The biggest problem with this sorta thing (as with a lot of life), is that it’s run by people with money, with little but money in mind. They have a narrow view of their target, and refuse to look outside it. They have no concept of "nice compromise" or "good in-between".
Their game plan at the moment is to expose people to E-games. They take the newest, dumbest games, so that someone flicking through will stop and look at the pretty 'splosions for a bit. But is this really the best course of action? What if, for example, they put C&C 3 in? It’s a new game that looks good, but would attract some gamers to watch it as well (nice compromise). And shouldn’t gamers be at least PART of their target audience?
It comes back to the fact though that they are broadcasting on Pay-TV. And Rich gamers, while not rare, are the minority (Hell, just keeping my computer up-to-date rarely leaves me with any money). I’m not sure if the rest of the world has their equivalent of SBS in Australia. It Pretty much the channel that shows the weirdest and wonderful things from all over the world. And it’s free-to-air. I mean, if I was flicking through my TV-guide and saw ANY gaming telecast listed, id be jumping for joy. However to keep me watching, they'd need to be Televising good games. So then their target audience would change, and they might be forced to list some more in depth games.
So, fact of the matter is, until e-games telecasts get some free air-time, the people running the show are gonna have to stick to the games that appeal to the "I have teh cables, and use it to watch football!" audience.
Yep, sums up it up quite nicely