|
|
TV Talk Discussion Group
Does anyone (besides me) still subscribe to TV Guide? Since I was old enough to care, I started reading the articles in the Readers Digest-sized, half-inch thick periodical. I even saved an issue or two from the mid-'80s for some reason or another.
FF to now. TV Guide has been a magazine-sized magazine for a few years now. A friend of mine said it was tough, as she lived in the Cincinatti area where the smaller version was printed. A lot of people there lost jobs and it was a big deal.
That said, it became clear when TV Guide got "bigger," that it was doing so to compete in the shelves at grocery store lines with other 'celeb' magazines like People and Us Weekly.
Still, it's NOT People. It's NOT Us Weekly. Yet it strives to be. Case in point: This week's issue featuring the SEXIEST STARS ON TV! Jennifer Love Hewitt was on the cover as "The Sexiest Woman on TV."
I wonder. Is TV Guide trying to kiss Ms. Hewitt's ass by proclaiming this? After she responded to media claims that she's "fat" as a size 2 or whatever? I'm not sure. JLH's face is quite pretty. The rest of her body is, too. We get to see her boobs almost in their entirety week after week! (I say this as a woman who has ample cleavage. It's best to leave some of it covered so it doesn't become distracting in day-to-day life.)
But I'm still thinking, "This is TV Guide. And it's trying to tell me who the sexiest people on TV are. I already have a magazine to tell me that. It's People." Sure, People also features celebs from other genres, but somehow I feel that the issue of "Sexiest" has been done. It's done by the people (no pun intended) who know it best.
And how the heck to the people at TV Guide make their decisions as to who is sexiest. The sexiest man, according to TVG, is Patrick Dempsey of Grey's Anatomy. Yep. Patrick is totally sexy. Even though I can still picture him as a large-nosed geek in "Can't Buy Me Love." But MY sexiest man on TV is, hands down, Josh Holloway (Lost). He was on the list in TVG. But he was not No. 1.
If I were to pick a sexiest woman, it would probably be Evangeline Lilly, also of Lost, who to me is more stunning without makeup and hairstyling than she is with it (so to speak, as I know she has makeup and hair on the set to make her look like she's not doing either).
I don't really have a point to this long ramble other than to say, wow. TV Guide has come a long way from that first issue with Desi Arnaz, Jr. on the cover. Sadly, coming a long way only means something is different, not necessarily better.
Any thoughts?
Yeah, I posted about this a while back; I've been SO frustrated with this magazine since they changed to the "grids," stopped giving full descriptions of most shows and stopped listing any shows before 7 or 8 p.m. or after 11. And the People-like format is so disappointing; who needed another magazine like that?? I wrote them a letter to say how much I missed their old format and was thinking about cancelling if they didn't change it back, and they promptly sent me a refund for the next partial year and the issues stopped coming - after something like 35 years - without so much as a by-your-leave. Whoever took over that place is pretty cut-throat, I think.
On the other hand ... unfortunately there still isn't another magazine like it for giving nighttime TV listings, so I've been buying it at the checkstand ever since at $2.99 a pop (sometimes more, for "special issues") ever since. Then, having my budget cut in half, I finally decided they probably weren't going to change back after all and I needed to subscribe again to save $$. (Their subscription price is so much lower than the checkstand price it isn't funny. Why is that??) So I'm now, reluctantly, one of the people keeping them in business again.
There is one benefit that almost makes up for the dumb new format: They occasionally have great photos of my very favorite guys on TV, and I now have sexy photos of David Duchovny, Josh Holloway, the royal princes William and Harry, Eddie Cibrian, Dennis Haysbert, Kiefer Sutherland, Taye Diggs and, as of yesterday (thanks to the "sexiest" issue), Jon Hamm (yum!) on my wall here next to the computer. I like to think of them as my own little "male harem" - ha!
I still see TV Guide on the stands but I seldom buy any issues.I haven't bought an issue regularly for 6 1/2 years and I haven't bought any issues since they changed formats.There just isn't enough on TV anymore for me to bother with and if there is something I am interetsed in I can look up details other places.
The days when I would eagerly buy an issue of TV Guide to read the latest show review or an article about a star are gone...and won't come back.
The problem is there are too many channels now and the magazine can't cover all of them in as much detail as it used to when the average TV got only three channels.(Anybody remember those days B.C.?...before cable?)TV Guide just isn't the Must-Buy mag it used to be for me anymore.
We stopped our subscription after they changed the size and it became more of a gossip rag than a magazine dedicated to TV shows. I liked to read it when it spotlighted certain shows and/or movies that I should watch. I don't know if it does that anymore, but if I want to find out what will happen on a show, don't devote more time to speculating if the lead actor and actresses is boinking in the breakroom or who hates whom. Give me more credit than that!
Replies: (list all replies)
Replies: (list all replies)
You know what I'm wondering? How many subscribers they've gained/lost? Have their ad revenues increased? Maybe advertisers like having a larger ad on a bigger page in this "big" TVG, as compared to the old "small" issues. Maybe TVG can now charge more money for their ads. Maybe printing costs, transportation expenses (due to gas, etc.), rising postage rates, and the like are kind of forcing TVG's hand. Do they have more subscribers now? Or fewer? I can't recall if they've raised their rates much since they changed their size. I do know I feel my subscription price is a great deal, though the magazine is not as good as I'd like it to be. It could be much more user-friendly!
So possibly TVG is raking in more cash now that they've changed things. Maybe something WAS "broken" and the changes have helped their bottom line. Or maybe things have nosedived. I don't know.
One thing I don't like is how they have such crappy daytime and late-night listings. Their weekend listings also STINK. It's so hard to tell what is on when. They say to look on their website for details. Well, not everyone has computer access, and not everyone who does want to have to look up TV listings on it when they're buying a magazine that SHOULD be listing those things!
Some of the grids are good; some are not. I think they should have individual listings along with the grids, and for more hours of the day. They used to do this. Just grids are not ideal; just "written-out" listings aren't great on their own either. A combination seems to work best. Sometimes I use one and sometimes the other.
I don't care about ANYONE's "sexiest stars" issues (including People's). I actually ripped those pages out of my TVG because they were just clutter to me. I always rip out the pages I don't need. Back-to-back ads, photos of stars in stupid poses, that sort of thing. I want the TV listings, reviews, commentary, news, basically, also possibly the occasional interview if I like a particular person enough to read it. Plus I do the crossword puzzle and Sudoku, read the letters section, and I guess that's that.
Replies: (list all replies)
Great post, susienews. I used to love TV Guide. I have copies from the 60s, when it was more of a guide than a magazine. Of course, we didn't have many channels in those days. Their Fall Review issues were an event! Those are the ones I kept through the years. I remember the Cleveland Amory reviews, which were always so funny to read. He later wrote those wonderful books about his rescued cat.
Now it is a confusing wanna-be People. I wish it had stayed what it was. I subscribe automatically and I suppose I will continue to do so. But it is not the magazine I used to love nor required reading. Now it is more force of habit.
As you know, I am reality fan, so I don't know much about the sexiest stars any longer. Back in the day, in the 60s and 70s, I could have named every star from every television show. I probably would have picked Guy Williams of Zorro and Lost in Space fame as most sexy star and David McCallum of The Man From UNCLE. Now he is still quite a good looking older man in NSCI, or is that how it is spelled, lol. I watch it occasionally. Now I guess I would pick a reality host, like Phil of Amazing Race, as sexiest. I watch The Office, but I can't say anyone on that show is sexy. OH - yes, Dirty Sexy Money. I do watch that, too. Peter Krause, I agree with TV guide's choice there.
OT - How was your vacation in Hawaii?? Lucky lady - one day, we have to get there.
Replies: (list all replies)
stopped getting t.v. guide long time ago. Got tired of ripping out the ads between the pages.
The sexiest man on t.v. has got to be Alan Shore on Boston Legal.
And the sexiest woman, by far, is the woman who plays the woman on that show that shares the office with the kooky guy.
Replies: (list all replies)
Replies: (list all replies)
Replies: (list all replies)
I still subscribe and suppose I always will. This issue was odd to say the least. One thing that got me was how they named the sexiest (whatever). They only named characters. I don't know about you but I don't watch all those shows but I would have a better chance had they parenthetically named the actors. Even on the new shows like Dirty Sexy Money that I do watch - I'm not sure of the characters OR the actors (it's too new).
I wasn't sure if I'd get used to the magazine size after the digest but I did. They are most definitely trying to compete with many magazines. If they would just stick to scheduling, recaps (even longer ones) and the occasional article/interview they just might increase their subscriptions. It falls into the category of trying TOO hard AND if it ain't broke - it wasn't yet they keep trying to fix it.
Replies: (list all replies)