Powered by i.TV
September 18, 2014

Someone has it in for the Sci Fi Channel

by Joel Keller, posted Aug 24th 2006 10:33AM
Sci Fi.com logoSomeone out on the Interweb seems to be holding a bit of a grudge against the Sci Fi Channel these days. I wonder why? Could it be the infusion of Extreme Championship Wrestling to the programming? The rumors that it's going to interrupt shows like Stargate Atlantis for six months? Or that they're cancelling Stargate SG-1? Hm... looks like there's a lot of ammo there.

Anyway, this grudge-holder has sent a press release to the PRWeb site saying that the network is changing its name to SurgeTV. The release says the name change was being done to reflect the "changing demographic" from the station, with more wrestling, stars of shows like Eureka appearing in the ring, more late-night risque programming, and the English-language debut of Mexico's Lucha Libre wrestling events.

The part of the press release that made me suspicious was where it says that the network wants to move away from their "nerd" demographic. Seemed like an indelicate choice of words for a press release, which is what made it scream "BS" to me. That and the fact that I couldn't find any evidence of it on the NBC Universal Media Village site for the network. So someone looks like they've pulled a prank on Sci Fi and PRWeb. Of course, for all we know, it could be absolutely true. If The Nashville Network can morph into Spike TV, anything can happen.

(UPDATE: Looks like PRWeb has pulled the press release from its site, as the link I provided above is now dead. Further proof that it was BS.)

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

37 Comments

Filter by:
Mark

"People are insanely realistic when they expect the channel to run Star Trek or Star Wars movies. The reason they run those cheap movies is because they don't have to pay anything to do it. If they were running all scifi classics they would go bankrupt. They don't have enough viewers to do that."

Well, first off, hope you meant "unrealistic."

Second, there's a trade-off. They maybe can't afford some of the big movies, but if they forego one of their crappy movies for the rights to a good movie, they're more likely to pull in more viewers. One reason they don't have a devoted viewership is they keep betraying those who try and tune in for a real sci-fi experience. I, for one, would watch the channel a lot more if it actually lived up to its name.

Unfortunately, I believe the current DoP is on record as not liking the genre, which explains a lot of choices, don't you think?

September 05 2006 at 11:40 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Annalee Ziefle

When I heard that SG-1 was cancelled, I thought it must be a mistake. I am devastated. I am angry. I will no longer watch the Sci-fi channel!

How can the Sci-fi channel cancel this wonderful show? Apparently they consider ten years enough. Well, I and thousands of other fans do not! This is a great show with wonderful actors, writers, and direction. This show could easily go another three to five years. SG-1 put sci-fi on the TV map.

I was sorry to see Richard Dean Anderson leave, but Danial Sam, and Teal'c were still there. The addition of Ben Browder and Claudia Black's characters was a great idea. Give it a chance to work. They bring with them many more story possibilities.

Have the Neilson ratings from the 50s been technically updated? If not, how can you use these figures to judge the fan base? I may not be here to watch SG-1 on Friday nights, but I damn well make sure the program is taping. I never miss an episode! I have watched this series from the beginning and have watched each episode several times. I never tire of watching.

I like Atlantis, but if is too much to produce two shows simultaneously, then cancel Atlantis and save SG-1. I watch Atlantis because it is an extension of SG-1 and has cross-overs.

I tried watching Eureka. I don't like it. Battlestar Galactica is good, but very dark. I won't miss it too much.

Now I understand that there will be a movie, but NOT with the actors and characters the fans have all come to know and love. Are these people CRAZY? Russell and Spader were great in the movie that began the series. But they have no connection with the series. I will not pay to see a movie about SG-1 without Richard Dean Anderson, Amanda Tapping, Michael Shanks, and Christopher Judge!!!!

I hope these people at MGM and Sci-fi start making decisions based on what the fans want and not based on some half-baked ideas created by people who obviously know nothing about the series or the fans.





September 03 2006 at 8:15 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Mike K.

The recent changes in programming on the SciFi Channel (in: ECW, Passions, "reality" ghost busters; out: SG-1, Firefly (it ran too short a time anyway...),B5, SAAB, classic TV/theatre SF (some of those serial programmes weren't that cheesey)show the truth of George Carlin: "If you nail two things together (wrestling/science fiction)that never have been before some shmuck will buy them (with ratings)."

PS: I thought ECW meant "electronic countermeasures warfare."

August 31 2006 at 2:03 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
JOHN MCGRORY

To all Concerned


The person in charge of the SiFi channel in an incompetent lout. In the last couple of years i have gone from SiFi most of the time to three hours a week. This is because of the management of the channel. There is ton's of SiFi out there, both good and bad. Properly managed it would be a draw again. Putting wrestling on is a insult to me and every one who has to pay extra to watch the channel.

I spent 20 years in the ARMY repairing the HAWK missile system and I could manage and program that channel better than She can. I would do it for Half as much as they pay her.

August 30 2006 at 11:29 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Cray

>If by "nerdy" you mean "moronic" and by "Sci-Fi nerd demographic" you mean "slobber-drooling mouthbreather demographic", you're absolutely right.

Yes, all wrestling fans are moronic, illiterate, inbred retards... or at least that's what anyone who doesn't watch wrestling would say. The only wrestling fans that truly fit that distinction are a small percentage of "marks" that somehow will scream "its real!" when anyone tries to tell them otherwise. Most people are well aware that it is scripted, and watch it just like they would watch any other scripted show. Stereotyping wrestling fans as stupid is just like stereotyping Sci-Fi fans as nerds. Therefore, if you feel slighted by the Sci-Fi demographic being stereotyped and argue against it, then it is hypocritical to stereotype another demographic.
WWE's products in particular are so heavily based on the "sports entertainment" aspect that actual convincing ringwork (think of it as athletic acting) is an afterthought. In this respect, WWE's products are more of a parody of a wrestling promotion than an actual wrestling product. If you were familiar with the old ECW promotion, you would understand that it was far more heavily reliant on the ringwork and highspots than WWE-style sports entertainment aspects. Therefore, the current WWE version of ECW is so drastically different from the original that it is as if ECW has entered... the Twilight Zone. That's as close as I can come to offering any justification for wrestling on Sci-Fi.
Really though, it is one hour per week. There is more time than that devoted to infomercials every night on Sci-Fi!
So, to wrap this up, great gag by whoever sent the fake PR release. Whenever you can inspire conversation, you've done your job.

August 27 2006 at 6:16 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
andy

>If by "nerdy" you mean "moronic" and by "Sci-Fi nerd demographic" you mean "slobber-drooling mouthbreather demographic", you're absolutely right.

Yeah, ECW is dumbing down a network that shows low-budget movies with mutant killer bats...

August 25 2006 at 2:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
rc

You all might like to read this article. I was mistaken in thinking Sci-Fi had the entire rights to Stargate. It appears they just had the broadcast rights (no small consideration) and MGM is 100% in control of whether SG-1 dies or not in the end. Wouldn't SG-1 make a nice centerpiece for the new UPN/WB combo network?

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6332083.html

August 25 2006 at 1:09 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Stile

Fire Bonnie. Now.

August 25 2006 at 11:41 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Jeff

Yeah, they've been on my bad side since MST3k was cancelled. Bastards! :-)

Not sure I'm into Eureka. I've watched every episode, but it seems a bit uneven. Sometimes good, then cheesy.

But I'm right there with most of the rest of you --- Wrestling should not be on the Sci-Fi channel. Unless, of course, the wrestlers were Sci-Fi related... Have Shatner wrestle Landau... heh. Or, have the "fake" wrestling, but the characters could be space-age types. "Zim the Destroyer vs. Gargon of the Seven Arms." Hee-hee.

August 25 2006 at 11:09 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Ian

SAciFi channel seems to be in a very confused state these days. I am most surprised thyat we don't get 5 hours of Poker sited ona StarGate Atlantis set.

Instead we get "wrestling"???????

Meantime rumors of show cancellations while showing 40 hours of repeats of the same shows is weird....

There is now a SHORTAGE of really decent real SciFi prgramming on TV and even on this channel. The ever present 2 hour special shows tell me I too can be a writer and producer for SciFi chaael, in a snap, as the standard is so so well L O W!:(

Come on guys you will draw the audience if you put on some more innovative, quality stuff.

August 25 2006 at 8:52 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Us

From Our Partners