The "Happy Tree Friends" phenomenon is part of the massive shift of eyeballs away from traditional media like TV toward the Internet.
"Happy Tree Friends" is at the forefront of a number of brands that are defining their success first in the online space, and then building from this strong audience base toward other media like TV, interactive, etc. The audience is in the millions online, clamoring for original content that they can share with their friends.”
It seems that the Internet is gaining a strong foothold… Do we consider the Internet a mainstream media then considering that its reach might even exceed that of the television?
Or is television still THE mainstream media? What do we mean by mainstream media anyway?
It seems to me that in today’s society, being able to please online audience is more important than pleasing audience at home watching TV… considering that success is more dependent on the Internet that is wider in reach?
Take the success of "Happy Tree Friends" for example. Many are concerned about the show, especially now that it is being screened on TV… Parents are afraid that their children might be exposed to “bad influence” as they would call it. But it doesn’t seem to be so simple anymore. These concerns might be raised but that’s not stopping "Happy Tree Friends" from being screened on TV.
Also, a point to note is that even though parents might oppose to their children watching "Happy Tree Friends" on TV, there’s no telling that their children would not turn to their alternative – watching it on the Internet itself which is so readily available.
With the power of the various media today, my opinion is that it is no longer a one-man show... Television no longer in control? Television might be the official mainstream media in name but the Internet might be the mainstream media that is in power… If we think about it, it seems as though we can do without a TV these days. All we need is the Internet.
To put it simply, what we can get from TV, we can easily get from the Internet – news, even television programmes, and we are not talking about just what we get on local channels… it’s what is shown on other people’s local channels (it’s international!) and we can even get it real-time.
What about our TV? Can it do the same?
In the past, the TV was considered to be our “eyes” in the sense that the TV is the window, which allows us to “see” the world through it.
But today, is that really the same? Are we still as reliant on the TV?
Look at what "Happy Tree Friends" can achieve by simply starting out on the Internet… What does this imply?
Coming to think about it, if the Internet can do what the TV does, but the TV is not able to do what the Internet can do…
Can we then say that the day will come when the Internet will replace the TV? And that day might be imminent…
Take your pick
If you were stranded on a deserted island, which of the following would you pick given 2 choices:
A) TV
B) Internet (of course, I mean with a computer attached if you pick this option)
Think about your choice… Why? What is this telling?
I would of course choose the internet! Mainly because I can get help with the internet to return, but that's not the point here.
ReplyDeleteThe internet, whether for entertainment or for information, is far more flexible than the tv, and therefore better suit our differing needs and wants. I can watch my favourite shows as and when I am free or want to, I can get more objective information (no/less censorship by the authorities), I can have just what I want and filter everything else out, and not have to wait for hours for the next show I'm interested in.
But most importantly, on top of that, the internet is interactive, which brings it to a higher level. We are no longer passive consumers, we can decide on what we see and what we don't. Everyone can communicate over the internet, but not on tv(teletext service aside).
Nonetheless, I believe the tv still has its function, perhaps for bonding and network convenience. The TV is after all still a more widely used item as compared to computers.