Its a lovely utopian idea but it won't work. People have been predicting the death of network TV since the early 80s (with the rise of cable and VHS) and its still around albeit in a somewhat diminished form.

And the writer fails to address the role of the advertiser in American TV. I can not see that advertisers will be happy when a medium where they plug their products will be cut off from them.

And finally, what about those who do not have a PC or a DVD player. Should we deny people the pleasure of their favourite show just because they do not have the money to see it?

Simon | December 14, 14:36 CET

I based my article on my own experience with BtVS. I have bunny ears, I don't have cable. I discovered BtVS via word of mouth last year. I bought the DVDs of S1&2. BtVS isn't broadcast in Toronto, so I got the eps for season Six and the current season via the net.

It isn't a case of money, it is about access. Broadcast teevee is in a death spiral, not teevee. You might as well worry about the people who don't have teevee sets who can't see Buffy, Angel and Firefly.

Joss Whedon is one of the few creators who have a strong enough fan base to change how teevee is delivered.

braingarage | December 14, 22:21 CET

Even if the show was distributed in that manner, M.E. would still have to be fronted money to meet the immediate costs. If the revenue from the distribution of the shows doesn't meet the amount made available from the backers, same story.

herb | December 15, 11:11 CET

More and more, it looks like the HBO model is the only route for high-quality, challenging programme makers in the US. (And even then, those hits are exceptional.) I'll support that, as long as Channel 4 buys up the rights ;)

holgate | December 21, 07:33 CET