The problem with choice

[azekeil]

In an earlier post I mentioned the frustration of too much choice. It occurred to me that radio could be considered proof of this - sometimes (often?) people like not having to make decisions. It also means that you are exposed to things you might not normally experience. TV is the same - it may be old fashioned of me but I actually think that TV was better when there were just four channels. Having so much choice has in my opinion diluted the impact of an individual channel, and hence the quality has gone down. Additionally, attention spans have decreased as people 'channel surf' for their preferred viewing.

kissycat1000 points out that having specific channels devoted to interest areas is a good way of exploring new material in an area that interests you - so that is one benefit of the greater choice now available.

What do you guys think? Do you welcome choice, or find it can paralyse you?

Comments

[oholiab.livejournal.com]

When presented with a multitude of choices, if I find myself unable to decide on the best course of action, I tend to go for a random course of action provided it seems interesting enough. You never know until you try.

Also, TV has always been shit. If you have lots of channels, go for Dave, previously known as UKTV G2. Top Gear, Never Mind the Buzzcocks, Have I Got News For You and QI. Good channel.

[azekeil.livejournal.com]

Well if you're able to make important decisions randomly (e.g. which uni to go to or which course to do) you're a braver person than I am!

Yup. Dave is actually reasonably interesting to me, and replaces my previous default of SkyONE (which I can no longer get as a [current] Virgin Media customer).