Cable customers: Sky's the limit
It looked inevitable from the start. BSkyB inflate the amount that they demand Virgin Media to pay for carrying a number of their channels, VM don't agree, both companies spin the media line to the hilt, negotiations go nowhere, and the channels are pulled from the cable feed.
It won't affect me too much as a cable customer myself; Sky News isn't a patch on News 24, Sky Sports News is my idea of hell, and Sky Travel always seemed fairly pointless (apart from for late-night viewers looking for titillation dressed up as reality documentary). The loss of Sky One's more of a bother.
We'll miss Lost quite badly in our household. As, of course, do millions of customers already, ever since Sky bought the rights and ringfenced the show away from unlucky non-satellite non-cable terrestrial customers. The same thing happened to 24 back before I got cable - the BBC made it popular in the UK, Sky outbids them, and I've never managed to properly get back into it since.
Luckily for sneaky old me the in-laws have Sky+ with a series record on Lost. And, though I've so far resisted, you can't deny the temptation of torrents.
However whatever I do, I won't buy Murdoch.
All these people on the message boards (yes, my life's that interesting!), writing that they're switching ("churning") from Virgin to Sky for their Losts, their 24s, their Galacticas, their Jon Tickle on Brainiac?. Do they not realise that Rupert Murdoch is the Emperor Palpatine of the modern day?
Those that know should realise that voting for Murdoch with your pocket shows the same self-centred selfish that allows the media baron to bulldoze his way through the scaffolding of good business.
Putting your cash behind his businesses, whether it be television, newspapers, or his internet purchases such as MySpace (via the advertising being served), is a vote against political liberty. Across the world, policies are drafted by our lawmakers' to please this Sith Dark Lord, or at least to not put his lightsabre out of joint. His non-elected influence is everywhere. Think Silvio Berlusconi without the responsibility, think Elliot Carver without the drawback of him being a fictional Bond villain.
I know I'm sounding sanctimonious, and business is business and entertainment entertaining, but those that care about human decency and democracy need to make a stand, no matter how small. Just look at R2D2.
For a moment there, I thought you were talking about Howling Mad Murdoch out of the A-Team. Maybe you were. I'm not convinced though, that one media tycoon is much better than another: they all want to be in control so they can brainwash us all. My advice? Sell the telly, don't read the papers (it's all lies, Starbuck, haven't you cottoned on to it yet?). Don't listen to any of what they're telling you. Just stick your fingers in your ears and go "la-la-la...la-la-la." You know it makes sense.
Presumably the repeated Star Wars references were themselves ironic, considering the studio from which the films were released... We're both old enough for those searchlights and drums to be synonymous with Star Wars...
BTW, you might take comfort from checking out the respective viewing figures of 24 and Lost when they were on terrestrial as compared to what they are now.
No SW irony I'm afraid, not on a conscious level, anyway.
When I reread the post, drafted whilst in a particularly braindead (Dead Alive!) state, it was so dry and staid (Dead Men Don't Wear!) beyond belief. In fact, so rrrrubbish did I consider the words therein, that I felt that even the words of George Lucas wouldn't damage it, nay, they might even add COLOUR! and EXCITEMENT!
But somewhere, deep deep down, I must've been wrestling with the Fox Dilemma...