Are shows SUCH AS HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER indicative of the creative bankruptcy of modern network television or are they testaments to the continued popularity of the content networks produce? 

YES, NETWORKS ARE DYING, AND IT’S THEIR OWN FAULT

There’s this delicious bit from The Larry Sanders Show, the painfully awkward and frequently hilarious 1990s comedy about a floundering late-night talk show, where Sanders’ bumbling sidekick Hank Kingsley (played by the immortal Jeffrey Tambor), who’s in the middle of a grueling contract negotiation, threatens to leave the show for a gig co-hosting a CNBC show. Unfazed, his producer, Artie, slyly takes a swipe at basic cable, saying, “My TV stops at channel 13, the way it’s supposed to.”

It’s an insult that doubles as a meta-joke — The Larry Sanders Show aired on HBO, which, in the ’90s, was way, way past channel 13 — but nowadays, it feels meaningful for a different reason: It’s indicative of an outdated mindset. The oligarchy of television, a realm once exclusively ruled by big-boppers ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox, has become (slightly) more egalitarian thanks to cable. Network television — or at least the omnipresence of network television — will die with our generation.

All one needs to do is take a look at the most recent Golden Globes Awards. In the Best Television Series Drama category, only one out of the five nominees — PBS’ Downton Abbey — was from a network television channel. (And even that was a rebroadcast of a BBC original.) The rest — Breaking Bad from AMC, Homeland from Showtime, along with The Newsroom and Boardwalk Empire from HBO — came from cable programs.

Netflix is also contributing to the transition away from network television by presenting the new David Fincher-directed House of Cards, starring Kevin Spacey, as an exclusively online program. Furthermore, it’s hosting the revival season of Arrested Development, a show once deemed too eccentric for prime time by former home Fox, that has since amassed a large cult following thanks in no small part to Netflix’s streaming services.

Accolades and savvy business decisions aside, network TV is flailing because, with a few notable exceptions, its pick of the litter is, well, litter. CBS is to blame for this in particular, as it plays host to three of the most repugnant and tasteless shows on all of television: The Big Bang Theory, Two and a Half Men and How I Met Your Mother. While many cable channels pursue creatively fruitful programs, the major networks continue to green-light aimless carbon copies of Seinfeld and Friends populated by narcissistic puppets who seem horribly out of place without a laugh track.

The real future for television lies beyond this realm, beyond channel 13. The biggest ratings may still go to the main networks, but the real art keeps popping up on lesser known channels. And if critics and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association continue to say shows like Breaking Bad and Homeland are of more merit than the same crap that has been spun off and syndicated into the ground, then, eventually, the people will gravitate to them. The ever-fleeting populist choice is only one of the many standards for the natural selection of showbiz. Every other creative category clearly tilts in the favor of cable.

—Dean Essner

NO, NETWORK TV IS STILL A VIABLE BUSINESS

Television consumption is a push and pull between what TV executives think will sell and what a diverse set of viewers know they want. Currently, things look bad for the big networks — CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox — all of which are suffering from plunging ratings, poor critical reviews and the ever-encroaching allure of Internet and on-demand viewing.

Ten years ago, big networks ruled the airwaves with original programming that attracted both critical acclaim and big Nielsen ratings, such as groundbreaking scripted TV including ABC’s Lost, NBC’s The West Wing and Fox’s 24. Despite the success of these shows, the market share of big network TV has been eroded by DVR technology and the more risque (though not always as quality) programming offered by cable channels.

Granted, DVRs have cut into the live audiences of both network and cable channels; it’s simply more convenient to watch a show when you have some free time, regardless of what channel the program airs on. The big networks’ response to this trend has been to create tons of shows that require no weekly commitment so audiences can tune in whenever they want (scripted Law & Order and NCIS copycat mysteries) — and, further, ones that don’t mandate maximum contemporaneous commitment, namely, unscripted “reality” programs in the style of Fox’s American Idol or CBS’s Big Brother.

For now, the more adventurous viewer might prefer to watch critical darlings on cable, such as AMC’s The Walking Dead, or even Internet exclusives, such as Netflix’s Lilyhammer.

None of this, however, means that the big networks are dead. As always, channel priorities are changing. Networks still provide local news and carry the best sporting events (NFL, the Olympics), both of which drive viewership. Beyond that, the networks still carry a few great dramas (such as NBC’s Parenthood) and own the majority of the best sitcoms available on TV.

Between ABC’s Modern Family and Happy Endings, CBS’s The Big Bang Theory and How I Met Your Mother, Fox’s animation block and NBC’s Parks and Recreation and oddball cult-hit Community, very few channels can compete with the amount of quality comedies on the big networks.

Furthermore, the amount of quality television on cable is often seen from a skewed perspective. Very few cable channels outside of HBO, Showtime, AMC and FX actually boast the critically acclaimed programming that has made the medium so popular in the last decade.

There are hundreds of other cable channels barely able to break even every year, often because the programming is terrible. Most channels are overcrowded with dreadful scripted shows (USA’s Necessary Roughness, most things currently on SyFy) and an obscene number of faux-unscripted reality shows that are cheap to make and appeal to the lowest common denominator (Bravo’s Real Housewives, most things currently on TLC).

The amount of bad TV with low viewership in a day’s worth of cable programming is astonishing — many lesser channels collapse under their own weight.

Meanwhile, the big networks produce very popular reality game shows (CBS’s The Amazing Race) right alongside some of the better dramas on television (CBS’s The Good Wife, ABC’s Nashville).

In the end, it all comes back to how viewers are consuming their shows. Right now, the freedom of the Internet is harming networks big and small alike.

What people seem to forget is the big networks are “big” because they are leaders in a large industry. It won’t be long before these massive companies figure out a new economic plan and refocus their attention on new, riskier programming.

No station has a perfect track record, but the big networks are prone to adaptation, and soon enough they’ll be back on top.

—Zachary Berman

diversionsdbk@gmail.com