Georg Ringsgwandl

Dear audience!
Certain, self-described intellectual circles are fond of watching television, saying that "it is largely an imposition on the accumulation of shamefully committed opportunist-junk".
As a practical man, I would like to say something in opposition: Why would there be more than 20 TV channels, if no one needed them?
Besides, it is not easy to come up with something witty every day. It's always easy to criticize something, but imagine: if you had to come up with a challenging 24-hour TV program, would you be able to? Probably not.
And even if you could: then you would have a program for one channel for one day. However, we need programs for 25 stations, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. So you would have to make 219.000 hours of material, and that material would have to be appealing. - Not so easy, is it?
And even if you managed this, it’s just for a year. Then you have another year and another year and so on.
Here, we have a short piece that shows us the ruthless selection process that takes place before the audience can be presented with a new TV hit.
In the most favorable case (industry slang: ideal case), an elaborate media strategy stands at the end of a harsh working process with a clear end in sight, which, along with a compulsorily innovative art work performance, undergoes a symbiotic synthesis of the sort that we are no longer surprised if we have ideal viewing numbers in abundance. (Georg Ringsgwandl)