|
Grex > Agora41 > #134: Ohmygod!Now they are thinking about making changes to the Weather Channel! | |
|
| Author |
Message |
bdh3
|
|
Ohmygod!Now they are thinking about making changes to the Weather Channel!
| 
Apr 29 05:29 UTC 2002 |
Grr. First it was _Court TV_. It went from coverage of actual trials
to mostly commercial TV. Now they- you know who 'they' are, the folks
that just have to fuck up a good thing - are considering 'half hour
no more' 'stories' about people caught up in local weather. I mean
excuse me, but if I wanted those stories I would turn to the local
news channel. 'They' are concerned that yer average viewer watches
not more than 18 minutes or so at a time. Well excuse me, if I'm
watching it, its because I'm interested in the weather, probably
because I am traveling and want to see the forcast for my route
and where I am going. Duh. I'm not interested in stories about
how somefolk are caught up in a storm someplace else. I'm not
even interested in stories about people caught in weather where
I am going. I just wanna know the weather report. Is that so
much to ask? Be happy with the quarter billion$US revenue and
stop trying to raise it by making things more 'interesting' to
viewers so that they watch longer. If I wanted to watch longer
I would watch another channel!
|
| 22 responses total. |
bdh3
|
|
response 1 of 22:
|
Apr 29 05:30 UTC 2002 |
Oh, and I don't subscribe to cable so I ain't a paying customer in
the first place - I only watch it when I am on the road.
|
ric
|
|
response 2 of 22:
|
Apr 29 12:11 UTC 2002 |
Nothing pisses me off more than turning on the Weather Channel and seeing
"Atmospheres" is on.
|
gull
|
|
response 3 of 22:
|
Apr 29 13:00 UTC 2002 |
Yeah, it sort of defeats the purpose of having a channel for getting quick
weather info. Maybe they could be like the TV Guide Channel, and run
weather info in the bottom half of the screen and whatever other tripe they
want in the top half.
|
aruba
|
|
response 4 of 22:
|
Apr 29 13:56 UTC 2002 |
I'm with Brian.
|
fitz
|
|
response 5 of 22:
|
Apr 29 21:26 UTC 2002 |
Weather channel rocks
|
senna
|
|
response 6 of 22:
|
Apr 29 22:27 UTC 2002 |
But not their stupid alt programming. Put it on TLC or something.
This post-MTV trend of putting "thematic programming" on niche cable stations
is totally idiotic, but it reaches a new low on the Weather Channel. The only
POINT of the weather channel is weather. At least ESPN has empty space to
fill with its alternate programming that used to be blown on lesser material,
but sports is a different deal. This is just weather we're talking about.
|
richard
|
|
response 7 of 22:
|
Apr 30 00:41 UTC 2002 |
the weather channel is one of my favorite channels. I like the periodic
specials they do like histories of past big storms and such
|
polygon
|
|
response 8 of 22:
|
Apr 30 04:13 UTC 2002 |
I'm with Brian, too.
|
gull
|
|
response 9 of 22:
|
Apr 30 13:11 UTC 2002 |
What I wanna know is, when will TLC get some *new* storm footage? They've
been re-running the same stuff for years.
|
md
|
|
response 10 of 22:
|
May 1 11:11 UTC 2002 |
Re this "I'm with Brian" stuff: If you can just pick someone to be
with, why bdh of all people? Why not Jennifer Lopez, or Kirsten Dunst,
or even Lauren Ambrose? Anyone's better than bdh, fer chrissake.
|
slynne
|
|
response 11 of 22:
|
May 1 14:15 UTC 2002 |
I am not sure what Jennifer Lopez's position is on the weather
channel's programming policies but if she would rather be able to turn
it on anytime and get a weather report, then I am with her on that.
Ditto for Kirsten Dunst, Lauren Ambrose, etc.
|
brighn
|
|
response 12 of 22:
|
May 1 16:18 UTC 2002 |
Kirsten Dunst has been rallying for quite some time for the Weather Channel
to stream reports constantly. It's her cause celebre... others have breast
cancer, or starving Somalians, or Michael J Fox, but she's got The Weather
Channel's programming. She's even made the cover of Time and Newsweek for it,
and runs an annual telethon.
|
md
|
|
response 13 of 22:
|
May 1 16:48 UTC 2002 |
Frankly, even if Kirsten Dunst were to buy the Weather Channel and turn
it into the 24-hour Bad Dance Music Channel, I'd still be with her.
Same goes for JLo and LAmb.
|
slynne
|
|
response 14 of 22:
|
May 1 17:09 UTC 2002 |
[insert dirty old man comment here]
|
brighn
|
|
response 15 of 22:
|
May 2 15:04 UTC 2002 |
KDu?
|
other
|
|
response 16 of 22:
|
May 4 01:14 UTC 2002 |
Who is Lauren Ambrose?
|
md
|
|
response 17 of 22:
|
May 4 12:11 UTC 2002 |
The first name that came to mind. She's that nondescript girl on Six
Feet Under.
|
remmers
|
|
response 18 of 22:
|
May 4 12:59 UTC 2002 |
Hm. "Nondescript" is not the first adjective I would have
chosen for Lauren Ambrose.
|
md
|
|
response 19 of 22:
|
May 4 13:43 UTC 2002 |
Really, she's kind of a cupcake.
|
other
|
|
response 20 of 22:
|
May 4 15:13 UTC 2002 |
The redhead?
|
md
|
|
response 21 of 22:
|
Jun 20 12:07 UTC 2002 |
Lauren Ambrose was on Letterman last night. She was quite radiant,
intelligent and funny, sang a couple of bars of "You're So Vain" and
has a great voice. Ol' Dave was visibly smitten by her. I don't think
I've ever seen him react like that. "What did you think of that Lauren
Ambrose?" he asked after her segment. "I look at a girl like that, and
I'm, you know, it's really..." After much barely-articulate hemming
and hawing like that, he concluded: "There were never any girls like
that when I was young enough to do anything about it."
|
remmers
|
|
response 22 of 22:
|
Jun 20 16:35 UTC 2002 |
For a completely different kind of Lauren Ambrose experience, catch
the movie "Psycho Beach Party" sometime. Oh my god...
|