What the hell happened to The History Channel?

[Sweed]

I used to watch The History Channel a lot but for a long while now their programming has been shit. Instead of showing actual historical programming they have about 90%+ Modern Marvels, UFOs, and Mega Disasters. Some of this stuff is ok, I guess, but it seems to be on all of the time.

So, Memorial Day comes and I'm looking forward to some WWII, Civil War, and Weapons at War. Or perhaps a day long "Band of Brothers" in HD. But no, these idiots came up with a marathon showing of Monster Quest until 7:00pm our time to be followed by Cavemen. Seriously what the fuck?

Maybe I shouldn't complain though with a day of programming that includes..

1.Searching for giant squid

2.Stalin may have planned to cross humans with apes

3.Probing Louisiana and Florida for the Swamp Creature

4.All female expedition hoping to lure Big Foot into camera range (this could be good if the chicks are hot and it is done right;) )

5.Looking for a loch Ness type monster some say they have seen in Lake Champlain

6.Giant bird sightings in Illinois, Texas, and Alaska in the 70's

Then take this power lineup and repeat it for those of us that want to see it again.

I used to check their lineup daily and usually found something I would end up watching. Now I'm lucky if I find a program a week that I want to see.

[Mustang]

Because 90%+ of the public have the attention span of 6 seconds and if you had actual historical programming, they would change the channel to a show call 'THE WORLD'S BIGGEST BOOMS!'

[MikeVic]

Because 90%+ of the public have the attention span of 6 seconds and if you had actual historical programming, they would change the channel to a show call 'THE WORLD'S BIGGEST BOOBS!'

fixed.

[Ajaxab]

Maybe they're trying to get rid of their reputation as the Hitler Channel.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

6.Giant bird sightings in Illinois, Texas, and Alaska in the 70's





http://www.waynebesen.com/Big%20Bird.jpg

[ISiddiqui]

History channel has been going downhill for a while. And pushing a show like "Ice Road Truckers"? WTF does that have to do with history and who the Hell cares about a bunch of morons who drive cargo over ice roads?

[Bad-example]

Makes as much sense as the Sci Fi Channel showing wrestling and ghost hunter garbage.

[flere-imsaho]

According to Business School, it is more important to diversify and maintain growth than it is to stay stable and fill your niche. It seems to me that's what's happened to the History Channel.

i.e. they got a bunch of MBAs in who just wanted to make more and more money

[JonInMiddleGA]

i.e. they got a bunch of MBAs in who just wanted to make enough money to justify keeping the channel on the air long term instead of having growth that fizzles just as quickly as it came

Fixed that for you.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Here's a recent profile of History for the coming season (came out in time for the advertising upfronts).
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/Cable_20/For_History_growing_from_a_rich_past.asp

The key to understanding today's programming choice is found toward the bottom of the page
Median viewer age 50 years old

While the network was 6th last year in 25-54, a lot of their audience is simply aging out of the demo, and while they retain their core focus with shows like Battle 360 and Cities of the Underworld (which I really really like), the less history/more "reality" oriented shows like Ax Men, Ice Road Truckers, and even Monster Quest are clearly part of an effort to at least make their core audience a little less close to AARP membership.

The biggest bit of b.s. in the whole preview is the quote from management "Our strategy is not about change as much as it is about growth,” says Nancy Dubuc, executive vice president and general manager. “We’re not aging down or chasing a different viewer. We have a coveted audience of upscale men, and I have no interest in changing that direction.”

That's nothing but a load of bull, piled high & deep.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Makes as much sense as the Sci Fi Channel showing wrestling and ghost hunter garbage.

Gee, I guess the highest weekly average ratings for a show in network history (http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2007/11/sci-fi-channel.html) is a bad thing. Probably ought to just give up on Hunters and run re-runs of some of the worst made-for-tv original movies ever.

[sabotai]

I really like Modern Marvels and Mega Disasters....

But yeah, it's going downhill. Monsterquest, Ice Road Truckers, Ax Men, UFOs, etc. They are trying to be the Discovery Channel.

[JonInMiddleGA]

They are trying to be the Discovery Channel.

Which is precisely who they compete with for advertisers.

[Greyroofoo]

God forbid I turn on the History Channel to watch something historical.

[JonInMiddleGA]

So, Memorial Day comes and I'm looking forward to some WWII, Civil War, and Weapons at War. Or perhaps a day long "Band of Brothers" in HD.

Incidentally, both History International & The Military Channel (formerly Discovery Wings) have what you're looking for today.

[Cringer]

History channel has been going downhill for a while. And pushing a show like "Ice Road Truckers"? WTF does that have to do with history and who the Hell cares about a bunch of morons who drive cargo over ice roads?

I think I should be offended, but maybe next time..... ;)

[Sweed]

I really like Modern Marvels and Mega Disasters....



I also like both of these shows too but they seem to be on all of the time.

[Sweed]

Incidentally, both History International & The Military Channel (formerly Discovery Wings) have what you're looking for today.

Yes, I have dish network and they had a preview with History International a little while back. I came away thinking if this is the way it always is then it's what the History Channel used to be. Just not sure I want to spend another $10 a month to move up one more tier in programming. Thanks though for mentioning it.

[Dutch]

I think I should be offended, but maybe next time..... ;)

Well, if it makes you feel any better, my wife likes that show.

[Nice Guy Eddie]

Maybe it's because people would rather watch Batman on drugs: ;)

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI7yrWljrY4

[flere-imsaho]

Fixed that for you.

That assumes you think they can siphon off enough market share from the Discovery Channel, and keep it long-term. Given the head start DSC has, that's quite an assumption. But who knows, maybe they make it.

Serious question: were they failing (i.e. losing money) before they changed their programming?

[Buccaneer]

Serious question: were they failing (i.e. losing money) before they changed their programming?

Because history is sooo dull and stupid and besides, nothing happened before 1980 anyways. :rolleyes:

[JonInMiddleGA]

That assumes you think they can siphon off enough market share from the Discovery Channel, and keep it long-term. Given the head start DSC has, that's quite an assumption. But who knows, maybe they make it.

Actually they've cleared the first hurdle: they've past Discovery already
History vs Discovery (1st qtr 2008)
Average primetime viewers 1,325,000 to 1,189,000
Average total-day viewers 758,000 to 726,000
Avg. primetime 25-54 viewers 661,000 to 585,000
Avg. total-day 25-54 viewers 390,000 to 347,000

The trick (for History) of course is keeping it that way. Among the advantages Discovery retains is median age (40 vs 50) and a better balance between men & women.

Serious question:were they failing (i.e. losing money) before they changed their programming?

Probably not, almost certainly not. But "making money" does not equal "making enough to solidify your existence versus some other option". And with the spectre of ala carte still looming out there in the distance, every network needs to wring every viewer (and dollar) they can out of the current system just in case that disaster ever comes to pass.

[kcchief19]

Instead of showing actual historical programming they have about 90%+ Modern Marvels, UFOs, and Mega Disasters.
The 90% crap that people watch pays for the 10% good stuff people don't watch.

History Channel still has some room to go before it enters TLC and Discovery Channel zone. I remember when their programming was virtually all educational. TLC is now out HGTVs HGTV, while Discovery Channel is mostly wild animal attacks and a list of jobs you're glad you don't have.

The all-time champ though is A&E (Arts & Entertainment) which is neither art or entertainment driven anymore. Unless you like ripped from the headlines crime drama.

[Chief Rum]

Actually they've cleared the first hurdle: they've past Discovery already
History vs Discovery (1st qtr 2008)
Average primetime viewers 1,325,000 to 1,189,000
Average total-day viewers 758,000 to 726,000
Avg. primetime 25-54 viewers 661,000 to 585,000
Avg. total-day 25-54 viewers 390,000 to 347,000

The trick (for History) of course is keeping it that way. Among the advantages Discovery retains is median age (40 vs 50) and a better balance between men & women.



Probably not, almost certainly not. But "making money" does not equal "making enough to solidify your existence versus some other option". And with the spectre of ala carte still looming out there in the distance, every network needs to wring every viewer (and dollar) they can out of the current system just in case that disaster ever comes to pass.

a la carte? What's that?

[JonInMiddleGA]

a la carte? What's that?

Basically the concept pay-as-you-go for cable, only buy the channels you want each month.

Among other problems is that relatively few cable channels have enough viewers to make themselves worthwhile on the per-subscriber fee vs the carriage fee currently paid by the cable systems. In other words, insufficient eyeballs means no more channel.

[flere-imsaho]

OK, I take it back, then. Thanks for illustrating with the info, Jon.

[Groundhog]

I'm sure the programming on our "The History Channel" varies a little from yours, but it's much the same. I was bored on the weekend so I turned it on and they had yet another show on Nostradamus, followed by a show on that America "psychic" dude from the early-mid 20th century (can't remember his name), that conveniently left out all the other crap about Atlantis (not to mention his other flat-out incorrect "prophesies").

[kcchief19]

Basically the concept pay-as-you-go for cable, only buy the channels you want each month.

Among other problems is that relatively few cable channels have enough viewers to make themselves worthwhile on the per-subscriber fee vs the carriage fee currently paid by the cable systems. In other words, insufficient eyeballs means no more channel.
The funny thing is that "consumer" groups pushing ala carte don't realize that instead of more choices we'll have fewer choices because there are plenty of channels that can't and won't survive. History Channel is right up there. I doubt I'd even spend a penny a month to have the History Channel, and on ala carte it would probably cost at least $1-2.

[kcchief19]

I'm sure the programming on our "The History Channel" varies a little from yours, but it's much the same. I was bored on the weekend so I turned it on and they had yet another show on Nostradamus, followed by a show on that America "psychic" dude from the early-mid 20th century (can't remember his name), that conveniently left out all the other crap about Atlantis (not to mention his other flat-out incorrect "prophesies").
Reminds I was going to mention this ... another favorite of the History Channel are the "documentaries" tied into movies opening. Last night's was "Indiana Jones and the Ultimate Quest." I watched it, but I laughed that it was on the History Channel. Same thing with their Star Wars "documentaries." I watched, but it made me think the History Channel was just a shameless shill to the highest bidder.

[Groundhog]

The History Channel got in to a bit of trouble over here like 2 years ago or so when they aired a "documentary" that was produced by some famous Holocaust denier that was rather, shall we say, unsympathetic to the plight of the Jews.

The problem I have with a lot of the documentaries they show (like the Nostradamus and the other psychic one) is that they are almost always one-dimensional and completely sell their opinions as fact without exploring alternative explanations. And the amount of details they get wrong is really alarming, and it's only when I watch one of their docos about a subject I'm familiar with that I notice it, so I hate to think how much crap they stuff up with the other topics.

[sabotai]

The problem I have with a lot of the documentaries they show (like the Nostradamus and the other psychic one) is that they are almost always one-dimensional and completely sell their opinions as fact without exploring alternative explanations.

It's even better when they spend 55 minutes telling how a bunch of people "know" what they believe is correct, and then with the last 5 minutes tell you why it's all a bunch of crap and that you just wasted your time watching it.

[RainMaker]

Crap, I was just thinking the same thing the other day. History Channel is to history what MTV is to music these days. I know they're trying to expand their market, but they're alienating some of their base. It's not so much I blame them for going after these new shows, it's just that they kill the concept of the channel. Kind of like how ESPN Classic killed their own channel.

You can still find some stuff on during the day or late at night. I usually go through the schedule and DVR the stuff I like. I admit, it's becoming scarcer every week. The only show I really enjoy on that channel right now is "The Universe". But even that show jumped the shark a bit this season with some of their episodes.

Also, has anyone noticed that a lot of these shows are focusing on one or two fringe scientists with an outrageous idea. I saw one the other day about a lost city in the orient that they say they found undersea. It looks nothing like a lost city to me, there is no evidence of highly civilized species living at the time it was created out there, and basically no scientist believes in it at all. But this guy and girl are convinced and the hour show completely focuses on their idea and almost treats it as fact. More and more of these shows are crossing the line of presenting stuff as fact that shouldn't be. The other day NGC ran a show on evolution that basically says the Hobbit (homo floreisinis) is a scientific fact.

Not history related per say, but if you get the Science Channel, I'd highly recommend checking it out. They've done a ton of cool shows on evolution and human beings. Shows on space and technology too. It's become my go-to channel now for stuff.

[RainMaker]

And I'll add that this isn't going to change. People in this country grow dumber each day. Look at what shows win the Primetime ratings race. These are the kind of people they want, not intelligent people who actually read books.

[King of New York]

I did some work for The History Channel once. Nice folks, but it seemed pretty clear that they were going for viewerships in the millions and for a younger audience--which is to say, there was definitely the sense of trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator, while keeping just a veneer of intellectual respectability.

I still think that there is pretty sizable market for high-quality historical programming. Look at the growth of The Teaching Company. It does DVDs and mp3s rather than television, but the folks there do not compromise on quality, and the company has grown by leaps and bounds over the last decade or so.

[Ksyrup]

I enjoyed Ice Road Truckers, but yeah, it's not a "History Channel"-type show. I assume this is no different from MTV and other channels branching out from the core of what they do to attract new viewers.

And those creature/legends shows were awful. I was hoping for much more (seriously). Instead, what they gave us was 50 minutes of questions they couldn't answer, backed up with the testimony of 45-year old rednecks saying they got drunk one night and swore they saw a big hairy ape-looking dude run by them when they woke up from being passed out. And then the show ended with basically, "We don't know what the answers to our questions are, what the hell did you expect?!" I watched two of them before I canceled the series from being recorded.

[ISiddiqui]

I think I should be offended, but maybe next time..... ;)

If it makes you feel better, I'd think people who were walking across the ice roads would be morons too ;).