To some extent "yes." Because the producers have serious title names for their shows, but in reality they turn out to be really clown shows. TV or radio shows do a variety of programmes. Let me give you an example some of the TV shows like serials etc run for decades. The reason is because they are produced by experts in their fields. Some of the TV and radio programmes are really clown shows. TV and radio producers must be conscious of this fact that title of a programme has nothing to do with the programmes. But, you can't have something like a show called William Shakespeare and play old classics in that program. There has to be professionalism in your programs. Both William Shakespeare and musical giants Beethoven and Mozart are professionals. But, you can't interchange the title and the program content because both are professionals or experts in their fields. Logically it might be correct, but it isn't pragmatic to have one in another. Due to lack of quality content producers are trying to fit one thing into another. This isn't professionalism. You also have to be quality conscious about your programmes. The better the quality of your programs the better the viewership. You need to assess your programmes from the past. You mustn't try to fit a square into a circle. It's awkward and it turns out be just clown shows. All quality TV channels including radio channels must start considering to give quality programs, not programmes of quantity. I don't want to turn a musical channel next time and it turns out to be a sports channel because some national game or sport is going in the world. I hope you understand this also this goes to your programmes in your channels. It's better to have quality programmes not just quantity wise more in your channels. Your assessment must also be from the viewership point of view, not just on some numbers that's readily available that you buy them in the market and in a week's time have your TV and radio broadcasting. If something goes wrong you should be also able to defend yourself in a court of laws. One week you have your channel and the next week because of some issues with laws of the land you cannot changeover to an advertising channel with a new name.
Transcript: The recent debate featuring Kamala Harris and Donald Trump was an important moment for the Democratic nominee to solidify her position as a leader. Yet, instead of seizing the opportunity to project confidence and vision, Kamala seemed to falter, weighed down by personal fears and memories of long-standing struggles. A key point that stood out was how Kamala Harris seemed to forget the very words she once made her mantra in her career as a prosecutor: "Kamala Harris for the people." These five words, often repeated by her during her time in courtrooms, represented her fight for justice and equality. However, during the debate, this sense of purpose seemed absent. The stage was set for her to remind everyone why she was the candidate for all people, but she failed to deliver a message that would resonate on that larger stage. Rather than focusing on a forward-thinking vision, Harris spent much of her time reflecting on the negatives, particularly issues of racism, ...
Comments
Post a Comment