|
TV Bites With
Neena Louise |
The Decline of TV Guide
by Neena Louise
TV Guide was a mainstay in my household for years. Since I was a child, I
anticipated the arrival of this magazine every week, eagerly waiting to tear
into it and read it cover-to-cover. This year, despite the repeated
"renewal notices" (each promising a better deal, though all seven were
for the same price), I won't be renewing.
What has happened to TV Guide? It has failed miserably to move with the
times and has, instead, gone backwards. I don't watch soaps. Or teen angst. Or
much sci-fi. I absolutely despise that smarmy Martha Stewart. That about sums up
an average TV Guide issue (the word "puff-piece" comes to mind
when I think of most TV Guide articles). How I long for the days in the late
'70s and early '80s when there were actually some fascinating articles - not
just sugary pieces about TV personalities. In this information age, celebrity
stories/gossip are everywhere, so I hardly think TV Guide would be a
first-choice source. I still wonder what new video releases have to do with
television, and their "What's On" column highlights only one or two
programs, leaving me wondering what the point of the column is, anyway. If I
want to know what's on I'll (duh) look at the listings. If I want highlights,
I'll read Entertainment Weekly or go to the Internet.
Another problem is that, with so many channels to choose from (in my area it's
possible to receive 75 through the local cable company) and TV Guides
that are issued by region rather than community, there are dozens of channels
listed that I will never be able to receive, no matter how much I might want
them. Additionally, the channel guides are often so sorely outdated that they
confuse me rather than inform me. Trying to weed out the channels I'll never
get, flipping to the back or the grids where listings for some channels I DO get
are delegated, and losing my place in the process makes the listings section an
excercise in frustration (I actually threw one issue across the room in
disgust). There has been rumor that TV Guide will no longer even have
listings and will become, instead, a TV information magazine. What a joke! The
only reason I even subscribed in the first place was for the detailed listings.
Since they have become so muddled, I no longer have a use for such a rag.
I've turned to the newspaper's TV magazine supplement for the first time since I
was a young child. I was surprised and pleased that it is leaps and bounds
better for planning one's TV viewing than the expensive TV Guide. They
list only the channels I can receive in my area; the listings are complete with
descriptions and an indication of whether or not it's a repeat; the prime-time
grids are placed close to the prime-time listings (rather than smack-dab in the
middle of the afternoon's listings like TV Guide's are). And it's free.
Sure the articles are pretty poor, but I don't get it for the articles, after
all.
It's really too bad that TV Guide has deteriorated to such a degree. I
actually had some real regret not renewing my subscription, but why pay for
something that's aggravating and useless?
| We
would love to know what you think, sound off on the
TV message
boards and let us know what you think! |
|
|
