NASA TV - Time For an Upgrade?

Fred Brown's response is an excellent one. They're doing what they were asked to do, and LA Times aside, they're doing it very well.

So the question is, is it time for the mandate for NASA TV to get an upgrade? Brown hits it right on the nose. Is this about entertainment? I think not. This is about public access to things the public is paying for. Are we paying for entertainment? I don't think anyone would say that. That's a steep cliff to dive off of, because when NASA starts becoming responsible for entertainment, then they're competing with the private sector, and I suppose they should be taking ads as well, while they're at it. When NASA has to arrange for it's own entertainment-motivated TV, when the entertainment industry no longer sees public interest in what NASA does, that's the end of the line.

I always thought that if I wanted Space 'entertainment' to watch
Discovery/Science ch.

If I wanted 'LIVE' then its NASA 'Select' TV.

Which I would like to see MORE of.

A 24/7 Earth obs from ISS in HD channel ??

--Ben

No, I wouldn't say that NASA TV is on the hook to provide entertainment but NASA TV is completely lame across the board.

Yes, some of their programing is educational BUT very boring and needs to be spiced up--all the kids I know that have watched it or are required to watch it say it is very boring.

And yes--you can see a shuttle launch on NASA TV but that's it---NASA should cover ALL things space and should cover ALL launches out of Kennedy not just NASA sponsored launches but also the birds flying out of Cape Canaveral Air force Station.

Spiff.

I agree with Spaceman Spiff, NASA TV is very stiff.

NASA TV does not need to entertain me, it needs to inform and educate me. Considering the amount of content NASA has available, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the frequency of repeat programming. It just the same thing every 2-4 hours on most days. What the hell, NASA? You should replay the launch of STS-1 EVERY DAY, because I would watch it!

This is a conversation we should have been having in 1982, when cable was becoming a big deal. NASA TV is terribly far behind.

When I finally got NASA TV on Dish Network, I was really excited for about 3 hours. Now I just use it to watch shuttle launches and ISS updates. NASA TV is incredibly boring, and thats a shame considering NASA helped pioneer the use of most of the related technologies. I don't need glitzy graphics and gameshows and whoop-dee-doo, but COME ON!

NASA TV's job is not to entertain but to disseminate information. Plain and simple. What entertainment they've attempted has been lame and uninteresting.

Not one more dime for NASA TV to become something it's not supposed to be.

Would it be too much to ask for a little classical music behind the nearly silent video files? The Weather Channel's local forecast isn't 'entertainment' but at least it's got a little grove to it.

Spaceman Spiff says "all the kids I know that have watched it or are required to watch it say it is very boring".

I'll often have NASA-TV going on the projector when the kids are working on their projects in my high school engineering and/or digital media classes. You'd be surprised at the number of kids that do enjoy the fact that it's not 100% action or continual commentary... letting the wild sound between the astronauts and the ground go about naturally gives the kids an appreciation for the real life application of space travel / life onboard Station. Watching the crews go about the mundane parts of space life makes it real - something that the wiz-bang shoot-em-ups can't do.

As a long-time NASA-TV watcher (I got my 8' C-band dish/receiver setup primarily to watch NASA-TV some 20 years ago before there WAS a Dish Network OR DIRECT TV) I'd hope that they leave the original channel alone and add an "entertainment" network, instead of trying to cram everything into the one public-TV feed.

Mr. Brown's response is a perfect indicator of just how insular NASA is. After 30 years those people have not recognized the need for effective P.R.?
"Entertainment" is not just slapstick comedy, morose drama, or any of the other fare we are witness to on for-profit media. Besides, if one actually reads the article before commenting on it, one will see that "entertainment" is not what is being asked for.
I sympathize with Robert Thompson who is quoted to have said, "There are times . . . when I think to myself, 'Wow, in five minutes I've listened to something I was really interested in and I've managed to become really bored,'"

No Mr. Brown, it's not a perfect world, and $1.5 million isn't a huge budget. But, if i and millions of other amateurs can put together a fairly watchable short movie of my vacation using readily available freeware, just imagine what you and your 18 strong staff could accomplish for the agency if you took advantage of the opportunity to reach out to your benefactors in a style that they can identify with!

This topic is near and dear to my heart. With a lifetime of NASA love in my heart and 30 years of television experience, I see NASA TV as what it could be. It doesn't and shouldn't compete with Discovery, but it could be made much more watchable.

Simple things like a logical program schedule, less repeats as the day goes on, and the moving away from the belief that it is a backhaul feed. I have worked on channels that did so much more with so much less budget. NASA TV already has what other channels pay millions of dollars for.....content. 50 years of content and more being made all the time. It has an in-place distribution contract with Dish and DirectTV...the most sought after prize in broadcasting. It has the ability to go live when needed and bounce in and out of recorded programming...something it does quite well. It has all the pieces. The hard part has been done. It just needs some expertise on how to assemble a playlist, how to serve it's audience.

Part of NASA's charter is to distribute what it learns. NASA TV needs to be more like NASA itself, moving forward. Using TV and a good integration with it's website could bring about both a wonderful PR tool for the agency, as well as a great venue for all Americans to see one of it's shinning lights in action.

At NASA TV, the dream just needs to be alive.

While NASA TV is not intended to 'entertain', but to disemenate, it could be used more often by NASA to disemenate information that captures the imagination.

To wit: NASA science missions are directed to spend 1 to 2% (the number keeps changing) of thier budget on education and public outreach. Why not take advantage of NASA TV when thinking best how to spend 1 to 2% of $700M! or $1B!

What on earth do they need money for? Ive seen homemade completely free streaming sites that were better than NASA's ill fated TV which is rarely on and when it is I'm sorry its not exciting watching a bunch a dudes sitting in mission control. this isn't the 60's . I don't understand how at the turn of the new decade freaking 2010 we don't have a live webcam on the moon.. Sure there is one on ISS but rarely is it broadcasting.. I think its possible to Educate and Entertain As one post said Discovery channel pulls it off. With the advent of instant gratification and the internet and texting I think NASA should get on board again this isn't live feed delay tv of the 60's. They should look to players like TVU and or stream torrent or sopcast. Media player just doesn't stream well. as they say on ESPN NASA" come on man" . I love nasa and the JOb they do but its PR division if there is such a thing just blows.

Many of the NASA missions and NASA funded projects create videos that are aimed to inform, educate, and/or entertain. It is NASA TV policy NOT to show those high quality, good production pieces. Who knows why. The items do show up on YouTube and other NASA mission sites. This stuff is already paid for - essentially "free" to NASA TV. They just have to queue it.

There is a difference between entertainment and making space interesting. It takes a true talent to make space exploration boring, but that's exactly what a steady diet of NASA TV does. It wouldn't cost a penny to replace the droning monotone of people like Rob Navias with someone with a broadcast-quality voice who knows how to keep people's interest. Better scripts wouldn't be bad either. With their scant resources spent on programs like NASA Edge, is it no wonder Congress continues to cut the PAO budget?

NASA TV doesn't need to change the content to improve. I think something it has needed for the longest time is a telestrator for the live coverage of both launches and the day-to-day operation of the space station. It would vastly improve how easy it is for the uncommon viewer to understand what is going on. So simple, yet it would increase the engagement factor by so much.

n5wd, I do enjoy the real-time communications with the long gaps between transmissions and detailed tedium of step-by-step operations. Yes, this is real coverage of manned spaceflight. I usually like to leave it on in the background during Shuttle/ISS EVA operations. Its actually very inspiring when I have work to do, knowing that those guys are working so hard up there. I'm even ok with the monotone voices of the mission controllers and PAO announcers.

What I don't enjoy are the long gaps between programs with a listing of what they intend to play later in the day, or the replay of stuff that they played 2 hours ago. Its like watching HBO in 1980.

Even worse : watching over the shoulders of mission controllers surfing the web while nothing is happening. Show me the data feed from Cassini or LRO, even if I don't know what the heck I'm looking at. I remember seeing this during the Voyager-Neptune flyby in 1989, it was fascinating!

Two words for those at NASA TV

"High Definition"

A lot of people including myself would like to see NASA TV in Hi Def--but in all honesty maybe it's just my Direct TV that doesn't carry hi def NASA TV

Spiff

I've said a lot of what I have to say about this topic before, including specific recommendations of how to fix a few elements:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/802/1

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/807/1

As someone suggested above, NASA by law is required to desseminate its information. Conveying that information effectively is implied in that charter, and making the presentation of that material palatable--even interesting--is a vital component of achieving that objective.

Making what might quite possibly be the most exciting adventure undertaken by humankind appear mindnumbingly dull is an amazing challenge...but boy oh boy, NASA PAO has accomplished just that.

Isn't it about time they atone for their sins?

That would be 'disseminate'. Sorry, it was late.