the latest “Idol”— in whatever country/language/format you happen to watch it.
Radio. Ah, radio. Remember that old fashioned medium? No doubt you listen to satellite radio; or Web radio; or radio over your IPod or Zune—none of us would admit to even having that ancient box—would we?
There you have it. Imagine if we didn’t have the Web – where would TV be? Or radio…?
The operative words are “watch” and “listen.” The bottom line that is still what we do. We watch and listen.
And what is it that we watch and listen?
Content?
And what kind of content?
See where I am going?
We are still caught up in the old fashioned argument of is it TV or Web delivered or magic. The bottom line (need a new cliché) at the end of the day…(Thank God for clichés) someone, somewhere, is writing, producing and distributing stuff we want to watch—stuff that many, many people want to watch.
I’m not talking about the 15mgs of fame that clog up our e-mails and populate You Tube and the like. I know, I know, some of it is really great, but those who are serious are looking for pay contracts so that they can really create and produce great programming that millions will watch.
It’s time we paid attention to what the difference is between a delivery channel and the things that fill it. Between media and content (McLuhan needs to be revised)…between what fashion tells us we should say and what we really do in our own private space.
Which of course leads me to a quote I saw this week:
Do you realize if it weren’t for Edison we’d be watching TV by candlelight?
~Al Boliska
So if it wasn’t for the Web we’d be bird watching? Or only reading books?
Or put another way:
If it weren’t for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we’d still be eating frozen radio dinners.
~Johnny Carson
Anyway, food for thought…
What do you think?
Interesting to mention this on the first day of the writer’s strike. They have to show re-runs of live talk, because live talk (late night or daytime junk) can’t be done without the writers. I guess content is the thing.
I recall watching TV some programs (quite a few) where the only thing I remember is that I can’t remember the program. That included some good programs (I think). [This sometimes created an eerie "de ja vu" (or was that "du ja ve") if I manage to actually see something twice, for the first time].
Was I captured by the technology? Were the writers manufacturing “bubble gum” for the brain? Was I just not really engaged much? Don’t know.
But I don’t think I’ve had the same issue with any book I’ve ever read.
Tom.
At this stage ..I am more concerned with Johnny Carsons educashon (sic) ..surely the television must be credited to that great Brit, John Logie Baird!
Which leads on neatly to another web related question..wiki style- , does the loudest web voice mean history can change before our very eyes on the web? Google “who invented TV” and check out which countries sites say what!!!
Ahh the internet.. national propoganda, sorry pride, without boundries.
TV and other new media have a lot of potential. I feel that its only being used inappropriately that we feel disgruntled. As a media, we sure have made right advances, its just the direction that needs to be put right. I mean I see my two year old daughter learn differentiate between a baboon and a monkey thanks to National Geographic. It is certainly the “choice” that makes the difference, use the new media to help you and your family grow than just consider it bad because it needs you to change.
The question of questionable info on the web as content is worthy of a full discussion — we have been trained to belive media sources — despite cynacism — yet the web, in and of itself, is not about the third party endorsement of trusted entity — schools are wrestling with this too in terms of papers and such.
So all content is not equal and all truth is not true.
Two distinct forms of television, “mechanical” and “electronic,” existed through most of the medium’s first 70-or-so years.
In 1884 German Paul Nipkow developed a rotating-disc technology, named the Nipkow disk, which transmitted pictures through wired connections. This was the very first electromechanical TV scanning system. Nipkow’s “mechanical” system was soon abandoned in favor of later technologies.
In the early 1940’s John Logie Baird, England, further evolved mechanical television from its 1920’s black/white-only format by developing the first color-picture tube.
North American (U.S.) Charles Francis Jenkins invented “radiovision” (mechanical-based) and claimed to have transmitted the earliest moving silhouette images on June 14, 1923.
The modern “electronic” television era emerged from the development of the cathode ray tube – the “picture tube” now being quickly relegated to history’s junk pile by “liquid crystal display” (LCD) and “plasma” technologies.
In 1897 German scientist Karl Braun invented the cathode ray tube oscilloscope.
Enter the Russians in 1929 (grey-hairs will especially love this one) with Vladimir Kosma Zworykin, who invented the cathode ray tube-based kinescope in 1929. Zworykin also invented an early television camera, the iconoscope.
Philo T. Farnsworth reportedly conceived the basic operating principles of electronic television at 13-years of age (circa 1919). What aren’t in dispute – later playing a crucial role in a patent suit between Farnsworth and the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) – are the electron tube sketches and prototypes Farnsworth produced while a high school student. Bottom line: Farnsworth and his later cohorts developed the most efficient means used for broadcast television’s (NBC, CBS, ABC) initial run.
Lest we forget:
Others also involved in “mechanical” TV development include Alexander Bain, Karl Braun, Herbert E. Ives, Boris Rosing and Aleksandr Stoletov;
Others involved in developing “electronic” TV include Alan Campbell-Swinton, Boris Rosing, Kenjiro Takayanagi and Kalman Tihanyi.
Thus, I guess one could say TV’s development was accomplished by “committee.”
A major “Thanks!” for the above goes to: The Television History Book, by Michele Hilmes, Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
As for LCD, plasma development (shall we also throw in CCD, satellites, et al, too?), those technologies will someday also be found in history’s junk pile and, no doubt, the subject of another Blog – perhaps one initiated by Mr. Sable?
As far as the future of content and its delivery is concerned, you might want to check with someone other than this old fossil, who – though a computer-electronic geek of high order – won’t today buy things “electronic” until a clear pattern has developed. Remember the Beta/VHS war? I do and now have a primo museum piece that “worked” better than the more common, more recently relegated tape-playing museum piece.
Then there’s today’s newest visual and ear candies, the former in my case tending toward History, National Geographic and Science channels. Most of history and science’s scripts have been and are being written outside of Hollywood so, I suppose, those programs will be plentiful for years to come. Well, at least the less-likely unadulterated versions, that is.
While recently on the very verge of abandoning Compact Disks and Windows Media in favor of satellite radio, even more recent merger talk (wish?) and resultant regulatory issues has caused an All Stop for me. Despite having its use in a couple-dozen rental cars over the last year, satellite radio ain’t getting my hard-equipment money until the matter is settled.
Ah, “time-shifting.” I happen to be jumping into that this very day, with my first Sling on the way. I want my, um, TV. (Oh! Sling’s now owned by Echosphere – the makers of two lovely, museum-quality C-Band satellite receivers I just happen to have on hand.)
Thus, with my very fast HSDPA (I’m tired of deciphering acronyms) plugged into my PDA and laptop, I leave it to the professionals at Wunderman as to the discovery of where one’s future advertising dollars might derive the best benefit. (And, please, give my best to Wunderman’s hard-working Shannon Ryan, too, Mr. Sable). – DC Williams
But at the end of the day — Im still watching Pirates of the Caribbean — for the umpteenth time — on my computer; on my flat screen at home; through DVD’s; time shifting and MOD.
Bottom line __ its still Captain Jack…
Thanks for posting this, lifted my day.