Grex Agora41 Conference

View Responses

Grex Agora41 Item 134: Ohmygod!Now they are thinking about making changes to the Weather Channel!
Entered by bdh3 on Mon Apr 29 05:29:17 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.

#1 of 22 by bdh3 on Mon Apr 29 05:30:30 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.

#2 of 22 by ric on Mon Apr 29 12:11:29 2002:

Nothing pisses me off more than turning on the Weather Channel and seeing
"Atmospheres" is on.

#3 of 22 by gull on Mon Apr 29 13:00:24 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.

#4 of 22 by aruba on Mon Apr 29 13:56:35 2002:

I'm with Brian.

#5 of 22 by fitz on Mon Apr 29 21:26:59 2002:

Weather channel rocks

#6 of 22 by senna on Mon Apr 29 22:27:42 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.

#7 of 22 by richard on Tue Apr 30 00:41:44 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

#8 of 22 by polygon on Tue Apr 30 04:13:39 2002:

I'm with Brian, too.

#9 of 22 by gull on Tue Apr 30 13:11:04 2002:

What I wanna know is, when will TLC get some *new* storm footage?  They've
been re-running the same stuff for years.

#10 of 22 by md on Wed May 1 11:11:36 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.

#11 of 22 by slynne on Wed May 1 14:15:05 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.

#12 of 22 by brighn on Wed May 1 16:18:46 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.

#13 of 22 by md on Wed May 1 16:48:32 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.

#14 of 22 by slynne on Wed May 1 17:09:26 2002:

[insert dirty old man comment here]

#15 of 22 by brighn on Thu May 2 15:04:12 2002:

KDu?

#16 of 22 by other on Sat May 4 01:14:31 2002:

Who is Lauren Ambrose?

#17 of 22 by md on Sat May 4 12:11:16 2002:

The first name that came to mind.  She's that nondescript girl on Six 
Feet Under.

#18 of 22 by remmers on Sat May 4 12:59:03 2002:

Hm.  "Nondescript" is not the first adjective I would have
chosen for Lauren Ambrose.

#19 of 22 by md on Sat May 4 13:43:28 2002:

Really, she's kind of a cupcake.

#20 of 22 by other on Sat May 4 15:13:40 2002:

The redhead?

#21 of 22 by md on Thu Jun 20 12:07:07 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."

#22 of 22 by remmers on Thu Jun 20 16:35:07 2002:

For a completely different kind of Lauren Ambrose experience, catch
the movie "Psycho Beach Party" sometime.  Oh my god...

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.