Why televison wins. The web fails to deliver suspense.


Having just spent the better part of six weeks watching the thrilling NBA playoffs (Congratulations Dallas Mavericks, NBA Champions) I wondered what the hell it is about live sports or even good television that makes it so compelling.   With the NBA season ending I thought, “Good God, where will I get my thrills from?”  Mulling over what I can do for entertainment throughout the summer, the web never came up.

Why doesn’t the web deliver suspense?  I have tons of ideas but not a lot of answers.  All I know, is the web is missing that IT factor that makes you yell at it,  it’s missing that super feeling of spin-tingling action.  It just is, there is no doubt about it.

Why is that? 

Why doesn’t the Internet have that thrilling feeling?
Is it because of the way that I use it?
Have I trained myself to use it for information gathering and not entertainment?

Is it because things that are “live” on the web tend to suck so bad they aren’t worth it? (The most compelling live action online is an Apple product announcement by Steve Jobs.  Woo-fucking-hoo!)   Sure, YouTube has some thrilling elements to it in its’ five-minute way.  (Jeez, five-minutes is actually too long).

What is it about the web that will always have it behind TV?
Is it the bandwidth of the web simply not being there?
Is it the archaic nature of live event rights holders who hold on to all the good stuff? (There is still no NFL game that is watchable live online as far as I know). 

The Internet may get there eventually. But for now, I’m looking for my live sports thrills on that 1930’s technology, of glass, wires and tubes – the trusty, reliable television.

Originally appeared from

By Laurent Courtines

I'm here and I am ready to go. Been doing my homework and I have things to say.

Leave a Reply