I’m not old enough to say, “I remember when MTV played music videos all the time.”
I’m not old enough to say, " I remember when VH1 played music videos all the time."
But I am old enough to say, " I remember when VH1 played either music videos or music-themed programs all the time."
Now, this is no longer the case. VH1 plays crap like Major League, Beetlejuice, the Godfather, and a zillion other ancient movies all the time. Why? This is a serious question–not just a rant. I don’t really understand the whole economics of music videos, but it was my general impression that studios or bands paid to make the video, and the station got to play it for free, since the whole point was to get publicity for the band. If this is the case, then playing videos should cost the network nothing. I suppose if VH1’s parent company (Viacom?) owns the rights to all the movies it plays, they don’t cost anything either. So, why play the latter instead of the former?
I have a handful of ideas:
- Constant reruns of decades old movies actually get better ratings than music videos.
- While videos get more viewers, they rarely stay for the commercials, unlike movie-watching viewers, so advertisers pay more to advertise on a low-rated movie than a high-rated music video.
- Playing music videos actually does entail substantial costs.
- Network suits are dipshits who have no clue what they’re doing.
Any answers, Dopers?