Poll: Do we live in the "golden age" of television?

[Jingthing]

You're talking technology.

I'm talking content.

It is true a big difference now is that with so many amazingly great shows, it's harder to find people who watch the same shows to talk over the water cooler.

And as people watch in binges, you don't have the time factor either when everyone was on the same episode.

It's much more segmented.

Sometimes there are standout exceptions like Breaking Bad.

This poll like all here is for entertainment purposes only.

It is not presented as a perfect poll offering all possibilities.

It used to be t.v. was an inferior medium for actors and writers compared to film. That's over. T.V. has arrived.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Jingthing

[Don Mega]

Ive been getting right into cup cake wars of late, great show.

[Jingthing]

People who voted Dark Ages ... you've seen Fargo and you still think that? For one example. I still think people who don't realize how amazing these times are for t.v. have not accessed the amazing content.

Propaganda? What are shows like Fargo and Breaking Bad propagandizing for?

If you're talking "news" networks, yes that's often true.

Years ago there may have been a few shows of merit at any time, such as Seinfeld. Now there are several, all the time.

If Charles Dickens was writing today, I reckon it would be for t.v. series, not novels.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Jingthing

[pgrahmm]

People who voted Dark Ages ... you've seen Fargo and you still think that? For one example. I still think people who don't realize how amazing these times are for t.v. have not accessed the amazing content.

Propaganda? What are shows like Fargo and Breaking Bad propagandizing for?

If you're talking "news" networks, yes that's often true.

Years ago there may have been a few shows of merit at any time, such as Seinfeld. Now there are several, all the time.

If Charles Dickens was writing today, I reckon it would be for t.v. series, not novels.

So far about 68% - 28% against the "enlightenment" that you perceive and keep re-addresing.....

TV simply is what it is and the handful of quality available versus the sheer amount of stations/networks/programming seems to suggest the amount of talent has been so diltuted and the bar is set so low that the mediocre shows tend to stand above the rest.....

Many are jaded by the lack of content and long gone are the days that bored people planned their time frames around the tube....

Guess that leaves us with places like this.....

Where we can trade and express pur own thoughts rather than have others artistic expression pumped into our minds.....

This might be the wrong forum to survey/poll as there are adventurous spirits here.....As opposed to the workaday mindless grind then plop in front of a TV.....

Even when in that grind I preferred watching the unrehearsed real time drama of a sport over a encapsulated pretend bit of weekly fiction.....

Edited December 12, 2015 by pgrahmm

[Jingthing]

Yes, people watch t.v. differently now, of course.

That's the technology.

Talking about the quality of the content.

And that QUANTITY of QUALITY content is here now more than ever.

Never presented this poll as any kind of attempt to be a scientific poll so don't be ABSURD.

If you want to brag that you don't watch t.v. ... well, dude, we all make such choices but by not watching t.v. in THIS era you're actually missing something of value. You can live in a world of DENIAL and act like you're not. But you are.

Not long ago, a friend at work told me I absolutely, positively must watch “Broad City” on Comedy Central, saying it was a slacker-infused hilarity.

My reaction? Oh no, not another one.

The vast wasteland of television has been replaced by an excess of excellence that is fundamentally altering my media diet and threatening to consume my waking life in the process. I am not alone. Even as alternatives proliferate and people cut the cord, they are continuing to spend ever more time in front of the TV without a trace of embarrassment.

I was never one of those snobby people who would claim to not own a television when the subject came up, but I was generally more a reader than a watcher. That was before the explosion in quality television tipped me over into a viewing frenzy.
...

Television’s golden age is also a gilded cage, an always-on ecosystem of immense riches that leaves me feeling less like the master of my own universe, and more as if I am surrounded.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/10/business/media/fenced-in-by-televisions-excess-of-excellence.html?_r=0

I'm having the exact reaction now. Not ANOTHER one! Too much. Too much. Too much MUST SEE t.v.!

Edited December 12, 2015 by Jingthing

[quandow]

I only download shows I want to watch and run them, commercial free, on MY schedule.

[Jingthing]

I only download shows I want to watch and run them, commercial free, on MY schedule.

Choosing your own schedule is very common these days.

But that's the technology.

The content part is that there is SO MUCH GOOD STUFF to watch these days.

On your own schedule.

The New York Times guy suggests there is relation between the new technical styles of viewing and the massive amount of HIGH QUALITY content. I can see that part but frankly if it was mostly crap as it used to be, WHO CARES about the technology? But that is not the case.

Thus: GOLDEN AGE OF TELEVISION.

We're in it.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Jingthing

[StreetCowboy]

What do you mean by "television"? I understand television to be broadcast video (as opposed to point-to-point video on demand, or downloaded video, or DVD, and I don't think I know anyone that makes a point of watching television, except for sporting events.

That said, I believe we live in a golden age of television. The pubs are packed for English Premier League games, international rugby and heavyweight boxing, all carried on broadcast media

Edited December 12, 2015 by StreetCowboy

[Jingthing]

I reject your limited definition. Obviously. Read the NYT article.

[StreetCowboy]

I reject your limited definition. Obviously. Read the NYT article.

So what is television? In your opinion.... Only drama serials? I notice none of the shows mentioned were pish British comedies, which is the only other 'TV' I hear mentioned in the pub Edited December 12, 2015 by StreetCowboy

[Squeegee]

Not the most interesting topic, really. A 'Golden Age of TV' was heralded and begun by The Sopranos with everything from the rebooted Battlestar Galactica to early Dexter very high in quality and excitement. From The Wire to Breaking Bad, from half a dozen great shows I know that you don't to the half dozen you know that I don't, right up to the epic proportions of Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead, we have already seen our Golden Age of TV. Your OP is far more telling in it's noting how we can no longer keep up with all the content.

A far more interesting topic - not poll - is the golden age in gaming that is going on right now: that's where the real cutting edge of popular entertainment resides at the moment.

[Supaluke]

I reckon the mark of a "golden age of television" is that we would watch more of it, and be happy to do so. I watch less TV than I did 30 years ago, and with less dedication.

Sort of agreeing with the above, I watch much less television now, then earlier.

My viewing habits could be ascribed as roughly inversely proportional to the screen size.

As the screens got bigger, I watched less.

Sort of like surgically assisted boobs on a lady, the bigger ones almost command your attention for a moment, then you just look away as there is probably little of substance behind the screen.

[Jingthing]

I reject your limited definition. Obviously. Read the NYT article.

So what is television? In your opinion.... Only drama serials? I notice none of the shows mentioned were pish British comedies, which is the only other 'TV' I hear mentioned in the pub

That's kind of can of worms to try to define t.v. in the modern context. Obviously not only drama serials. That's absurd. Of course comedy shows of all kinds are t.v. Obviously not only watched when broadcast.

You kind of know it when you see it and there is a TON of it.

It's video obviously but not all video.

I think some of the content on youtube can be classified as t.v., such as web series produced for youtube delivery, and probably most of it can't.

Porn is mostly video ... is that t.v.?

Like I said, can of worms.

But it's a lot of stuff! An awful lot. But the thing is a there is so much that is the opposite of awful.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Jingthing

[Supaluke]

Out of curiosity, I just read that list you (Dustdevil) painstakingly compiled and I can honestly say that I've not watched one of those programs, not one.

For a moment there I thought I was in with a chance with the # 41st pick and then realised that 'Walking Dead, The' is not the same as the excellent BBC produced program 'Waking the Dead'.

BTW, I do watch TV, just nothing on Dustdevil's list.

Yes. It all started with The Sopranos in 1999-2007. My personal rankings, for what they're worth. (Grey shading denotes current; the others have run their course.)

(please see post # 26 above for more details)

Edited December 12, 2015 by Supaluke

[BookMan]

Yes. It all started with The Sopranos in 1999-2007. My personal rankings, for what they're worth. (Grey shading denotes current; the others have run their course.)

Some very decent series on that list. There would be a score of decent European, Australian series etc that would fit nicely in there too

[BookMan]

Not sure if we are in a Golden age or not..

But there are a lot of great new series coming out... and not just from the traditional areas of America and UK. There is a host of quality shows from Australia, and Europe... Now easily available online...

Having extra players such as Netflix, Amazon etc. dishing up some quality productions is only expanding the choice of what to watch and providing a lot more innovative dramas and comedy, that are pushing boundaries the main TV networks didn't like to push in the past.

Has it become cheaper to produce these shows? I know that SFX/CGI has added another dimension to many shows, providing a viewing experience we couldn't have had twenty years back. Game of Thrones & Walking Dead just two examples.

[Eagleizer]

Since the technology moves forward every year and we get better and

better resolution and other functionalities to the TV, would it not always

be in "The golden age"? I`m sure TV`s are going to get better every year

until some more convenient platform arrives. I would like to be able to

travel with my TV, but 55" is just too much.. LOL

[DrTuner]

Porn is mostly video ... is that t.v.?

tele.vision. ie. seen from far away. So unless you're participating, yes it is.

Which makes me wonder what will end this "golden age" of media in pre-compiled series format, probably interactive 3d stuff like the games of today or some telemanipulation stuff. Should take a couple of decades.

It sure won't be "real life", which in the overcrowded cities of current world is quite unpleasant. Escapism will continue to rule.

[farangmick]

Not watched TV since I came here seven years ago. So I'm in the grumpy old git category. Can keep the wife and kids quiet for a time though.

[Scott]

Yes. It all started with The Sopranos in 1999-2007. My personal rankings, for what they're worth. (Grey shading denotes current; the others have run their course.)

I just had to delete my vote and make it a yes. There really, really have been and are a lot of great things to watch on TV.

[AlQaholic]

What is television?

Yeah, there is no such thing anymore, now it should be called "Stream". I'm waiting for the time when you will have a dedicated "Stream" room similar to the one in the movie "Gamer", and you can see a 3D stream in the middle of the room and walk around the scene and watch from any angel, Real 3D.....