Help, I'm Being Held Prisoner in a Suggestion Box -

Help, I’m Being Held Prisoner in a Suggestion Box


I just thought I’d use a post as a sort of Open Thread™ to ask readers what they’d like to see at this blog. Now that we’ve got comments here, and this blog is therefore a real blog at last, I’d be interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on what kind of posts I should be doing more of. More links to TV news items? More inside-baseball stuff like the “Better Know a Writing Staff” posts? (Well, they’re not inside baseball, more like an outsider’s take on inside baseball… outside baseball?) More episode reviews? More DVD reviews? More pointers to great posts on other TV-related blogs? More insane arguments about how Hogan’s Heroes was better than M*A*S*H? No, wait, you’re going to get the insane arguments whether you ask for them or not. But any thoughts are appreciated.

Filed under:

Help, I’m Being Held Prisoner in a Suggestion Box

  1. It’s the thought pieces that keep me coming back – the structural analyses, the discussions of character types, the theories bandied about – all of that is just excellently done, and done in a way that no one else seems to be doing. News I can get anywhere.

  2. Insane arguments are always appreciated.

  3. What’s important about what you do, Jaime, is that it’s *not* inside baseball. When I write about structure or overviews, I can’t bleed out the inside industry stuff. I try, but I don’t heave the time to really do it, and think about it.

    Because you’re approaching it as a guy who loves but doesn’t make TV, your breadth and depth of knowledge is always audience focused. You manage to explain the “inside industry” in such a way that it’s comprehensible to civilians. But adding that depth and perspective makes your thought pieces a lot meatier and more insightful than most of what passes for TV writing — and by that I mean people writing about television, not writing the stuff itself.

    You also have a breadth of knowledge that’s kind of humbling. It’s great that you can take Duckman and Old musicals and opera with the same degree of seriousness.

    I’m thrilled you’ve added comments because I know how important and how affirming that feedback can be, and it can lead you down some interesting roads.

    But hell, man, you’ve got the most interesting mix of obsessions and interests going already. A bit of forgotten TV history here, drilling down into the current there, behind the scenes trends of why this or that may be happening. It’s all wonderfully informative and entertainer, whether you’re inside the park or not.

    Thanks for a consistently good read — and for taking the medium so very seriously.

  4. All of the above? You’ve got a great mix already. I love the insane arguments and “know a writing staff” kind of posts especially. I also like the background posts to your print articles, like the orchestra one, and the sneak peak of the Potsie one. I wouldn’t necessarily want to see more links/news unless you add your own twist (as you usually do now).

  5. hey Jaime,

    when I read the title I totally thought this was going to be a post about how you submitted an idea and it didn’t get responded to :) Great to see people responding in the comments. I love the TV show posts :)

  6. Another vote for all of the above. Your blog is important to me because I’m seeing a real change in how people view television, and I’m not talking about standard vs. HD. It seems to me that viewers are finding their own voices, forming groups, and talking back. Before the Internet, that was hard to do. So now that we are becoming our own critics, we need education, guidance, principles. We need more than someone telling us a show is good or bad, we need to understand why that is so. And as Denis McGrath says, we need someone to write from the audience’s point of view. (But of course I read McGrath and Alex Epstein every day for their insider point of view, too.)