How interesting that a subject about
one TV channel aimed at less than
10% of the population can spark 12 pages of discussion!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by timewarrior2001
Exactly where do you draw the line?
|
The line is drawn based on what the demand will be. If all 6 million of the UK's gay/lesbian/bi population would tune into a Gay TV type channel, then there might be sufficient demand. NTL does not have enough coverage of that 6 million people to make the channel viable for distribution due to the fees that ntl would charge the channel. And that is just assuming that
every one of the 6 million would tune in! More likely would be less than 10% of that 6 million.
I think something important needs to be said here...this has nothing to do whether the channel is aimed at the gay population or not, it's to do with basic economics. Will we make enough money to pay to pay the ntl fees. Chances are that they won't, which is why the channel isn't on ntl.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by timewarrior2001
You DO NOT need Gay TV programmes, it'll end up being trashy eurocrap as usual.
|
I don't think any of us are in any position to decide whether we
need any TV programme. We do not need Eastenders, we don't need Channel 4, in fact we don't NEED television at all. But some of us like watching some programmes on Channel 4 - so it's nothing to do with whether we need it or not.
We all have choices, with regards to what we watch. I choose not to watch God TV, but I respect Russ' right to do so. I choose not to watch the football, but I respect people's rights to do so.
None of us, gay or straight, have the right to say that there should not be any channel on any platform.