What a load of rubbish! Since when has he been anti- American? He actually took a huge interest in the election process and even went there for The Project, during the election itself.
5 Likes
When the main channels topped being available in HD from 2009-10 many sought their US content in HD elsewhere.
1 Like
Thanks Trump but your analysis of the situation is completely rubbish. Friends was very liberal and was one of the highest rated shows of the late 90s and early 2000s. The US version of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy rated 1.5 million viewers per episode in 2005 on Ten.
5 Likes
Nah, I don’t really buy that. The regular viewer is none to bothered about SD vs HD in my opinion.
1 Like
Puhlease, I watched Friends each week and it was not “very liberal”. All 6 were in various heterosexual relationships. Joey was a corny schmoozer of women. Chandler a bumbling idiot. Monica a previous fatso.
Now compare that with shows “around 2009”…Glee, which went from a show about music to one about gay relationships every two seconds, Ugly Betty, Modern Family. All programmes which purposely chose contexts such that “very liberal” themes could be explored…
The one that reinforced decades old stereotypes of gay people as ultra-camp “designers”? That one?
Thanks for your nonsense analysis, Hillary.
Exactly. The American mainstream media hates the “America” the right-wing represents more than Waleed ever could…
So Ross’ lesbian child-adopting wife and her partner were negatively portrayed? Don’t think so. Very liberal for the 90s.
Will and Grace did really well here with two gay leads. Desperate Housewives had plenty of gay characters too and that was a huuuuge hit.
Tons of gays watched Queer Eye and Rupaul’s Drag Race because those shows were supportive of gay people and portrayed them positively. They actively knocked down the stigma around gay culture, and a mainstream audience took note. For shows which reinforce old stereotypes about gay people, it certainly is weird then that lots of my gay friends watch the new seasons of Rupaul’s Drag Race.
TV becoming more liberal in recent years is in-keeping with the general attitudes of younger demographics. What has changed is the means by which audiences access TV, and that means that American content cannot sustain a TV schedule. Networks need first-run Australian content otherwise audiences download. Also a lot of American shows just aren’t quality anymore. It’s got nothing to do with some imagined takeover of American TV by devious liberals (which you might discover at some stage have been dominating the attitudes of Hollywood for decades).
3 Likes
This discussion is really going off topic here.
12 Likes
Hint: it’s a sit-com…that usually means storylines are played for laughs…the “lesbian child-adopting wife” of dorky Ross was not intended to be a positive series-defining storyline…LOL!
Looking at the totality of the series (the content, the main characters, the dialogue) rather than picking out one storyline or two, should leave you in no doubt that Friends was very ACCESSIBLE and mainstream.
(I think you’re confusing the fact that because liberals who happen to be losers still watch it endlessly, and talk about it, that somehow it’s a shining beacon of liberalism…).
The show is literally about stay at home housewives in suburbia (as far from “liberal” America as you can get)…
As for Rupaul I have no idea what that is and would suggest most Australians don’t either.
The opposite in fact. The thread is full of feverish speculation about what CBS will do with Ten…the reality is that CBS is only involved because they’ve improved their otherwise dire situation in regards to Ten, and most likely see it as an opportunity to cheaply broadcast their content in Australia.
Analysing what direction CBS might take Ten and the compatability of their content with Australian audiences could hardly be more relevant.
But, you know, come in here again to tell us why you don’t like CBS (hint: we know, it’s American not Australian, and you hate people who supposedly have cultural cringe 
).
Are Australians really downloading content from the major free to air networks in America on the same scale as they were watching them prior to 2009? I think not…
We’ve had this discussion many times on this site before…fast-tracking doesn’t necessarily work…that is, Australians don’t want to watch mainstream American content whether it’s on TV, or downloaded the same day…
I haven’t said I don’t like CBS. They’re fine to do whatever they want in America. I just think they will just force more American culture down our throats via Ten.
Maybe people are fine with America continually extinguishing every cultural difference Australians have, but I’ll never be happy about that.
1 Like
So exactly what I said. I don’t necessarily disagree in any case…but a CBS backed Channel 10 is better than no Channel 10…
If that’s the only option but do we really know if there were any other offers out there for Ten? The CBS deal caught everyone by surprise and there was at least one other failed offer besides Murdoch/Gordon. Who else may have been a bidder?
I think there is zero chance that Ten will pay $0 for CBS content. That’s like saying that Aldi, McDonald’s, Apple and Ikea in Australia wouldn’t pay a licence fee to the parent company, and pay for the products sourced from overseas. They do. Though Ten will no doubt pay a reduced fee than what is in the current contract.
2 Likes
I agree. There’s no point in CBS buying Ten to make $100 million in profits if they’re forgoing more than $100 million in content licensing (or whatever the actual numbers are).
However, they will have a lot more flexibility now.
-
For the same money as before, Ten may be able to get more content for the same money - such as shows that weren’t previously licensed in Australia. More variety and less repeats on the multichannels could help boost ratings - even if only by a small amount, it could translate it a little bit more revenue. Likewise, they won’t be as locked into showing content which they have purchased by isn’t rating. (Some shows come with agreements that require they be shown in entirety, or they can only be shown if other shows are packaged with it).
-
There could be some shuffling when it comes to buying sports right. For example, CBS may be willing to take a cut of $20 million in program rights, if they money is required to secure a sport which will then generate more than $20 million.
-
If Ten have a particular bad year and can’t pay all their bills, CBS can just forego some of its program licensing fees to prevent Ten going in receivership again.
4 Likes
Don’t know where you heard that from?
All I know is that Mark Latham wrote Bill Shortens Budget Reply speech in 2014, as did Paul Keating.
Source: Former ALP cabinet minister.
Matlock is known for doing that.
The last two posts juxtapose beautifully.
My dreams involve a Bermuda businessman and a giant blue map. Is this normal?
5 Likes