General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsChuck Grassley is right.
Weirdly. But yeah what CG said.
http://www.salon.com/2016/12/30/chuck-grassley-is-continuing-his-surprisingly-long-feud-against-the-history-channel/
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,674 posts)because they showed so much WWII footage. But it's way worse now, with hardly anything but stupid reality shows.
Abu Pepe
(637 posts)But at least it was history.
monmouth4
(9,694 posts)Protalker
(418 posts)I finally can agree with one point from a Republican.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)hatrack
(59,583 posts)But Chuck is entirely correct.
My brother has a dish, and it's staggering - 800 channels? 1,000? And what's on? Pretty much nothing. Between 1/3 and 1/2 are informercials and home shopping channels. There are dozens - no, a couple hundred pay-per-view or pay-per-porn channels, tons of sports and celebrity bullshit streams, cooking and house-flipping shows . . . .
There are about half a dozen I ever spend time on - FSTV, TCM, the NASA Channel, C-Span and occasionally PBS and MSNBC.
Yes, I'm a nerd and I admit it, but "vast wasteland" doesn't even begin to capture it.