I disagree that television is more aesthetically dominated by critically acclaimed but poorly rated shows. I think television is more aesthetically dominated (if I'm understanding what you mean by that) by trashy (or at least dumb) shows that get huge ratings.
It's nothing new. Critically acclaimed novels/films/TV shows/record albums/Broadway shows rarely get the sales they deserve. Sometimes there is overlap, but usually not. It was true in (say) 1920 and it's true now.
I'm curious to know why it seems to bother you that someone, somewhere out there is watching a critically acclaimed, but poorly rated show. Aren't the low ratings punishment enough for the show's creators and fans?