![[a case of the blog]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrdW6m_GKpkUaPi56fHU6TFDQPOe1Rd_Lu0S_T5NgEIvzR2rJYBvUU6yRIyH7xtuBt0hVMDAcuqSlLEu9ooq2iwOOnskdsfS9BMjPZJsFJMVIlMJopdnOVjxqeNRR9etLlOY9wUNdSpW6D/s1600/newblogheader19.gif)
So tonight marks the first week of Vince McMahon's Million Dollar Giveaway, and I have to wonder something: What in the blue hell is with all the negativity towards this sweepstakes? Because that's all that this is: A SWEEPSTAKES! Practically every where you go, from Lance Storm's commentary to the News Day blog I discussed last week, people proclaim this contest as a pathetic, desperate maneuver to garner viewers. Most people have interpreted this giveaway as "We'll pay you to watch our show."
Are we really that cynical and eager to find SOMETHING to criticize? Yes, this is an attempt to get viewers, but isn't that the point of running a television show? Vince McMahon explicitly stated that this was the intention during his live promo last week. This should come as no surprise either way, though, as the primary purpose of television is to get people to watch your program. If for some reason you're losing viewers, you respond by trying something new in order to win them back. This is a very standard practice. Hell, twice a year we go through sweeps so that (a) ratings go up and (b) networks/producers/whoever make more money off of advertising. And virtually every single television show participates in this practice, and that's not an exaggeration.
I also find the argument of "we'll pay you to watch our show" weak and flawed (not to mention a bit lame). Oprah is probably the most successful person in her genre, and she regularly doles out loads of money to her audience (both live and viewing). Remember when she gave every single person in the live audience a car? Regis & Kelly regularly call previously registered viewers (sound familiar?) and quiz them on various topics in order to win money or a trip (and many of these questions involve information that you would not have known had you not watched their show). Z100 pays the bills of numerous viewers everyday. Are all of these programs paying their viewers to watch? Are they all desperate and pathetic as well?
The idea of giving your audience an incentive to watch is nothing new, nor is it pathetic. Obviously, it's the WWE's responsibility to ensure that they air a program that maintains that new and returning audience, or else they essentially wasted one million dollars a week. Nevertheless, it's undeniably earned them significant attention (that News Day blog has already posted something in the range of 10 posts revolving around the giveaway), which leads me to believe that the idea isn't ludicrous. It just absolutely amazes me how many people have labeled this ploy as a miserable failure, weeks before it even officially began.
Are we really that cynical and eager to find SOMETHING to criticize? Yes, this is an attempt to get viewers, but isn't that the point of running a television show? Vince McMahon explicitly stated that this was the intention during his live promo last week. This should come as no surprise either way, though, as the primary purpose of television is to get people to watch your program. If for some reason you're losing viewers, you respond by trying something new in order to win them back. This is a very standard practice. Hell, twice a year we go through sweeps so that (a) ratings go up and (b) networks/producers/whoever make more money off of advertising. And virtually every single television show participates in this practice, and that's not an exaggeration.
I also find the argument of "we'll pay you to watch our show" weak and flawed (not to mention a bit lame). Oprah is probably the most successful person in her genre, and she regularly doles out loads of money to her audience (both live and viewing). Remember when she gave every single person in the live audience a car? Regis & Kelly regularly call previously registered viewers (sound familiar?) and quiz them on various topics in order to win money or a trip (and many of these questions involve information that you would not have known had you not watched their show). Z100 pays the bills of numerous viewers everyday. Are all of these programs paying their viewers to watch? Are they all desperate and pathetic as well?
The idea of giving your audience an incentive to watch is nothing new, nor is it pathetic. Obviously, it's the WWE's responsibility to ensure that they air a program that maintains that new and returning audience, or else they essentially wasted one million dollars a week. Nevertheless, it's undeniably earned them significant attention (that News Day blog has already posted something in the range of 10 posts revolving around the giveaway), which leads me to believe that the idea isn't ludicrous. It just absolutely amazes me how many people have labeled this ploy as a miserable failure, weeks before it even officially began.
No comments:
Post a Comment