jsg (05/10/83)
I do not currently have cable, but have seen MTV while visiting friends in the past. I will agree that the playlist is very limited, but what would you expect? Many band (new, old and in between) simply don't put out vidio's. Although it's not as barren as it once was. As for being aimed at the bubblegum croud. Again what did you expect? It is just like having a top 40 radio station on TV (although not quite that bad). THey do take some chances on new music, whioch is encouraging if nothing else. I have heard of, but never actually seen, a weekly show where they have the audience call in their opinions of bunch of vidio's. The bands are mostly obscure local bands from around the country. THe winning bands vidio receives a regular slot on MTV and the band gets some kind of limited recording contract. THe worst vidios, in my opinion (this is in general, folks, not just on MTV), are those which just show a band on stage playing their particular song. The vidios which involve some sort of short scene or vidio depiction of the song are much more pleasing and seem to come across better on the tube. THe couple of times I've seen MTV it's been more of a background type thing. Almost like having the radio on in the background. The biggest problem with MTV as you might imagine, is that the sound is pretty bad (Unless you've got a new TV with the special sound package). All in all MTV has a long way to go before they really make a dent in the cable TV market. Jeff Grunewald RLG Corp. ...!(seismo, brl-bmd, mcnc, we13, lime)!rlgvax!jsg
eli (05/11/83)
Relay-Version:version B 3/9/83; site alice.UUCP
Posting-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/3/83; site uw-beaver
Message-ID:<574@uw-beaver>
Date:Wed, 11-May-83 11:32:22 EDT
Organization:U of Washington Computer Science
MTV programs primarily a CHR format ("Contemporary Hit Radio"). This is
essentially top-40 with "new music." Some of the main differences between
MTV and local CHR radio stations are the video aspect, the nationwide
distribution and the power of MTV to >make< hits.
Personally I find that certain videos make a tremendous impact on me, some
positive, some overwhelmingly negative. For instance, I found that after
viewing "A Flock of Seagulls" on MTV, I couldn't listen to their music
anymore without picturing how incredibly wimpy they look. (As well as how
incredibly cheap the production of their video was).
As to Mr. Grunewald's assertion that not many bands are producing videos
yet, I disagree. Just about every local band in town (Seattle) has
produced at least one video, some more. Some of them are of the often
boring liveshow genre, but alot of them are rather creative affairs.
(One, "Body Waves" by The Young Executives, was in MTV's light rotation
for a short while). This seems to be true of just about all of the major
music scenes I'm in contact with.
More the problem seems to be MTV's insistence that their audience is not
interested in getting too far out on a limb musically, and so they don't
take advantage of the huge number of interesting videos available to
them. Michael Jackson had to dominate every chart in existence to force
MTV to play him. Jeez!
I expect MTV to have some competition one day, and just as with radio,
they can slug it out with their promotions and obnoxious Dj's and jingles,
while their formats remain almost identical. I'm waiting for noncommercial/
college video channels.
I think most videos burn out much more quickly than the records themselves.
Very few of them stand repeated viewing... and it seems that the majority of
the ones that could be seen over and over are only to be found in clubs with
video capability, and not MTV.
... uw-beaver!eli
Ps. Does anyone else believe that MTV "VJ" Mark Goodman is actually
"Welcome Back Kotter"'s Juan Epstein?rlr (05/12/83)
Relay-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/3/83; site mhuxt.UUCP Message-ID:<469@pyuxjj.UUCP> Date:Wed, 11-May-83 19:31:59 EDT I don't pay for cable TV (it hardly pays when all you have is a 12" B+W), so I don't watch MTV regularly. My friends that have it watch it sporadically. If you're into the same repeated heavy metal all day long (how many teenage boys with hairpieces on their chests does it take to impress a throng of HM fans? ...), it might interest you. Mind you, they are not anywhere near as "narrowcasted" as AOR radio stations (should be BOR for business-oriented rock... or BORing for that matter). I'm not sure whether this is because "new music" artists got more deeply involved in video earlier than the AOR bandwagon-leapers, thus creating more available new music video product, or because the programmers at MTV actually like the stuff. (Don't count on the latter; MTV honchos seem to be "record industry" lackeys, wearing their slick satin MTV jackets---they'll play what they're told to play) They are guilty as charged, however, in terms of their avoiding anything outside of the mainstream AOR/acceptable-new-wave styles. No black music at all (despite repeated attempts by black artists to push their video product to MTV), no serious video/music artistry, nothing outside the proscribed mainstream limitations. I get the feeling that the only reasons they air "new wave" videos are: 1) someone told them it's "cool" (listen to the lack of enthusiasm/knowledge that the VJ's have about this music), and 2) there's more of /it/ around for them to air than anything else (unfortunately that's no loner true, as mediocre acts and their clever managers figure what's in all this for them---Billboard now lists the top 40 videos!!) Interesting alternative to MTV---the USA network. USA Night Flight has had some pretty bizarre and interesting programming, including concerts (e.g., Devo) and extended artist-oriented programs (including the video work of the Residents, which MTV has repeatedly refused to even look at). They also devote a weekly show to hardcore, for those who are into that sort of thing. In summary, it sure looks like MTV is yet another example of mass media lowest common denominator being shoved down our throats. But it does have some redeeming social value, in that they do play a fair amount of new and interesting music videos from time to time. If only we didn't have to sit through all the garbage to see the one good one. Rich
lee (05/12/83)
Relay-Version:version B 3/9/83; site harpo.UUCP Posting-Version:version B 2.10 5/3/83; site rochester.UUCP Message-ID:<1563@rochester.UUCP> Date:Thu, 12-May-83 00:00:29 EDT Sender:notes@rocheste.UUCP Organization:University of Rochester #R:hpdb:-12900:rochester:800004:000:1938 rochester!lee May 11 21:27:00 1983 Well, like anything MTV has its good aspects and its bad ones. On the good side, they promote a lot of groups that commercial stations don't normally play. I don't know why this is so. Perhaps it is because progressive groups tend to have the best looking videos. From what I see in Billboard Magazine, the industry believes that MTV has helped sell records for groups that weren't getting exposure though conventional media. Maybe when they get out of the red (about now?) they will stop trying. On the bad side, I too am dissapointed by the lack of black groups-- even cross-over artists are missing. On the other side, a group out of NYC (the Apollo Organization?) is trying to start and urban-progressive alternative to MTV. I am not too crazy about the "Vee-Jays". One or two do an OK job but most come off very flat and very ill at ease in their jobs. Even with a limited repertory they could still play more older selections. This would be helped if they put more effort into doing more of their own production work. Sometimes they will record a live stage show but that is about it. Even segments from old Beatles movies would be a nice alternative. I believe that I have only seen one video in which that band members aren't seen. There is no reason to believe that the band members are the best actors for their own music... or even that actors are necessary at all! The one exception is Flash and the Pan's "Media Man" which was animated and visually re-enforced the points in the lyrics. I have seen many semi-professional film makers use rock music songs as a point of departure for visual images. The range of expression can only be limited by requiring that band members be in there own videos. I do realize that MTV basically only shows what record companies send them but they are fighting for an audience and should try harder. "When you are too blitzed to do anything else, there is always MTV" =lee
pchris (05/12/83)
As for the lack of music by black artists on MTV, Maurice White of
Earth, Wind, and Fire and Rick James have accused MTV of racism.
They both make a valid point--there are black ROCK musicians who
have produce videos of more than sufficient quality to merit inclusion
on the network. It's interesting to note that MTV's initial reaction--
"our format doesn't lend itself to showing that kind of music"(to
paraphase)--has been succeeded by their showing videos by Prince,
the Bus Boys, and Michael Jackson. Hopefully others will follow.
The USA Cable Network's "Nite Flight" show has a more liberal format
and much more interesting presentation. They mix videos from a wider
range of artists with interviews and concerts. I know this sounds
somewhat similar to MTV, but "Nite Flight" runs for only 4 hours
Friday night, then is repeated again in its entirety later in the
weekend.
Phil Fair
ABI/Indy