Sy Fy versus Sci Fi

Posted By: Peter DavidPosted On:

I was asked on the BSG thread what I thought of the change on the Sci Fi channel to Sy Fy.

I tend to agree with what Isaac Asimov once told me: Sci Fi was a stupid term from the very beginning. When it was first coined, it was supposed to be a play on “Hi Fi.” But Hi Fi was short for High Fidelity. Sci Fi didn’t track because “fiction” isn’t pronounced with a long “i” sound.

So to my mind, Sy Fy makes as much sense as Sci Fi, which is to say, none. Garbage in, garbage out.

PAD

63 comments on “Sy Fy versus Sci Fi”

  1. “The ultimate irony is that when SFC was almost entirely classic SF reruns and old movies, I watched it a LOT more.”
    .
    .
    A-bloody-men to that.
    .
    In terms of the actual name, I can accept that it’s being done so that they have something they can trademark. All well and good.
    .
    The justifications they’re giving, on the other hand, reek of contempt for the people who are supposed to be their audience. Incredibly bad idea.
    .
    On balance: a negative, but not one that’s likely to alter my viewing choices, since I wasn’t watching said channel much anyway these days.
    .
    Nico — who was the teacher who wrote for TNG? You’ve piqued my curiosity. (It wasn’t Sarah Higley by any chance?)
    .
    TWL

    1. For some reason I just thought to actually try syfy.com and the only thing there is a link to the official press release about the name change.
      .
      No matter what the subject matter, reading something with phrases like “…while opening the brand aperture to accommodate a broader range of imagination-based entertainment” and “…for us to truly become a global lifestyle brand” that just turn my stomach.
      .
      What does “global lifestyle brand” even mean???
      .
      And “…portable across all non-linear digital platforms“? Not sure about that one either. What are the linear digital platforms? I don’t get it.
      .
      Finally: “An aggressive trade marketing campaign will kick off this spring. scifi.com will assume the URL syfy.com at that time. Can marketing types stop using the word “aggressive” already? It’s OK to BE aggressive, but simply saying it doesn’t make it any more effective. If anything it makes it less imo. It just always comes off to me as so much meaningless posturing. Buzzwords are so obvious and often, perhaps even usually, an indicator to me of the vacuosness of many of the ideas (and maybe the people?) involved.
      .
      So I guess the bottom line for me on this and things like it is that old adage about how it’s not what was said, but how it was said that rankles.

      1. I think “non-linear digital platforms” means games. Except I’m not sure why they wouldn’t just say “games.” They’re definitely talking about reaching into games, selling more crap from their stores, and other licensing opportunities. Why they think they can make more money with a “SyFy” hoodie than a “Sci Fi” hoodie, I don’t know.

  2. Oops. Didn’t even pay attention to the fact that I did my prior comment as a reply to Tim Lynch’s comment. Didn’t mean to do that as it obviously wasn’t a direct reply to his statements. Oh well. Regardless, my points stand (or fall as the case may be in anyone’s assessment).

    Also, I left an end quote off the italicized portion of the “Finally:” paragraph, but that was probably fairly obvious.

  4. “Syfy” is a wonderful term because the circumstances of its creation make it a more effective dysphemism than “Sci Fi”. Henceforth I’m calling all degenerate quasifantastic rubbish “syfy”.

    At the top we have “science fiction”, which is very difficult to write unless you’ve got at least a master’s degree in one of the sciences.
    Next we have “science fantasy”, which is science fiction with the net down.
    Then there’s “sci fi” which substitutes a frisbee for the ball.
    And down among the Z men…”syfy”.

Comments are closed.