From observation, recognising that the general standard of television in my opinion has deteriorated and continues to do so year by year, so much so I now watch very little, I’ve found as far as the programme quality and content on all television channels, the following Doghouse's Laws of Television often apply.
I started compiling this list several years ago and some of these "laws" are now occasionally mentioned by contributors to a specific TV network message board, though of course they can apply to any channel.
I'm sure other contributors may relate to some of them and can think of other examples of practices which could be added to the list.
With a new programme, if your impression of it after ten minutes is that it's going to be rubbish, you’ll only be right 95% of the time.
The number of advance programme trails screened, will be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme. The ”best bits” of any programme will be included in the trail.
The volume of background music will often be in inverse proportion to the amount of watchable activity on the screen at that time.
Any TV audience gets the standard of programmes it deserves. It’s no good complaining about the quality of a programme if you continue to watch it.
If an idea for a programme suggested to a TV network commissioning department isn’t another soap in one form or another, or requires an "in your face" presenter/auto-cutie, celebrities, judges, phone votes, or the inclusion of dysfunctional members of the public, it is unlikely to be made.
The number of programme presenters appearing at any one time, will usually be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme.
The number and variety of similar programmes on TV, are likely to be in inverse proportion to their cost to present.
To reach the widest audience, in a programme where the subject is of a specific nature, it may include totally unrelated elements in an attempt to also “engage” viewers who aren’t the slightest bit interested in the actual topic, in a futile attempt to increase the ratings.
Some programmes, even a few news bulletins, given the level at which the programme makers pitch their production, should have the words; "for Dummies" added to the title.
If you've any doubts about watching a programme, from the trails or advertising you've seen, take a chance, give it a miss.
I started compiling this list several years ago and some of these "laws" are now occasionally mentioned by contributors to a specific TV network message board, though of course they can apply to any channel.
I'm sure other contributors may relate to some of them and can think of other examples of practices which could be added to the list.
With a new programme, if your impression of it after ten minutes is that it's going to be rubbish, you’ll only be right 95% of the time.
The number of advance programme trails screened, will be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme. The ”best bits” of any programme will be included in the trail.
The volume of background music will often be in inverse proportion to the amount of watchable activity on the screen at that time.
Any TV audience gets the standard of programmes it deserves. It’s no good complaining about the quality of a programme if you continue to watch it.
If an idea for a programme suggested to a TV network commissioning department isn’t another soap in one form or another, or requires an "in your face" presenter/auto-cutie, celebrities, judges, phone votes, or the inclusion of dysfunctional members of the public, it is unlikely to be made.
The number of programme presenters appearing at any one time, will usually be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme.
The number and variety of similar programmes on TV, are likely to be in inverse proportion to their cost to present.
To reach the widest audience, in a programme where the subject is of a specific nature, it may include totally unrelated elements in an attempt to also “engage” viewers who aren’t the slightest bit interested in the actual topic, in a futile attempt to increase the ratings.
Some programmes, even a few news bulletins, given the level at which the programme makers pitch their production, should have the words; "for Dummies" added to the title.
If you've any doubts about watching a programme, from the trails or advertising you've seen, take a chance, give it a miss.
by Doghouse Riley November 2, 2008
Get the Doghouse's Laws of Television mug.The first sit down meal between a couple following a falling-out, disagreement and/or argument where one party has clearly been in the wrong.
by Dougy_18 July 17, 2011
Get the Doghouse Special mug.Related Words
by Jeff Adamo November 7, 2007
Get the doghouse bass mug.1. (adjective) to be unable or unequipped to handle a situation of temptation due to animalistic tendency, much like a dog's instinct to attack turkeys in his dog house
2. to be in the presence of one whom cannot control his actions related to sex, food, addiction or anger
2. to be in the presence of one whom cannot control his actions related to sex, food, addiction or anger
1. Person 1: "Dude! So whack; how could he cheat on her at that sorority party?"
Person 2: "Oh come on, you know they're all babes; turkeys in a doghouse."
2. Person 1: "You can't to his house alone!"
Person 2: "Why not?"
Person 1: "He'll totally take advantage of you! Turkeys in a doghouse..."
3. Person 1: "Why do you relapse?"
Person 2: "I was at a Miley concert with all my dealers! Turkeys in a doghouse!!"
Person 2: "Oh come on, you know they're all babes; turkeys in a doghouse."
2. Person 1: "You can't to his house alone!"
Person 2: "Why not?"
Person 1: "He'll totally take advantage of you! Turkeys in a doghouse..."
3. Person 1: "Why do you relapse?"
Person 2: "I was at a Miley concert with all my dealers! Turkeys in a doghouse!!"
by ShanfullyGracious September 27, 2009
Get the turkeys in a doghouse mug.Related to the term doghouse.
A common deflection method used by the offending party to revert blame or guilt back to the offended party.
Used as a means to avoid accepting responsibility for making a mistake or a bad decision. Expressed by bringing up a prior conflict that is irrelevant to the current situation.
Can be used as a a noun or a verb.
A common deflection method used by the offending party to revert blame or guilt back to the offended party.
Used as a means to avoid accepting responsibility for making a mistake or a bad decision. Expressed by bringing up a prior conflict that is irrelevant to the current situation.
Can be used as a a noun or a verb.
As in, you are in the doghouse with your girlfriend but instead of saying sorry, you bring up something unrelated to get her in trouble.
"You shouldn't have done that."
"Well remember when you forgot our anniversary??"
"Don't try and put me in the reverse doghouse"
or
"Stop trying to reverse doghouse me!"
"You shouldn't have done that."
"Well remember when you forgot our anniversary??"
"Don't try and put me in the reverse doghouse"
or
"Stop trying to reverse doghouse me!"
by Carolina Plantagenet February 29, 2012
Get the Reverse doghouse mug.Referring to the fight game (boxing, mma, etc.) it means no rules, no stoppages, no rounds. You fight until one fighter quits, or is knocked unconscious.
by ChrisThaDon February 18, 2021
Get the Doghouse Rules mug.After dumping a huge load of shit in the john, you jam a girls head in the toilet and fuck her in the butt. when you are about to blow your load you pull her head up and go in her mouth, punch her in the face and then give her a swirly.
by Feason February 1, 2007
Get the chocolate doghouse mug.