Do you have to emphasize that it was "low budget" three times in the essay? Of course, it's "campy" and quaint compared what's available today, 30 years later. The sets, costumes and special effects were elaborate compared with other television shows. Even then, movies could splurge on the latest technology in special effects, but no advertizer would spend so much to produce a weekly television show. Would you dare tell a "Trekkie" that Star Trek was a campy "low budget" show for the same reasons?
- I would hope that a healthy Trek fan (of which I consider myself a passionate example) will appreciate that it was indeed a campy low budget show, and that its appeal comes largely from the way the ideas transcended the production quality. Krofft productions were low budget even for the time, though I think you are right that it was the scale of the ideas and not the size of the budget that was important. I am attempting to make some changes to emphasise that more. I do think the "camp" appeal is an important part of the cultural context, more so than with a show like Star Trek.