Originally Posted by kylie_madonna:
“Sorry don't agree with this article. Yes watching clips YouTube etc is the way forward, call me old-fashioned, but if theirs a chance to watch something on my laptop or my telly on the sofa the telly will win every time!”
Although, unlike you, I actually agree with the article, I agree with you on this point. Watching a television programme or a film should be done on a TV, not a laptop or a tablet or a phone (unless doing a long distance journey or something)... I just can’t get my head out of that way of thinking – so people can call me old fashioned too. But I actually watch YouTube on my TV, via my Amazon box. And given you can now watch YouTube on your TV via smart TVs, via a Amazon/Roku/Apple/Android box, via SkyQ etc I can’t be alone in enjoying the best of The Late Late Show, on YouTube, in HD, on my TV – just a couple of hours after US broadcast.
As has already been mentioned this week in this thread – viewers have two options. Watch the latest Carpool Karaoke (or whatever segment is making headlines that day) on YouTube from about 10am (UK time) or wait until it appears on Sky On Demand from about 8pm (UK time). Yes, YouTube is only giving you the highlights and not the whole episode, but I suspect that’s all the casual viewers wants to watch anyway.
Originally Posted by kylie_madonna:
“ Plus I don't agree with watching all the clips online is like you've watched an episode. Maybe I'm a want it all kinda guy but watching clips over the full transmission is not watching the show.”
The total length of all the YouTube clips each day is usually about 25 minutes... and the full length of the episode if usually about 40 minutes – so you’re seeing most of the episode. What is generally missing is the majority of the interview segment, which (as I’ve referred to above) the casual viewer will usually be least interested in. I will concede though, if there are guests you are interested in on that particular night you really need to watch the full episode.
Originally Posted by kylie_madonna:
“ And I don't agree with why would any British person wanna sit through American guests they don't know its not about that on these type of shows its about the host... Surely my dad can't be only person who watches a talk show regardless of who is on it, even tho if you know some of the guests it does help .”
But unfortunately the average British person won’t want to sit through interviews with American guests they don’t know. People generally just aren’t that open-mined. This is why Letterman, Leno etc. never found success over here. When Letterman was on ITV2 (daily at 7pm) its ratings varied depending on who his gusts were – an A-lister would cause a spike, but normally the ratings were low. The same applies even for Graham Norton and Jonathan Ross – as a general rule, the bigger the guests, the bigger the ratings that week.
Of course there are those who watch the programme for the host, not the guests – and that’s where James Corden has an advantage with UK audiences over the likes of Fallon, Colbert, Conan etc. But to be a success you need to grab those casual viewers too who watch based on who the gusts are.
But no – your Dad is not alone. I watch every episode of ‘The Tonight Show starring Jimmy Fallon’, ‘The Late Late Show with James Corden’, and ‘Conan’. Also ‘The Graham Norton Show’. Regardless of guests.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m really pleased ‘The Late Late Show with James Corden’ is now available on Sky. But I just question, in this technologically advanced age, does it really need to be? Or at least, in this technologically advanced age, is there enough demand for it?
Looking at the expiry dates of the episodes on Sky On Demand it appears they’ve signed a 1 year deal with the programme. It’s success will be decided whether Sky re-new that deal this time next year. I really do hope it’s successful, but I have my doubts. Only time will tell.