Sci Fi Channel Changes Name to ‘SyFy’ — Really? |
jump to navigation

Sci Fi Channel Changes Name to ‘SyFy’ — Really? March 16, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: BSG,Editorial,ENT,Sci-Fi,TNG , trackback

Starting in July, if you tune to the Sci Fi Channel to watch reruns of Star Trek The Next Generation or Star Trek Enterprise or Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica you will notice that the channel has a new name ‘SyFy.’ NBC Universal announced the change this morning saying that it will ‘broaden the appeal’ of the network. Really?


Taking the Sci-Fi out of Sci Fi
The Sci Fi Channel has been the spot for genre television for decades, including reruns of various Star Trek shows, currently with Enterprise and Next Generation in the schedule. It has also been the home to original science fiction programming, including the much lauded Battlestar Galactica created by Trek vet Ron Moore (and will be home to the BSG prequel Caprica). However the channel seems to be trying to move away from branding that so closely associates it with science fiction. In the official release SCI FI President David Howe stated:

While continuing to embrace our legacy and our core audience, we needed to cultivate a distinct point of view with a name that we could own that invites more people in and reflects our broader range of programming

The new home of Syence Fyction

As of now it is unclear if this new branding and planned ‘broader range’ of programming will impact Star Trek, which is as quintessentially ‘science fiction’ as you can get.  Trek is probably safe, especially as SyFy is still planning a new Stargate show, which (no offense to my fellow Gate fans) is perceived to be even more nerdy than Trek. But is this change really necessary? Is science fiction really that bad of branding message? And if so, then why go for the homonym? Why not rebrand as ‘If’ or ‘Imagination’ or some other generic name?

Also there is a bit of a Trek irony here. Back in 2001 Paramount launched its new Star Trek show without ‘Star Trek’ in it, calling it just ‘Enterprise’. This too was used to ‘broaden the appeal’ of the show, by dropping that nerdy connation. ‘Star Trek’ was later added to the name of the show anyway and it is now one of the more popular shows on Sci Fi.

I am not the only one asking this question. Entertainment Weekly (as mainstream as it comes) is also asking the same question, noting that science-fiction is actually growing in popularity. EW cites the return of Star Trek to popularity as part of its evidence…

let’s reject the notion that sci-fi isn’t mainstream. In the last decade, two Star Wars movies have been the top-grossing films of their year. If we use an inclusive definition of sci-fi, we can add Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Return of the King to our list of box-office winners; The Dark Knight, Spider-Man, and Spider-Man 3 aren’t too far off. The top five grossing movies for 2005? Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe; Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire; War of the Worlds; and King Kong. In 2007, Transformers, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and I Am Legend were in the top six. Last year, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, and WALL-E were among the top five. Star Trek is coming back. Lost and Heroes have generated buzz on TV. But tell me again about how many people would never watch sci-fi.

Of note, popular genre news site SciFiWire will not be changing its branding according to a post on the site



1. Casey - March 16, 2009


2. boomer13 - March 16, 2009

sounds lame to me…

3. Mjomark - March 16, 2009

Weird indeed.

4. Brad - March 16, 2009

I don’t have cable, so it doesn’t really matter to me anyway. Go SyFy!

5. redbellpeppers - March 16, 2009


However, maybe we’ll get higher quality grade “B” movies out of it.
Manticore? Frankenfish?

6. Devon - March 16, 2009

That is completely stupid. WHY???

To take a note from someone on AICN.

“Hardball with Chris Matthews: Tonight on Emessemby See.”

7. dayxday - March 16, 2009

More proofs that the suits just don’t get it.

8. CommonHeir - March 16, 2009

It feels like it’s about to go the way of G4… dumbing down and forgetting it’s direction.

Should have known it would happen when they started showing wrestling.

9. John Gill - March 16, 2009

I haven’t watched that channel in several years, their programming just isn’t what it used to be.

10. Ben - March 16, 2009

…makes no sense…

11. Brian - March 16, 2009

Looks like someone in marketing is trying to justify their job. There is absolutely no reason to do this.

12. Pat D - March 16, 2009

Sounds like to me whoever is running “SyFy” doesn’t want to be a nerd. Gues what? Changing the name won’t make a difference.

13. AJ - March 16, 2009


April 1st is still a few weeks away. ;-)

“Imagine Greater” is just horrible grammar for a demographic that more than knows how to read.

14. fwise3 - March 16, 2009


15. RC - March 16, 2009

It’s the “New’ Coke.

16. 790 - March 16, 2009

Wow. That’s gonna really bring in the viewers that were not really into the Sci but into the Sy.

Uber lame!!!

17. krikzil - March 16, 2009

That’s just silly. And just when sci-fi was making inroads at mainstream acceptance too.

18. TrekTwenty - March 16, 2009

I suppose it makes sense, with much of my generation entrenched in 1337 speak and text message abbreviations.

I don’t like it.

19. Sloan47 - March 16, 2009

I somehow doubt they market tested this name… it’s just strange. How is this going to broaden the appeal? Phonetically it’s exactly the same… They should have just changed the name of the network altogether.

20. Eli1477 - March 16, 2009

The joke about there being 500 channels of obscure topics and interests to choose from is hopelessly outdated. Now there are really only 3 types of channels, sports, news, and reality. Think about it, what difference is there anymore between A&E, MTV, History Channel, Discovery, VH1, SPIKE, or TLC? They are all going for the lowest common denominator, you even now see it with news channels like headline news, I mean they call it HLN and run showbiz news for 15 hours a day! All the channels on cable all are looking quite the same. This will get far worse in the future, all “seeking to broaden their reach.”

21. sean - March 16, 2009

Sounds good to me. The term “science fiction” is generally unappealing to most people, and for good reason. Un-nerdify the network, please.

22. Daoud - March 16, 2009

Sigh? Fye!

There’s some justification from the “branding” issues related to protecting copyrights on “Sci Fi”. I think they’re limited on products and such, compared to a channel like “Spike”, “TNT”, or “ESPN”, none of which can be used in other contexts the way ‘sci fi’ is.

If they’d just been honest and said “Using SyFy will allow us to protect our branding and use the name more widely on products and other projects, without causing confusion with the whole field of science fiction, commonly called sci-fi in the vernacular,” they’d have made a heck of a lot more sense. (and cents ;) )

23. screaming satellite - March 16, 2009


24. Bradley1701 - March 16, 2009

Cool! Geek is becoming chic!

25. Daoud - March 16, 2009

Sigh? Fie! of course is what I meant. Grrrr. Had the dead video/music store chain on the brain.

“Sigh?Fie!” [tm]

26. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 16, 2009

Holy cow, that is supremely dumb. And someone just made a bundle off it.

27. Sloan47 - March 16, 2009

And here’s a fun game. Go to Wikipedia and combine from the list of Acronyms SY & FY and come up with who the network is trying to appeal to! My favorite is: Sybase Fiscal Year… A network about the financial workings of a database developer company. Absolutely riveting.

Try it yousrelf:

28. That One Guy - March 16, 2009

I don’t think changing the name will help in the slightest.

But it is true that nerds rule the mainstream now. If you look at the last decade, all these reboot and comic book movies are primarily based on things that were once considered the epitome of nerdism.

Transformers, Watchmen, Spider Man, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, X-Men, Superman, Iron Man, Batman, and the dozen or so other film series that have come out, have all been pretty successful. Even Watchmen, which isn’t doing too great right now, relatively speaking,, has still made over $100 million.

I think that is the reason that this new movie will rock the house, simply because geek is cool. My generation grew up with crap like Bill Nye and The Magic School Bus. Science is actually mainstream, which is strange. A decade ago, almost no one had laptops or used computers to the extent that they are now. But now, I look onto campus and see that virtually everyone has a computer.

Technology and geekism is actually mainstream.

“One day the nerds shall rule the Earth.” Anyone remember that t-shirt? Well… it happened.

29. starquack - March 16, 2009


30. ashrond - March 16, 2009

I see this panning out about as well as when TechTv did the same thing and became G4, or as I prefer to think of it “the lowest common denominator channel” I cant stand to watch anything on that channel now; its pretty mindless.
RIP Sci-Fi, it was great while it lasted…

31. starquack - March 16, 2009

Sorry. Thought I was clever and didn’t read all the posts before me ;)

32. Check the Circuit - March 16, 2009

My wife just knocked me over as she ran for the remote so she could turn on the hot new chick network…SyFy. Or course ,she pronounces it “Siffy.”

33. Ashley - March 16, 2009

feh …way lame… :/

34. JohnSmallberries - March 16, 2009

In a related note, General Electric, the parent company of SyFy and NBC, changed its name to GeeEee.

35. John from Cincinnati - March 16, 2009

Let’s all mix and mash everybody into one glob.

Science Fiction was a genre, now it’s a marketing ploy.

People are different, they want different things. I want science fiction. The last thing I want is an OC/Star Trek hybrid. Oops. Uh, the last thing I want is a Melrose Place/Star Wars hybrid.

36. Lady Larisa - March 16, 2009

this….is…pathetic…. SY-FY?!?!

37. Myke in Iowa - March 16, 2009

Thys ys all a subversyve plot to elymynate the letter “eye” from the alphabet.

Actually, I work in marketing and branding and can’t quite figure this one out. Then again, I couldn’t figure out the connection of professional wrestling to SciFi Channel, either. I mean, if they set up the ring and the matches more like “Gamesters of Triskelion” … now, then we’d have something worth watching!

38. Snake56 - March 16, 2009

So that’s why “Syfy Portal” changed recently to “Airlock Alpha” ?

39. Illogical - March 16, 2009

Coming from the network that is supposed to be Sci-Fi and offers such programming as Wrestling, Mansquito, Mantasures Rex – and the like….this comes as no surprise. I’m a Sci-Fi fanatic and around here the Sci-Fi channel is the least watched.

40. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - March 16, 2009

Do the Morons at Scifi get it. There losing Viewership because there canceling great shows. They Canceled Sg1 and Atlantis and Bsg and now they are changing there name to be Broader. Except for the New Stargate show coming up and Maybe Caprica I do not even watch there new Stuff. I sometimes Watch reruns and thats it. Ok I do watch Ecw but come on. Get with it Scifi or should I now say Sci What.

41. OrlandoMoviueGuy - March 16, 2009

I haven’t watched the network since Bonnie Hammer started screwing things up. I am certainly not one of those people that was impressed with the so called reimagining of Battlestar Galactica let alone any of her other decisions that I think made the channel a joke.

42. Dennis Bailey - March 16, 2009

A lot easier to trademark SyFy than SciFi, especially if the channel is planning to move into areas of entertainment outside TV where they haven’t already established “SciFi” as their brand.

43. Daoud - March 16, 2009

I can’t wait to see the Russian version, СЬІФЬІ

Of course, they could have dageshed it or leeted it to Š¥F¥ or §¥ƒŸ…

#36 SUPERB! Now, *that* would be “imagine greater”.

Perhaps the new tagline coda for us will be to their “imagine greater: get lesser”

44. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - March 16, 2009

Ok While we are at name changes lets Call Star Trek Trek Star. Star Wars Wars Star. or Bsg as gsB or babylon 5 as 5 Babylon or Blde Runner as Runner Blade. or Transformers as Former Trans. Or Trek Movie as Movie Trek

45. Babel Girl - March 16, 2009


What’s next? G4 – JeeFor

46. Steve J. - March 16, 2009

What a load of horsesh*t! Let them keep showing their wrestling shows and the rest of their crap. Remember when they ran episodes of “Law and Order” a few years back? Now, that’s some hard sci-fi for you there.

47. Mike in Iowa - March 16, 2009

While “SciFi” may be nearly impossible to trademark as a brand name, “SciFi Entertainment” or “SciFi Network” may not have been as difficult. Add to that a distinctive mark and there’s very little reason I can see for changing the name of the network.

48. thorsten - March 16, 2009

I mailed crackers to Bonnie Hammer after she cancelled Farscape.

49. bmar - March 16, 2009

Used to work there. We originally called ourselves “The Sci Fi Channel”… as in “You’re watching The Sci Fi Channel”…then it was decided that we would drop the “The” and the “Channel” and just be “Sci Fi” as in “You’re watching Sci-Fi.”

Not sure I get the logic behind this one. Sounds like they called in some external brand experts who get paid by the recommendations they make – and felt that they had to change SOMETHING.

(apologies to my buddies who still work there…you know who you are!)

50. THX-1138-Star Trek: Timmy! - March 16, 2009


51. Brad - March 16, 2009

Let’s get some Star Trek news!!! PLEASE!!!

52. Babel Girl - March 16, 2009

i think we r losing r english language 2 strange wording that kids make up for cell phones

53. Josh - March 16, 2009

Maybe Paramount should switch and use GuardYan of Forever so they don’t have to pay any money to Harlan Ellison

54. LCDR Arch - March 16, 2009

Stupid executives trying to make up a job and cover up his/her lack of knowledge and usefulness to the company. Probably the best case of “group think” I have ever heard of.
Everyone must be afraid to tell the emperor that he has no clothes……dumb….dumb….dumb. Oh well, time to hand out bonuses to those that do the “hard” work of coming up with dumb ideas.

55. Father Robert Lyons - March 16, 2009

I wish they would have just re-named themselves Skiffy and got it all over with.

SyFy… sounds… positively… blech!


56. fred - March 16, 2009

It’s ONLY a different way of spelling it. Same name, unique branding.

57. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 16, 2009

I wonder if the outpouring of derision we’re seeing here (and all over the web) is what they meant by “broadening appeal?”


58. Chingatchkook - March 16, 2009

Well, they could have named it something really cool…like ‘Space’. Maybe put a stylized galaxy for a logo, maybe a maple leaf….

Uh, never mind ;-)

59. Mike in Iowa - March 16, 2009

@53 – No, then they’d have to pay Harlan Ellyson, instead.

60. 1701 over Gotham City - March 16, 2009

lame lame lame.
But then, aside from a very few gems, the network has been lame for a while now.

Rock Monster… hee hee hee!

61. Lancelot Narayan - March 16, 2009

We have an expression in the UK. This is an example of how you use it:

“Marketing people are wankers.”

62. Brett Campbell - March 16, 2009

Reminds me of when Esso changed its name to Exxon in the early ’70s.

Nixon was president, and on the back cover of a Mad magazine issue there was a phony ad:

Nixxon: It’s still the same old gas.

63. Chad N. - March 16, 2009

How about they take the enormous amount of money they spent on this “rebranding”, and use it to make their lame creature-of-the-week movies watchable. Or how about spending the cash to create better programming along the lines of Farscape, BSG, and the upcoming Caprica.

64. Unbel1ever - March 16, 2009

When I saw the Logo before reading the headline, I thought: Why does promote women’s products ? SyFy ? Really ? SciFi was so much cooler.

65. THX-1138-Star Trek: Timmy! - March 16, 2009


“It’s ONLY a different (and completely unnecessary) way of spelling it.”

There. I fixed that for you.

66. Dennis Bailey - March 16, 2009

#47:”While “SciFi” may be nearly impossible to trademark as a brand name, “SciFi Entertainment” or “SciFi Network” may not have been as difficult.”

Too long to be useful. Someone could easily crowd you – if they cared – by coopting the “SciFi” and adding another word to it.

67. Christine - March 16, 2009

Omigawd. That is so LAME. “SyFy”?! No. No. It’s “SCI-FI CHANNEL”. What? Are they gonna change the website, too? Are they gonna take off Star Trek, Stargate, BSG, all them others? Pfffffft. I sure hope not.

68. Roger - March 16, 2009

“It will broaden appeal.”

No. No, it most definitely will not.

69. Guinan - March 16, 2009

Have you seen any of their orginal programs/movies of late? This channel which started out with such stellar shows like Farscape and Invisible man has been steadly going downhill. A few standouts have managed to hold their own regardless, BSG and Stargate for example, but those fans expect good writing, storylines and good CGI, and are not tuning into what passes for Sci-Fi’s idea of orginal programing.

Rather than spend money on quailty writing and yes special effects which are pre-requisite for Science Fiction in most cases, they would rather spend it on stand alone movies which frankly give the phrase “B” movie a bad name.

If people aren’t watching the “Sci-Fi” channel it has nothing to do with it’s name, and more to do with the fact that there is nothing good to watch. Changing the name, isn’t

70. Chris - March 16, 2009

Dumb of course this is the network that somehow thinks wrestling fits in with their programming. I’ve never figured that one out.

Sci Fi is screwing up like Gatoraid has. You don’t mess with your identity if it’s working.

71. Jamie - March 16, 2009


72. Ian - March 16, 2009

Just. Plain. Stupid.

73. I am Kurok! - March 16, 2009

This is a joke, right?

If not, I guess I’ll tune in to SyFy to watch Stahr Trehk.

Seriously, the programming has become kind of lame, I remember the good old days when they had TNG, SeaQuest, Space: Above and beyond, Time Traxx, Highlander, etc. etc. I think they even had ‘The Starlost ‘ (Amish in Space-priceless!!) with Kier Dullea (did I spell that right) and Walter Koenig as the bad-guy.

Now it’s made-for-TV ‘B’ movies and 3 hours of Ghost Hunter. . . .

74. Rick Sternbach - March 16, 2009

They should rename it “Skiffy: Think Like Apple.”

75. McCoy - March 16, 2009

Uh, well, gee, there’s less history behind the SciFi channel name than TOS designs—so I hope anyone that thinks this change is lame, also now understands why many of the changes in the film are lame.

76. Hat Rick - March 16, 2009

“Imagine Greater”?

How about we start by imagining a better tagline?

But maybe they’ve got the right idea. If SyFy doesn’t work, then there are always other permutations: SyFi, SiFy, SiFi, ScyFy, SciFy, SieFie, FySy, FieSy…. Oooh, the mind boggles!

: rolleyes :

77. SpockOut - March 16, 2009

This seems to me like they want to become UPN. Embrace your core audience and people will tune in, bring in other stuff and you risk driving people away. UPN didn’t last and SyFy won’t either.

78. Chris M - March 16, 2009

Is this an early April fools joke? What a stupid idea!!

btw am I the only one who thinks it’s ironic that back in 2001 they took the name Star Trek out of the title for Enterprise in order to appeal to a wider audience and yet here we are in 2009 and in order to appeal to a wide audience they’re simply calling the new movie Star Trek!

79. Christine - March 16, 2009

#69; Guinan :: “…Rather than spend money on quailty writing and yes special effects which are pre-requisite for Science Fiction in most cases, they would rather spend it on stand alone movies which frankly give the phrase “B” movie a bad name….”

I know; seriously. They make a new movie every. Single. Week. (Or so it seems.) I actually kind of liked “Eureka” and occasionally one of the “Stargate”s, but why not put more into their GOOD shows and not so many bad movies? They’re just… really… corny. And dumb. My opinion, but let’s face it… “Wyvern”? Sheriff guy with a Texan accent in Alaska? Uh, no.

80. Lendorien - March 16, 2009

This is so silly. Look at all the sci fi shows on TV that are insanely popular. Heroes? Lost? Dollhouse? Fringe? Terminator? etc. All qualify as scifi. All have significant audiences. Sci-fi doesn’t necessarily have a negative connotation. Sci-fi is mainstream.

Sci-fi’s problem is that they’ve embraced crappy programming. Shows like Ghost Hunters? What?! Where is the original programming that makes a network stand out. Sci-fi channel lacks any sort of invention. They’ve been relying on Stargate (13 or more years now) and the surprise hit BSG which is ending in a week or two. What else do they have? Nothing.

I stopped watching Sci-fi some time ago. They have nothing but reruns and reality shows.

The rebranding will be the end of the network as a sci fi network. They’ll start pulling in generic crap instead of redoubling their efforts to find solid scifi programming. It’s a real shame.

81. McCoy - March 16, 2009

2009 is going down as the year marketers took over Trek and the sci-fi channel to make goofy changes in an attempt to “broden appeal” and bring in new people with gaudy taste.

Everything is becoming very, uh, ugly feminine curvy with strange lines. Going through this with BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen designs right now too. UGHHHHHhh! Seriously, we need to see if there’s some sort of connection between Chris Bangle, Scott Chamblis, the SyFy channel and Symbol M2000 Bar Code Scanners. Some sort of conspiracy.

This must be what my parents went through. I am becoming an old man. Tonight I shall get out my B-9 robot toy and my Electronic TOS Enterprise and sit on the couch with a pillow and a blanket watching the original “Star Wars” (with no bloody ‘New Hope’ titles or Jabba the Hut).

82. The Governator - March 16, 2009

um… what?

83. jim - March 16, 2009


84. TrekMadeMeWonder - March 16, 2009

“While continuing to embrace our legacy and our core audience, we needed to cultivate a distinct point of view with a name that we could own…”

SY-FY, really?

Sooo thin.

Well, I am so glad you still can’t copyright most of anything on the internet.
As if it matters.

85. Andy Patterson - March 16, 2009

I don’t understand it, even after reading the entire thing.

I don’t want to see Mark Hamill, Erin Gray, Gil Gerard, Walter Keonig, Lee Majors and Lynda Carter doing an Apprentice like show but with ex scifi stars taking up some ridiculous tasks every week.

86. brady - March 16, 2009

Slow News Day

87. The Governator - March 16, 2009

81. McCoy

I agree with you, except for the part about Star Trek. So far the marketing for the movie has been outstanding. As for this “SyFy” thing, yeah, its stupid and “goofy”.

88. Lendorien - March 16, 2009

What is the expression?

Circular logic:

“We’ve abandoned out core programming and people stopped watching us. If we change our name and abandon our core programming even further, people will come back…

no wait… uhhhhh…”

89. TrekMadeMeWonder - March 16, 2009

How about the Science Fiction Channel.

The science ficton audience are the ones that have supported you.

90. toddk - March 16, 2009

remember when mtv and vh1 were all about music videos? now its all crappy reality shows. I remember when the sci-fi channel first launched. I couldnt understand why they were showing episodes of dark shadows.

They did have good classic stuff like voyage to the bottom of the sea, the time tunnel, space 1999, buck rogers and battlestar galactica (original), to name a few..remember tvland when it was about classic old shows? well not so much anymore…groan…and dont get me started with american movie classics, once dedicated to movies that reached only into the mid70’s..and speak of the devil. AMC recently showed star trek nemesis. my hypothosis regarding the sci-fi channel is that perhaps SYFY is alot easier to trademark.

91. Ian Watson - March 16, 2009

#58: Came here to say that. (:

We up here in Soviet Canuckistan have had “Space: The Imagination Station” for a *long* time. From the beginning, it branded itself at not just science fiction fans, but fans of fantasy, paranormal, speculative fiction, and so on.

In recent years I’ve heard complaints that SciFi has been turning away from its demographic by not showing as much sci-fi and instead showing fantasy or other works. Perhaps the name change to Syfy will ameliorate that.

92. Toothless Grishnar Cat - March 16, 2009

Well, the channel already lost a great deal of my respect when they pulled MST3K (one of my all-time favorite shows), so I’m not particularly offended by anything they’re up to right now.

93. Mr Spack - March 16, 2009

Considering 90 percent of what they broadcast is crap I see no problem with them changing the name from Sci Fi. It’s honesty in advertising.

94. Chris Basken - March 16, 2009

April Fool’s!

95. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - March 16, 2009

The Scifi channel has had some realy bad programming as of late. the worst show that they did was Flas Gorden. What a joke of a show. whats up with all these snake Movies and Croc Movies. oh and do not forget the dinosour Movies. I mean come on. Yes they had a couple of good ones. Farscape was good and Star Gate Atlantis was good and Bsg. But they try and claim Star Gate Sg1 as an oribnal and it’s not. Showtime network had Sg1 doe 3 or 4 seasons before Scifi took over. This used to be a good network with great Scifi programming. But now it is a shell of it’s former self.

96. Jamesintucson - March 16, 2009

this is another one of those stupid paramount ideas that I wish could be unsaid. Seriously? the channel isn’t crappy because it’s called sci-fi. It’s crappy because of weird stupid programming. Yet all us geeks keep coming because its the only place that comes anywhere close to fulfilling our needs. This is like renaming NBC or ABC or CBS, their names are symbols that come with years of tradition.

97. Weerd1 - March 16, 2009

With the exception of a few standouts like BSG, Lexx, or Farscape, Sci Fi has barely been sci fi for years. Why do I keep flipping past poorly produced horror movies every Saturday and Sunday when they could be re-running a host of old SF TV shows, or movies from the 50s and 60s? Instead of “Ice Spiders” how about “This Island Earth,” or “Forbidden Planet?” This name change just reflects a steady drift away from core SF programming in the first place- c’mon, I flip on Sci Fi and there’s wrestling?

Let them change their name, and maybe some entrepreneur can give us a channel with actual 24 hour (heck I’d take 18 hour) a day SF programming!

98. buddykarl - March 16, 2009

Oh they felt this would be a way to be able to actually own the name of their network as opposed to a term that appears all over cultural domains. Very soon, they will change the major network name to EmBeSee…just so they can own the letters N, B & C…although Syfy looks more like it would be pronounced “siffy” at first glance.

99. TrekMadeMeWonder - March 16, 2009

LOL! ; )

100. Spock with a Crowbar - March 16, 2009

I really hope someone is fired over this. More to come:

Comedy Central will now be ‘CalmScent’

Food Network will now be ‘Grubcast”

USA will be “YOU, Esse”

Cartoon Network will remain Cartoon Network (however ‘cartoon’ will be spelled with a backwards “k”)

AMC will be named for whichever film they are showing 24/7 that week. Last week it was called ‘The Roadhouse Channel’ will now be ‘’

History Channel will be… do I even have to say it? ‘The Hitler Channel’

101. Jon S. - March 16, 2009

Let’s see… during the weekends, SyFy runs mind-numbingly horrible SyFy Original Motion Pictures such as Sea Beast, I am Omega and Raptor Island. During the week, we get all-day marathons of failed syfy series like Jeremiah, Dark Angel and Eureka, or movie marathons featuring such gems as the Leprechaun series. Sure, they play TNG, ENT, BSG and Lost, but the rest of their programming is utter garbage.

BSG proved that SyFy can fund a successful series. Why, then, did they cancel Farscape? Why didn’t they pick up Firefly? Instead we wind up with Eureka, ECW and WCG Ultimate Gamer? SyFy’s woes are not due to a branding or identity problem, they’re due to the network being run by TOTAL MORONS. Can we have the Space Channel in the US now, please?

102. Christine - March 16, 2009

#100 :: “…USA will be “YOU, Esse” …”

That made me laugh.

But “YOU, Mikey” would be better. -SCRAMS- Mikeeyyy! ♥ (Gosh, I love Burn Notice.)

103. Magic_Al - March 16, 2009

Sounds like management figured out a CYA for when their ratings and ad revenue tank after BSG is gone. “People are getting used to the identity! Can we put on more wrestling and reality shows?”

104. Jefferies Tuber - March 16, 2009

I hate this. Stupid and condescending. The only question is, who should be more insulted–the male geeks who made SciFi the most profitable genre in the business or the women who apparently are supposed to prefer cute misspellings?

105. loengard - March 16, 2009

This has got to be the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen. That takes some talent with all the crap going on in the world of late.

SyFy?? Please. To quote Vice President Biden: “Gimme a f*@#ing break!”

106. GilmourD - March 16, 2009

It’s NBC… What? Do you expect them to be smart? I mean… They canceled TOS back in ’69… That was the first dumb move.

107. Derf - March 16, 2009

I’m sure they got a new Chip McGenius in there and he’s hoping to make a name for himself and squeeze a bonus out of it to put gas in his Hummer (the truck, not the other).

108. Jeffrey S. Nelson - March 16, 2009

Frakkin’ stupid!

109. Radioactive Spock - March 16, 2009

so irritating, especially since i already have come to dislike the channel for it’s deviation from true sci-fi in many cases. there needs to be a new station that gets back to good sci-fi. star trek and bsg being obvious exceptions to the rule.

110. VERG - March 16, 2009

SYFY will make me go BYBY. Hate it.

111. TonyD - March 16, 2009

Much like G4 did a couple of years ago, this is clearly a first step in the SciFi Channel adopting a more “mainstream” programming grid in the hopes of attracting a wider audience. They’ve already shown pro wrestling on the network and I’m sure it will only be a matter of time before the programming schedule consists entirely of sitcom reruns, reality shows and hand-me-downs from USA Network.

I haven’t watched the SciFi Channel with any regularity in years. It was a pretty fun network when it first premiered; anybody else remember SciFi Buzz? That was a really fun and informative show. But these days, other than the occasional worthwhile program, it has degenerated into the home of uninspired low budget made for cable movies and brain cell killing el-cheapo productions like Ghost Hunters.

Maybe somebody else will come up with the brilliant idea of launching a science fiction network that actually broadcasts classic sci-fi shows and tries adapting classic sci-fi literature into movies instead of the current fad or another genetically engineered monster run amok.

SciFi or SyFy or whatever its called could cease broadcasting next week and I doubt most people would even notice.

112. Daoud - March 16, 2009

Coming soon from NBC/Universal: (Or Enbeesee Yooneevyrsol, effective 1/20/2013)

SlyFy: All STALLONE movies ALL the time! And Jeopardy!
SpyFy: All BOND movies ALL the time, along with old episodes of The Price Is Right
StyFy: Led by a new show, Dr. 9020/20, a daily look at the worlds of optometry and ophthalmology (or ofthemology effective 1/20/2013).
SkyFy: Pictures from the forward cameras of aircraft 24/7! Nothin’ but Blue Skies (and the lyric stylings of Brent Spiner!)
PygsFly: The network that shows you brief glimpses of MTV (now Empty-V) playing videos, CNBC (the Constitutional nitpickers business channel) without Kramer, courtTV showing a trial, CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite, and the Apollo landings, PBS showing useful programming, the History channel airing -yes actual history, wrestling on TBS where it belonged, crappy sitcoms on ABC where they belong, etc.

Are we sure this announcement on SyFy wasn’t supposed to be held until 4/1/2009??

113. Matt Wright - March 16, 2009

Retarted… of course Sci-Fi barely shows real sci-fi these days, they’re far more known for their crappy monster movie of the week that show ad nausum on the weekends, etc.

114. TomBot3000 - March 16, 2009

As always, its focus groups, consultants, and bs beans counters, to “punch it up”, brand it, and re-package… because we can’t just improve content, etc. ;-D

115. Oxmyx - March 16, 2009


Syphilitic Fyborg

SyFy channel for new young Nietzsche, Baudelaire , Keats, Manet, Oscar Wilde, Franz Schubert, Heinrich Heine ……….

SyFy Is the Grandgore!!!

S..k You F..k You

SyFy for You

116. MC1 Doug (formerly Doug from Afghanistan) - March 16, 2009

Dumb dumb dumb…

80% of the network’s original programming is pure crap… then throw in stuff like wrestling and ghost hunters and one has to wonder what the execs are thinking.

guess no one should be surprised by any this…

I have to ask with all the great science fiction in print why the network cannot finance programming based on the works of good science fiction instead of the derivative schlock that is being passed off as good science fiction?

117. Beck - March 16, 2009

At first I thought this was a joke. Then I read the rest of the article. I just can’t understand what goes on inside the heads of TV and movie executives. And I can’t imagine a bunch of people getting together and actually saying, “Yeah, this is a great idea! We should totally do this!”

To be honest though, I hardly ever watch SciFi anymore. Their TV movies are just crappy and most of the weekday marathons are sub-par series that I don’t care to see. So this change affects me very little.

118. NoRez - March 16, 2009

Evil Mutant Carnivorous Animal Planet.

119. Trekwebmaster - March 16, 2009

I agree… SyFy? C’mon, having to change names to “imagine greater” sounds like writing an essay paper in “text-speak.”

Well, there goes millions of dollars worth of “branding” out the window. Paramount / CBS, please don’t change Star Trek’s name to St*r Tr3k!

I don’t get it. Mass Communications and New Media should refer back to AP Style unless quoting a source directly, verbatim.



120. Driver - March 16, 2009

To the Suits-Just dump the whole thing already. This is what the name change is leading up to anyway. Sy Fy sounds Jewish. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, mind you.

121. Ryan - March 16, 2009

You left out this little gem of a quote from one of the channel’s founders regarding the name: “The name Sci Fi has been associated with geeks and dysfunctional, antisocial boys in their basements with video games and stuff like that, as opposed to the general public and the female audience in particular.”

Nice to know they know how to piss off their audience, eh?

122. DmsDyMach - March 16, 2009

Did someone say Hi-Fi? Oops. And another channel bites the dust.

123. krikzil (aka Lixy) - March 16, 2009

This is worse than TRU and Spike for insane rebranding….

124. Jamie - March 16, 2009

Some suggestions…








s-High Five!



The Science Fiction Channel


Sigh… fine.

Personally, if it was me, and I wanted to make the channel more interesting to the mainstream, I’d call it something like “K-BOOM!” or “LASERBLAST!” or “SEX IN SPACE!”, or whatever.

125. oztrek - March 16, 2009

Only in America

126. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - March 16, 2009

Ok. NBC. Oh im sorry. nbc you in the ratings. Oh yeah. nbc does not even have 1 show in the top 20 in the neilson ratings. Oh yeah. nbc owns the scifi. ooops i mean syfy channel. or as i call it the b no c channel bad movies. Sure they have a few shows to keep us tuned in and then they blast us with bad promos for bad shows. Remember the Flashgorden series. No. I waisted a whole hour on the pilot. Bad Idea. The exectitives at the Scifi chgannell are like the ones at the AIG Insurence Corp. Greedy and stupid.

127. Trek Fan - March 16, 2009

Just plain stupid. Perhaps some better programming might help. I find it very annoying to watch Enterprise in 4×3 letterbox when the commercials that are broadcast during the breaks are 16×9 with 5.1 audio. Seriously.

128. Capt. Jax - March 16, 2009

I think David Howe needs to be fired. I’m tired of all these balless, spineless people who want to APPEAL to a broader audiance to extend their greed. When are they going to learn that they can’t change labels just to suit their greedy desires.
I’ve watched Sci-Fi for 15 years and can say unequivocally, except for it’s core programs (BSG, SG1, SGA, etc), the quality of the shows have been going down hill for the last 4 years.
Amanda Tapping’s show “Sanctuary” is the only good show that has been added, and they didn’t come up with it. They just backed it after it gathered a major following online.
If Mr. Howe can’t come up with anything better with all of the writers Sci-Fi has in it’s employee than those lousy-assed “B” grade movies it put out on Saturdays then he definately needs to be replaced.

129. WastedBeerz - March 16, 2009

OMG just had a thought… why not just go the opposite direction… something so insane, so dorky, something that will be a real head turner… instead of un-dorkifying scifi, take it even further… and increase interest in the process… ladies and gentlemen, I give you…




or simply…

The Nerd Channel

Or, going along with their phonetic respellings…

NURD… nah, too close to turd.

Seriously though, it could work!!!

130. McCoy - March 16, 2009


Uh, sounds like Abrams and co. to me.

131. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - March 16, 2009

Well. They could change it to this name. The D show channel. Because all of there shows are simply DUMB!!!!!!!

132. T Drake - March 16, 2009

Just like the nashville network,,TNN..then died

133. Carlg - March 16, 2009

Bleh. Makes me glad we have the “Space” channel in Canada. Still showing copious amounts of Trek, thank you very much. :)

134. Francine Crockett - March 16, 2009

Get off my lawn.

135. SerenityActual - March 16, 2009

When SciFi was good, it was really good: Farscape, Invisible Man, Lexx, SG-1, Atlantis, BSG, etc. But their crappy movies of the week and wrestling drove me away.

I loved them in the beginning with the Gerry Anderson and Glen Larson shows, but now I just buy the box sets I want, and save the monthly fees that they might get.

136. richpit - March 16, 2009

112 –

“SlyFy” sounds like my kind of channel!

137. Isaac - March 16, 2009

I registered SyFyL.US based on the obvious pun… and put a forum there to discuss it, too. (no ads – I’ll make no money on it – just thought it would be nice to have a place to talk about it…)

138. byodredd - March 16, 2009

Y don’t lyke the brandyng change they are proposyng eyther. Yt stynks.

But as a poynt of reference to all those horryble Sci-Fi Channel Premyere movyes…. the large majoryty of them are not produced by the Scy-Fy Channel. They are dyrect to DVD fylms made by the studyos. Lyterally hundreds of those movies could be found on the shelves of vydeo stores over the last ten years.

Scy-Fy creates very few of those fylms. Yts not a defense of theyr tactycs, yts just a poynt of ynformation.

Most of the the fylms broadcast are so bad they are laughable.

139. Spockanella - March 16, 2009

I’m trying hard not to mock the “SyFy” people but…but…oh, who am I kidding? This is just silly!

This might be one of the minor signs of the apocalypse.

140. LionessQBe - March 16, 2009

They won’t even accept Email from consumers.

141. Christine - March 16, 2009

#121 :: “…“The name Sci Fi has been associated with geeks and dysfunctional, antisocial boys in their basements with video games and stuff like that, as opposed to the general public and the female audience in particular.”….”

Now that’s just insulting. Last I checked, my mom, my friend Kyrie, and I are not boys, much less dysfunctional, antisocial ones, and while my dad, brother, and several of my guy friends are male, they don’t fit with that description. Maybe whoever said that should get their nose out of the computer and start getting out a little more.

As for geeks? I’m a geek. A mega-geek. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Geeks are the ones who get the big paychecks and change history.

142. Keep the Faith - March 16, 2009

Great idea !!!

… Right up there with “new coke.”

143. Decker Unit - March 16, 2009

All this shows is, they can’t spell.

It doesn’t surprise me at all. They will spend money on drivel like Mansquito and endless Tremors sequels, yet when quality shows like Firefly (with a built in fanbase) need a home, they look the other way .

144. Dan P. - March 16, 2009

Just call em Syphy…. every chance you get, in every forum.

Also, it appears they have not registered this trademark, yet. Somebody go get it first, keep it away from them!

And, after a year in-the-works, is that the best photo of the logo they could produce–guy with a disposable camera went down and shot over the receptionist’s desk? Clearly, they really put a lot of thought and effort into this thing!

145. Izbot - March 16, 2009

I knew it. In fact, I’ve been saying this for a loooooong time here: this channel will rebrand itself and distance itself from science fiction. Just like The Nashville Network (TNN) going from country music videos to being called Spike, a channel for what? stupid bachelors? to being called G4, a cchannel (I guess?) for people who like video games and police dashcam videos. Or CourtTV becoming a channel for stupid people who like …more police dashcam videos and car crashes. Soon all cable channels will center around wrestling, ghost hunters and police dashcam videos.

It’s despicable. Science fiction, by definition, has traditionally been for the thinking viewer. The “SyFy” Channel has now gone to the opposite end — the lowest common denominator — and is turning into the same sort of Fox-esque “reality” TV-based BS that’s on 90% of the 600+ channels on my ridiculously-priced digital cable package.

Hey “SyFy”: %^#@&* YOU! Your increasingly vapid schedule has pushed me out of your demographic long ago! I resent that I even know a word like “demographic”! I *hate* wrestling! INor am I some superstitious yokel who believes in ghosts! Reality TV?! I like science fiction because, usually, *reality sucks*! ….police dashcam videos??! $#%%&& YOU!!!

146. Haynes1701 - March 16, 2009


I agree totally. When I finally got into the 21st century and got DirecTV one of the things I was looking forward to was finally getting to watch the Sci-Fi Channel. And then, much to my dismay, found it to be utter garbage. I expected to see not only Star Trek, et al, but The Time Tunnel, Land of the Giants, Lost in Space, Dr. Who, Battlestar Galactica (classic series) and Space:1999. The only time Sci-Fi ever has anything decent it is in an all-day marathon. Same is true of TV Land, but that’s another rant.

Branding is definitely NOT the problem. Programming is.

147. Izbot - March 16, 2009

20. Eli1477 –
“The joke about there being 500 channels of obscure topics and interests to choose from is hopelessly outdated. Now there are really only 3 types of channels, sports, news, and reality. Think about it, what difference is there anymore between A&E, MTV, History Channel, Discovery, VH1, SPIKE, or TLC? They are all going for the lowest common denominator, you even now see it with news channels like headline news, I mean they call it HLN and run showbiz news for 15 hours a day! All the channels on cable all are looking quite the same. This will get far worse in the future, all “seeking to broaden their reach.””

It’s what the fat blobs in “Wall-E” are watching on their screens every waking hour. Said it before, repeat it again: I HATE HOLLYWOOD.

148. Scott Gammans - March 16, 2009

Who cares? After Friday they won’t have anything worth watching anyway. As one wag on Gawker noted today, they might as well call themselves “The Crappy Channel That Used to Have Battlestar Galactica”.

149. Christine - March 16, 2009

#146 :: “…Branding is definitely NOT the problem. Programming is.”

However… You gotta admit. The name “SyFy” doesn’t help the programming.

150. Christine - March 16, 2009

#148 :: “…After Friday they won’t have anything worth watching anyway. …”

I have to disagree. They show ENT and TNG repeats all the time. And Dr. Who repeats. And occasionally, OCCASIONALLY, a good movie like “Serenity”, or one time, “Star Trek: First Contact”. So…. Yeah. But all the stuff they make? Not that good at all.

151. Matt Wright - March 16, 2009

133 — Quite envious… I wonder how we can get some of that “Space Channel” love down in the US.

145 — Best summary of how those networks have “re-invented” themselves into lowest common denominator junk, ever!

146 — Ohhh TVLand, that’s a bitter rant from me as well. 10 years ago when it was a premium digital cable/satellite channel, rather then a basic cable one, it actually had things like Get Smart, Dragnet, etc.

152. Izbot - March 16, 2009

148. Scott Gammans –
“Who cares? After Friday they won’t have anything worth watching anyway. As one wag on Gawker noted today, they might as well call themselves “The Crappy Channel That Used to Have Battlestar Galactica”.”

Yeah, is it any coincidence this is happening the week before they lose their cornerstone show? Who’s planning on watching Caprica? It’s described as “Dallas” but on a planet suspiciously identical to our own — with even less sci-fi elements than BSG. Will I watch it now? Hell, no.

153. Scifiwryter - March 16, 2009

Guys, This a simple marketing issue.

I’m an aspiring comic book writer, and have done a fair bit of research into intellectual property law as it relates to logos.

In media, it’s all about establishing an identity that you can claim and protect. That is a trademark. The word means literally what it says — a mark of trade. Business use them as a visual shorthand with customers. If a trademark is effective, the public will begin to identify value with that it. Hopefully, at least in the eyes of the holder to the exclusion of others. Simply put, The more visually unique the branding on a product is, the more recognizable and associative it is to the potential consumer, and the more defensible it is in a legal dispute. It is a way for a business is graphically and simply state “This is ours, and the public knows it.”

It’s why Coke uses the font they do, and why they have the ribbon on the can.

It’s the Nike swoosh and the golden arches.

It’s why the marketing team on the new movie chose to go with a logo that is clearly descended from, and evocative of, the Original Series. Note also, that the delta shield is being prominently used as well

There have been plenty of cases where companies have lost the ability to legally defend their marks because they were too generic.

Finally, though, and this is most important here, you cannot copyright or trademark a concept or idea. You can only legally protect your expression of that idea or concept.

Looking at it from this perspective the channel’s current logo is pretty weak because:

1. It’s not visually distinctive. The only truly defensible aspect is the the planet symbol, and that is pretty weak.

2. It’s attempting to trademark an idea (We all know science fiction is a genre, and one that is becoming increasingly hard to categorize.) Abbreviating a word does not make it a strong mark. However, spelling it the way they have in the new logo gives it an individual spin, as well as a graphic quality. These are two important elements in a successful mark

3. In the ever expanding sea of content that is the internet and new media, you need the strongest most defensible marks you can get because infringement is running rampant and there is so much more choice for consumers

I’m sorry if I rambled on a bit. It’s just that I’ve seen a lot of overreaction here. It’s still the same channel — for better or worse. I do agree, by the way, that the programming has gotten a bit thin on the ground as far as old stuff. Personally, I think It’s all part of NBC’s initiative to move people toward hulu, and hence the net. That where enertainment is headed anyway. Don’t forget that they co-own it with fox. Most of the good stuff from Sci-fi of old is on there right now for free.

154. Izbot - March 16, 2009

150. Christine –
“#148 :: “…After Friday they won’t have anything worth watching anyway. …”
I have to disagree. They show ENT and TNG repeats all the time. And Dr. Who repeats. And occasionally, OCCASIONALLY, a good movie like “Serenity”, or one time, “Star Trek: First Contact”. So…. Yeah. But all the stuff they make? Not that good at all.”

And I must disagree with you: I own all those shows already on DVD! Any idiot with a computer and a DVD burner has all those shows already! SciFi (‘way back when it was still called that an hour ago) has been mostly producing the stupidest “science fiction”-oriented direct-to-cable movies for a long time now. “Classics” like “Mansquito”. That one, at least, was almost clever in it’s title. Mostly they feel roundtabled. Like a bunch of idiots in a room brain-storming “What’s a good idea for a movie? Something with a prehistoric fish-monster… I know! We’ll call it “Prehistoric Fish-Monster”!” or “How about a movie like “Aliens vs. Predator” but without the originality [*Irony alert: “Aliens vs. Predator” was never an original idea] and without the legal problems. Hm. Well, the word “alien” is still in public domain. How about ‘Aliens vs. Hunters’? Yeah! That’s a great idea!”

I won’t miss this channel once it’s deleted from my favorites list next week.

155. Christine - March 16, 2009

#154 :: “..And I must disagree with you: I own all those shows already on DVD! Any idiot with a computer and a DVD burner has all those shows already! …”

Unless, of course, that particular person (“idiot”) has parents who won’t allow them to do such things, and they happen to be a rather broke teenager who’s too young to get a job.
So, in fact, to people like them (me), Sci-Fi channel (er, SyFy) is good for something. I WOULD be sad to see it gone.

156. Will - March 16, 2009

Well, it fits. They think wrestling really belongs in their schedule? This is how they justify it?

Too bad, SciFi used to be a good channel. I guess this means First Wave is definitely never coming to a legally released DVD set?


157. Izbot - March 16, 2009

155. Christine –

My apologies, Christine. I am, admittedly, caught up in my outrage at this stupid channel. That was in bad form.

158. Izbot - March 16, 2009

157. Izbot – March 16, 2009
155. Christine –

PS, I *do* consider myself an idiot with a computer & DVD burner. ;)

159. sebimeyer - March 16, 2009

Killed Farscape.

160. Scott B. here. - March 16, 2009

If they want to broaden their appeal, how about producing some good programs and movies?

The only reason I watch SciFi is for “Eureka” and the occasional Twilight Zone marathon. I never got into the new Battlestar Galactica or Stargate. The rest of the time all they seem to have are lame monster movies. I do wish they’d invest in some classic science fiction novels and short stories and adapt them.

But I have less hope than ever of them increasing the overall quality of their programming with this new wrong-headed rebranding effort.

Scott B. out.

161. Bob - March 16, 2009

This has to be THE stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. What’s next… changing The Weather Channel to TwistR TV or The Home Shopping Network to “Ahch Ess Enn”. Gotta leave it to suits in America. Duh!!

162. focuspuller - March 16, 2009

My reation is this:


163. Miles R. Seppelt - March 16, 2009

SyFy?! Now that is a stupid idea…

164. Trekkie88 - March 16, 2009

NBC is just a stupid company & I don’t watch any of their channels but Sci-Fi. I think the reason why they are changing the name is because they are going to make it like USA.

I don’t know if you have noticed, but its like all the channels are like changing and becoming closer & closer to the same. Why?? Can not one channel be different anymore? Some channels split because they have 2 distinct kinds of programming, then they become the same again. Reality shows are everywhere & I can’t stand it!

There are so many changes coming. I just found out that Oprah has bought ‘Discovery Health’ & is going to call it ‘OWN’, ‘Oprah Winfrey Network’ (I’ll be deleting that from my channel guide!). ‘The N’ which was ‘Noggin’ at night is going to be called ‘Teen Nick’, & ‘Noggin’ is going to be called ‘Nick Jr’. I’m surprised they haven’t completely removed the word history from the name of what used to be called ‘The History Channel’, they call it just ‘History’ now, but it has nothing to do with history anymore, its just like ‘Discovery’ which is nothing like it was when it started, same with TLC, its all reality shows.

Everything is converging & becoming the same. As a result there is not much left to watch on TV anymore. Everything on ABC is a drama or reality show except for a couple of things (‘Scrubs’ & ‘Samantha Who’). We need sitcoms again! I miss TGIF. And the fact that ABC canceled ‘Boston Legal’ because most of the cast was over 50, & they want to appeal to 18-30 year-olds, even though most of that age group don’t watch TV. And the only thing worth watching on CBS is ‘The Big Bang Theory’, & ‘Fringe’ on FOX. I remember when almost everything on TV was worth watching.

They try to sex things up too much as well. The last month of ‘Grey’s Anatomy’ has had some of the best episodes of the series because they haven’t revolved around sex at all!! I just find myself mainly watching FOX News & Gospel Music Channel now. I’m sorry, I just had to vent because it makes me so angry!

And yes, I am weird! But aren’t we all!

165. tman - March 16, 2009

Is this to get women viewers in? That would be stupid, but understandably stupid. Otherwise, I’m perplexed.

166. tman - March 16, 2009

Is this to get women viewers in? That would be stupid, but understandably stupid. Otherwise, I’m perplexed.

167. Chad N. - March 16, 2009

I’m with Rick. They should call themselves “Skiffy”!

168. CMX54 - March 16, 2009

Gee, is the Sci-Fi Channel still on the air? Hadn’t noticed. :)

169. S. John Ross - March 16, 2009

Crappy channel gets new name. Channel still crappy. Name now more accurately reflects level of crap.

170. The Old Man - March 16, 2009

I got rid of cable TV years ago. I loved Farscape when it came out but they started changing the day and time and I had a terrible time finding it. Then the constant psychic hotline advertisements just about drove me out of my mind.

Nearly all television programming anymore is aimed at the lowest common denominator for the highest possible profits. Who cares about quality. Who cares about originality. Who cares about making something that makes this world just a little bit better.

It’s all about their profits. I’m sick to death of greed. What happened to the America I grew up in?

171. McCoy - March 16, 2009

I, ah, still don’t get why everyone here is so angry over this relatively minor detail (spelling) over a network that many are claiming doesn’t have good shows.

It seems to me that the Uglyprise, bar-code bridge and different looking Trek weapons are a much larger impact to science fiction fans than this could ever hope to be.

If you say it’s ok to make all the TOS design changes (sacrifice the holy grail of geekdom) in favor of “freshness” to draw a larger crowd, why can’t the sci-fi channel do it?

172. Mark Anton - March 16, 2009

This is a really dumb idea. Enough said!

173. Green-Blooded-Bastard - March 16, 2009

It looks like it should be pronounced see-fee

174. USS TRINOMA - NCC-0278 - March 16, 2009

This marketing decision reminds me when a long long time ago Coca-Cola wanted to introduce New Coke and removed the original Coke for a few weeks. That marketing decision BOMBED. Syfy??? What a joke!

175. Jamesintucson - March 16, 2009

OMG, here’s a clevor idea for Sci-Fi, instead of running re-runs how about you invest in doing straight to tv releases of big name movies and then sell on DVD. I.e. imagine if they spun off a bunch of star trek movies made from great books. Each of the series could come back for movies every year, cost litttle, earn big. You could do this with tons of series! If they can put out productions like phase 2 for free, a major network can kick out something like Of Gods and Men or whatever it was called quality. This seriously has me irritated. Betcha a scifi exec would never read this thread though, they’re too busy reading up on wrestling.

176. Devon - March 16, 2009

#171 – So you just wanted to hear yourself make a post about the new movie to slam it. Nice.

177. Marvin - March 16, 2009

The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing division of the Universal Television Networks as “a bunch of mindless jerks who’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes”.

(With apologies to the late Douglas Adams…)

178. Amazing_Bizarro - March 16, 2009


179. JusticeBoy - March 16, 2009

Its time for someone with vision to start the Science Fiction Channel!
Let SyFy fall by the wayside.

180. Izbot - March 16, 2009

Remember how every book or article on Roddenberry and the birth of Trek started with NBC’s rejection of the original pilot, “The Cage”, as “too cerebral”? Remember how that became a badge of honor among Trekfans in particular and sci fi fans in general? How it implied that we, the folks who ‘got it’, were the smart ones and everyone else out there in tv wasteland were the unthinking mass consumers? Well apparently “SyFy” would rather we be those unthiking mass consumers and not people who want to be challenged or inspired to work for a better future.

Personally I feel the lopsided focus on the Stargate series on “SyFy” has been a dead giveaway. I have always felt Stargate (created by Roland Emerlich who’s never had a good idea in his life) was a cheap imitation of Trek, freely taking whole cloth from us and turning it into half-parody. I’m not at all surprised by this rebranding. It has been one more step in their trudge toward the dumbing down of intelligent television. Really, people! Professional wrestling on a self-professed ‘science fiction’ channel? How does that even remotely jibe? I’ve known one or two people in my life who are professional wrestling fans and the only “sci fi” they ever admitted to enjoying was “Predator” ‘cuz there wuz lotsa gunz innit.

181. iyellkhan! - March 16, 2009

the problem is that since NBC took over, they have failed to understand the value of their nitch market. If SciFi has a bad reputation, it might have something to do with their mediocer “reality shows,” which bring some ratings, but at the expense of legitimacy. And when your network comes off as a joke, people dont watch. BSG is the last real vestage of scifi on that channel in terms of original work. They turned Eureka into a deoderant infomercial, and the last season of SG Atlantis was laughable when compared to the quality of the show a few years prior.

The execs seem to only know they want more viewers, but they dont know how to get it. heres a secret formula – good writing + reasonable budget = people watch!
Stop spending money on movies of the week and reality shows and go produce quality material in your nitch market. Otherwise, I’m starting my own channel, called SCIFI, to confuse and screw with your viewers.

You game, SYFY?

btw, does anyone else see SyFy and think Syphillus?

182. Izbot - March 16, 2009

181. iyellkhan! –
“btw, does anyone else see SyFy and think Syphillus?”

LOL! That’s funny because Syphillus, like SyFy programming, eats big holes in your brain!

183. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - March 16, 2009

If I say…

“I am not a nerd or a geek, I am a nurd and a giek”

would you believe me, or would it just confirm in your mind that I AM a nerd and a geek?

The moral of the story is: behaving self-consciously never improves the perception of those whom you fear judge you.

184. tribble farmer - March 16, 2009


185. sir num nums - March 16, 2009

April Fools???

I hope…

Too many networks that are geared for one thing have been changing themselves to be like every other network.

I guess next Comedy Central will start playing Dramas…

186. Izbot - March 16, 2009

Here’s another quote from a current MSNBC article on the rebranding:

“Next year’s “Battlestar” prequel “Caprica,” which is a terrestrial drama rather than an outer-space adventure, will further support this brand expansion, an effort that began on the programing side a few years ago with the launch of drama “Eureka,” about a town of geniuses.”


“We love being sci-fi, and we’re still embracing that,” said network president Dave Howe on Friday. “But we’re more than just space and aliens and the future — the three things most people think of when they think of ’sci fi.”’

187. Ben IV - March 16, 2009

Dumbest idea ever.

“If we use an inclusive definition of sci-fi, we can add Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Return of the King to our list of box-office winners”

Either they haven’t seen those movies or they didn’t pay attention in science class.

I wondered who came up with the lame premise for the new Stargate show. Must be the same folks who came up with this “rebranding.”

Someone please tell me this is a joke.

188. Q-Pid - March 16, 2009

Hmm who said “If you put a lipstick on a pig, its still a pig”? Goo SyFy or whatever…

189. Jovan - March 17, 2009

No, no, no, AND NO.

What the eff are they thinking?

190. Diggin' up Bonze - March 17, 2009

How fraqqing lame. Must be after aphter heyer prophits. Sayve the wurld phrom MONEY JUNKIES!

191. defiant79283 - March 17, 2009


Why fix something that is not broke.

192. BonKH - March 17, 2009

Is this some kind of early April Fools joke?

To quote the articles quote from David Howe, “…a name that we could own…” seems, to me, to be the only true intent of this move. Anyone in the the universe (Mirror Universe, too) can legally use the word/phrase Sci-Fi for any purpose they wish. My guess is, NBC Universal simply wants to OWN the channel’s name for brand recognition and marketing purposes.

Yeah, it’s a bad move. Someone should be fired for it.

I’ve been trying to straighten up my science fiction and fantasy section for a week, but it’s tough going because of all the traffic that section gets. I can’t do the work for my customers being in the way! I’m not complaining… I’m just saying that section gets a lot of traffic. Even more than my adults only section.

193. thorsten - March 17, 2009


what, you’ve got a problem with Cupertino, Rick?

194. afterace - March 17, 2009

you dont really want to know what “SYFY” means in Polish….

195. Keep the Faith - March 17, 2009


196. Captain Christopher - March 17, 2009

This is another example of the “dumbing down” of America.

Cy Phooey !!!

197. Daren Doc - March 17, 2009

Well, this is good news for me… as I won’t have to bother tuning into this channel anymore after Galactica is over with…

…and it’s not as if they had much SciFi there to begin with.

198. Rabid Rob - March 17, 2009


It’s also another nail in the coffin of the English language as we know it.

199. Gigastazio - March 17, 2009

I sure hope someone send this overwhelming torrent positive feedback to the suits at SciFi so they can see firsthand how inviting and embracing of their core audience this actually is.

200. thorsten - March 17, 2009

This here was a pretty neat thing on the SciFiChannel…
till they shut it down 2007…

201. protogenes - March 17, 2009

For the people who find spelling “SciFi” a chore.

202. Kirk's Girdle - March 17, 2009

So is this for modern day illiterates who need phonetic spelling or to silence the geeks who refer to the network as “sciffy”? Either way, it ranks up there with one of the stupidest things I have ever seen, and I am now just a little bit dumber for having seen it.

203. Kirk's Girdle - March 17, 2009

I assume this change will not broaden their appeal via word of mouth?

204. Kirk's Girdle - March 17, 2009

How about Misteree Syence Teevee 2009? It would certainly describe some of the direct to dvd content showing on there.

205. Star Trackie - March 17, 2009

Just as well, Sci-Fi channel has pretty much sucked as a source for “Sci-fi” for years. Their not worthy of the term coined by Uncle Forrey anyway. Good riddance.

206. Alternative Timeline - March 17, 2009

Is it April 1st already?

207. Cafe 5 - March 17, 2009

Let me see…reality I have a night vision camera…did you see that? …what was that?.. and lets get out of here. Then the wrestling, and their own in house movies that cost $3.98 to produce. The few shows that are watchable like Eureka, BSG,The Stargates,Dr Who,Star Trek & its different incarnations and a few other second run scifi shows hardly make up a network. This leaves their programming with a good may holes to be filled with…nothing. This channel usually cost extra on cable and anymore its just not worth it. If one really likes to view certain series they can buy them on DVD and save time and money. A change of name won’t do any good. Putting powdered sugar on a pile of dog sh** doesn’t make it easier to be consumed.

208. Muziahaki - March 17, 2009

How gay.

209. Nathan Tjoa - March 17, 2009

D U H!

210. Muziahaki - March 17, 2009

I guess this is what we get in a society where 52, 000, 000 people want free ice cream without realizing somebody has to pay for it.

211. Danpaine - March 17, 2009

Stupidest thing I’ve heard since I read the article about the woman who called 911 when McDonalds was out of her favorite ‘nuggets.’

No wonder other countries can’t stand us.

212. Tony Whitehead - March 17, 2009

Syfy…tonight’s programming brought to you by:

Brawndo….The Thirst Mutilator. It’s got what plants crave!

Now back to “ balls!”

213. rogerthealien - March 17, 2009

I wonder will they also be changing the nane of Sci-Fi channel here in Ireland & UK?

214. Dif - March 17, 2009

I read that as “siffy”

Anyway, the only reason I tune into scifi now is the twilight zone marathons. I’ve been annoyed with the station since they started airing lame horror flicks among other stuff.

215. Denile ain't just a river in Egypt - March 17, 2009


I don’t have any problem with them wanting to appeal to a wider audience, but this name change is complete nonsense. How did anyone ever sell this? It’s a homonym which ties it to SciFi, but it’s a misspelling. How does that identify with a larger audience? Oh, so the average person looks at the new name and can’t quite figure out what it means so they are enticed to check it out because SciFi is such a turn off. I get it now. Riiiiight. Maybe they should consider more quality programming to broaden their audience.

I agree that if they were going to change the name they should have gone with something more general such as “Imagine” or “Beyond” or something of that sort.

#212 Totally agree with the SyFy/Idiocracy reference. Fits perfectly.

216. Holger - March 17, 2009

What’s wrong with ‘Sci Fi’???

On the other hand I can tell you what’s wrong with ‘SyFy': that’s a meaningless aggregation of letters which only happens to sound the same as ‘Sci Fi’.

I agree with many of the previous posters: what a weird decision!

217. Moonchick61 - March 17, 2009

#101. What the Frack is wrong with “Eureka”. It’s one of the best shows
Sci-Fi has come out with in a long time. As for “Firefly”, I tried watching it a couple of times. A total waste of time. Don’t understand what everybody saw in it.

218. AJCrane - March 17, 2009

It shouldn’t matter but for some reason I find it quite disturbing. And I agree, they should have better programming,. A lot of times, they are airing stuff that have nothing to do with Sci-Fi, but when you think about it. the FY part is part of FANTASY (Harry Potter is more fantasy than Science Fiction). The SY part – now that doesn’t make sense to me at all. Why not have it Sci-Fy. Now that would be more accurate.

219. Decker's Stubble - March 17, 2009

The other night they had on “Pirates of the Caribbean”. Veeerrry sy-fy.

220. krikzil - March 17, 2009

Mr. Howe said going to Syfy will make a difference. — “It gives us a unique word and it gives us the opportunities to imbue it with the values and the perception that we want it to have,” he said. [from another article]

Values and perception? Is he for real?

221. Trevorj - March 17, 2009


Man, now my viewing experience is going to be hindered by the fact that the station name annoys me. =P

222. Holger - March 17, 2009

218 AJCrane: Sci-Fy… nifty idea. I would have liked that!

223. Are you kidding!!! - March 17, 2009

Are you kidding!!!

“…beyond just the traditional sci-fi genre, including fantasy, supernatural, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure.”

I watch this network to see sci-fi shows – not fantasy or paranormal. I want to see space ships and aliens! I want to see outer-space, the future, alternative time lines, nano-tech and robots!

The great Rod Serling said: “Fantasy is the impossible made probable. Science Fiction is the improbable made possible.”

224. WolfTrek - March 17, 2009

Back in the day, the SciFi Channel was on my TV all the time. Over the years, their offerings have dwindled down to almost nothing of interest. With this name change, I can honestly say that once BSG has finished it’s run there will be no need for me to ever park my TV on this channel.

225. mctrekkie - March 17, 2009

Dumb Dumb Dumb move!

Someone should cut and paste this comment thread and send it to Bonnie Hammer over at NBC U (over the head of the current sci fi president, David Howe)

Anyone that wants to know the connection to the SYFY web site should go here :

(spoiler- yes they supposedly sold the name to NBCU)

I suppose it’s to be a combo of Sciency and Fantasy?

I know they are reaching for a broad demographic. seems to me that companies that keep changing their logos aren’t exactly sure what they want to be when they grow up.

Gateway and Oldsmobile- new logos – now out of business.

Good PRODUCT should represent your brand. AMC’s logo is boring- yet they got emmys for MAD MEN. and nothing is more boring than the HBO logo- and there is some great stuff there.

Logos/ web site changes… all short term things for new presidents to say :” Look what I changed, mommy”

With this level of competence David Howe qualifies for some AIG bailout money.

PS. Imagine Greater makes no sense grammatically.

except- I can’t imagine a greater mistake.

226. Captain Dunsel - March 17, 2009

Hey SyFy! FU

227. Brian Matthews - March 17, 2009

In my opinion, the Sci-Fi Channel has a crappy image. Except for a few notable exceptions (BSG, Lexx, Farside, et al) in programming their presentation is horrendous. Those dumb commercial bumpers they show – representing almost nothing to do with sci-fi except special FX – are embarrassing.

If you’re going to spend money on ‘syfy’-related bumpers then show us something from sci-fi- like short original clips relating to some well-known sci-fi literaure, like RINGWORLD, PLANET OF ADVENTURE, THE MAN WHO FOLDED HIMSELF… heck, I could come up with a list as long as my arm of books I’d like to see adapted from. These may be subjective examples, but they fit the bill better than a dwarf on a unicycle running into the SciFi Channel logo and popping in a poof of smoke into a flutter of hummingbirds or whatever the frak it was. Spare us. Save us. Even STARGATE is derivative now, zooming around in spaceships like the STAR TREK I hear some fans say it isn’t.

And don’t get me started on wrestling. Don’t.

228. Scott - March 17, 2009

Looks like an act of marketing desperation. And a dumb one.

229. Dr. Image - March 17, 2009

They should change it to “Mansquito.”
That would make MORE sense.

230. Clinton - March 17, 2009

Remember, SyFy, we’re not laughing with you, we’re laughing AT you.

231. Wes - March 17, 2009

SyFy can be owned, SciFi can not. Bottom line.

Also, Stargate nerdier than Star Trek? How is it inside that little bubble? Stargate has always been more ‘socialable’ than Star Trek. Even now with JJ Abrams coming into the picture.

232. Author of The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers - March 17, 2009

This is all smoke and mirrors.

I’ll bet you dollars to donuts some legal beagle somewhere has found some legal entanglement to the term “Sci-Fi”, and told someone they’d better make the change.

What’s key is that it is a *visual* change only; it sounds the same, and to me that screams some sort of trademarking issue.

There’s no other reason to spend time on something quite this idiotic.


233. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - March 17, 2009

Just as well. Now maybe we can get Space,. a real sci fi channel down here.

234. Izbot - March 17, 2009

I likes me sum wrasslin’ on that there SyFy channel! >SNORT< [spits]. An’ them thar spooky ghosts’r shore creepy! [hikes up pants]. I watches the SyFy cuz I gots to git me sum edjucatin’! [scratches ass].

235. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 17, 2009

I got to about post 95 and realized most of us are thinking the same thing – YUCK!

So here’s an idea: how many of you would watch a web network that marketed itself as a science fiction network and then showed …

science fiction!!

Thoughts? The Hulu of Sci-Fi.

Now, I’m not just throwing this out there for giggles. I think there’s a case to be made for something like this on the Internet. After all, it’s the sci-fi fans who embrace technology first, right? Who needs Nielsen ratings?

There could even be a section for fan films, original user content, etc.

Just need a big enough server, some distribution agreements, advertisers, and LOTS of fans to watch!

Consider this an official survey of TrekMovie – would you watch this on the Internet?

236. Jim Smith - March 17, 2009

It’s very, very simple. ‘Sci-Fi’ is a generic term and can’t be trademarked. ‘SyFy’ isn’t and can.

237. Aqua - March 17, 2009

I think someone got April Fools Day and St Patricks day confused.

238. dayxday - March 17, 2009

Puff Daddy, P. Diddy, Diddy. Prince, unpronounceable symbol (the artist formerly known as Prince), back to Prince. Jefferson Airplane, Jefferson Starship, Starship.

Success is really just a name change away, isn’t it?

239. Gary - March 17, 2009

Anther great idea, almost as good as New Coke.

240. Gary - March 17, 2009

Psi Phi would have ben a much cooler name.

241. Peter N - March 17, 2009

For even greater “separation” of the name of the channel from the genre, may I suggest “ΨΦ” or “Semper Sci Fi.” Just imagine.

The city where I live (Abilene, TX) recently spent an insane amount of money to get itself rebranded, from “The Friendly Frontier” to “Frontiering.” What?!? That is not a verb! And this is the kind of stuff that gets normal people upset.

242. vorta23492392932939230 - March 17, 2009


Do you like money? SyFy likes money.

This name change thing is disgusting, smacks of the worst focus-group marketing-thinking that I ever heard of. Just gross.

Meanwhile, on another point —

Stargate is percieved as geekier than Star Trek!? I mean – Stargate has the US Miluhtary and snarky comments, and irony, and its in the present and and…. Jaffa? I guess it is geekier than Star Trek. Oh well, I love em both.

243. Daoud - March 17, 2009

Newsflash! Trekmovie to rebrand itself effect 4/1/2009 to Cool! Not as cool as, but close!

(Hint, trekmovie is perfect… save trekhq for forums….)

244. Will_H - March 17, 2009


245. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 17, 2009

Seriously, I just set up an e-mail for folks to send a note of support. Would you watch an Internet SF version of a Hulu-type of channel?

I plan to talk to people here in Kansas City to see what would be involved in launching this kind of site. I need to hear from the science fiction fans! Send an e-mail (hopefully my “handle” is a link) to let me know what kind of numbers we could plan to achieve.

I think there’s potential for this. Prove me right!

246. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 17, 2009

Anthony, may I post the e-mail address? Don’t want to overstep here.

247. GaryS - March 17, 2009

Why not just call it the Science Fiction Channel?
too many words?

248. James - March 17, 2009

This is just like when Nintendo announced that it’s upcoming console, then titled “Revolution,” would be renamed “Wii.”

The entire Internet said: “It’s silly, stupid, and I liked the old name fine.” But now, we’re all used to it and thinking back, the name change made sense.

“SciFI” is boring, generic, and doesn’t indicate the fact that the channel has been airing horror, fantasy, reality shows and even wrestling for many years. Using a name that sounds exactly the same but is more abstract when written out is incredibly clever, even if it looks silly right now.

Give it a few months, and get over yourselves, Internet.

249. James - March 17, 2009

Although I do agree that “Imagine Greater” is pretty dumb. But it’s a slogan, so the bar is set pretty low.

250. Izbot - March 17, 2009

247. GaryS –
“Why not just call it the Science Fiction Channel?
too many words?”

It’s because there’s no science fiction on this channel after BSG wraps this weekend.

251. Izbot - March 17, 2009

…But what about Stargate you say?

I shoulda said “It’s because there’s no good new science fiction on this channel after BSG wraps this weekend.”

252. cmdr diaz - March 17, 2009

how is this pronounced ? sEeFEee???

253. GaryS - March 17, 2009

How abou this ?
dont even say the Imagine network,
just Imagine.

254. speed24601 - March 17, 2009

Great. Now Sci-Fi can appeal to the younger generation of children who were all taught how to spell phonetically. Kids these days can’t spell for sh*t.

Also, why would they try to move away from their core audience? If people don’t watch Sci-Fi already, why would they watch it because they’ve started spelling “Sci-Fi” incorrectly? This whole thing smells of Berman and Braga.

255. Barking Alien - March 17, 2009

I suppose with the amount of horror they show on this network and there already being a horror channel they were perplexed with how to rebrand.

SyFy is a silly name. Its like saying people don’t like to eat liver but if we call it LiveR it will be cooler and therefore more appetizing.

Having worked in marketing and branding I think this is a poor name. I would have gone with IF like in the eyecatches they do. At least there would be some brand recognition.


256. NOTBOB - March 17, 2009

This is dumb and here’s why:

1. Sci-fi does well at the box office. If the movie or show is good, the people will watch. If Sci-Fi wants more viewers they should do more good quality shows like the reimagined Battlestar Galactica, and less Flash Gordon. If they want to do Flash Gordon, then do something true to Flash Gordon! It could be campy like the 1980s movie and people will watch it. But do not do a awful unwatchable mess that so stupid, it’s not even funny to watch. And if you do something that is terrible, don’t give the ok for 22 episodes! And instead of having 49 awful sci-fi original movies and two good ones, save some of that money that you spend to make the 49 crumby movies and make 28 good movies. Think quality not quantity. I personally don’t watch the Stargate shows (the movie with Kurt Russell worked for me, but the recast show didn’t seem right to me) but there seems to be a viewership there. Keep that show. I like the idea of Caprica–a different type of sci-fi from the people who made the new Battlestar Galactica. But stop with doing the weekend sci-fi movie that is essentially the same movie each weekend with a different monster. They are all like watching really poor attempts at making Jurrasic Park meets Aliens with cheap looking CGI monsters. Do good work, people will come. Why not get some talented people and make a series like twilight zone show that has different directors attemtpt to do the stories of Philip K. Dick? Why not make a series called Do Androids Dream of Electiric Sheep that would be a season long telling of the novel? A season would allow a show to be true to the novel and different from the great film Blade Runner.

2. Sci-Fi covers a wide range of movies and show genres. Fantasy, space opera, horror, superheros, etc. People all get that. Why don’t the suits?

3. Forrest J Ackerman, the man who coined the term “sci-fi” passed away. This is all the more reason they should keep the title SCI-FI.

257. Pyxlboy - March 17, 2009

I still hate “Wii”…it evokes the image of a small child with balls for fists that stands on ball feet, going tinkle in the toity.

If you saw the “Battlestar Galactica:Last Frakkin Special” there was a vapid twit of an executive talking about how she really wanted the guys to put a “dog or puppy” on the show. Her attachment to business speak (it’s no longer a show, but a product) even on camera suggests she’s exactly the kind of “If We Brand It They Will Come” self important Exec-U-zombie (trademark pending) that would decide they need to call it “SyFy”.


258. Bob Tompkins - March 17, 2009

New Coke- Coke 2

259. DOOMGUY1001 - March 17, 2009

Broader range of programming…COOL! maybe they will put some Doctor Who (old and new) in the schedule somewhere.

260. Q - March 17, 2009

#8. I totally agree with your thoughts on Sci-Fi going the same way as G4. It was so great in the beginning. *Sigh* All good things come to end, and all that jank…

261. Sam Belil - March 17, 2009

What an “EM-TEE SOOT” idea!!!!

262. Christine - March 17, 2009

#254 :: “…Kids these days can’t spell for sh*t. …”

I disagree.

I can spell perfectly fine.

(Saying that because most people I encounter think that 16-year-olds are still kids.)

263. Christine - March 17, 2009

Izbot :: It’s all right, we all get out of line sometimes. :3 You’re forgiven.

264. Mark T. - March 17, 2009

This would have been funny if it were April 1st.

265. THX-1138-Star Trek: Timmy! - March 17, 2009

They should rethink this name change thing. Why not go with something cool.

Like—- SciFi: Timmy!

266. Closettrekker - March 17, 2009

#53—“Maybe Paramount should switch and use GuardYan of Forever so they don’t have to pay any money to Harlan Ellison”

Now *that* was funny.

267. The Governator - March 17, 2009

Yeah this just doesn’t make any sense. Changing the name doesn’t change anything, especially since they’re not really changing the name at all! It’s the same damn thing spelled differently. So how is this suppose to appeal to a wider audience? They would have to change the programming for that, which wouldn’t make any sense considering its the channel for science fiction. Oh wait, it hasn’t been that for years. Well at least they show Trek regularly.

268. Izbot - March 17, 2009

259. DOOMGUY1001 –
“Broader range of programming…COOL! maybe they will put some Doctor Who (old and new) in the schedule somewhere.”

I think “broader range of programming” more likely means LESS sci fi shows and more non-sci fi junk like car crash videos, rasslin’, Scooby Doo and the TAPS team, etc.

269. Woulfe - March 17, 2009


So this mean Sci-Fi fans can own the word Sci-Fi ourselves ?

– W –
* Smirks *

270. James - March 17, 2009

That’s it dumb it down for ’em.

271. Captain Dunsel - March 17, 2009

Well, obviously, SyFy is so very different from Sci-Fi. I mean, just say it out loud a few times and hear the different timbre in your voice. Feel the power of the new name. Conjur with it!

Imagine (greater) the respect and awe people will feel when you tell them you watch “SyFy,” compared to the scorn and derision you get now when you admit that you actually watch “Sci-Fi.”

272. Dom - March 17, 2009

ScyFy: the love that dare not speak its name! ;)

273. vorta23492392932939230 - March 17, 2009

248. James – March 17, 2009

That analogy doesn’t work. This was supposed to be a channel (and supposedly still is) dedicated to Science Fiction and fantasy programming… where does the baby-talk spelling of ‘SyFy’ indicate that at all?

Its just over-marketing as opposed to naming a game console that could be called just about anything without mattering, like a proper name of a person.

This just sounds like warmed-over focus group bs that disrespects what the channel has so far claimed was their purpose. Sci-Fi is a real word.

What’s next? Comedy Central renamed as Cmdy Cntrl? Or maybe LMAO TV.

274. Matt Wright - March 17, 2009

245 — Jason I’m with ya. I’d love an on-demand web network of good sci-fi shows.

P.S. Ironically the very business model you’re proposing (Hulu) is paritally owned by NBC Universal, the idiots who own The Sci-Fi [SyFy] Channel.

275. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 17, 2009

As of 8:58pm central 3-17-09

Just took a look at the SciFi Wire story, and all of the comments have been taken off. There’s just the announcement. Guess they got the message. What message are they sending to us?

276. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 17, 2009

Yeah. The irony is that they’re marketing Hulu as an alien conspiracy to take over the world. That kind of disconnect is frightening.

I’m taking steps.

277. Matt Wright - March 17, 2009

Bah! …it figures about the SciFi Wire story. I remember when the same kind of shinanigans went on at the G4-TechTV forums when they merged and then took a shit all over The Screen Savers.

278. rn - March 17, 2009

It’s the dumbing down of America. Unbelievable !

279. Johnny Curmudgeon - March 17, 2009

I really love it… Syfy… HiFi… LoFi… what fun to watch dolts like these. But one thing puzzles: No Harlan touch brought in yet ? I admit I skimmed the comments, mighta missed it… but I mean… since Day One HE’s been wonderfully riding anyone’s SciFi butts about “SF” vs “skiffy” and I’ve loved it.
Maybe they finally ‘got it”…


280. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - March 17, 2009

This reminds me of a sketch of Monty Python’s Flying Circus:

Introducing Raymond Luxury-Yacht…

“No, it’s *spelled* ‘Luxury-Yacht’, but it’s pronounced ‘Throat-Warbler Mangrove'”

281. Big Bill Cox - March 17, 2009

I see this as the death knell of the Sci Fi Channel. I guarantee that we’ll see actual “sci fi’ programming on this channel drop sharply over the next year or two, and eventually they’ll rename themselves like when The Nashville Network changed tro The National Network and then to Spike. Too bad. Sci Fi Channel used to be fairly entertaining and sometimes enlightening. Now it’s turned into yet another outlet for the lowest common denominator.

282. AdmNaismith - March 17, 2009

…and the ‘COPS’ reruns start at 20:01AM, 1 April 2009

283. Carlos Teran - March 17, 2009

I hate it. Then again, it’s their money. :)

284. Atlantians - March 17, 2009

I hate the Sci-Fi… ahem… SyFy channel.

The only reason I watch them is because they have shows I like.

If they didn’t… I would never touch that channel.

285. Lendorien - March 17, 2009

The Sci-fi channel needs new management. Someone willing to embrace sci-fi. As I wrote earlier, there are tones of shows on tv right now that fit within the category fo sci-fi.

Sci-Fi’s problem, as many have stated is their crappy programming. Look, if HBO can produce incredible shows, why can’t sci-fi? They have with at least one in BSG. It’s about embracing the brand and staying true to the market. They’ve lost viewers because they’ve screwed with programming. What does Scare tactics have to do with Sci-fi. Or monster of the week movies? or WWE? I don’t mind the name change. What I do mind is that it represents a plan to shift into even more garbage in/garbage out programming that has ruined the channel.

What’s more, that quote from the Sci-fi executive is insulting and offensive. Way to insult your core demographic and label people in an utterly insulting and high handedly self righteous way. My mother taught me better than that. Apparently this guy’s didn’t. I bet he uses offensive words for black people too. Someone or a group of someones need to be fired. Get some new blood who actually LIKE sci-fi in.

286. Notbob - March 18, 2009

I really have to say it ticks me off quite a bit to see they want to change it to syfy. What does that stand for, anyway?

I can’t stress this enough, Forrest J Ackerman, the man who came up with the term “sci-fi” just passed away a few months back . In fact, he seems to have wanted his final words to be “sci-fi.” There was an article about it on Chud.

Syfy sounds exactly like SCI-FI. It’s not gonna get people to check it out. It sounds exactly the same, sends the same message to people’s heads. If a person is so hell bent against science fiction, then they aren’t gonna come anyhow.

First the name change to SYFY written in big bold letters–bigger than the logo they have now–then they’ll start playing the Hills and that crap that killed MTV. SYFY is probably trying to get that annoying 18-25 year old crowd that goes out all the time. I’m 31 and I’m tired. And if I want reality, I’ll get out of bed. I want to escape from reality. SYFY if you go the way of MTV you’ll end up with a huge fu u!

287. Rick - March 18, 2009

Let me get straight to the point. Can you say Scifi Channel a lost cause! Sorry to me it seems like a channel such as this could have so much more potential! How do some of these execs get in charge of things like the Scifi Channel, etc. It seems like in the last decade or so the newest generation of top executives running studios, channels, etc. seem to have lost touch. Money/power seem to be the end all to running these operations. Sure they are important elements, but wouldn’t it be great if some of these management types cared about the subject matter they are running? I am not saying all execs are like this, but it seems like too many are! I have to know there are types out there somewhere that could run the Scifi channel much better than it is now!

288. Rick - March 18, 2009

Looking at the poll and reading other comments, article, etc. really hits home how clueless those running the Scifi channel are! I have to wonder if they have any underling looking around the Internet at the various sites talking about this. I have not been to the actual Scifi site but I heard even on their message board they were getting hammered for this!

289. Rick - March 18, 2009

You know someone should sometime create say a channel that say plays just music videos, maybe a channel that deals with history, a channel that shows only science fiction shows/films, hey how about a western only channel, etc. Also how about 10 years later these channels stick to the subject matter they represent in their title.;) Gee what a concept! Naw I don’t think something like that could work on this planet.;)

290. Chesty - March 18, 2009

Morons. One of the idiots at “the” channel stated that “SyFy” is how he would text it. The people running NBC, Universal, and SciFi are complete fools.

I guess making it SyFy justifies the wrestling and the stupid ghost shows. Their movies continue to suck and they took Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis off the air. Remember that it is owned by NBC, the same idiots that took the original Star Trek off the air.

Nothing changes.

291. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 18, 2009

Comments are back up on the SciFi Wire’s page. Still no love for the change.

292. Mark - March 18, 2009


you no what this means, no more “If” bumpers, I was liking those.

plus why spell it wrong? It makes no sense, PLEASE PLEASE let’s hope this doesn’t lead to more “reality” shows. I hate those.

293. Mark - March 18, 2009


you know what this means, no more “If” bumpers, I was liking those.

plus why spell it wrong? It makes no sense, PLEASE PLEASE let’s hope this doesn’t lead to more “reality” shows. I hate those.

294. Daoud - March 18, 2009

#292±1 You could still have “yf” bumpers ;)
Reality shows, like:
“Who Wants To Be A Starship Captain?”
“Mansquito Bachelor”
“I Love Latinum 3″
“Shuttlecraft of Love, with Kirk Thatcher in for Bret Michaels”

295. Kreg - March 18, 2009

Really lame. Especially now that they will have to start managing another domain and setup redirects for to go to the new correct

Ya, their marketing and other suits don’t get it.

296. Robin the Bird - March 18, 2009

#290-More proof that text messaging will be the harbinger of doom for the English language and possibly life as we know it.

I can’t watch the network in question now. The network’s new name makes my eyes bleed. All I would further write on the subject has already been posted, so I will spare you.

297. Mark - March 18, 2009

should have gone with SiFi it would look a lot less stupid.

298. Steve S - March 18, 2009

They want something they can copyright, and that’s fine, because they took the “Sci” out of “Sci-Fi” years ago. They used to have shows about NASA and a science minute, and… oh well. I guess Sci-Fi 2.0 and John Edward were the start of the slippery slope. Except for all the fine CBS/Paramount/Viacom programming, BSG, and Animonday, Sci-Fi is unwatchable. They have cancelled Stargate and Farscape and now it’s pretty much “Stupid Lame Direct-To-Video Theater” on the weekends, and wrestling?!?

I thought cable was supposed to give us narrowcasting. First FX, then TechTV, TVLand and now this. Boggles the mind.

299. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 18, 2009

I’m officially throwing this out. I’m in the process of developing a site. My goal is to launch July 1.

Right now, we’re trying to track down content. One suggestion has been to get old SF shows and movies that are in the public domain. TREK author Dayton Ward has also expressed interest in contributing.

It’s in EARLY gestation phase. But I need help getting the word out! Will you watch? Will your eyeballs be there? The more interest, the easier it will be to get advertisers and generate revenue to get more content.

I’m not trying to spam the discussion. Just letting folks know what’s going on. The TrekMovie community can be a big help!!

300. Jason P Hunt - co-creator of COMET TALES - March 18, 2009

And the comments are back down at the SyFy article.

301. ensignHarris - March 19, 2009


302. Phil Smith - March 19, 2009

Stupid. But then the SciFi Channel is stupid.

303. Skagen - March 19, 2009

#7 – “more proof that the suits just don’t get it”


304. Bill Lutz - March 20, 2009

Broader base?
When you call a channel SCI-FI you have to realize the initial limits of your demography…..
Give me a break….

305. JH - March 20, 2009

“Sounds like crickets F**king” -Harlan Ellison

306. Allen Charles - March 21, 2009

This will spell the end of our channel, It is a very sad day for me. I have been very loyal to watch EVERY program produced for what I believed to be my channel. In the future this channel will just be one of many channels on cable and no longer my main viewing channel. Before long we will no longer look to this channel as our source for Scifi. I believe NBC actually hates the programing on SCIFI and has been looking for a way to remove ALL SciFi programs. No longer will I just watch them to SUPPORT my channel because I no longer have a channel. If they wanted a new channel why not change the name on Sleuth or CHILLER networks and leave the one hope SciFi fans had of consistent programing. Maybe another broadcaster like NewsCorp ( FOX ) will add a real SCIFI Channel they seem to support the programs much better than NBC ever has anyway. NBC may gain folks that hate SCIFI but will lose the core of they viewers. Just a very sad day for me.

The contemp. NBC proves they have for me certainly will make me look elsewhere for something to watch or recommend to others.

My protest is to NEVER watch a LIVE program on ANY “NBC” owned network again. In the future I will record using a DVR and NEVER give them the benefit of having a LIVE viewer. This will KILL ad income and cause the management responsible to be removed and folks that can HEAR fans of their programs will be used to replace these folks.

. Bonnie Hammer should go work for Lifetime if she HATES SCIFI fans so much she does not want to be associated with us. The same with USA another channel I have supported in the past, never another LIVE viewed program ever again.

307. LoyalStarTrekFan - March 23, 2009

306, you are overreacting. “Maybe another broadcaster like NewsCorp ( FOX ) will add a real SCIFI Channel they seem to support the programs much better than NBC ever has anyway.” Let me guess, you’re one of those people who believe that FOX and NewsCorp can do not wrong and that NBC and their parent company GE can do no right.

When it comes to cable networks NBC is the best (with the obvious exception of the liberal-fest MSNBC.) USA has some of the best shows on TV like “Burn Notice,” “In Plain Sight,” “Monk,” “Law & Order: CI,” and shows reruns of the real best show on television “NCIS.” Further Sci-Fi Channel has many great shows like “Stargate” and the popular “Battlestar Galactica.” I don’t see the big deal over the network changing its name. I would refer everyone to the link below where Sci-Fi Channel President Dave Howe sat down and answered questions and comments from Sci-Fi Channel viewers. The rationale behind the name change makes good business sense.

“Also, we need to grow our business beyond just being a cable channel. We want to extend our brand into new businesses, such as gaming, films or the youth market. But if we created a “SCI FI Games” label or a “SCI FI Films” label, it’s the same problem of ownability. Our current name doesn’t work. But “Syfy Games” or “Syfy Films” does work. It’s a unique and recognizable brand name that consumers will know comes from us,” Sci-Fi Channel President Dave Howe said in the interview with Sci-Fi Wire linked above.

It’s a business decision, nothing more, nothing less. In other words, it’s no big deal.

308. Samantha_McKay - March 23, 2009

Thats completely lame. Thats like calling NBC En Bee See
or Lifetime Lyff Thyme. It’s ghetto speak. They must be getting Mo’ money from somewhere to even make a change so lame.

Bunch of morons. Probably the same ones who put Wrestling on the network.

Still, it”s got Sanctuary, Stargate and Startrek so I’ll watch it.

309. TB - March 23, 2009

SFN makes more sense than SyFy.
Shorter and not absurd.

310. Allen Charles - April 6, 2009

I have seen this story on several sites and what comes to my mind is that NBCU missed the golden opportunity with this channel. They are disappointed that the channel name may stop some folks from viewing the channel, the TRUTH is they used the name to get honest Science Fiction fans to look at this channel as their channel, but over the years the programming has become a different genre than the channel’s viewers want to watch. The folks at NBCU dislike Science Fiction and have just refused to air programs within the genre. They seem to love critter monster “B” movies and now wrestling. The problem with wrestling is the fans of WWE will not watch ECW so the program limits the viewer base for the channel and especially turns off women. Now they decide to dissociate the channel from Science Fiction fans and release stories calling them GEEKS that live in basements and are antisocial creatures of some kind.

If NBCU had actually made this channel for Science Fiction programing and had gone after every Science Fiction movie and series as they became available for cable, and had shown all the old classic Science Fiction shows with new series being really promoted and continued year after year they could have dominated the genre and they could have developed a following of the 10 percent of the viewing public or about 35 million folks that are fans of Science Fiction. Their ratings would have continued to grow and likely could have been within the top five cable channels in the country. But they did Science Fiction in NAME only and now even the name change SPELLS the end of the channel. I have several DVRS and I will just search for Science Fiction programs and NEVER CONCERN myself with going to this channel except when a program shows up within the search. Good Bye NBCU.

311. Neil - April 17, 2009

Uhm…”SyFy” is an abbreviation of SYPHILLIS.

312. Justin - June 13, 2009

Just another sellout from the suits willing to sell the soul for any advantage they IMAGINE might be their reward.

I expect nothing else from NBC under its current bonehead, douchebag, moronic leadership that has ruind the brand across the board.

313. Doug - June 14, 2009

Just found out about this “great decision” network heads are talking about and it is awful. Hey I have a great idea let us dumb down something that
ideally is watched by people who actually like intelligent programming obviously forgetting the really bad B movies that Sci Fi produces but none the less other amazing shows such as BSG and soon to come Caprica. Oh wait network geniuses already did it. Soon to come to sy fy great reality programming. Just wait and see it will happen.

314. Vicki - June 17, 2009

Are they changing their “branding” because the poor programs presently aired, aren’t working? I have watched Sci Fi since the time clock count down many years ago. They cancelled Stargate SG-1, no Eureka, Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits and the list goes on. Ghost Hunts, Wresting (? excuse me?), Scariest places on Earth, Primeval are poor (at best). Wake up boys., you could end up like Bravo . . . No one watching!

315. slowhand - June 26, 2009

They are in the top ten ratings, they say it’s their best year yet. Now some genius wants to change the name after 16 years. Some people can’t stand prosperity. Give this guy a bonus.

316. Lori - July 1, 2009

scifi what are you thinking??????? syfy = stupid. you had one of the coolest names on tv. and what type of audience will this attract?

isn’t there a billionare science fiction fan out there willing to put together the best, intelligent channel ever. SCIENCE FICTION FANS WOULD PAY FOR A GREAT TRUE CHANNEL!!!

hello?????? anyone???????????

317. Monica - July 3, 2009

I agree with many of the comment above. The SciFi channel will lose its viewership. I was really sad when they cancelled the Stargate series programming. Recently, the SciFi Channel also aired James Bond movies!!! Wrestling and reality shows are not entertaining.

I hope we can at least find science fiction rereuns on other channels!!

318. Jiory Strode - July 5, 2009

SyFy, huh. How long before they start showing Gossip Girl reruns?

Well anyway, I think you can kiss the whole Sci-Fi Channel thing good bye, the SyFy channel is going to be slowly become VhUSA CW-2. Focused on reality shows, occasional to permanent airing of scripted dramas/black-dark comedy shows (like Psych, Burn Notice, or The Closer), and possibly special events (Dog shows, Formula 1 racing, Ms. USA pageants, and etc.).

Sci-Fi shows will still air on the channel, but decrease every 1 to 2 years, after the networks decide to put the proverbial nail in coffin, as it is deemed too cerebral for mainstream audiences and low ratings (compared to Fox and CBS, hehehe). Followed by the monster of the week movies that will descend back to video shelves untouched, Deemed too dumb and 1950-ish for the mass consumer crowd who has too much elegant taste and sophistication to watch, such low grade rubbish.

You are going to start to see shows that are completely unrelated to Sci-Fi, as well horror and fantasy. I thought it was appropriate for them to air Fantasy and Horror. Mainly, because those genres really didn’t have their own stations around the time of Sci-Fi channel’s creation, while there’s modest crossover appeal between Sci-Fi Fans and Fantasy or Horror fans. That’s exactly what the Sci-Fi channel did in the beginning until about 2004, Their movies and shows had never been exclusively Sci-Fi, because of the fantasy and horror movies…but that is understandable. It wasn’t too far off tangent to what was being done or for its general audience.

You have to admit it was good, while it lasted and it was bound to go this route, especially after the acquisition of ECW (I don’t hate pro wrestling, I think it is out of place on this channel), NBC-GE finally taken over, and an occasional non-Sci Fi NBC show that airs through the week . . . there’s no programmes for certain nights, allegedly. I guess the network has to follow a modernist approach and air shows that are relevant to mainstream or can bring bigger numbers, like USA, MTV, and ESPN.

319. Cal-el - July 8, 2009

Someone at the Sci-Fi channel has been hitting the acid too hard. LOL

320. judy hall - July 10, 2009

can someone tell me if syfy will still air stargate sg1, stargate atlantis, i am not a computer person; can someone answer me? i live in bossier city, la. twitter name is scully1013. i am lame; please ans; my email is; thanks

321. Tim - July 10, 2009

Dave Howe is a moron. Changing the name of the channel to “SyFy” is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

322. judy hall - July 10, 2009

i want to know if syfy is cancelling all of the stargate sg1 reruns and the stargatge atlantis reruns? i know i am a nerd but i can not find any information on their schdule. help thanks

323. Julie Rich - July 16, 2009

It’s ridiculous. I’ve read the official releases about why this moniker change occurred and they’re illogical. Nothing they say has anything to do with, well, ANYthing. Sci Fi is a TERM, coined by the late great 4e Ackerman (Forrest Ackerman who amongst other things was a literary agent for some of the greatest Golden Age Sci Fi writers who ever lived) and the term has a meaning and a message. SyFy is like.. HUH!?!?s It stumps me and everyone I’ve spoken to about it. A main point is, even for the younger folk, newer generation etc., it has no more “broad appeal”. Sci Fi communicates JUST FINE and is very broad and encompasses the young and old. SyFy is moronic and weird and does not also communicate a Science Fiction concept in any wise. It’s NOT TOO LATE to change it back – can you spell C L A S S I C C O K E? Do it now and save face!!

324. Jen - July 16, 2009

very strange- what’s the difference?!

325. Jen - July 16, 2009

I liked Sci Fi MUCH BETTER…

326. Amanda - July 24, 2009

Siffy what is Siffy remind you of? And the promo while I love that song doesn’t make me imagine greater. Have you seen the comments and youtube with the promo. You can see they did their job at getting the lowest common denominator and people who don’t even like scifi or lack imagination to think they are imagining

327. Rene - July 25, 2009

sci-fi to syfy??? Now that’s truly pathetic. This station has been going from good to bad to worse since it’s inception and a name change won’t salvage it from it’s mediocrity today. I have a question. Why hasn’t the station (it did briefly in it’s first year) show any of those great science fiction, fantasy and horror classics anymore??

328. Collette - July 29, 2009

I’m in marketing and I totally understand a re-brand, in-fact have done a few very successful ones in my tenure. This one however goes TOTALLY against what a re-brand is all about. It IS a slap in the face to its CORE audience while trying to appeal to a non-audience. A beginner did this debochery, not a seasoned professional I assure you. I wouldn’t want to be the network executive OR ad agency that signed off on this one. Bye-bye account and your network executive jobs.

329. Cobo man - July 30, 2009

Alexander on the Sci Fi Channel. Oh I mean … Syfy Channel Saturday Night at 9

330. SHEILA LOUCKS - August 20, 2009


331. Bill - September 22, 2009

Imagine Greater…


332. albert w loescher - June 16, 2010

The last word in this movie is ‘extinction’. I quote the words of Desmond Morris from his book, ‘Naked Ape': ‘Many exciting species have become extinct and we are no exception’.
I first viewed this cinema prior to the Gulf event. It was repeated last Sunday (13-14 June). I watched in again and was rapt like an idiot watching his house burn down.
The ending of this gloomy film is far more realistic than the countless ‘Armageddon’ flicks previously. This story reveals the the greed and arrogance of Homo s. sapiens. As king of Shinar, in his quest for power, built a tower as tall as the depth of the TransOcean-BP platform drilling rig. The theme truthfully state that Homo cannot undo is indiscretions without the guidance of God.
‘God bears with the wicked, but not forever’.
–Miguel de Cervantes
This is a great movie and we should heed its warning.
albert w loescher of PILMOA

333. nike air jordan jumpman pro - October 7, 2010

Sto has got to be one of the worst star trek games ever put out and it is in the top 10 most boring games ever made. Do not waist your money on this trash, wait for The Old Republic. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.