Random Thoughts on the Telly

So last night, I’m watching an episode of CSI: NY (so not as good as the original in Vegas, but wev), and during the show, I see commercials for all these other CBS shows, none of which I’ve seen, but all seem to be in the same vein—law enforcement and/or mystery solving. This morning, I started looking at the other network schedules, and, although detective and crime shows have always been a TV staple (hello, Perry Mason), it seems like there’s just an absolute glut of them at the moment.

CBS offers CSI, CSI: NY, CSI: Miami, Cold Case, Criminal Minds, NCIS, Numb3rs, and Without a Trace. NBC offers Law & Order, Law & Order: SVU, Law & Order: Criminal Intent, Crossing Jordan, and Medium. ABC’s got Alias and is adding a new show to their schedule called The Evidence, in which all of the clues to the case will be revealed in a videotaped evidence log and viewers are invited to “play along with our heroes as they find each clue, determine its meaning, put the pieces of the puzzle together and figure out who done it.” Fox has 24 and a new show, Bones, which features a forensic anthropologist. USA’s got Monk and endless Law & Order re-runs. And TNT has its own production, The Closer, coupled with re-runs of Law & Order, Without a Trace, and Cold Case. And this doesn’t even begin to touch on the myriad of investigation and forensics programs on A&E, various incarnations of The Discovery Channel, HBO’s long-running documentary series like Autopsy and America Undercover, and all the other shows of the same ilk across the cable spectrum.

What struck me as curious about the prevalence of these shows is that it’s completely counterintuitive based on the hostility toward science and contempt for facts that so deeply plagues the public discourse. CSI is the top-rated non-reality TV show, topped only by American Idol, and its entire premise is that logic, reason, and science are the path to truth. I don’t think only members of the reality-based community are watching these shows; I’m curious how a person who disdains intellectualism as elite or, you know, not that necessary, appreciate a show that is predicated on precisely the opposite view.

In looking at the current crop of shows, I couldn’t recall ever having seen such a dearth of sitcoms. They’re there, but the rest of the network schedules are dominated by “news” shows, like 60 Minutes and Dateline, and reality shows, which seems to signal at minimum a curiosity about the world and the people in it. Why are so many people interested in watching a show like The Amazing Race, but not exploring beyond their own borders? Why watch Trading Spouses, but refuse to challenge one’s own biases by exploring new or unfamiliar territory?

I imagine television gives some people the justification for not broadening their own horizons, as it were. I saw it on the teevee; I don’t need to do it myself. But what about the people who spend their days championing the watering down of science classes by infusing them with lectures on intelligent design, and by night, snuggle up with the remote to spend some time with Grissom and his CSI team, whose work is dependent on sound science? They must exist; the numbers of people who support teaching ID and who watch CSI make it unlikely there’s no crossover. What is the disconnect here? It feels like the opposite of escapism.

No conclusions from this blogger, who remains a bit mystified by the whole thing. Just thought it might make an interesting discussion.