Thursday, October 27, 2005

Question of Cosmic Significance

Why do baseball broadcasts have to have the score, an image of the diamond, the count, the pitch speed, and the corporate logo together taking up some 15-20% of the screen?

Why do announcers feel as if every pitch needs to be replayed multiple times in order to discern the hidden meanings and strategy behind the pitch?

Why do we need a cutesy graphic display [complete with whooshing sound effect] between every pitch highlighting some usually insignifanct stat?

Do the announcers ever shut up?

I'm old enough to remember NBC's Major League Baseball Game of the Week every Saturday morning. [These were pre-cable days, dear readers, back when the average lifespan was 35 years if you were lucky.] Every once in a while, they'd put up a spartan graphic indicating balls, strikes, and outs, and, perhaps once or twice they'd flash the score, but, other than that, the screen contained the action, not the latest graphical cutesies thought up by the network. The announcers actually were silent from time to time. They assumed that most of the people viewing the baseball game were there for the game, not for the announcers or the tech toys.

I also remember when Monday Night Football [think late 70's/early 80's] didn't have that annoying country music guy singing about football, and when MNF didn't have actors from other ABC shows coming into the booth to plug the latest new thing on ABC. The screen wasn't filled with cutesy graphics. You just had Howard Cosell reminding you that you are not as smart as he is [and who was?], and you had Howard's 3-minute "Halftime Highlights" which, in pre-cable days, was really the only way to see any visuals from around the NFL. Too bad that the denizens of political correctness sacked the greatest announcer ever.



And whatever happened, pray tell, to those killer yellow blazers that had the ABC Sports patch on the front pocket? Those seriously need to be brought back.

2 Comments:

Blogger c.t. said...

The absolute most moronic thing is when FOX (and now CNN is doing it too) covers up a third of the screen with those gaudy graphics not just when a talking head is on (bad enough) but also when they are showing some video of something and you are forced to kind of feel like you have to get on tip-toes to see what is happening behind the big, moronic, needless graphic.

The anger comes in here: we have to rely on the competence of the director (or whoever) to pull a lever and remove the graphic when something is to be seen with a full screen or when something is just simply covered by the graphic. So what happens every time? They forget to remove the graphic except for about the last two seconds of the video.

So why do we as viewers have to be put through this? I personally consider it so annoying it's a reason not to even watch any dumb television news network at all.

Why annoy the audience?

Sometimes on Fox and Friends the HOSTS of that show would say "Can we remove the graphics?" They'd say it nice, but their faces would be: "What the hell are these moronic graphics doing on the screen making it so we can't see anything!?!"

So, what...are they all zombies who work for that network? Do they think the graphics play some role in getting them ratings (like: when the audience is always slightly annoyed it makes them tune in)?

Friday, October 28, 2005 1:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's all disgusting!
I think they do that stuff for female viewers? "Dress up the screen real purdy-like. But even the women can't stand it.
Back in Howard and Dandy Don's day, when a fight broke out on the field they showed it.
Jack Lambert, when asked what he thought about just having to touch the QB with two hands commented:
"Yeah, and why don't we just put little dress' on-um too?

I played ball? I was a kid once?
Hey Theismann! aaaaaaahhhhhhhhh
sssssshhhhuuuu-dup!!!!

They're trying to put little dress' on us!

It's the end-times!

Montster.

Friday, October 28, 2005 3:02:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home