[SUBMITTED] Internet Killed The Television Star

[Nation of Quebec]

I've been busy lately and haven't drafted an issue recently. Thought I'd get back at it with a topic I've had in mind for a while.

Title:

Internet Killed The Television Star

Validity:

Internet and computers not banned, low level of free speech of higher

Description:

Television viewership is at an all time low. Even popular soaps like "As @@NAME@@ Spins" have been rapidly losing viewers. The culprit? More and more citizens have cut the cord and turned to the internet as their primary source of entertainment.

Options:

[option]"The solution is obvious!" states wealthy television executive @@random_name@@ while looking disinterested at the WhoTube video playing on your laptop. "The government needs to make it tougher for people to cut the cord. Why not raise internet prices? Oh, and streaming services like Webflix are notoriously unregulated. The government should regulate them the way they regulate television. The point is, the television industry is vital to @@NAME@@'s economy, and we need to encourage people to watch more television, not less!?"
[effect]VHS has made a comeback now that television is more popular than ever

[option]"Forcing people to use something they don't enjoy seems rather draconian," muses television writer @@random_name@@, who has worked on many episodes of the critically acclaimed adaption of Hexicon. "The better solution would be for the government to invest in the @@DEMONYM@@ television industry, so they can hire more writers, have better effects, and a bigger budget work with. Arts and culture could use the extra funding. I've always wanted to produce an adaption of that Jennifer Government book."
[effect]Storage Battles: North @@ANIMAL@@ Islands continues to lose viewers despite government funding

[option]"Remember when everyone thought radio was going to be the next big thing?" asks WhoTube celebrity The Nostalgia Nerd, donning his trademark pocket protector and loosened red tie. "Change is an important part of the industry, and online entertainment is the next big thing. Each of my videos get over a million views, and I think this is something the government should notice. Why not invest in a program to teach young people how to become successful WhoTube stars? Not only will this give consumers more viewing choice, you'll also help tackle youth unemployment. Granted not everyone will make it big, but them's the breaks!"
[effect]@@LEADER@@'s nephew's webseries about the alleged hauntings of @@CAPITAL@@ generates millions of views

[option]"The internet and television are an unregulated cesspool of violence, sex, and profane language!" declares infamous moral crusader activist, @@random_name@@, known for a failed attempt to ban the Hexicon series. "The only joy one should get is that from the Creator! The government must ban the internet, and better regulate television, so that the good people of @@NAME@@ can cleanse their sins and gain their entertainment from what really matters... finding peace with the Creator!"
[effect]the most popular television program is a televangelist claiming he can cure your lupus with frequent donations of 'seed money'

Title:

Internet Killed The Television Star

Validity:

Internet and computers not banned, low level of free speech of higher

Description:

Television viewership is at an all time low. Even popular soaps like "As @@NAME@@ Spins" have been rapidly losing viewers. The culprit? More and more citizens have cut the cord and turned to the internet as their primary source of entertainment.

Options:

[option]"The solution is obvious!" states wealthy television executive @@random_name@@ while looking disinterested at the WhoTube video playing on your laptop. "The practice of 'cord cutting' ought to be banned! Internet sites like WhoTube and Webflix are stealing our customers away! It's not like they even have good content. Make it so that people are contractually obligated have television when they sign on whatever cable company they choose. When people remember how good television is, they'll come crawling back."
[effect]citizens are contractually obligated to watch at least one television show per week

[option]"Forcing people to use something they don't enjoy seems rather draconian," muses television writer @@random_name@@, who has worked on many episodes of the critically acclaimed adaption of Hexicon. "The better solution would be for the government to invest in the @@DEMONYM@@ television industry, so they can hire more writers, have better effects, and a bigger budget work with. Arts and culture could use the extra funding. I've always wanted to produce an adaption of that Jennifer Government book."
[effect]Storage Battles: North @@ANIMAL@@ Islands continues to lose viewers despite government funding

[option]"Remember when everyone thought radio was going to be the next big thing?" asks WhoTube celebrity The Nostalgia Nerd, donning his trademark pocket protector and loosened red tie. "Change is an important part of the industry, and online entertainment is the next big thing. Consumers deserve to have the choice to what to watch, and the fact that my channel gets over a million views per video and Webflix's Weirder Events has won multiple awards speaks for itself. This is the future now, and the television executives and the government ought to get with the times."
[effect]@@LEADER@@'s webseries about the alleged hauntings of @@CAPITAL@@ generates millions of views

[option]"The internet and television are an unregulated cesspool of violence, sex, and profane language!" declares infamous moral crusader activist, @@random_name@@, known for a failed attempt to ban the Hexicon series. "The only joy one should get is that from the Creator! The government must ban the internet and television so that the good people of @@NAME@@ can cleanse their sins and gain their entertainment from what really matters... finding peace with the Creator!"
[effect]televangelists have taken to preaching on the streets now that they have been cut off from their main source of income

[Australian rePublic]

Why is this a problem?

Maybe add why to the description

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Such a nice issue!

After the draft that was entitled "These Heels Weren't Made for Working," I think this is the second time within such a short time period that an issue makes us hum a tune whenever we see its title

As for the issue, I think the suggestion in Option 1 is quite weird. In this context, cutting the cord means that you cancel your subscription to whatever TV provider you had chosen (e.g. cable TV), right? But then, wouldn't that only apply to the people who had chosen to subscribe to cable TV? How about those who have an FTA satellite TV? Or remember that there are some TV channels that have livestreaming via YouTube IRL, so you can watch them even though you don't have a TV at home. So Option 1 might be applying to a quite small group of people.

And what about "Make it so that people are contractually obligated to have television when they sign on whatever cable company they choose."?

What does this even mean? Who would subscribe to cable TV and NOT have a television? Also, if you are forcing me to watch cheesy TV shows just because I have a subscription, wouldn't it be better if I cancelled my subscription and tossed the TV out of the window?

Or are you forcing me to both keep my subscription AND watch TV? This is crazy, pal. This is worthy of being the final crazy option, not the first option.


Also, what does Option 3 do? It seems more like a "leave-things-as-they-are" option, but is that acceptable as a good option? (I often get criticisms that some options I write do not specify what policy the government should adopt, so I have to make something up.) I agree that you could argue that the government policy here is stay out of the matter, but wouldn't it be perhaps better if the WhoTuber asked for some government subsidy?

As funny as it sounds, in Turkey (a country that once banned Youtube for allowing the display of anti-Erdogan content), the government-backed employment agency has committed itself to "training" the Youtubers of the future as a solution for youth uemployment, lol. So maybe you could have something like that in option 3?

https://www.dailysabah.com/turkey/2017/ ... o-help-you

P.S. The link is from a strongly pro-government media agency, so don't be fooled by the overly-positive discourse in the report. Turkey is still a dictatorship, not a heaven for futuristic start-up companies founded by idealistic young people

[Nation of Quebec]

Such a nice issue!

After the draft that was entitled "These Heels Weren't Made for Working," I think this is the second time within such a short time period that an issue makes us hum a tune whenever we see its title

As for the issue, I think the suggestion in Option 1 is quite weird. In this context, cutting the cord means that you cancel your subscription to whatever TV provider you had chosen (e.g. cable TV), right? But then, wouldn't that only apply to the people who had chosen to subscribe to cable TV? How about those who have an FTA satellite TV? Or remember that there are some TV channels that have livestreaming via YouTube IRL, so you can watch them even though you don't have a TV at home. So Option 1 might be applying to a quite small group of people.

And what about "Make it so that people are contractually obligated to have television when they sign on whatever cable company they choose."?

What does this even mean? Who would subscribe to cable TV and NOT have a television? Also, if you are forcing me to watch cheesy TV shows just because I have a subscription, wouldn't it be better if I cancelled my subscription and tossed the TV out of the window?

Or are you forcing me to both keep my subscription AND watch TV? This is crazy, pal. This is worthy of being the final crazy option, not the first option.


Also, what does Option 3 do? It seems more like a "leave-things-as-they-are" option, but is that acceptable as a good option? (I often get criticisms that some options I write do not specify what policy the government should adopt, so I have to make something up.) I agree that you could argue that the government policy here is stay out of the matter, but wouldn't it be perhaps better if the WhoTuber asked for some government subsidy?

As funny as it sounds, in Turkey (a country that once banned Youtube for allowing the display of anti-Erdogan content), the government-backed employment agency has committed itself to "training" the Youtubers of the future as a solution for youth uemployment, lol. So maybe you could have something like that in option 3?

https://www.dailysabah.com/turkey/2017/ ... o-help-you

P.S. The link is from a strongly pro-government media agency, so don't be fooled by the overly-positive discourse in the report. Turkey is still a dictatorship, not a heaven for futuristic start-up companies founded by idealistic young people

All good points to consider.

Posted a second draft. The first option now regulates the internet and streaming more to encourage people to watch more TV.

[Australian rePublic]

Maybe internet killed the video star would be a better title, more similar to the actual song

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Maybe internet killed the video star would be a better title, more similar to the actual song

But the internet stars are also video stars

[Nation of Quebec]

The title is a parody of the song, while also being an updated version of it.

Maybe internet killed the video star would be a better title, more similar to the actual song

But the internet stars are also video stars

Exactly. They're called YouTube videos, so using video in the title would just be confusing.

[Jutsa]

Greeting, NoQ!

I've postponed on reviewing this for some time, as it appeared to be mostly fine on first glance. Then I noticed a strange punctuation,
while looking at this randomly, and got inspired to give this one a review anyways.

However, let me first be pedantic:

speech of higher

speech or higher?

Option 1:

Oh, and streaming services like Webflix are notoriously unregulated. The government should regulate them the way they regulate television.

Now this should be something to note. Not all nations have regulated television, right?

not less!?"

What's that question mark doing there..?

VHS has made a comeback now that television is more popular than ever

I suppose so, but this isn't a particularly outstanding effect line... especially if your nation didn't have VHS.
Maybe something like "cable is now cheaper than the internet" or something?

Option 2:

industry, so they can hire more writers

I'm not certain that a comma is necessary after industry, but I'm not 100% certain.

and a bigger budget work with.

to work with. Arts and culture could use the extra funding.

Storage Battles: North @@ANIMAL@@ Islands continues to lose viewers despite government funding

Wouldn't something like "subsidies are given to failing industries even when they don't work" work a bit better? Your call, though.

Option 3:

Not only will this give consumers more viewing choice, you'll also help tackle youth unemployment.

I believe that choice, you'll would be better as choices, but you'll.

Granted not everyone will make it big, but them's the breaks!"

Comma after Granted, I think. Also, I'm not familiar with "them's the breaks"; is that a reference to the youtuber this character is based off of?

Option 4:

cesspool of violence, sex, and profane language!"

Between this and "cut the cord", I feel like this is possibly worth having a restriction from classrooms. Then again, I'm not entirely sure where the barrier lies.

declares infamous moral crusader activist, @@random_name@@,

Here, you have a comma after activist. You didn't have commas before the names of the above options, so I'm suspecting this one's unnecessary.

The government must ban the internet, and better regulate television,

Aw, you can't just restrict the internet to religious channels and allow televangelists on there?

the most popular television program is a televangelist claiming he can cure your lupus with frequent donations of 'seed money'

By far the best effect line.

I was thinking, you could also, instead, have the fourth option be about banning television and whotube altogether, and have them replaced by radio, in reference to option 3.
That being said, the current option still works - although, I think it could do without the banning of whotube.

All-in-all, it's actually an interesting issue, and a decently written one at that. Take or leave from my review what you wish!
Good luck.