So how long until Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon die?

>>86699323
>Year 1008*2
>Still using TV

Define die? Kids might not be watching live anymore because they can stream shows that CN and Nick get paid for online anyway.

>>86699323
Better question anon: Do you really want to live in a world where Youtubers set the standards for what children grow up watching?

Well, we already live in it, but do you want to continue living in it?

>>86699398
Cartoons aren't for kids anymore, they're for hipsters and neckbeards

This is a common question for broadcast media in general. And the answer to that is, I don't know. It might all just move to streaming services, which is really not that horrible of a future.

>>86699478
Pretty much the only real reason to pay specifically for cable or satellite these days is because local sports are blacked out on the legal streaming options. I don't know if teams will ever break the bond with those providers though.

I say 2020

>>86699648

When transmissions become costly enough that it's not worth it, probably.

I think the on demand world will treat animation far better than syndicated TV. The content will be judged more fairly and be available to more, we might even see true mature content spreading, like Bojack Horseman.

>>86699648
>>86702142
A large part of seeing live sports as a stable viewing audience for TVs was the idea that sports fans were so ingrained in their living room viewing habits that they'd never change. Rio torpedoed that notion and networks are unsettled.

People are going to look to the Netflix model which has more creative freedom, but razor thin profit margins. And if advertising increases on streaming platforms people will go where there's less advertising.

>>86699323
I blame video games.

>>86699364
I dropped TV in 2004 when I realized that the subscription was more then the cost of buying the DVD box set for every show I watched. Then I just downloaded those things and the cost didn't matter.

>>86699323
This is based on neilson viewership and doesn't account for VOD or DVR views

They might very well close as a cable network if they keep losing live viewers but their properties are valuable in the new entertainment market

File: 1469368727079.jpg (356KB, 707x1000px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 707x1000px

>>86699323
You know...I see it as something that has potential FOR GOOD.

Think about it, this will force these channels to search for OTHER viewers, thus generating more of a diverse programation on style and tone.

On the last years we have seem an increasing on good live actions shows on channels like HBO, FX and the like. In the same way, more and more children's cartoons are trying to be allowed to have an overacting plot and development. These shows have show to be popular with older audiences, and attain a very popular fanbase on the internet, with fanart and discussions that are basically free publicity.

I think that CN and other Channels will try in a last effort to appeal for the TT GO! and reboot Ben 10 and PPG crowd on the hopes that they will be "with it" with modern kids on the next years. We can clearly see that there is a drop on the amount of lorefag shows, and a focus on things like Might Swords and TTG, shows with a very same-y and tested aproach.

If this doesn't work? I think that they will try to bring back more continuity focused shows with an overarching plot and try to appeal to older audiences besides just children. After all, they WILL need new viewers.


I think that it is a possibility, and a move that has potential to work, but would need someone brave enough to push.


What you guys think?

>>86705209
I think you're basing your predictions on a universe where cable continues to be a relevant force for the foreseeable future, which is not the case.

>>86699364
Countries with state funded TV channels tighten up the laws to make it harder for NON TV OWNERS to avoid the TV tax.

Oh wait they are doing it now

>>86705209
Tv is a Dieing medium that's getting slaughtered by the internet once ratings drop below car radio its over,

>>86699323
It still rakes in dough. Fuck off.

>>86699364
>gen Z refusing to use things dad use from razor to TV to work just because dad it evil like Hitler and Ronald Mc Donalds
yeah you are so pushing this world forward man.

>>86705380 Not counting old/classic shows...

Its mostly because the programming besides a few shows is crap pandering to the next lowest common denominator,
and people watch the good ones online anyway.

Cables going to die with news.

So many jobs require having a TV on at all times to the news.

Man, minecraft lets players really killed children's tv channels.

>>86705323
Are you upset that Adventure Time is ending soon, anon?

>>86699405
you think the youtube cartoons are their ally,
youtube merely adopted the toons.

Newgrounds was born in it, molded by it. I didn’t see the youtube until I was already a man;
by then, it was nothing to me but blinding!

>Tried to shoehorn that in for those whowere raised by newgrounds.

But yeah the only thing that stops competitors in and keeps talent from going elsewhere is the way Nick and CN have the option of showing it where nobody else can

>>86699474
>Cartoons aren't for kids anymore, they're for hipsters and neckbeards

And SJWs and faggots

File: Radio.jpg (12KB, 520x292px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 520x292px

>>86705522
>6(Mon)15:45:07 No.86705546 ▶
> >>86699405
Those people could revive radio,
especially if the MGTOW and news in review ramblings that are little more than a photo/games being played with narration.

Radio is like usenet nobody really uses it, but it could be retaken

>>86699323
Rebecca Sugar taking Steven Universe to netflix when
Also the first company that decides to go fully digital will survive. The rest are gonna either die or fade out.

>>86705585
Cable providers will do whatever is necessary to keep their shit going as long as possible, long after most have moved to internet-provided entertainment.

They'll likely offer networks such low opt-ins that they can still profit from ad revenue until the advertisers themselves pull out of network/cable TV.

>>86705672
I see bigger protests against T.v. tax from cord cutters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUgcyYics3A
The technology can be appropriated for things people actually use, such as carrying shows that people watch intended for those with IQs above 70

Anyone who supports Netflix original shows need to be shot on sight.

>>86705897
Amazon and similar make shows and are gearing up to overtake TV

>>86705921
And it's cancer.
Streaming services are fucking cancer.

>>86705993
Tell me about it, i get 0.15 MBPs internet speed now.
I had 2mbps in 2008

>>86699323
sauce

>>86706129
He got it from kechupland
faggit

>>86705268
To be fair the public funded programs are often better in those countries (France and Switzerland to speak of my personal experience) and they give better streaming access than private networks (BBC Olympics coverage).

>>86699323
Once they chase away viewers with bad new shows, they will start to run out of the money to make any new shows at all. Then there will be a couple of decades of rerun old cartoons, until eventually re-branding into reruns of old live action sitcoms. Not so much a death, as slowly fading away.

>>86706223
BBC is carried on the backs of the UK taxpayer and could easily survive without requiring people in the UK paying a "TV License" if the bbc were to magically disappear tomorrow it would take a week to notice and by then other channels would "Pick up the slack"

>>86705897
>>86705993
What's the problem with them? I feel like the Netflix model is a pretty fair deal.

>>86705897
>>86705921
>>86705993
and the luddites join forces to fight the evils of medium killers!

pathetic

>>86706368
Power looms are the devils tool

>>86705562
Hipsters are SJWs and neckbeards are faggots. The point is that kids aren't the main demographic anymore.

>>86705897
>>86705993
Why? I hope this isn't based on quality because TV isn't really better.

>>86706368
It always amazes me how retards think things should never ever ever change. Humanity is always going to change and digging your heels in only delays the inevitable.

>>86706284
Removing a tax won't change that they're paid for by taxes, it's just displacing costs, not lowering them.

Oh yeah I'm sure channel 4 would suddenly produce quality programs, they're not doing it now because BBC. Right?

>>86706483
Chanel 4 is a public broadcaster but is forced to rely on ad revenue,
so it cant get away with as much as the bbc.

Itv is a private broadcaster C4 is not as its publicly Owned this is the reason C4 has better programs than the BBC (so people watch it)

>>86706284
I'm glad they got rid of BBC 3.

>>86706563
I only realized when i saw family guy being advertised for another station,

I mean what ELSE did they have bbc needs to be DISBAND DISSOLVED OR PRIVATIZED

>>86706442
Change isn't necessarily always good. It's okay to criticize or oppose change if you believe it means taking a turn towards something worse than the current status quo.

However, in this particular context (TV vs. digital services) I don't really mind change. TV's pretty much dead to me by now anyway, I haven't owned one in years. Everything I want to see is already online.

>>86706552
Nothing to do with "getting away with" things.
Not relying on ads means you can make good programs even if they don't tear up ratings. Like educative TV or less popular sports.
>Ratings=good
Oh boy here we go. Yeah 8oo10cats does countdown is such a creative show.

>>86706330
>>86706368
It's the reason why shows never get BDs. Fuck you all.

>>86706610
They have the best comedy show on Brit tv (peep show) and basically make the best TV documentaries in the world.

>>86706626
Name 1 bbc show that cant be carried by ANY other station.

besides we have the internet to watch the shows the censors will not allow, and bbc doesn't take big risks

>>86706638
>BDs
Bandes dessinées ?

>>86706663
Sell that part to to discovery Chanel or national geographic.

peep show could be funded and aired by any other channel.

>>86706676
Blu-Ray faggot

>>86706669
Any of their documentaries. When private channels make documentaries they end up being basically clickbaity bullshit with hookers or ancient aliens.
>BBC doesn't take big risks
You might be confusing taking (economical) risks and edChinese.

>>86706696
I think you might be retarded.

>>86706712
>bluray
why in the everliving fuck do you care so much about a physical medium that has already become obsolete? BD has no traction because most people are watching HD digitally. and now we've got 4K digital.

who fucking CARES about blu ray

>>86706712
Are you fucking serious?
Who gives a shit you consumerist shelffag poser.

>>86706737
Edginess you dumb phone

>>86706737
Vice makes good stuff when they aren't trying to push an agenda and the audience will go to where the best options are.

The bbc transmitters are becoming an indefensible waste of electricity,
>>86706760
i think you might be triggered

seriously if the bbc encrypted the channels and only made them available to people who actually wanted them there would be no problem, but why should we subsidizes this dinosaur

>>86706863
Triggered by what? A retard who doesn't understand offer and demand or TV production?
Actually kinda.

>>86706915
Explain butter mountain's with
supply and demand

objecting to something that is no longer needed being payed for by people who increasingly don't even use it doesn't make you a retard.

besides other companies will fill the void and its a small void

>>86699364
And what happen when the dark age of digitalism descend unto you? Everything you every downloaded: memes, videos, music. Gone. Because of a simple technical error?

>>86705049
Keep those DVDs.

>>86707008
Public funded tv can produce things with little demand, and that's a good thing because it occupies some niches that would otherwise go unfilled.
>People don't watch BBC programs
The Olympics beg to differ.

No chance profit-oriented tv would "fill the void" they literally don't have the same job.

>>86706773
>>86706782
>not caring about preservation
You can fuck off anytime.

>>86707048
If that happens (which won't) I'll have a lot more on my plate than worrying how I'll be able to rewatch BTAS.

>>86707178
Kill yourself.

>>86707112
I do though, I've worked as an archivist, but some schmoe having a Teen Titans blu ray set doesn't matter one bit.

>>86707085
The Olympics SERIOUSLY there is no reason why the BBC is the only company that can carry that.

And last time i checked the RIO Olympics weren't covered by UK TV license fee

Didn't see any TV license vans demolishing those villages

Of course you can make money by airing the Olympics.

British Gas was privatized British Telecom was privatized Its the BBC's turn.

And for profit TV does have the same job as public funded TV (to broadcast shows) and anything they will not touch will be picked up by "Alternative media" as they WILL air those shows.

>>86699405
>Do you really want to live in a world where Youtubers set the standards for what children grow up watching?
There is Netflix. And other streaming services.

I don't think Youtubers'll set the new standard, because even a channel as Frederator migrated to the stream service known as VRV. And, I think that is what'll happen, Youtubers'll post three or five minute shorts while promoting,
>do you like what you see and want to see more subscribe now to VRV or [insert stream service here] for only fifteen dollars a month you can watch full episodes!

>>86707204
>i care about preservation i swear!
>doesnt own a single DVD/BD
>exclusively watches streams
lol

>>86707202
No u. Honestly you probably should if your purpose in life is hoarding digital copies of media to save western culture in the case of some dumb /pol/ habbening. It's like you don't remember the y2k bug, and like you know nothing of professional archiving.

>>86707213
But yes there is, most Olympic sports do fuck all for ratings and aren't shown on private networks in other countries.
You don't understand buying rights either?

Privatizing public services rarely end well because niches aren't profitable.

And no, for one the purpose is to make money, for another it's to make programs that are deemed good by politicians.

>>86707178
>which won't
I remember when /mu/ said David Bowie will be fine. And look what happen to him.

You can never be sure, anon.

And, of course there are other problems then collecting, yet isn't it good to own physical copies of your favourite series? You don't have to buy everything you watch.

>>86707264
I just archive because I like the best quality possible.
Now kill yourself.

>>86707258
Because I know individual fucks like you have no bearing on it on the end, and I also know that DVDs and BDs are among the least durable of physical supports, especially if stored wrong (which is the case for yours).
They'll be unreadable way before your dumb blackout comes up.

>>86707329
If no TV station caries the Olympics(Highly unlikely)
It would be streamed online via the official website or through a TV peripheral.

Most private tv stations make programs that would be deemed good by politicians.
political affiliation comes into play
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wj8SDS75RU

Even so it decent justify TV licenses especially those imposed on people who no longer even bother having a TV

>>86707264
>save western culture
Your paranoia is to the skies and reaching for outer space high.

If I love a series, I'll buy it. If I don't, I'll torrent it. Not going to scoundrel money on anything unncessary needed when there are other priorities that are of greater importance. It has nothing to do with perservation or Y2K happenings.

>>86707345
Oh yeah it was really likely that Bowie was immortal.

>>86707428
>taking your discs out the case ever
Now I know you're retarded.

>>86707415
At least now you stopped pretending you have altruistic motives.
I have no idea why you're this triggered though.

>>86707462
It was a weird coincidence is all. Still, in a dark humour sort of way, very comical too.

>>86707434
Stop making dumb assumptions that have literally been proven wrong by facts.
Most people watch the BBC through streams anyway.

>>86699398
Kids aren't going to Nick.com to stream cartoons. They're on youtube watching Minecraft Lets Plays.

File: SIX O'BONG.png (101KB, 861x475px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 861x475px

>>86705268
>TV Tax

>>86707442
I'm not the paranoid one here, I just assumed you were>>86707048

>>86705583
they are radio in concept. they just don't use the same technology.

>>86707475
>Implying plastic cases are proper storage
Amateur pls.

>>86707477
Because it's annoying when shows half the time don't even get DVD or BD releases and are shoved onto amazon video or Netflix, and I have to hope someone will rip it and upload it somewhere else.

>>86707415
You realize you can archive on a hard drive, right?

>>86707504
Its not dumb to say the Olympics wouldn't be available online because it WAS.

Its not dumb to say people wouldn't get it this way because they DO
>Most people watch the BBC through streams anyway

Would you like to pay a tax to fund websites you dont use also?

Cite the "FACTS" that prove that the TV license or bbc is still needed today.

>>86707596
no shit

>>86707788
So what's the obsession with discs? Just store the episodes on an external drive or something.

File: Mylar_Punched_tape.jpg (8KB, 220x165px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x165px

>>86707788
Punched tape is he most durable if you want to store something for centuries, so if you want to be buried with something...

Just leave a few instruction books on how to decode it
>>86707820
you can hold it it FEELS more permanent, various computer backup devices backed up would be more practical

>>86707524
>They're on youtube watching Minecraft Lets Plays.
Um gramps, you do know that minecraft is no longer relevant? They are more likely watching leafy videos (which managed to be worse somehow)

>>86707533
Nope, I'm not. I understand that shows like Wander Over Yonder won't get physically release, so I understand the value of digital releases.

And, I have Steven Universe downloaded too, I like it and all, yet not to the point where I feel I need to own the DVDs.

As someone who buys physical media to listen to director/cast/crew commentaries, it bothers me that digital releases rarely have any of that stuff and charge the same price.

>>86705209
>Think about it, this will force these channels to search for OTHER viewers, thus generating more of a diverse programation on style and tone.
You poor thing. It just means they'll keep throwing in cheaper syndicated garbage until finally pulling the plug.

Maybe it will be like the death of Saturday morning cartoons? Instantaneous.

>>86703061
>Rio torpedoed that notion
That only happened because NBC went full retard on their Olympics broadcast by not showing shit, and the shit they did show was delayed, incomplete and full of ads. That shit only happened in the US.