I understand WHY they show violent/sex-filled shows in that first hour of prime time television. I just don't particularly like it. I keep on hoping that one of the networks will wake up and see that there are many families out there that don't want to watch CSI or "How I Sexual Relations With Your Mother's Friend" or "Two and a Half Hound Dogs" with their kids. Heck, we used to watch Ugly Betty along with all the subtexts of one character who was addicted to sex and another who had a sex change operation. But at least it was a sweet show at it's heart and we could gloss over the unwanted parts.
. Our ancient DVR can only record one thing at a time and I can't watch something else while it is recording either, otherwise I would record and watch some of these shows later. That's the next thing on my list now that we have a new plasma TV.Hmmmm..... You indicated that you understand why programming is how it is, i.e., it is what the target audience wants to watch, but then you imply that networks need to "wake up and see that" they should be presenting something else.
That confuses me. The networks know that there are other families out there, just not enough of them to matter, in terms of changing their programming to match the specs you'd like to see.
Let me make my self clearer. I think the networks know that sex and violence sells advertising. I also think they throw CSI in at odd times because they don't have anything better to broadcast. It's already in the can and a rerun of CSI is cheaper than filming a new show. It seems to me that they are blinded to the status quo of sex, violence and reality TV. Why change something that works? I think that a night (1-2 hours) of more family friendly shows with LESS sex and violence would also attract viewership and with the way that networks are struggling, it would be worth a try. I'm not saying that they should remove programming with violent or sexual content, I am just hoping for some programming that doesn't follow that formula.Hmmmm..... You indicated that you understand why programming is how it is, i.e., it is what the target audience wants to watch, but then you imply that networks need to "wake up and see that" they should be presenting something else.
In many cases, I think viewers are their own worst enemy in this respect. The networks (except for CBS) don't have a personal preference. They'll present whatever kind of programming consumers want to watch most.
I'm sorry but I don't see any reason to believe that there is money to be made there, that isn't already being made. It isn't that the networks don't ever try "family friendly shows". They do. Viewers don't watch them in large enough numbers. I think what it is is a lot of folks all chatting with each other saying that they would watch, but in reality most of them (though not you, I suppose) are just saying what they want to say, without much regard to what they're going to actually do. I think this lip service is really causing a lot of frustration, because it makes it seem like there are unsatisfied needs, when the reality is quite the opposite: All indications are that the entertainment programming that the networks provide is a very good reflection of what makes them the most money, as it should be.
I think there are outlets for that kind of programming, but since it is a niche interest, they are niche outlets. ABC Family often provides some programming along those lines... Kyle XY, for example, lasted several years.
And an excellent example of what I'm saying. If family friendly programming was in such high demand, and such low supply, its ratings should be through the roof. Instead, its ratings suck.
I know that everyone has their own opinions about people, but Chevy? Seriously? Can't say there's many other celebrities I'd love to meet over the almighty Chevy.
I will say, though, that you've redeemed yourself by being a fan of the IT Crowd. "Good morning, that's a nice Tnetennba."
Networks follow the money.
As No Ordinary Family demonstrates - no they don't!
The music industry has pretensions of producing "art" to a much greater extent than television. Because there is so much more money involved, networks are all about the money.
As you know, the time-slot a show has is also important to ratings, so it may not be simply the show itself. The best show will tank in a bad time slot. It makes you wonder when a network puts a show in a lousy time-slot if they really have any faith in it at all.
We like most of the shows listed, except Two and a half Men, it has gotten icky. It's the only word I can think of to describe it
Community I can take or leave, but DS15 loves it.
No one has mentioned Outsourced. While it's not on the same level as some of the other shows, like 30 Rock or Modern Family, I think it's cute.
I've tried to watch it 3 times. Sheldon was so obnoxious that it was almost stressful. I couldn't stand it and had to change the channel.
YES!! It's just one of a whole lot of programs that I find offensive. I give each new program one viewing, and as far as so-called "comedies" go, there are NONE that I would watch. The last really good comedy on the air was Frasier!! Shows like "Two and a half men" or "big Bang" or How I met your Mother" are so smutty I can't understand how parents allow their kids to watch.
I spoke too soon. While Outsourced was doing very well last year, since returning from the holiday hiatus, it's done very poorly.
Oops! 
