State Of The Television...
The "State Of The Union Address" is tonight, and boy am I ever glad there's an Oilers Hockey Game, 'cause I've found it harder and harder to give a damn about those "Addresses" over the years.
It's not about the President, and it has nearly nothing to do with politics; I ain't even goin' into any of that here.
What pisses me off is that they think they have to take over every channel. Is that really necessary? Really? Would it be so bad to offer us, as Americans, a choice in the matter of whether or not we watch? Wouldn't it be better to just put in on, oh, say one UHF channel and one VHF channel so that we might decide if we want to watch Bush or watch something else?
Nobody likes feelin' backed into a corner -- if people felt free to choose a channel (instead of surfing through six channels of the the same thing), I think they'd be more likely to choose to pay a little attention to the President's speech. Maybe he'd catch their interest while they were surfing during commercials, or maybe they'd check the listings and say something like "Hmmm, Dawson's Creek Re-Runs, a Benny Hinn special, a documentary on body lice, or the State Of The Union Address... Y'all wanna see what President Bush has to say?"
If I'm tryin' to find something to watch on TV and the only thing on every channel is the same thing that's on all the other channels; I'm probably going to say "Screw this, where's the DVD remote?"
Marketing is about choices; and tonight, when there's only one choice on broadcast TV, I'll be at the Convention Center watchin' Hockey.