International politics
Article summary
Streaming websites, such as We7, have enabled viewers to access television programs on-line. Also, it has increased the television audience and enabled fame of artists and increased the circulation of their songs such as Susan Boyle’s “I Dreamed a Dream.” Television is an influential medium of communication such as portrayed by the February 6, 2010 Super Bowl between New Orleans Saints and Indianapolis Colts whereby 106m Americans watched. Contrary to 1992 Bruce Springsteen’s song “57 Channels (and Nothin’ On)”, today there are hundreds of channels offering a sundry of programs of different genres. As of 1990s, India had two state-run television channels but today has over 600. Britain homes receiving multi-channel television rose to 89% from 31% ten years ago. The TV set has been also modified from “squat cubes” to sharper brighter and thinner flat-screen TVs; and heated screens to prevent condensation.
They are no longer the preserve of dining rooms; they have spread to kitchens and bathrooms. False predictions televisions ending have been made many times and in its stead consumers embrace technology as an alternative. Sure there was a technological gale— websites, cell phones, social networking sites— however, they have had a little impact on television. Viewers use a large portion of their time watching media, with an 8-18 aged person currently spending 10 hours and 45 minutes. TVs are also used as monitors when playing video-games, are digital radios and high profile TVs can be used to access other things such as weather forecasts and stock quotes. TV programs can be accessed through computers, cell phones and tablet gadgets. Streaming websites have been a better option than the traditional TV set and has had an impact on the people who made a living from TV. Sales of recorded music have lowered with the coming of a file-sharing website. Internet has made classified ads on newspapers and books sales decrease. TV may end up to the “wasteland” because of multiple choices. TV won’t follow the fate of newspapers soon but danger lurks ahead for it.
Critical evaluation
This article fits a crisp term, saber-rattling. Television has witnessed turbulent times and has emerged a winner. The streaming websites, the endless socializing networks being created almost overnight and other Internet-enabled advertising sites have entered the scene. However, people’s admiration of the television has cushioned it against the impact of those creations. Despite the fact that the article’s message— in a concealing way such as painting in stark images the popularity of the Internet websites— mostly supports the notion that the demise of the television is nearing; the writer nevertheless acknowledges that the predictions have come and gone. If these predictions were anything to go by, the television could be long gone.
As the saying aptly puts it, that which doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. The television has stood on its own like a nugget on sinking soil; another thing that the article agrees with that the new sites, “have squeezed around it” (The Economist). I agree with the article that the income of the television is not as it used to be before the technological gale— its fortunes have dwindled because its main source of income, advertising, is shared with the new Internet sites. I agree with the writer’s conclusion that, for television, things will never be the same again and that television will either have to shape up or ship out of the media arena.

Work cited
The Economist. “Changing the channel.” April 29, 2010. Accessed April 18, 2012 http://www.economist.com/node/15980859