The disseminator of TV academic forum is undoubtedly an expert and scholar in a certain field, who has unique opinions and discoveries on the problems in the research field. These experts or scholars go to the forum to spread knowledge and ideas, which is conducive to increasing the authority and knowledge level of TV programs. However, it is undoubtedly wishful thinking to think that "TV has undergone constructive changes" ... and successfully completed its own transformation from shallow to deep. In fact, TV culture is still a popular culture, and elegant culture is just a popular elegant culture with its structural defects. Take Lecture Room as an example. In order to achieve higher ratings and make the program wider, the topics of the program are mainly concentrated in the fields of literature, history, law, sociology, economics and other humanities and social sciences. However, it is difficult for basic theoretical fields such as natural science to become attached to television. Even within the scope of humanities and social sciences, the topic selection of the forum is still too dependent on history. This makes us associate this topic with the lively dramas of the Qing Dynasty and the Tang Dynasty. It is easy to wonder whether the academic forum is spreading knowledge and exchanging ideas, or is it fueling the prosperity of TV dramas? If the topic of TV academic forum is too narrow, which is not conducive to the further expansion of TV academic space, then the media attribute of TV is fatal to the spread of cultural ideas.

From the perspective of media history, the formation, development and dissemination of academic ideas mainly occurred and completed in the printing media stage. When the society is rapidly transforming from print media to more powerful electronic media, the production and dissemination of knowledge will inevitably be forced into the process of maximizing the production and dissemination of electronic media programs. Faced with this turn, the first thing scholars think about is not what kind of content to spread to the audience, but how to make its expression more suitable for the characteristics of electronic media communication.

It is undoubtedly a kind of pain to dance within the limits and learn to express academic ideas in the rules of the game. As some scholars have said, "from the analysis of communication content, abstract thinking, logical reasoning and passionate thinking that intellectuals are good at are not as infectious as painful expressions and excited emotions." Bourdieu, a French sociologist, once asserted that "TV is not conducive to the expression of thinking ... it is a communication tool with almost no independence, and it only gives some quick thinkers the privilege of providing cultural fast food and pre-formed ideas ..." (5) Therefore, TV, a powerful production logic and a large-scale production method necessary for the survival of columns, stripped off the rigor, meticulousness and rigor needed by thinking.

Because of the existence of TV, a huge product processing workshop, every academic discussion is actually a process of ideological shaping. It is only the result of this kind of plastic surgery that the original "thought parts" with distinct gas field and connotation tend to be "standard parts". Under the control of this media production logic, although a seemingly prosperous TV academic communication environment has been created, it can only be a false TV cultural prosperity. From this point of view, TV academic culture is also lacking in nutrition, and its ideological enlightenment significance is greatly reduced. Scholars have become the tool symbols of TV media to some extent, and their real knowledge and ideas can only be spread through paper media, which may be the real reason why some scholars are unwilling to make friends with TV at present. There is no doubt that Yi Zhongtian's words are cautious about the hidden crisis of the connection between academics and television: the connection between academics and television is "win-win", academics expand the scope of communication, and television improves cultural taste; Failure to do well is a "lose-lose", academics lose their own quality, and television loses its audience.