Mediacorp & MediaWorks competition or wasting resources
-
Are MediaCorp & MediaWorks (News channels) really in a GOOD competition or just wasting resources? Are they having too many newscasters & lack of REAL journalists... what about the competitiveness & creativity we offen talk about
What is their reasons?
We have more than FIVE NEWS channels air everyday. But do you guys realise that all news channels are reporting VERY SIMILAR news. EspECiallY *Mandarin news on ch 8 & ch U at 10:00pm.
I offen watch news at 10pm on either ch 8 or ch U. Besides those REPEATED or RECORDED news, that I understand. But I REALLY dun see ANY NO POINT of having 2 channels reporting almost *SAME news at the *SAME time slot
It is again about quality not quantity & is really *WASTAGE of resources, as in having everything X 2... two stations, two newscasters & so on... I mean
*DOUBLE OF EVERYTHING FOR JUST ONE SAME THING.
Imagine there is so much happenings & many interesting topics in the world to be reported, & this is what we've got
My suggestion is to either *STOP one or two of the news channels to *SAVE TIME for other programmes, or IMPROVE the news reports (having different stories/topics) & *CHANGE the time slot This will definitely BENEFIT BOTH the media companies & viewers. right?
I am not very sure about ch.5 & ch.i is it the same? I think news on CNA is more than enough for both ch.5 & ch.i. -
the only thing i don't like is that due to their will to compete, they place equally good shows or movies at exactly the same time and day as the other. in the end, when two good movies are being shown, we can only see one at a time. senseless competition. they exist not to compete but for public entertainment!
-
that's the thing i hate when 2 channels are showing superb movies.. hope these mediacock and mediaworse can stop this silly competition!
-
Hard to choose between watching Zhou Huimin and Liang Ni.
-
which one is more prettier?
-
Watch cable better cos no advertisements!
-
AXN damn lot of commercials, same goes for Discovery, Cartoon Network also, unless you don't count promotional items as advertisements, I shaddup from hereon.Originally posted by gerrykoh:Watch cable better cos no advertisements!
-
The term "wasting resources" can only come from someone who believes in a command economy.
As long as both companies can remain viable, let the market decide how many players there shd be.
Afterall, don't we all want a lesser govt, and a bigger free market economy? -
like tat create more jobs leh...
-
Yeah like Brutus said. More jobs.
Hahah imagine:
"MEDIA CORPS! Singapore's NUMBER 1 station! (out of the 2)." -
Helen Chang.Originally posted by rongshao85:which one is more prettier? -
lol.. its like a economic data response qns to me now~
-
Why not Mediaworks take over Mediacorp ? i think Mediaworks is better than Mediacorp =x
-
Each have their own niche markets. I think it is good to have two stations as viewers will have more choices.
-
Other countries do have a lot of TV channels with a lot of newscasters showing similar news at almost the same time too... If it is not viable, they would have quit the competition themselves.
-
Its a competition for the advertising dollar. Thats why the news and popular programmes are shown at the same time slot.
-
Feel tat after subscribe to SCV, i realise tat Singapore Channel cannot make it compare to other countries channels, they r so much more interesting n full of rich contents. Able to draw me to the TV for hours.
-
Look at it tis way... Govt knows dat having 2 stations, it gets TWO sources of TAX instead of ONE.. so why would it encourage them to each each other up, even if they r really wasting resources..?
juz my $0.01 cent worth of thought.. -
good understading of economic concepts
haha.. -
Singapore media history is one of monopoly.
The local newspaper the Straits Times was a monopoly created some years back by the government out of the fear of free press.
Up to today, that fear might exist as an anomaly not real because when people writes their views, they may not necessarily target at government but may do so for a variety of reasons.
So because of the monopoly Straits Times has been enjoying, it was able to enjoy high rates of advertisement charges. TV media charges are priced based on formula of charging by the Straits Times with loading for peak times and multiples based on program's rating.
When newspaper and TV are highly priced, businesses cannot afford to advertise except the very successful companies. The present lack of media advertising support were mainly self-created by monopoly in the first place.
With lack of advertising revenues, it becomes not viable to have two or three TV stations. Each will have to lower the charges further to get advertising revenue. Unlike the ST, they are now split into a few channel causing TV media's peculiar problems.
It is therefore not viable to have MediaCorp and MediaWorks as in the case of Straits Times which is true monopoly and still reining supreme. This is the anomaly of media industry in Singapore. -
So its good to have more newspapers and TV stations so advertising costs can go down ?
-
“Good” is subjective. What’s good for the consumer, may not be good for the industry players, and may also not be good for the nation.
But this is my perspective of competition in Sg.
Ideally, less govt dictation, more free market decisions.
2 antagonistic players are better than 1 player because, if one party charges a premium/ become complacent, the other can lower rates / be innovative to gain market share.
If 1 player does not listen to the market/ authorities, the other player can attempt to curry flavour by being a moderate.
However, if the industry players behave like a cartel, (I think of cab companies) then, thereÂ’s little benefit of competition.
Therefore, as a consumer, we shd not use such terms as “wasting resources” but instead, we shd support/reinforce the benefits of competition, such as ranking industry players, and consume only the services of the better player. Make the No. 2 hurt till they think of something better.