I’m astonished that…
-
some people are so obtuse that they can’t follow a simple and logical proposition.
-
some people still don’t know how to code after five years.
I can follow it just fine. And it’s stupid. To me, this is similar to being in a hurry on the road, then pitting everyone else on the road for not pulling over to let me through. My lateness is none of their concern. NBC’s lateness is no concern of CNN’s.
Real zinger theer, bub. (Look! I misspelled “there,” too! You should point that out next time you post! Then you’ll really have me where you want me!)
Clearly not, if this is the analogy you’ve come up with. Try again, “bub”.
But I am glad I’ve been able to help you learn how to code properly. After five years you should be proud you’ve picked up something here…
Well, if you believe that I’m so very clueless, why don’t you attempt to fight a bit of ignorance and help me understand your point, instead off resorting to third-grade style attacks on technical mistakes I’ve made while posting that have not a thing to do with the topic at hand?
Well, I’ll try…but since you do appear quite clueless, “fighting ignorance” is a bit of a tall order, no?
NBC essentially controls all of what you’ll see of the Olympics here. Sure, you can catch some of the more obscure sports on BRAVO at 3am if you like, but the “marquee” events are reserved for NBC prime-time. This is a pain in the ass, but since they paid big bucks for the rights, there’s little to be done.
Now here’s where it might get complicated for ya: Most people enjoy actually seeing the events, rather than just hearing the scores. Most people are also interested in not knowing the outcome of the event before they see it – it’s a strange phenomenon, I know, but it does actually make sense.
As others have pointed out, many television networks have gone out of their way to prevent the results from being “spoiled”. And now, it appears, Yahoo has created a “hide” button to allow people to surf their site without fear of accidentally stumbling across various sporting outcomes.
The point, therefore, which is somehow eluding you and others, is that all the internet news sites could quite easily do the same thing. It’s a basic consideration issue, and one which I imagine will be normal practice four years from now.
One more point: If this is just a pissing contest between NBC and the other networks/news sites, then the real losers are the spectators/fans. NBC has an obligation to its bottom line (and GE stockholders) to show the main events in prime-time. It has paid a fortune for the rights, and it needs to show the most popular sports when the audience is highest, both to serve the public and to get the most bang-for-buck in advertising. (The fact that there are ads every three minutes is another issue, and certainly NBC deserves its own pitting – which I believe it has somewhere around here.)
So if others are simply trying to “spoil” the results in order to fuck with NBC (and possibly erode their viewership), then they are doing so at the expense of sports fans. Which is really shitty if you think about it, considering the whole “spirit of the games” nonsense.
You won’t know until you try, and I appreciate you finally doing so.
Well, I guess I’ll accept you’re unwilling to discuss this without condescension… I can live with that. It just so happens that as a baseball fan, I understand this phenomenon perfectly.
See, spoilers are a social consideration… News entities are not responsible for social consideration. They are responsible for gathering up-to-the-minute information about events for their audience and making that information available as soon as possible. Nothing else. They are not responsible for presenting information at your convenience. If some media outlets choose to delay their coverage for viewers like you, that’s perfectly fine. I have no problem like that. But it’s absolutely ridiculous to act like they’re doing something horrible by sticking to their format.
See, it boils down to this- you are attempting to stay oblivious to certain pieces of news (the results of certain Olympic events). Fine. But if you want to avoid pieces of news, do not go to a news source! If you do, and the results are spoiled, it’s no one’s fault but your own.
Fine, I apologize for the condescension. It’s probably beneath us both, anyway. 
But this statement, “News entities are not responsible for social consideration”, is absolutely wrong. There are many, many times when networks have edited or even censored their content or delivery out of respect for the audience. Examples: Photos or images that are particularly gruesome; details of a story that might affect a family’s well-being; sensitive information that could affect/hinder the public’s perception of a particular outcome. And yes, obviously, some news sites/networks have taken “social consideration” for the results of the Olympic games.
News entities quite often make changes to the delivery of their content for the well-being of the public. That DOES NOT mean they are altering the actual content; they are simply presenting it in such a way to suit their audience. And no, I’m not talking about “spin” or propaganda. I’m talking about simple consideration that can better serve the viewer without distorting or twisting the facts.
I knew that Hamm won the gold and that it was controversial before I saw it live because I happened to visit Yahoo. It’s a double edged sword. Bad because I had been spoiled, but good because it was one of the few events that I didn’t fall asleep watching. NBC has been wrapping up the gymnastics coverage around 11:30pm. Not too convenient for us working slops who have to get up at 6am. So I missed the end of the women’s and men’s competition as well as the ladies all around. I didn’t miss the men’s because I wanted to see for myself what the fuss was all about.
So allow me to join in on the universal condemnation of NBC’s coverage. The only consolation is that I do believe with the advent of the DVR, etc., TV will change in the not too distant future and we will not be forced to adapt to some network’s crappy primetime highlights show. Hopefully it will be broadcast live and the viewing audience will be able to see it when it’s convenient for them.
There’s ettiquet. “If you don’t want to know the results, look away now”
Sound familiar?
I’d like to think so as well. Thanks, I appreciate this.
The difference here is that with gruesome images, etc… the facts are still being presented, just not certain details. You can decline to show, or warn viewers of, gruesome images without straying from your basic purpose, which is to distribute information. The Olympics are a major world event, and a news source would be remiss not to treat it as such. They are not responsible for keep your suspense at a “fun” level.
If I missed 24 last night, I know not to go to 24episodeguides.com today, because as a 24 episode guide site, there will likely be spoilers on the front page. In the same vein, if I don’t want to know who won the Giants game tonight, I know not to watch the local news. And if I don’t want to know what happened in the
Superbowl, or Game 7 of the World Series, or the Olympics, I know that since they’re such major events, they will have their place on the front page of CNN.com (and the news ticker on CNN) with other major events, as well they should.
Again, if some sites offer spoiler warning, hey, good for them. But I think the proper reaction is to appreciate those who do, not blast those who don’t. No one is under any obligation to follow NBC’s lead and no one should be blamed for being better at Olympic coverage than NBC.
For decades now, the smart people who are time shifting have realized that it’s a good idea to avoid sources that could possibly spoil the result. It’s really not a new or difficult concept. If, you know that you’re not going to be watching something live, avoid websites/TV news/radio news etc. that, you know, might give away the result.
Sorry leander, but if this were true, every other network in the world would be forced to do the same thing, and that most definitely is not the case. The CBC and the BBC (which still have to balance the books) show the Games live-- or even on the web and make money because their coverage is great.
NBC has chosen not to adopt this policy, which is one (albeit not the only) reason the Olympics consistently get lower and lower ratings.
I agree that other networks/news sites are not under any obligation to do so, but it seems obvious that they would best serve their audience if they were simply to add a spoiler button (or the like). And if folks don’t “blast” them for not doing so, then they won’t change. If enough people cause a stink it will become standard practice across the board, and no one will have to worry about accidentally stumbling across the results – while still having access to the info if they so desire.
Yookeroo, your sentiments have been expressed several times in this thread, in a much wittier fashion. When come back bring original argument.
Barbarian, with all due respect, the network system in the States vs. Canada or Britain is much, much different. Prime-time hours are the most watched, and thus most profitable, time for television here. NBC has been winning the ratings almost every night with the Olympics, and certainly would not if they were to show them during the day. I imagine the fact that both the CBC and the BBC are heavily funded by the gov’t play a big part in allowing them (fiscally) to broadcast the Olympics live. NBC doesn’t have that luxury, and when it comes to ad revenue and audience, prime-time will bring the greatest numbers. Just a simple fact of US television.
Maybe they feel they best serve their public by putting the results right there on the front page. Maybe they figure that most people who don’t want the news don’t go to new sites until they’re ready for the news. Avoiding news sites if you don’t want results is the sensible thing to do.
But it’s such a great argument. It can stand being re-used.
No, it’s really a tiresome and simplistic argument, devoid of any “social consideration” (as Troy put it).
I’ll say it one last time: Some folks use the internet as their primary source of news. It is quite easy for news sites to “hide” the results without affecting the information. And it’s silly to think that one should have to miss all news simply to avoid a few spoilers.
In any event, CNN has started using subtlety in their headlines. Yahoo has a hide button. Others will probably follow suit.
Just noticed something for Barbarian – the ratings are up compared to the last games.