Tom Vitale on Sci-Fi Channel programming

[RescueFarscape]

Sci-Fi Magazine, Aug. 2002 edition, pg. 82


"Actually, that's the secret of the whole thing: Although we debate these issues inside SciFi, the real power lies with you. We make decisions every day, and then you, the viewer, tell us if we were right or wrong. Related genres that earn high ratings and positive letters and e-mails will continue to air, and programming that you reject won't, Ultimately, the decisions made by SciFi's programmers are really in your hands."
--Thomas Vitale


Thought that would be a good thing to remind the Sci Fi Channel, et al, of and copied it down word for word. Just wanted to pass it on.

'Specially liked 'Actually, that's the secret of the whole thing: Although we debate these issues inside SciFi, the real power lies with you. We make decisions every day, and then you, the viewer, tell us if we were right or wrong.' And that's exactly what I sent to Tom, Bonnie, Barry, Michael on postcards this morning.

This article was about what sci-fi is versus what they air on the Sci Fi Channel. "Last year we decided to push the limits of the genre beyond the breaking point...Clearly, the Sci Fi Channel viewer did not want to see that type of (program) on this network."


Hopefully, they'll keep on (start?) listening. :eh:

[Dominar of Action]

Problem is, they could put on any number of things that have little to do with science fiction and they might get ratings (e.g., nude mudwrestling), but does that mean they should be showing it? Not if they want to call themselves "Sci Fi." Like his fellow execs, it seems Mr. Vitale is having problems with the "vision thing."

[MediaSavant]

It should be noted that Mr. Vitale attended the 2001 NY Convention and stood on stage with David Kemper. They seemed to have a great relationship.

It makes a difference in how you read things people say when you've actually seen them/heard them in person.

[Dominar of Action]

People can play public roles, MS, even television executives. I've seen executives (not TV ones, but execs all the same) that I knew for a fact *hated* each other, yet you'd never know it from observing their public behavior. Of course, you may be right and TV and DK may be the best of friends, but unless you've actually been a fly on the wall in some of their meetings, when they weren't "performing" for the benefit of an audience, it's just as likely that they're not.

In any event, the personal relationship between TV and DK has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of whether Sci Fi has a coherent long-term programming strategy or if they are just grasping blindly for ratings wherever they may be found.

[GARNET]

I think DoA is right just because they seemed nice on stage does not mean anything. It could have been act for the event. As for the viewers having control, I think it more just talk to make the viewers feel like they are in control when they have almost no say at all. It all base of generalities, curves, percent, what advertivsers will pay, what the network can buy cheap and the biggest what the top exec. like. The fans have little to no say in the end. If that were true we would have gotten better response from them then we did whether it was bad or good. They just blow us off any way. It just business, I just wise they stop acting like we have say when we seem to have none. It all up to them they have the power and if it serve them then it done not if for us.