"I love this game ...", said the great Andrés Montes about his beloved basketball. Phrase that became more than famous and that today comes to the hair to talk about the strategies, more than wrong, to which the
Eurocup
has led
to many
television
networks
. Football night, a night of headaches, especially in the networks where it is not broadcast, especially on
Antena 3,
taking into account that it is
Telecinco
, the main competitor, who broadcasts the Eurocup. Program change, broadcast change and
Mask Singer 2
for another time.
If the first semifinal of the Eurocup between Spain and Italy this Tuesday led to the cancellation of
El Hormiguero
, the second semifinal, held last night, between England and Denmark, with its subsequent extension, was a tsunami in the programming and the most justified pissed off from an audience that is up to the very bow that the networks think more about their own benefits and about fucking each other than the viewer.
That the second semifinal of the
Eurocup
was going to be held this Wednesday has been known for weeks, if you hurry me for months. That is to say, it was not a novelty, nor was there any counterprogramming, nor did she catch anyone in their panties. So much was known that in anticipation that the first semifinal, with Spain and Italy, and in anticipation of the second, with England and Denmark, was going to hit audiences,
El Hormiguero
decided not to broadcast the program live and leave two old interviews for do not waste unnecessary cartridges. So much was known that the
Pablo Motos
program
announced it last week, warned the viewer and nothing has happened here. However, there is something that cannot be counted on: how are the parties going to develop?
If all goes well and the match starts at 9:00 p.m. at 10:45 p.m. at the latest, it may be settled.
But what if what happened happens?
What if there are extensions?
What if there are penalties?
Well, everything falls apart and the plans that had been hatched are going to ruin.
Last night
Antena 3
dismantled all plans and ended up making a play that, rather than fixing the disaster, turned it into a much bigger one.
What is the Audiovisual Law good for?
The chain decided not to broadcast the gala 7 of
Mask Singer 2
, which was planned and announced, and put a rehash of all the programs broadcast in this second edition, plus some of the best moments of the previous season.
Error!
The remedy was much worse than the disease. A mistake that
Antena 3
made last night
, but that has been the norm by which the channels are governed for a long time.
Telecinco
also does it to blow up
Antena 3
and nothing ever happens here, and here there are only a few injured, and here no one takes action on the matter. I don't know why there is a
General Audiovisual Law
. Wet paper.
"Gala 7, the final
stretch
of
Mask Singer
begins
with a guest mask. After the unmasking of José Manuel Calderón and Mar Flores, who were behind the Dog and Flamenco masks, the final
stretch
of
Mask Singer
begins
with a guest mask:
Penguin
. There are only six masks left to discover in the program:
Crocodile
,
Little Monster
,
Hedgehog
,
Egg
,
Banana
and
Dragon
. The final
stretch
is coming! Which superstars will be unmasked? "
Mask Singer 2
this Wednesday. It is not only that the guides collected it, it is that for weeks, like every week,
Antena 3
thus announced the new gala, the invited mask, the reunification, the final stretch ... That is, the forecast is that last night there would be a
Mask
gala
Singer
2 and there is nothing more to talk about. However, football changed everything. The extension of the England-Denmark semi-final led to a turn of events where the only ones harmed are the show itself,
Mask Singer 2
, and, of course, the audience.
After the broadcast of the repetition of a program of
El Hormiguero
with the interview with
María Pombo
, the channel put on a new summary (another one) of its new Turkish series
Tierra Amarga
. You had to make time to see if by putting straw into the programming the game would end, overtime passed and
Mask Singer 2
could be broadcast
without losing the pull because of football. But some thinking mind decided that as putting a summary of
Tierra Amarga was
not going to be enough, the best thing to do time would also be to issue a summary, which has been a rehash, of all the unmasked masks in
Mask Singer 2
. I am going to act as the devil's advocate and we are going to put ourselves in the place of that thinking head: football,
Eurocup
semifinal
, England-Denmark, extra time, possible penalties ... Refrito.
How are they going to waste a
Mask Singer
gala, the reunification gala, of the first invited mask for four cats to see? And in part it is acceptable, and in part you have to understand it. If they broadcast the Gala 7 of
Mask Singer 2,
how many spectators were going to see it taking into account that a semifinal of the
Eurocup was being played
. In the end, television is a business. The entertainment, the spectacle, the fun, the disconnection leads us to think that television is not governed by the basic rules of the market, and it does. It is one more business where the concern is not to lose money. And how do you get money? With an audience and not wasting unnecessarily. Broadcast a new
Mask Singer 2 program
competing against a Euro semi-final is bad business.
The problem is not that a chain changes a program for not competing with what cannot be competed, the problem is that it does so without prior notice, without taking into account the audience, without respecting the viewers.
Antena 3
and
Mask Singer 2
had two options, or to do what RTVE did on Tuesday with
MasterChef 9
, broadcast the program at its usual time despite the fact that Spain, yes Spain, which shoots more than England or Denmark, was being played in the extra time and on penalties the pass to the final of the
Eurocup
;
, or do what
Antena 3
did last night
, rehash and let it escape. Above all let it escape because the downpour that has fallen on them and Noah's. Which is the best option? Well, none is perfect. With the first, you lose audience at least in a good part of the program, but you retain and respect the audience. With the second, you don't waste a gala broadcast, but you unnecessarily piss off the audience. If you choose the first one, the best option is to do what
MasterChef 9 did
, use social networks, taking into account that it is a program, like
Mask Singer
, which generates many responses on networks, to play with the viewer and take yourself to laugh the showdown between the program and the semi-final Spain-Italy. The problem is,
Mask Singer 2 did
n't even use that trick.
Having social networks and having decided to bet on the rehash,
Mask Singer
could have used the pull of the program on social networks, and more, when a large part of the audience was downloading their anger in them, to, first, announce that it was not going to see the gala, second, to diminish its importance - in the end it is just a television program - and, third, to sing the mea culpa a bit and gain the viewer's understanding. But not even that. Until late at night on the
Mask Singer
account,
the tweets with the new gala continued to be maintained. Halfway through the rehash, they began tweeting the great moments of
Mask Singer 2
that they were seeing.
And it was not until much later that the tweets of the new gala were withdrawn, but without saying a word of what had happened.
Silence is consent.
Man, an explanation, an apology, a mea culpa, a 'against football you can't', something, whatever.
It is bundled on Twitter, the networks are turned on, the audience explodes and the decision, again wrong, is to keep absolute silence.
Audience erupts against Mask Singer: "Scoundrels"
Well, to endure the storm, which was not small. And it was not because there are programs, like
Mask Singer
, like
MasterChef
, like
Survivors
that have their audience, that have a loyal audience that waits for the broadcast day to sit on the sofa at home and enjoy. That audience would have gone to see
Mask Singer 2
before continuing to watch the game or they would do what many did on Tuesday with
MasterChef 9
, with one eye they would see the
talent
and with the other the match of Spain-Italy. It is that loyal audience that sustains these programs and it is that loyal audience that must be listened to, that must be taken into account, that must be respected. Yes
Mask Singer
You have done it with the improvements in the second edition after the audience complaints in the first edition, and you have taken them into account, and you have listened to them, was it so difficult to take them into account last night? I do not believe that those who happened to crack a rehash were not aware of the tsunami that their decision was going to provoke. They knew it and did not know how to manage it.
"Today's guest mask was that of a clown, right? Because it is the face that has remained for all of us"; "The gala was announced, scoundrels"; "New program ... and a milestone! We are outraged"; "After
Antena 3
does not complain that their programs are not successful. They look for it themselves ..."; "What seems most serious to me is that this decision is not communicated to the viewer. It costs nothing to put a skirt or to put a tweet about it"; "The worst thing of all is that I have waited until the end of the rehash in case the gala started ... well ... the worst invested 2 hours of my life." These are some of the hundreds, of the thousands of tweets from the audience last night after the
Antena 3
prank
. And they are few, and they are the softest, and they are the lightest because the anger they have caused is one of the heaviest in recent memory.
You see it? It was not necessary. Things can be done in very different ways and in situations like last night, any decision will not be the perfect one, but you have to find the least harmful one and, of course, the one that
Antena 3
finally decided
was the worst of all. Why? Not only because of the anger that it has caused in the spectators but because with things of this type you directly load a program that had cost a lot to raise taking into account the creeping strategies of
Telecinco
to sink it. Yes, there will be viewers who will continue to watch it because
Mask Singer
is a great entertainment program, but there will be another good part that will pass from seeing it and there will be another, those who are not on social networks that after plugging in last night
Antena 3
and seeing that it was a rehash, they will think that this is over and they will no longer have the program for the following weeks.
Last night's solution is a serious mistake with consequences in the medium / long term, consequences that lead to loading a great program, loading
Mask Singer 2
.
Why do these kinds of things happen?
Because the law is made, the trap is made.
With things like last night, with the counterprogramming of
Telecinco
to whistle
Antena 3
-now I put Survivors, now I remove it, now I broadcast it here, then there-, with these disrespect for the audience, it is demonstrated that the
Audiovisual Law
that is supposed to protect the viewer is useless at all and is useless because there are always loopholes that the chains will take refuge in so that they are not caught and because, honestly, it is not applied as it should be applied.
If the fines that should fall fell, if they were punished as they should be punished, the vacillations to the spectator would be only those who could afford them, and not like now that it is one day and another as well.
Without an audience there is no television, and this should be recorded by fire.
According to the criteria of The Trust Project
Know more
Mask singer
Antena 3 Esperanza Aguirre, the political blow of Mask Singer 2
Antena 3Ana Obregón busts Mask Singer 2 the night of Paloma San Basilio and Eva Hache
Survivors 2021, three days in a row Telecinco's vile strategy to attack Mask Singer
See links of interest
Last News
Home THE WORLD TODAY
Work calendar
Stage 11 of the Tour, live
England - Denmark, live