Ins and Outs: Does YouTube fit on the boob tube?
Jeremy Toeman contributes Ins and Outs, an opinion column on entertainment technology:

With an estimated 100 million YouTube videos watched per day (not to mention the dozens of other similar sites like Revver, Brightcove, Blip.tv, etc.), the debate about internet video as a viable means of delivering content is effectively over. In fact, even as YouTube was still in a major growth phase, companies like Verizon were quickly forming deals to get the content onto mobile phones, while software companies like Orb and TVersity created means for bringing it to the TV set (via an Xbox or other intermediaries). While there is an ever-increasing list of methods to get YouTube off of, well, YouTube, one thing that more companies and consumers are beginning to ask is how YouTube content can be delivered to these other new platforms.
Back in the late 1990s, there was a common understanding of the concept of "lean-forward" and "lean-back" activities. At the desk / PC, one leans forward, uses the mouse and keyboard, and has a very interactive session. Whereas at the TV, one leans back (presumably on one's couch), uses their remote control, and has an extremely passive experience. You may also have heard the terms "2-foot" and "10-foot" user experiences, also reflecting the at-PC versus at-TV interaction models. For years I've been preaching the virtues of lean-forward / lean-backward product design theory to consumer electronics and gadget-makers. Guess what? It looks like the theory's a little flawed.
Let's look at it again. The lean-forward part basically states that people won't want to use their PCs as video playback devices. Right. Add up your YouTube users plus DVD watchers on airplanes plus all the personal video people are creating plus webcam use, and it's pretty safe to say that we're all watching a heck of a lot of video on our PCs. Now, if we're talking about watching Lord of the Rings in high-definition on a 50-inch Pioneer Elite plasma versus watching it on my 14-inch Vaio laptop, there's no debate about which one's a "better" experience. But the bottom line is the PC has proven itself as a perfectly acceptable entertainment device, shocker of shockers.
Regarding the lean-back or "10-foot" interface, the implication is that consumers, for the most part, seek a very passive entertainment experience in the living room. But as we well know, tens of millions of DVRs, 10+ million Xbox 360s, and countless legions of interactive set-top boxes deployed in homes today seem to imply that the average couch potato is probably comfortable with a few more features than some might think. And getting a YouTube video onto the big screen is an increasingly simple and straight-forward affair. Here are just a few methods:
Let's get it out of the way first: the picture quality is beyond terrible. You don't need to be some purist to find the video extremely blurry, pixilated, and practically unwatchable. But forget that for a moment, let's just assume that with increasing bandwidth and expanding storage, the video quality of the internet video service of your choosing will improve in the short term. The real problem with "lean-back YouTube" isn't just the overwhelming amount of content. It's one thing to browse a list of shows you decided to TiVo and choose something every 22 or 44 minutes (or 30 / 60 minutes if you actually watch the commercials), but it's just not very fun to find and select new videos from an infinitely large heap of content once every 3 - 10 minutes. In some ways it's almost Sisyphean.
When you're at the PC you hardly notice, probably because you are used to clicking a lot. What's more, when you're not getting bombarded with links your friends want to show you, it's still much more fun to rapidly search or browse through all the content. If "skateboarded falling down stairs" doesn't amuse you then "high-speed car wreck on ice" certainly will. And it's limitless. But on the couch, this browsing around gets tedious quickly. Some may argue it's the content itself, but we can look as far back as the 90s and recall "4-year-old hitting daddy in the crotch" or "groom accidentally ripping bride's wedding dress" on America's Funniest Home Videos. We like to watch short, user generated content; you might even call it the true birth of reality TV. But we like it pre-programmed.
Which is why it only makes sense that the best method for making short form / long tail / user generated content acceptably enjoyable on a non-novelty level (and by a wide audience) is through programmed services. It might be something as easy as setting "TV subscriptions" to view a river of videos based on tags, categories, channels, or users, or using pre-programmed offerings, such as TiVoCasts's short-form content, VH1's clips, and Verizon's walled-garden YouTube integration. But even then the problem is that very few people share the same interests. Just because I got a laugh out of "box in a box" doesn't mean you will too. It's a little ironic that one of the next frontiers of information and access challenges is the TV, a device that's comfortably sat in our living rooms for half a century.
Still, technology is creating new entertainment options for us all the time, and while some quickly find a space in our home, not all make a lot of sense. It's been almost a decade since the second wave of interactive TV services launched, all of which subsequently failed. The early 2000s saw a rush of content providers either building boxes (á la Moviebeam) or creating new services (á la Movielink), with little or no success. Now we have some things we didn't then: extremely fast pipes, powerful set-top boxes and connected devices, high penetration of home networking, and very efficient video decoding technologies. The landscape for delivering interactive and customized content experience is set, it's up to the next generation of content and technology companies to deliver. Maybe then I will finally get to see "kid falling off bike into pond" in the brilliant, high definition, on-demand, customizable, interactive experience I've always wanted. In the meantime, I'll leave my YouTube in my laptop's browser where it belongs.

Back in the late 1990s, there was a common understanding of the concept of "lean-forward" and "lean-back" activities. At the desk / PC, one leans forward, uses the mouse and keyboard, and has a very interactive session. Whereas at the TV, one leans back (presumably on one's couch), uses their remote control, and has an extremely passive experience. You may also have heard the terms "2-foot" and "10-foot" user experiences, also reflecting the at-PC versus at-TV interaction models. For years I've been preaching the virtues of lean-forward / lean-backward product design theory to consumer electronics and gadget-makers. Guess what? It looks like the theory's a little flawed.
Let's look at it again. The lean-forward part basically states that people won't want to use their PCs as video playback devices. Right. Add up your YouTube users plus DVD watchers on airplanes plus all the personal video people are creating plus webcam use, and it's pretty safe to say that we're all watching a heck of a lot of video on our PCs. Now, if we're talking about watching Lord of the Rings in high-definition on a 50-inch Pioneer Elite plasma versus watching it on my 14-inch Vaio laptop, there's no debate about which one's a "better" experience. But the bottom line is the PC has proven itself as a perfectly acceptable entertainment device, shocker of shockers.
Regarding the lean-back or "10-foot" interface, the implication is that consumers, for the most part, seek a very passive entertainment experience in the living room. But as we well know, tens of millions of DVRs, 10+ million Xbox 360s, and countless legions of interactive set-top boxes deployed in homes today seem to imply that the average couch potato is probably comfortable with a few more features than some might think. And getting a YouTube video onto the big screen is an increasingly simple and straight-forward affair. Here are just a few methods:
- "The Brute Force" - Hook up a laptop or a media center PC directly to your TV set, use a wireless mouse or remote control.
- "The Gamer Hack" – Download TVersity (http://www.tversity.com/home), stream it to your Xbox 360.
- "The l33t Gam3r Hax()r" – XBMC. You know it or you don't.
- "The Magic Wand" – Using the Opera browser on a Wii allows you to navigate straight to YouTube.
- "The Gadgetnerd Geekophile" – The Digital Entertainer from Netgear includes built-in YouTube streaming (among other things).
- "The Big Apple" - Buy an Apple TV. (iPhones will cut the mustard if you're out and about, too.)
Let's get it out of the way first: the picture quality is beyond terrible. You don't need to be some purist to find the video extremely blurry, pixilated, and practically unwatchable. But forget that for a moment, let's just assume that with increasing bandwidth and expanding storage, the video quality of the internet video service of your choosing will improve in the short term. The real problem with "lean-back YouTube" isn't just the overwhelming amount of content. It's one thing to browse a list of shows you decided to TiVo and choose something every 22 or 44 minutes (or 30 / 60 minutes if you actually watch the commercials), but it's just not very fun to find and select new videos from an infinitely large heap of content once every 3 - 10 minutes. In some ways it's almost Sisyphean.
When you're at the PC you hardly notice, probably because you are used to clicking a lot. What's more, when you're not getting bombarded with links your friends want to show you, it's still much more fun to rapidly search or browse through all the content. If "skateboarded falling down stairs" doesn't amuse you then "high-speed car wreck on ice" certainly will. And it's limitless. But on the couch, this browsing around gets tedious quickly. Some may argue it's the content itself, but we can look as far back as the 90s and recall "4-year-old hitting daddy in the crotch" or "groom accidentally ripping bride's wedding dress" on America's Funniest Home Videos. We like to watch short, user generated content; you might even call it the true birth of reality TV. But we like it pre-programmed.
Which is why it only makes sense that the best method for making short form / long tail / user generated content acceptably enjoyable on a non-novelty level (and by a wide audience) is through programmed services. It might be something as easy as setting "TV subscriptions" to view a river of videos based on tags, categories, channels, or users, or using pre-programmed offerings, such as TiVoCasts's short-form content, VH1's clips, and Verizon's walled-garden YouTube integration. But even then the problem is that very few people share the same interests. Just because I got a laugh out of "box in a box" doesn't mean you will too. It's a little ironic that one of the next frontiers of information and access challenges is the TV, a device that's comfortably sat in our living rooms for half a century.
Still, technology is creating new entertainment options for us all the time, and while some quickly find a space in our home, not all make a lot of sense. It's been almost a decade since the second wave of interactive TV services launched, all of which subsequently failed. The early 2000s saw a rush of content providers either building boxes (á la Moviebeam) or creating new services (á la Movielink), with little or no success. Now we have some things we didn't then: extremely fast pipes, powerful set-top boxes and connected devices, high penetration of home networking, and very efficient video decoding technologies. The landscape for delivering interactive and customized content experience is set, it's up to the next generation of content and technology companies to deliver. Maybe then I will finally get to see "kid falling off bike into pond" in the brilliant, high definition, on-demand, customizable, interactive experience I've always wanted. In the meantime, I'll leave my YouTube in my laptop's browser where it belongs.



















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mike Salem @ Jul 18th 2007 4:26PM
damn you can really go on for a while i couldnt finish
injate @ Jul 18th 2007 4:38PM
watch less tv, read a book. idiocracy is a documentary.
ssuk @ Jul 18th 2007 5:20PM
You're doing it wrong. tl;dr.
Elias @ Jul 18th 2007 5:47PM
That's what she said
strider_mt2k @ Jul 18th 2007 10:56PM
They'll be here all weekend folks, big hand.
Try the veal!
Mike Salem @ Jul 19th 2007 12:35PM
hahah thanks strider you guys crack me up
Zarniwoop @ Jul 18th 2007 4:30PM
I feel like I just got bait and switched. It started out talking about YouTube and then turned into an Apple commercial, then some boring crap and I just couldn't finish reading it. Bah.
jshields44 @ Jul 18th 2007 5:17PM
Really? It mentioned Apple once...
Anyway, I know it's the height of lazy, but I'd rather watch anything on my couch than at my desk chair, risking carpel tunnel, but only if the interface is as user-friendly and dynamic as that of a PC (TiVo's is a good example). And when those pipes widen, we'll all want to take advantage of our sweet 50" 1080i's.
derek @ Jul 18th 2007 4:37PM
yeah...nice way to give me a headache
michael @ Jul 18th 2007 4:38PM
Not really. Most of them are just short clips. Not something I would enjoy sitting on the couch for.
Plus the fact that they're already low quality doesn't make them any more enjoyable on your TV.
claude @ Jul 18th 2007 4:49PM
I barely enjoy watching you-tube videos on the PC. There are some entertaining videos on there and it is kind of neat to see user generated content, but for the majority of the videos the quality is so terrible that I cant stand to watch it in the 5" box on my monitor, let alone full screen. I couldn't even imagine how bad they would look on a decent sized tv.
Grey Acumen @ Jul 18th 2007 10:48PM
I agree totally with you. Youtube used to have some really awesome stuff. People used to have truly inspiring and hilarious videos.
Now it's all political or video blogging or the same goddamn sports clip submitted by 10 different people and somehow ALL getting on the most viewed page, anime episodes that have been cut into 3 pieces or some stupid MTV music video, some stupid video that is using a stolen video to advertise their own site.
The quality has seriously turned to crap.
Electromodo @ Jul 18th 2007 5:06PM
If I sit down on a coach in front of a big screen, I expect to see a solid video content: a professional movie, news or sports. I can't imagine myself relaxing on the sofa and browsing tons of crappy home videos from YouTube on a big TV, regardless of the quality.
Methinks, YouTube and similar services are like forums, they exist to spend boring time in the office, or to get distracted from boring college homework.
IMHO, YouTube will always remain a thing for a "laptop browser". There are much better content to watch on a big screen (including game consoles), so here I agree with Jeremy Toeman.
Bachus @ Jul 18th 2007 5:12PM
youtube is little more than 3min entertainment. i can't really see the desire to turn it into some everpresent video output on all varieties of screens. there are other distribution methods being developed that suit this purpose much much better. let joost get out of beta and be sold to someone big like google and THEN you've got real ipTV. hell, even stage6 is leaps and bounds beyond youtube.
Christapher @ Jul 18th 2007 5:12PM
have you seen _current tv? ive watched it on my friends directv and its pretty much what youre talking about. users create content and upload it (high quality i might ad) then other users in the community rate them and the clips with the highest ratings get shown on the tv. its really neat because essentially anyone can get any message or story across to millions. you should check it out.
btw @ Zarniwoop
since when is using the word 'apple' three times in an article make it an apple commercial? that is 3 out of exactly 1,193 words, 1 utterance for every 398, or 0.25146689019279128248113998323554% of the final composition.
L. M. Lloyd @ Jul 18th 2007 6:58PM
"since when is using the word 'apple' three times in an article make it an apple commercial?"
Here is the funny thing about words; what matters is WHAT they say, not how many times they say it. When you say something like,
"Excepting the Apple TV, not one of these solutions is what you might call elegant"
you really do end up sounding a bit like a commercial. It wouldn't even matter if you only mentioned Apple once. If that one mention is in a sentence that says that Apple is better than anyone else in the world, then it sounds a bit more like ad copy than serious journalism. Especially since Apple's solution to the problem doesn't particularly differ from anyone else's solution to the problem, and as such isn't really any more "elegant" than anything else out there. Any time you have the typical Engadget spin where putting an Apple logo on something automatically makes it more elegant, well thought out, beautiful, fun, and easy to use, it comes off like an add.
Jeremy K. @ Jul 18th 2007 5:25PM
There is a fix to YouTube. It's called Stage 6. If only YouTube videos were on there. stage6.divx.com
You can actually view DVD quality video on there AND the videos download as fast as your connection can handle. If you forget about the content of YouTube and compare the two sites, YouTube pales in comparison.
Bachus @ Jul 18th 2007 5:53PM
totally agree. google needs to buy up stage6 and integrate it's encoding/decoding functions into youtube. the end product would be amazing.
Maff @ Jul 18th 2007 7:46PM
Veoh is a pretty viable solution too, esp. for anime and feature length content, with the advent of 10mb+ broadband, films are minutes away on your tv in good divx or H264 Q, roll on the future
Charbax @ Jul 19th 2007 12:31AM
Google Video was actually made using DivX Networks technologies, it was announced in some official press releases back then that Google has partnered with DivX Networks. You will find the DivX versions of every single Google Video when you use the Download for Windows/Mac feature. If you are accessing it from a Windows/Mac it downloads the little .gvp file which is associated with the Google Video Player if you have that one installed. From a Linux machine you will be downloading the .avi automatically because Google hasen't made a Google Video Player for Linux yet. This Google Video Download format is at the resolution of 480x360 for 4:3 aspect ratio content and 480x272 for 16:9 content. And I'm not sure about the bitrate but I don't think it is very much.
Stage6.com is better than Google Video's quality because that one works with up to high definition resolution and no limit in Bandwidth. I wonder if Google is planning to add this DivX quality to all Youtube videos, I wonder if Google and Youtube has kept all the original files that were uploaded by all the users during the past couple of years on their services, if they have kept them, then they could re-encode better resolution, better bitrate and release those using the Mpeg4 DivX codec which would be suitable for the lean back couch set-top-box experience.
Iam9376 @ Jul 18th 2007 5:25PM
Yeah because I REALLY want the already shitty YouTube quality videos blown up to fit on my screen...
Yeah.. that'll rock...
(no, it really won't)
Chris M @ Jul 18th 2007 6:11PM
Agreed. And those of us with decent-sized monitors and high resolutions already know the pain.
I'm on a 22" widescreen at the moment; at the office I've got dual 22s (haha, sounds like I'm talking about rims on a car) and they're all run at max-resolution.
I have to literally- lean IN to watch youtube videos on the flash 'widget' on the page. If I want to sit comfortably I have to make them full-screen, which is a BAAAADDD idea. Pixelated beyond belief.
It's a mixed bag. People want their entertaining entertainment, then they want their _real_ entertainment. Youtube fits in the first category. The latest MGM/Touchstone/Paramount/Disney film, the most recent episode of your favorite primetime show, and bootlegged copies of both of the above apply to the second category.
Frankenstein Black @ Jul 18th 2007 6:10PM
or you could build an HTC for your friend and put 2 video cards in it (1 ATI single head and 1 Matrox quad head) and help him hook it up to 4 19in and 1 72in monitors.
http://www.eternal-champions.com/images/den_football_madness.jpg
YouTube x 5 (or 4 Youtube and 1 PornTube in the middle ;^) Now thats entertainment!
hage @ Jul 18th 2007 6:35PM
One thing that should be noted is due to Apple's h.264 initiative, the youtube vids that have been converted to watch on your APTV are SIGNIFICANTLY improved quality, they're not just transcoding the FLV in most cases, they're reencoding from the original raw files. As a result, the experience is greatly improved. Now, it won't really be a complete experience until EVERYTHING is re-encoded this fall, and hopefully simultaneous live h.264/flv encoding for every new movie that's uploaded, but for now it is VERY watchable on even my 42" HD plasma.
h.264 really IS the greatest codec going today.
bob @ Jul 18th 2007 6:39PM
i dont know what the hell everyone here is talking about. the internet IS coming to the TV. just because Youtube doesnt measure up like some others ( stage 6 ) doesnt mean we should forget the whole thing.
The fact that I can go to a website and choose from a long list of programs that actually intrest me than someting that i'm just watching because its on the box is a big deal.
The quality might suck now , but a lot of these online video sites are doing DVD quality so its a non-issue. It's just a matter of time.. like a year or something.
Bruno @ Jul 18th 2007 6:47PM
Some very relevant points, the author's main mistake is to mix 2-foot/10-foot with lean-forward and lean-backward. They're related, but they're not synonymous.
In fact a perfect example of a well-implemented cross-interface is TiVo. It is (or can be) very much a lean-forward activity but is presented attractively and more importantly, functionally in a clean 10-foot interface.
AppleTV unfortunately was not created as elegantly and it suffers, like many other devices that try to bring lean-forward to the 10-foot domain.
I don't write for anyone or contribute weekly columns, but I'm available for consulting work.
Brad @ Jul 18th 2007 8:53PM
That was an excellent article. Inspiring actually. Very astute to point out that the youtube experience is far more than just the content, but the content mixed up with the mechanism for delivery. It's also a guilty pleasure. It's what you do to procrastinate from doing something else. It's also the quick escape when you get a link. TV is anti-social. It's not community driven. Sitting on a couch, I want to be engulfed in entertainment. I want to be immersed in engaging passive consumption. The internet requires interaction, action and thought; albeit sometimes stupid thought, you have to continually choose your path of interaction.
A laptop can substitute for a television; but only when a substitute is required (airplane, road trip, sitting long hours on an Ikea chair in your bedroom until your children finally fall asleep). It's a convenience.
And the thought of channel surfing on TV is almost a thing of the past. You only watch what you want to watch when you want to watch it. If you want to channel surf, you head over to youtube and play the game.
There may be a convergence in the future, but it won't just be figuring out the technicalities of getting the content to the couch dweller; somehow the experience itself has to be tuned in and turned on.
CR @ Jul 18th 2007 9:52PM
What will happen is that Comcast, Time Warner, or Verizon will put up a video upload site or partner with an existing one. They then will make these videos available on their VOD portal where you can view it on a set top box through their service.
Unboring @ Jul 19th 2007 2:30AM
i love engadget but I always feel there distain for the ps3, its blatently obvious when Im reading articles like this and wii opera, xbox360 are mentioned, iTV, but not ps3? Ps3 plays utube great and other videostreaming websites, why is this totally overlooked? anything positive about the ps3 always seems to be shot down or not mentioned, anything negative seems to be highlighted here. Im just wondering if its only me who notices this anti-sony, anti-playstation vibe I get from engadget.
Chip @ Jul 19th 2007 8:40AM
SageTV already has Google Video and YouTube support. For those that don't know, SageTV is like Windows Media Center but without DRM hassles and many more features. It's not as convenient for finding videos as using a browser, but if you know what you want, it's pretty easy to find it. The quality.. well it's YouTube.
poseidongroove @ Jul 19th 2007 6:41PM
Unboring, I agree with you. Engadget editors are lazy kids who spend all day playing Xbox. Anyway, I've said this on this site before content shifting is here what you're saying is not revolutionary. If you roll up all the video content you want using Yahoo Pipes, Pull it down to a DLNA capable NAS like Dlink DNS-323 (DLNA is enabled using Twonky) connected to your router on a 1GB ethernet connection, your PS3 which is DLNA capable will pick up any content you're syndicating. Tvtonic and tversity are great for that. I've said it before. Programme guides and IPTV are stupid stuff. The future is RSS Feeds. Only a lateral thinker will get this not a dumb Engadget editor and Apple biggot. In anycase it's here on our PS3. Alright, firmware 2.0 of PS3 will make it accesssible to the common man. RSS is a platform and Yahoo Pipes is an great example of how to use it. http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes/pipe.info?_id=AN2vgK8e3BGiaYyXy6ky6g
KH @ Jul 19th 2007 10:06PM
Good article. I agree that while people in front of TV like some interactivity, they largely want to be entertained, watch content in a more passive than an active manner. There is a service called moowee.tv available for the Wii which attempts to do this. It pulls video content from the Internet in the form of channels which are created by the community of users. Instead of cherry picking videos to watch, you just watch channels created by others which interest you.
Jesse @ Jul 20th 2007 12:09PM
Talking about lean-forward/back, the PS3 is a good example of bad design. The font size in the main interface, and in the store is WAY too small, and cannot be changed (as far as I can tell). It is lean-forward design in what should be a lean-back environment.
The 360 has a perfect font size within its interface, viewable from even the furthest couch. I really wish Sony would at least offer an option to increase the size.
KiraXD @ Jul 22nd 2007 2:53AM
this show me that you dont really know anything. (never actually USED a ps3 eh?)
were not talking about dashboards here, were talking about media capabilities.
The browser font CAN be changed. anyone who owns a PS3 can tell you that... as well as being able to zoom into any page you visit (which is actually VERY functional compared to the 360's brow.... oh thats right...)
Tversity, nero home, wmp11 all stream to my PS3 perfectly as well.
Lets not forget we can always "Lean Back" after
booting up Linux, set our resolution to whatever, and continue "leaning back" as we dont need to head back to the PC in the other room"
man sony really screwed up with their design there huh?
Jesse @ Jul 22nd 2007 12:00PM
Actually I bought a PS3 in the first week it was out, and it has mostly been collecting dust underneath my TV. Also, did you even read my comment? I didn't say anything about the browser, I was talking about the MAIN interface and the STORE. Both of which you cannot increase the font size, as far as I know. I'm a PS3 owner, and I have to squint and come close to the TV to read the damn thing, and this is in 1080i.
sean @ Jul 21st 2007 2:07AM
See my niggas don't dance,
See we just pull up the pants and,
Do the Roc-a-way.
Now lean back, lean back, lean back, lean back.
Shelly Jacobs @ Jul 21st 2007 8:57AM
How now earn $revenue cow? MSO's will $pay to carry the channel? Monthly client $subscription? Interstitial $advertsing? Hey, it ain't for free unless Google needs a write off!
Vin De Bona & Bob Saget should get royalties!
missingxtension @ Jul 23rd 2007 12:12PM
While some the points are correct, you still missed a very important point. User generated content is not profitable to the user. So there will never really be any reason to do any quality control. Cameras are hardly gonna be HD, so the videos will always be low quality. One big reason is also the pipes are not equal, I have a 15/2 internet connection, witch makes sure that i download more than i upload. I cant imagine uploading a HD video to you tube in a timely manner, even at that speed (600m/hr). Then theres the big question is if people made a contribution, then it should be released under a gpl esque license that assures no one is making a killing from someone else's work. Its only fair, were talking about paid subscriptions that give you access to you tube, or someone else's videos. Get it YOU tube
Yoshi Likes Boys @ Jul 24th 2007 12:34PM
AppleTV is the one that DOESN'T suffer from this problem, as YouTube is in the process of recoding its entire library in h.264, and in SIGNIFICANTLY higher quality. YouTube on APTV is tremendous, the only problem is the selection is extremely limited. I'm hoping once they go fully live in the fall, they will also be doing live encoding of everything.
IAGray @ Jul 28th 2007 7:29AM
Wrong. (Television) programming works for sit down television may work as part of evening relaxation, but it is far more likely that social practices will follow technological developments as they have so consistently done so in the past. This is not blind marxism but the observation that television in it's programmed form is limmited in it's appeal to those who are at rest. The previous limmitations of technology in light of current developments, were an important element of the creation of the couch-potato subculture, but as ever with changing lifestyles and increasing political literacy (one might refer in abstraction to the increasing use of the french half of our language) habits will change with stimuli.