And now for your morning dose of Stupid

[annathepiper]

Apparently the Sci-Fi channel feels it needs to rebrand itself: it's going to be calling itself "Syfy" now.

I particularly like the part where they're still equating "science fiction" with "geeky loser living in his parents' basement", and how they seem to believe that girls don't like that icky "science fiction" stuff.

I'm trying to decide exactly how much this annoys me. BSG is about to end, and I haven't frankly been watching anything else the channel's been broadcasting, aside from the occasional crappy movie for a Suckoff. But this isn't because I'm not a skiffy fan. It's more because I just don't watch much TV in general these days. Nevertheless I am cranky enough to consider writing a letter to the channel. Grr.

Comments

[stickmaker.livejournal.com]

Y'know, they used to show classic fantasy, SF and horror movies and TV shows, Grade A and B and occasionally C, with some strange and sometimes interesting in-house programs. There was variety, and much of interest.

For the past few years, though, I've seen very little of that. Instead they mostly show tired re-runs and their in-house Grade B and C and occasionally D movies. They seem to think, for some reason, that this is an improvement. About the only thing they show any more which I actually record for time-shifting is Ani-Monday. Even that has a nasty habit of starting a good show then switching to something else without explanation.

This new change just confirms that they don't understand their target audience. Or even what their target audience *is*.

[firni.livejournal.com]

"Nevertheless, there was always a sneaking suspicion that the name was holding the network back."

No, it's the fact that they cancel decent shows and replace them with "Ghost Hunters", wrestling and horrible, horrible movies.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

I think we watch Doctor Who on SciFi, because we don't get BBC America. If it wasn't for that, I'd have no reason to watch their network after Friday.

BTW

[firni.livejournal.com]

Another friend pointed out: "why try to shed the geeks and the nerds? without them there'd BE no channel."

And via yet another friend, some addresses for you!

http://txtriffidranch.livejournal.com/277752.html

[thunderpigeon.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I honestly don't know whether to be annoyed or amused. The disturbing part is they have a point, at least when it comes to how SF is perceived, and if changing their name gets good F/SF shows a market among people who think Sci Fi is for geeks (but somehow have no problem with Sy Fy), then more power to them. I'd rather they didn't pander to the stereotypes, but if pandering breaks the stereotype down, then I'd frankly rather reach audiences than worry about semantics. On the other hand, if it just expands the market for crappy made-for-TV movies, then yeah, what a nuisance.

[dqg-neal.livejournal.com]

Excellent. now maybe someone can start a real Sci Fi Channel.

Re: BTW

[sianmink.livejournal.com]

The channel is soon to find this out, when BSG stops, there's no Stargate, and Stupid Monster Movie of the Week fails to to keep fans from heading to greener pastures.

Re: BTW

[firni.livejournal.com]

Yep. I was looking at my Tivo subscriptions, and once BSG is gone, there isn't a single SciFi (SYFY?) Channel show on there.

[jedishampoo.livejournal.com]

It's those... horrible, horrible movies! Argh. We used to watch Sci-Fi channel constantly, especially when it was "Sci-Fi Fridays." Seriously, I wouldn't be upset if they showed more reruns of old, good stuff.

But I must admit that I gave up on BSG a while back, even, angry at the inconsistent characterization. But I've been hearing people chat about the finale... IYO, has it gotten any better?

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

I watch Ghost Hunters. That's usually about it, save for the occasional ST:TNG episode.

[emmacrew.livejournal.com]

Hey, let's offend/alienate our CORE MARKET in hopes of getting some new viewership!

[annathepiper]

The really sad thing is, it'll probably work for them. Because the "not geek loser" audience still outnumbers us actual geeks.

[batyatoon]

Yeah, but why would the "not geek loser" audience watch SyFy?

[annathepiper]

Because I daresay the sorts of things they will air will appeal to them more than the actual SF fans.

[batyatoon]

Oh, almost certainly, but the question is will the sorts of things SyFy will air appeal to them more than what they're watching now.

[annathepiper]

That's the thing, I guess--whether a change in programming comes with the change in brand. The vibe I get from the various actual fans I've seen talking about this is that "I'd watch way more of the Sci Fi channel if they stopped showing as much crap". I'm not however getting a sense that the channel execs are interested in reducing the amount of crap in the programming.

[ariaflame.livejournal.com]

Interesting note via zanjan about the meaning of Syfy (http://zanzjan.livejournal.com/195437.html) in some languages

[annathepiper]

Yeah, I've been seeing that go around all over the place, and it is quite, quite apt.

[annathepiper]

Clearly we're all watching inadequate amounts of Ghost Hunters!

[annathepiper]

BSG has not matched its glory days of Season 1, but it's hung in there enough and kept me invested enough that I'm staying with it until the end. Because even in its inconsistency, it's still pretty much the best game in town on TV as far as I'm concerned, and damn I'm going to miss it so. Sniff.

And yeah, seriously, if you're going to show that many crappy movies, the least you can do is make sure they're the ones for MST3K!

[annathepiper]

Hah! Seriously!

solarbird says that before the Sci-Fi channel came onto the air, there was actually another effort in progress that never made it onto the air. Which is a shame, because apparently they were more fan-focused.

[annathepiper]

Here's the thing, though: they've proven that they can bring in the audiences. Two words: Battlestar Galactica.

If they'd actually continue to show stuff that doesn't suck, they wouldn't need to pull these stupid semantic tricks. But I can't think of a single thing on the channel that I'll actually bother to watch after BSG's final episode airs next week, and this kind of semantic bullshit is unfortunately making me seriously reconsider checking out Caprica once it airs next year.

[annathepiper]

Yeah, I'll have no reason to stick with it, either, and I'm sad to say that this kind of semantic bullshit makes me reconsider whether to come back once Caprica finally airs. I mean, I was ambivalent about Caprica anyway, but what do I know? I'm just a girl, I'm not supposed to like that icky "science fiction" stuff!

[annathepiper]

I have no clue what's going through their heads. Especially given that they've already demonstrated that they can bring in the audiences they want if they air stuff that doesn't suck. Battlestar has consistently brought in high viewership over its four year run. And they've got nothing to follow it up with the same kind of force.

And if they're going to pull this sort of stupid renaming bullshit, I'll seriously have to reconsider whether I'm willing to give any other show they air a chance.

[annathepiper]

THIS.

Re: BTW

[annathepiper]

Thanks for the link! I'm still thinking about whether I'm cranky enough about this to send a letter. Q said that the reaction on the scifiwire post has been blisteringly negative. Maybe I won't need to!

Re: BTW

[annathepiper]

Yeah. They have NOTHING in their lineup I'm willing to commit to watching, right now. I've seen the first few episodes of Eureka and have found it cute, but I can get the Doctor through other means--and without content cut out to boot.

And if they're going to pull this kind of bullshit with their branding, clearly they don't want me around as a target audience member anyway!

Re: BTW

[firni.livejournal.com]

They've shown time and time again that they don't give two shits what the fans think. WE'RE GEEKS.

Re: BTW

[annathepiper]

And this is why I'm mostly leaning against sending any sort of letter, because I'm sure they wouldn't care. Meh!

Dara just relayed off of nilhistic_kid's LJ that he's seeing a lot of "syfylys" going around his Friends' list. HAR!

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

Well, I suppose one could say I'm not watching it, since I don't exist. I'm a girl, on the internet, and I like sci-fi and video games. I don't exist, therefore I cannot watch enough programming to keep Sci-Fi SyFy interested in entertaining me. Which they don't want to do, because I don't exist.

[annathepiper]

*nods sagely* I don't exist either! I'm a girl, on the Internets, and I like reading SF! HARD SF sometimes, even! Also, I'm bisexual!

I'm clearly a figment of someone's imagination. I'd say I'm a Mary Sue, even, except my eyes aren't purple!

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

This reminds me of when I was still watching B5. They were just wrapping up the show and I was living in a town house which had the misfortune of having its own cable TV. The channel choices were so bad that once B5 was done, the only programs of interest were random discovery channel stuff.

I went without TV for almost 3 years starting from that event.

Honestly, we're on IP TV these days courtesy of AT&T. We're to the point where we're on a tech that would let us just subscribe to shows if they were delivered in that fashion to the DVR.

I'm done with subscribing to networks. I just want to subscribe to shows.

[annathepiper]

I just want to subscribe to shows.

Yes! I've been doing way more TV watching via DVDs lately than I have been when episodes actually air, and in the future I suspect I'll be way more inclined to do things like watching episodes online. I would totally groove on a "subscribe me to this TV show" model.

Especially if the traditional networks continue to demonstrate the Dumb.

[magnet5.livejournal.com]

Someone told me that SyFy is a high-school slang these days for syphilis.
And I have heard speculation this will justify them keeping the SF content low and devoting more time to wrestling, Scare Tactics and reruns of Lost.

[annathepiper]

The "syphilis" thing I've heard quoted in several locations as coming out of Polish slang, not high school, but yeah.

And indeed, the actual real SF/F content on the channel is awfully low these days. Lost is arguably an SF show in many ways, but wrestling? Not so much.

[magnet5.livejournal.com]

Someone pointed out on another blog that with Kyle XY and Middleman, ABC Family has done almost as much new SF stuff the past couple of years as SciFi has.

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

I have a bit of sympathy with the networks over their cost model for producing such things. They make the first hunk of their model by doing things real-time and spattering it with advertising. Most of the people who want to do things by subscription are already doing what they can to both free themselves from the advertising but also from the timeslot. I don't care that they want me to watch it at 9P on Friday - I'll watch it when I damned well please.

On the other hand, the networks have also done very well by packaging up the shows for DVD. I've heard in many cases that they're making far more on the DVDs than they did on the original broadcast - but I have no numbers to back that up. But in that particular case, they're making the money long after the expenses.

This suggests that they need a model where they can recoup production costs up front and have a model where they plan on making more of their money out the back end. That's certainly not something that makes traditional media investors happy. They want something they can get good profits on quarter to quarter.

We can at least be happy that IP multicast has become pervasive in set top boxes. This means that we're likely one cable network away from someone deciding to go with the subscription model using delayed broadcast delivery with a DVR to catch it.