41–50 of 68 posts
About 20 years. I don't miss it at all. In fact, I can't recommend it highly enough.
I do consume some TV though but through the BBC iPlayer which we get in the UK. its a flash based player available on the web, but as I have to access through my Mac - I normally end up getting distracted and just browsing the web instead.
It always intrigues me to read someone's account of how they have given up TV. More often than not, they are just watching some TV show (in this case 24) via some other distribution channel. They are still watching TV just not on TV. Also more often than not, they will degrade some other show as evidence of the disaster that TV is all the time missing the point that what TV programs you watch are a matter of taste an…
It always intrigues me to read someone's account of how they have given up TV. More often than not, they are just watching some TV show (in this case 24) via some other distribution channel. They are still watching TV just not on TV. Also more often than not, they will degrade some other show as evidence of the disaster that TV is all the time missing the point that what TV programs you watch are a matter of taste an…
Agreed. It's probably more accurate to say "I've given up just watching anything , and now choose to watch only the TV programs that interest/entertain me". Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV. So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
Amen. So much of TV programming is a gas that expands to fill the airwaves - and economic pressures these days push that content toward low-quality dreck that has little to recommend it other than the fact that it earns a bit more in ad revenue than it costs to produce (I'm looking at you, reality TV).
The issue, it seems to me, is not one of quitting TV per se but of quitting the business model in which you pay a flat monthly rate for a bundle of channels. Since you've already paid for it and since it's there anyway, it's easy to rationalize and get used to the idea of sitting down and channel surfing.
Aside from being a major time suck, this also tends to normalize the idea of spending hours watching rubbish that literally makes you dumber.
It's not until you make a sharp break from that kind of exposure that you start to notice just how bizarre and dysfunctional it all is.
We have a TV, but don't receive any channels - by cable, satellite or aerial - and haven't for about a decade. We do tend to come across high quality TV shows from time to time - mostly on the recommendation of friends whose taste we trust - and if we really like a show, we'll buy it on DVD. That way we get to watch it in sequence, without commercial interruptions, whenever we feel like it.
If a show is not good enough to warrant repeat viewings, it's not good enough to buy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. It's probably more accurate to say "I've given up just watching anything , and now choose to watch only the TV programs that interest/entertain me". Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV. So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
It's also that many anti-TVers are simply anti-TV-ad-ers, though they don't explicitly state so. Most alternate sources of TV content have fewer ads (at least, of the kind that interject into the content) than TV. Beyond that, about the only thing you can complain about is the timing of what's available / what will fit on your DVR, where you can stream from Hulu or expand your computer's HD space as needed.
There's something you lose if you just go to on demand stuff. TV is an 'event', at a specific time. Kids go to the playground and talk about what they saw on TV last night. I think that's pretty useful socially to have shared experiences like that. I'd hate to be the kid that doesn't have anything to talk about because his parents don't have a TV.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also that many anti-TVers are simply anti-TV-ad-ers, though they don't explicitly state so. Most alternate sources of TV content have fewer ads (at least, of the kind that interject into the content) than TV. Beyond that, about the only thing you can complain about is the timing of what's available / what will fit on your DVR, where you can stream from Hulu or expand your computer's HD space as needed.
Yeah may be true. And I agree it's a problem in the ad heavy US, but not as much other places. Also, just get a PVR, start watching the TV show 10 minutes after it started, and skip the ads if they annoy. There's something you lose if you just go to on demand stuff. TV is an 'event', at a specific time. Kids go to the playground and talk about what they saw on TV last night. I think that's pretty useful socially to h…
Overall, I agree, though plenty of arguments can be made for and against this, especially where TV is concerned (given its brain-rotting tendencies). Personally, I grew up on mostly different shows than everyone else anyway, so I only shared experiences with an extremely small group of people, most of whom I'm sure I never met. Bill Nye, Nova, and generally PBS (no cable) were my shows of choice through all of elementary school. I also had the Animaniacs lineup near its beginning, but the vast majority of other kids my age (at my school) didn't get most of it.
Not bragging about my "mental might" here, my parents & older sister just did a good job loading me with things to learn before and during that age, so I had a real intellectual advantage at elementary school. They taught me most things 1-on-1 well before they came up in school. It's definitely put me in a different social circle, as I associate more with geeks than other stereotypes, but I'm happy here. For myself, I'll call not sharing a lot of the "normal" TV experience a positive thing.
It always intrigues me to read someone's account of how they have given up TV. More often than not, they are just watching some TV show (in this case 24) via some other distribution channel. They are still watching TV just not on TV. Also more often than not, they will degrade some other show as evidence of the disaster that TV is all the time missing the point that what TV programs you watch are a matter of taste an…
Agreed. It's probably more accurate to say "I've given up just watching anything , and now choose to watch only the TV programs that interest/entertain me". Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV. So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
I don't necessarily agree with this statement. I do not believe people are as selective with what they watch if they own a TV (yes, I know, there are always exceptions). When you actively seek out the content when/where/how you want it, as well as probably paying for it in some cases, you are much more selective with what you watch and how much time you spend watching it.
If people own a TV, they are using the hundreds of channels they have to suck up time rather than providing them true entertainment. People who own TVs, in my opinion, are much more likely to channel surf and just find a boring show to fill up their time because they find nothing else to do. This gets even worse with the increasing use of DVRs.
It turns into not filling an interest/entertainment need but rather providing a diversion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. It's probably more accurate to say "I've given up just watching anything , and now choose to watch only the TV programs that interest/entertain me". Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV. So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
"Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV." I don't necessarily agree with this statement. I do not believe people are as selective with what they watch if they own a TV (yes, I know, there are always exceptions). When you actively seek out the content when/where/how you want it, as well as probably paying for it in some cases, you are much more selective with what you watch and how much time y…
I'd say it's best to cure the problem (If you have one) than to proclaim that TV is bad.
The same sort of personality could waste time reading the dictionary or an encyclopedia. Not because they want to lookup something, just because they're bored. But that doesn't mean books are bad.
It always intrigues me to read someone's account of how they have given up TV. More often than not, they are just watching some TV show (in this case 24) via some other distribution channel. They are still watching TV just not on TV. Also more often than not, they will degrade some other show as evidence of the disaster that TV is all the time missing the point that what TV programs you watch are a matter of taste an…
Ugh, just made me realize how much I spend just to watch sports - but that desire is not going anywhere and I'll continue to do so.