Re: Where the hell are Fringe and Flashforward?
Thanatos
Extravagan <extra...@frogsoup.xelon.com> wrote:
> I just checked my cable service's interactive program guide to plan the
> evening's TV watching, and I was completely unable to find Fringe or
> Flashforward at their usual times, or anywhere near them, on their usual
> channels.
>
> No new episodes, no reruns, no nothing. They're just *gone*.
>
> What the hell happened? Did they cancel them? Why no fanfare?
>
> I wish to hell the networks would actually tell viewers what the hell is
> going on.
It's Thanksgiving, dumbass. Most people are intelligent enough to
realize that they're not going to waste their top programming on a night
when no one is watching TV. It's only a pattern that has been going on
for the last 40 years or so.
elz...@aol.com
> In article <hem3cp$cd...@aioe.org>,
LMAO I was thinking the same thing. Clueless viewers.
suzee
> Which is what happens when a show is just plain missing without a
> forwarding address. The guide shows it missing, but doesn't say why or
> when it's back; the network didn't deign to inform viewers at the end of
> the previous episode that it was moved/gone/whatever. So the viewer is
> left in the dark. Depending on what sort of guide they get, they might
> know if the show has reappeared a week in advance or only a day. If it's
> disappeared for three weeks, they won't know if it's three weeks, two,
> eight, or gone forever.
They do tell you. If they move it to another night, there's promos
saying so. At the end of a show they'll say 'next week on...' or
'returns in two weeks' or 'all new episodes in January'. It's pretty
easy to pick up on these things.
> The broadcaster actually saying something just before the move/hiatus
> would be much preferable.
They do.
>>>>> Basically, my complaint boils down to this: what happened to "same
>>>>> bat time, same bat channel"?
>>>> Remote controls, on screen tv guides and 57+ channels.
>>> That is illogical. The one has nothing to do with the other.
>>
>> I didn't give one. I gave three.
>
> And NONE of them were relevant, except that the large number of channels
> in modern times weighs somewhat *against* what you are saying since it
> allows, in theory, broadcasts to coexist that would formerly have had to
> pre-empt one another due to limited bandwidth.
No, the larger number of channels and shows means the networks move the
shows around for what they think is the best position for one.
Look at Bones - it's been on 5 years I think, and has been shown on five
different nights.
suzee
> suzee wrote:
>> Extravagan wrote:
>>> suzee wrote:
>>>> Look at Bones - it's been on 5 years I think, and has been shown on
>>>> five
>>>> different nights.
>>>
>
> (Suzee calls me a liar here)
I did? Huh?
> I am not.
>
>>> It's moving things around or having them disappear and come back MID
>>> season that bugs me. Doing it without fanfare or any information
>>> about when it'll be back, as they often do, doubly so.
>>
>> You're not reading the right information
>
> I'm reading the only information they deign to provide during the final
> break before the next show. That that information is inadequate is THEIR
> fault, yet the way you phrased that is as if you think somehow it's MINE.
>
> This is getting ridiculous.
Yep.
suzee
> In article <Pine.LNX.4.64.09...@darkstar.example.net>,
> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Ian J. Ball wrote:
>>
>>> Let's say you and me go grab some tacos?!...
>>>
>> Aren't you supposed to have pumpkin pie today? Or is that an artifact
>> of only Canadian Thanksgiving?
>
> Oh, not limited to Canada at all! Pumpkin pie is very much a traditional
> Thanksgiving dinner dessert here in the States. In fact, I'm pretty sure
> that it's the most popular one.
We make sweet potato pie. And if you substitute coconut milk for the
liquid in the recipe it's really yummy! You could probably do that for a
pumpkin pie too.
clouddreamer
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:47:49 +0200, in rec.arts.tv, clouddreamer
> <saveth...@save.money.too> said:
>
>
>> And no, Canadian channels are contracted to show US programming at
>> agreed timeslots. They can't show next week's episode this week. Think
>> about it!!! (I doubt you do that much). Imagine what would happen to
>> their ratings if it was broadcast in Canada this week and people had a
>> week to download the episode from torrents. Millions in ad revenue gone.
>>
>
> Ah, no they're not. The shows are broadcast in Canada at the same time
> as in the US because the Canadian cable companies are obligated, when
> requested, to simulcast the Canadian signal over the signal on the US
> channel if the same episode is being shown on both channels. Thus, we
> only see the Canadian advertising, not the US.
>
> There have been many examples of shows being broadcast in Canada before
> the US broadcast of the same episode. Bones is a current example I
> believe. Global shows it a day before Fox.
>
> You are right that it is ad revenue driving the schedule, but it is the
> Canadian ad revenue NOT the US ad revenue.
>
The ad revenue that would be lost would be in the US...because people in
the US would download the episode and not watch it the following week.
The contract allows for some shows to show early like Bones and SVU, but
one day isn't enough to attract the large number of downloaders like a
week's head start would.
..