Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming  (Read 11801 times)

BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18600
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #45 on: April 25, 2005, 02:21:18 AM »
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Apr 24 2005, 11:44 PM\']And if you need a reality show, see The Apprentice, with the second-season-forward "exemption" clause.
[snapback]83187[/snapback]
[/quote]

And if you don't want a clause, then see Idol, American. Don't watch too much of it, though.
"It wasn't like this on Tic Tac Dough...Wink never gave a damn!"

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 13018
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #46 on: April 25, 2005, 12:02:49 PM »
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 12:07 AM\'][quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Apr 24 2005, 11:54 PM\']I've long forgotten where I read it, but isn't there a rule saying if you change the rules of a competition show (like Survivor), you have to change the title?  If so, this might be part of why Survivor: Vanuatu and Survivor: Pulau are counted as two separate shows.[/quote]
No -- that was something Steve Beverly came up with (he claimed it was an FCC regulation), and it's easily debunked.  [/quote]
I think this rumor really heated up when Greed changed to Super Greed.  Seems that there were a lot of folks saying that they were required to change the name because of the change in the prize structure.  As David says, that's obviously absurd.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

dzinkin

  • Guest
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #47 on: April 25, 2005, 12:09:57 PM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 12:02 PM\'][quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 12:07 AM\'][quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Apr 24 2005, 11:54 PM\']I've long forgotten where I read it, but isn't there a rule saying if you change the rules of a competition show (like Survivor), you have to change the title?  If so, this might be part of why Survivor: Vanuatu and Survivor: Pulau are counted as two separate shows.[/quote]
No -- that was something Steve Beverly came up with (he claimed it was an FCC regulation), and it's easily debunked.  [/quote]
I think this rumor really heated up when Greed changed to Super Greed.  Seems that there were a lot of folks saying that they were required to change the name because of the change in the prize structure.  As David says, that's obviously absurd.
[snapback]83209[/snapback]
[/quote]
The first time I heard the claim was when ABC was about to introduce Super Millionaire, though Greed was mentioned in the thread in question.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2005, 12:10:55 PM by dzinkin »

uncamark

  • Guest
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #48 on: April 25, 2005, 12:34:23 PM »
According to this msnbc.com article, the FCC is announcing that analog transmissions of broadcast signals are to end on December 31, 2006--if 85 percent of households have digital sets.  Something tells me they won't reach that figure in time.  :)

Dbacksfan12

  • Member
  • Posts: 6222
  • Just leave the set; that’d be terrific.
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #49 on: April 25, 2005, 12:39:01 PM »
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 11:34 AM\']According to this msnbc.com article, the FCC is announcing that analog transmissions of broadcast signals are to end on December 31, 2006--if 85 percent of households have digital sets.  Something tells me they won't reach that figure in time.  :)
[snapback]83211[/snapback]
[/quote]
All thanks to an act signed way back under the Clinton administration, no?

Backhanded slaps aside; exactly what good does this do; except force consumers to eventually buy a new digital TV, thus increasing the country's GNP?
--Mark
Phil 4:13

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27694
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #50 on: April 25, 2005, 01:19:12 PM »
[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 09:39 AM\'][quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 11:34 AM\']According to this msnbc.com article, the FCC is announcing that analog transmissions of broadcast signals are to end on December 31, 2006--if 85 percent of households have digital sets.  Something tells me they won't reach that figure in time.  :)
[snapback]83211[/snapback]
[/quote]
All thanks to an act signed way back under the Clinton administration, no?

Backhanded slaps aside; exactly what good does this do; except force consumers to eventually buy a new digital TV, thus increasing the country's GNP?
[snapback]83212[/snapback]
[/quote]
Mark Cuban has an interesting and fairly compelling argument as to why this is good for a lot of people on his blog.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

uncamark

  • Guest
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #51 on: April 26, 2005, 12:50:43 PM »
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 12:19 PM\'][quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 09:39 AM\'][quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Apr 25 2005, 11:34 AM\']According to this msnbc.com article, the FCC is announcing that analog transmissions of broadcast signals are to end on December 31, 2006--if 85 percent of households have digital sets.  Something tells me they won't reach that figure in time.  :)
[snapback]83211[/snapback]
[/quote]
All thanks to an act signed way back under the Clinton administration, no?

Backhanded slaps aside; exactly what good does this do; except force consumers to eventually buy a new digital TV, thus increasing the country's GNP?
[snapback]83212[/snapback]
[/quote]
Mark Cuban has an interesting and fairly compelling argument as to why this is good for a lot of people on his blog.
[snapback]83219[/snapback]
[/quote]

Of course, as he himself states, he has a vested interest in the whole thing, but it is an interesting argument.

ChuckNet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2193
PAX to Abandon All Entertainment Programming
« Reply #52 on: April 26, 2005, 10:03:00 PM »
Quote
What is the FCC planning on doing with the frequency occupied by a channel 62? Here in the Catskills, we used to have WTZA on Channel 62, but they switched call letters to WRNN several years back and became a mostly-infomercials station.

Yep...I visited relatives in Albany back in 95, and was surprised at what little non-infomercial programming Ch. 62 was carrying...local news, a primetime movie, the unsuccessful syndie revivals of The Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew Mysteries that aired during the 95-96 season, and that was about it.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")