TL;DR: Reality TV is a soul killer for any station, but it's a guaranteed money maker. So far, I've yet to see a single, good station not succumb to this spiral. People love train wrecks or crafted stories that feel "real". So long as this is the stuff the masses want, every station will eventually start making this material in search of "cash cows".
The main reason stations put out reality TV is because they're very cheap & easy to create. Aside from the host, the cast are random fools (no need for actors) and everything they say/do is done on-the-fly (no need for writers). The shows aren't a guaranteed money maker, but they do serve as cheap filler for time slots networks don't want to invest resources in.
Well, I simplified the truth a bit in a "lies to children" sense. You are correct. These types of shows are super-cheap but that means that your ROI is near-guarenteed, even with just moderate, or equal viewership.
These corporations make these niche stations profitable by basically a survival-of-the-fittest approach for their content. They will begin airing 2-3 reality shows, often with HUGE advertisement pushes and drop the least watched shows, replacing them with new ones every 6 months or so. Once they find a few that are doing well, they add a fourth and fifth... and then they get piled on and rotated out.
Channels like History and A&E are also big on having "specials" which are often nothing more than reality TV pilot episodes. If the special get 100,000 viewers, they'll air it again. If the subsequent viewing get 125,000 viewers, they'll make that "special" into a full blown show the next season. I don't think this applies to the OPs context, but since History has long since left the quality-content zone, they are probably trying to stay "true to their origins" by making new "documentary" content. But, profitability is so important that they have to make material that will catch peoples attention by sensationalism. Sensational things are rarely true, or they are half-truths at best. Regardless, this documentary proves the point. History channel airs what gets attention... just like every other cable station out there.
Just like the "Disney" Channel starting about 15ish years ago, the "History" Channel doesn't live up to its name either. Just like the so-called "reality" TV genre. Shoot, the Disney Channel was at its best back when it was a pay channel...
Comments
TL;DR: Reality TV is a soul killer for any station, but it's a guaranteed money maker. So far, I've yet to see a single, good station not succumb to this spiral. People love train wrecks or crafted stories that feel "real". So long as this is the stuff the masses want, every station will eventually start making this material in search of "cash cows".
The main reason stations put out reality TV is because they're very cheap & easy to create. Aside from the host, the cast are random fools (no need for actors) and everything they say/do is done on-the-fly (no need for writers). The shows aren't a guaranteed money maker, but they do serve as cheap filler for time slots networks don't want to invest resources in.
Well, I simplified the truth a bit in a "lies to children" sense. You are correct. These types of shows are super-cheap but that means that your ROI is near-guarenteed, even with just moderate, or equal viewership.
These corporations make these niche stations profitable by basically a survival-of-the-fittest approach for their content. They will begin airing 2-3 reality shows, often with HUGE advertisement pushes and drop the least watched shows, replacing them with new ones every 6 months or so. Once they find a few that are doing well, they add a fourth and fifth... and then they get piled on and rotated out.
Channels like History and A&E are also big on having "specials" which are often nothing more than reality TV pilot episodes. If the special get 100,000 viewers, they'll air it again. If the subsequent viewing get 125,000 viewers, they'll make that "special" into a full blown show the next season. I don't think this applies to the OPs context, but since History has long since left the quality-content zone, they are probably trying to stay "true to their origins" by making new "documentary" content. But, profitability is so important that they have to make material that will catch peoples attention by sensationalism. Sensational things are rarely true, or they are half-truths at best. Regardless, this documentary proves the point. History channel airs what gets attention... just like every other cable station out there.