This is a sweeping and biased statement on your part. Watching reality TV format does not necessarily mean that you are not intellectual. Mind that academics do take reality TV as a phenomenon to research and study about how it impacts our society.

You also don’t seem to understand the definition of reality TV. Please see here for a definition: http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-cobuild/reality%20TV

Examples that you have stated such as The Ellen Degeneres Show, The Tyra Banks Show, The Martha Stewart Show and Talk Show With Spike Feresten are all variety talk shows and not reality TV.

The reason for the large number of foreign programs being added to our daily television show schedule is partly because of the high cost of producing in-house shows as compared to simply buying the rights to broadcast shows. With the internet widely available to Singaporeans, our local televisions are struggling to keep the attention of the people to our local television channels. You can’t blame them for broadcasting more foreign programs to attempt to bring back the eyeballs to their channel.

I used to subscribe to cable until i realised i was paying for something i had no time for. But when i was subscribed, i would watch BBC, CNN, Discovery and National Geographic.

Of course, occasionally you’d catch a report about singapore. And you can tell immediately the depth of the BBC or CNN’s reports.

Mediacorp has a world to do before they even catch up.

I believe in liberalising the television market. Naturally when Mediaworks went bust, I was disappointed. But then again in such an ‘open’ society as ours, what are the chances that we really get to see or hear what we really want?

I really feel fortunate to have Cable in my household. I feel for other Singaporeans without it.

Cable is a relief – if you can afford it. Majority of singaporeans still either don’t have it or can’t afford it. (SCV recently increased their charges, right?).

In any case, cable doesn’t cover local issues.

I really hope someone with clout will speak out about this and help wake Mediacorp up.

Regards,
Andrew

There’s so much crap on TV these days I can’t remember think of any reasons to watch Channel 5 unless its the news. Even then, Numb Already has a point. We would probably have heard of it even before the broadcast time through the internet.

What we need are more quality programs that will capture the nation’s interest while enriching them. But that might take some time especially with the lamentable fact that S’pore’s Media network’s a monopoly. So there’s not much of a choice really.

PS. Speed 2 Cruise Control’s on Star Movies tonight! (Advertisement free) =)

I have also stopped buying local newspapers. If I desperately need to read something of importance or interest that have appeared in the local newspapers, I simply go to the libraries or the clubs to read them. Usually, they are old news, anyway.

The cyberspace is much faster and more up-to-date than the local newspapers and local TV channels. We are now in the Information Age. So, those medias that cannot cope up with the speed and the varieties of providing what the audience wants will sooner or later have to be phased out of the race.

Moreover, local mass medias are totally controlled and “directed” by the govt and, therefore, have gained a reputation of presenting only what they want us to know or hear, not the whole picture or the whole truth. Most of the time, half-truths or selective truths.

I avoid all the local mass medias almost totally because I do not wish to go “blind” or “unbalanced”!

I agree with Andrew. Feedback and Talking Point type shows should be revived, even if they may not be commercially viable yet. Why the heck do we pay TV license fees if MediaCorp is making loads of money from advertisements on inane reality TV shows?

As I recall, the rationale for collecting tv licence fees is so that our tv stations can broadcast programmes which are not commercially attractive but which are necessary.

Crime Watch, for example.

So, I do not buy the reasoning that Mediacorp should or can only broadcast programmes which are commercially viable.

Otherwise, why have us pay for tv licence fees?

To quote from the MICA website:

The bulk of Public Service Broadcast funding is channeled towards the production of local programmes in various genres. Local programmes are costly to make but are needed to keep Singaporeans informed about issues of relevance to our society, promote better appreciation of social issues and strengthen community bonding. Some examples of PSB programmes supported in the past year include: 40 on 40 a documentary series which traces the significant trends and developments in Singapore over the last 40 years, First Mums a drama series on first-time mothers and Manam a drama on the plight of those suffering from mental illness.

PSB funds are also used for National and community interest programmes such as National Day Rally and National Day Message broadcasts to communicate critical national messages to Singaporeans.

Regards,
Andrew

I’m not sure if this dearth of current affairs programmes on TV can ever be resolved. It’s safe to assume that previous attempts have failed abysmally. Future attempts will probably fail too, given that Mediacorp, like all TV networks, is concerned with maximizing viewership (and minimizing costs). Will supply of such programmes create its own demand? Maybe, but not enough to sustain the bottomline, I think.

Perhaps you expect too much of the TV industry?