<p>"I don’t think there would need to be a WET. Isn’t that like basically every other major television network besides the spanish Univision? Besides, BET is mostly garbage anyway. " - Mouse, you said it best.</p>
<p>Thanks for the assist. Just calling it like I see it.</p>
<p>you mean FOX?</p>
<p>^ Isn’t all Television getting worse.</p>
<p>Consider the ages of the audience that BET competes with. People who watch MTV and VH1 and ****. Obviously those latter two channels have gotten worse over recent years; perhaps there’s a direct correlation between the three. They all have to provide the audience with something they’re going to want to sit down and watch.</p>
<hr>
<p>As far as this thread is concerned, I don’t know how you can say BET is a double standard and that nothing should be separated by race.</p>
<p>African Americans have been discriminated and denied from being a part of or in the media over the course of United States history. I’m sure that was an even bigger double standard. Maybe one of the partial reasons BET was established was to allow for better representation of African Americans in the media and on television? That’s not fair? That’s a double standard just because African Americans are directly targeted for the first time in this industry and it increases the representation of African Americans being on TV at a time when they were OVERWHELMINGLY underrepresented?</p>
<p>I kind of approach the idea of WET from a business standpoint. What would be on WET that isn’t on MTV right now?</p>
<p>^ What would be on WET that wouldn’t be on TV in general? No reasonable business person would make an investment in this idea, because there never was/is a need for such a specialization.</p>