You told me last week that removing the cellphone from your life would be detrimental.
What about the TV?
When you consider the time wasted in front of the television set that could be put to use with increased productivity, and when you factor-in free internet video shows on conduits like Fancast, iTunes, and Hulu; the question begs to be asked if you continue paying monthly bills for your boob tube. If not, why not?
I haven’t for the simple fact I like curling into a fetal position in front of my TV, whether watching a news broadcast or enjoying a mindless movie. Once I make enough money for a flat screen LCD monitor, I’ll buy one of those and pick up a cheap netbook, and connect the two devices together for better quality TV via the web. Until then, the status quo works well for me.
Dan Frommer knows what I mean. He turned off his cable bill two years ago and saved about $1,000 a year, but he’s now back to cable, elaborating why the cable/satellite market is riper for advertisers than the web, not the least is because of the larger audience and greater choice of programming:
…there’s still way too much good stuff that’s not online.
And much of that good stuff won’t be coming online in the near future.
Why not? Because cable operators like Time Warner Cable and Comcast still represent a huge percentage of revenue for TV content companies, while online video generates a laughably small amount of revenue for these companies.
Therefore, anything that relies on a live, nationwide cable audience — like most live sports, or the Oscars, or “MythBusters” — isn’t going to be available for free online for a long time.
I guess you’re going to keep that TV and your cable bill after all, eh?