Ha! Ha! Ha! I read this today at The Internet Movie Database. They were talking about those devices that will tape a TV show but edit out the commercials for you. Mr. Kellner is the CEO of Turner Broadcasting.
“It’s theft,” said Kellner. “Your contract with the network when you get the show is you’re going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn’t get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial … you’re actually stealing the programming.” Asked about viewers who go to the bathroom during commercial breaks, Kellner responded, “I guess there’s a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you’ve got that only for one reason … to make it easy for someone to skip a commercial.”
The whole blurb is found here:
Funny, I don’t recall signing a contract… When I watch a show broadcast to my TV I don’t agree to crap. In my case I pay for the delivery system (cable). So long as I don’t try to profit off that system what I do with it is my business. By his logic when I flip the channel I’m stealing from his network. Maybe I’m stealing from him right now since I’m ignoring his broadcasts entirely as I sit at the computer…
You know, advertising revenue supports a lot of free TV. I wonder if many people, in their desire not to be “bothered”, have actually thought about the ramifications if the advertisers can cut their rates by 50% because these little devices allow people to skip their ads. It’ll be a dot.bomb fiasco all over again, but this time with the entertainment providers. Imagine: no more Buffy because the lost ad revenue can’t support 3 major networks, 1 also-ran, and 2 after-thoughts, not to mention all those little cable channels. Friends gone after 4 seasons because the cast made insane salary demands.
Mr. Kellner is rightfully scared: the advertising revenue model for television is more in jeopardy than ever before. What else do you expect him to say?
The revenue the networks get from cable subscriptions is miniscule when compared to the advertising revenue. Not so true with the cable channels (Discovery, TLC, CNN, etc), but regardless: advertising is the main source of revenue for TV, period. Get rid of that and you get rid of a lot of shows.
So if I watch commercials, I am garaunteed to buy the product? How many people would actually have this product (I am geussing it costs mad bills), and would that make a dent in budget because nobody is watching their commercials? If I flip to another channel during commercials and see the exact same commercial, am I now giving money to the other station? Where is this money coming from?
Do you people not understand how advertising works?
Brand saturation increases awareness of the product, and it sells. The product manufacturer is willing to pay money to get its brand out there and in a position of being noticed - this is called ADVERTISING.
The money to make the ads and to place the ads (particularly in certain timed spots) is paid for by the manufacturer on the promise that viewers will see the ads and become familiar with their brand.
You take the ads away, nobody will ever know about a particular product, and suddenly the world crashes and burns, spining madly out of control.
Be that as it may, it’s not in jeoprady because viewers are being immoral: there is no “contract” here, and there is certainly no “theft”… Advertisers gamble that enough people will watch the ads to justify the programming. For the last 50 years, and certainly still today, this has been one of the safest gambles out there. It may not be in the future. But it’s a business risk they take, not a criminal nor unethical action on the part of viewers.
I agree with Manda JO. There is no contract between TV station and viewers; the networks gives me free opportunity to watch its programs, hoping that I’ll watch the commericals as well, which gets the network cash. If people don’t watch the commercials, bad luck, but they’re not obliged to do so. Newspapers don’t sue me if I skip the advertisements, and if I’m sitting in a bus without looking at the adverts I can be doing anything, but I’m certainly not stealing.
But if you buy a Tivo, they know you’re not watching the adverts, and therefore the advertisers will pull out, and you can say goodbye to “free-to-air” television networks.
You’re paying for your TV by accepting and watching the ads. If you buy a machine that blocks ads, you’re getting free TV, which is not fair to the networks.
There are no conditions under which I’m allowed to watch TV, and if I don’t obey them I forfeit the right; TV is broadcast for free by the networks. They hope to have people watching commercials, and they usually get them, but it’s a free service nonetheless.
Companies that provide free samples usually do so in order to make me by the product later on; it’s not “fair” to the company if I accept the gift without buying the product, but I’m not obliged to do so, neither legally nor morally.
TV isn’t giving you a sampling, they’re handing you everything they have, and all you are obligated to do in return is accept the interruption of advertising.
You deny the advertising, you do not DESERVE the TV. You do not have the right to commercial free television, unless you pay for it, be it through a monthly fee or through watching advertising.
Is this a thread full of “devil’s advocates”, or are you all really this stupid?
I’ve always been amused by the way the networks and advertisers determine the effectiveness of the advertising. For some reason, it appears to me to be based on the number of people watching the show, not the number of people watching the commercials. What if I like the show but can’t stand the product advertised? What if I like the product and buy it but never watch the show? What if the commercial breaks are conveniently set at the same time CNN has a two-minute news bite? What if I like the product and the show and buy the product but can’t be bothered to complete the survey telling the manufacturer why I bought the product?
Any advertisers here who can clue me into this system?
And Guano: Exactly how does that constitute a broken contract? Especially since I don’t recall making even a verbal agreement with some marketing executive when I purchased my televsion set.
The “contract” is that you get free TV if you watch the advertising. If you actively deny the advertising by using a machine designed to remove advertising from your TV viewing, you have broken that contract.
It doesn’t have to be an actual signed piece of paper, it’s an unspoken accepted agreement in order for free broadcasting to be able to exist.
GuanoLad, please tell me you’re shooting for humor, or irony or something. I refuse to believe you can be this stupid.
“Here’s something that is totally free.”
“Thanks.”
“Ahem.”
“What?”
“You are now obligated to do what I tell you.”
Bullshit! If NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, Comedy Central, ESPN and the fucking Home Shopping Network are handing me everything they have, I’m not obligated to do shit.
You work in marketing, don’t you. That’s the only explanation for your inherent evil.
I don’t deserve what’s free? I don’t the have right to watch something that is pumped into my home for nothing? What should I do? Keep a log of the commercials I do watch and mail it daily to the local Big Brother office to make sure I can retain my right to do whatever the fuck I want in my own house?!?
“I’m sorry, sir, you failed to meet your quota of McDonalds commercial this quarter. We’ll just be taking your Trinitron.”
You know what I’m going to do from now on just to spite you? That’s right – no advertising whatsoever. Every commercial, I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and sing “La la la la la la la” at the top of my lungs. I’m going to rip out every print ad in every newspaper and magazine I buy. I’m going to close my eyes tight as a frog’s ass for every billboard I pass.
So when I accidentally run that bus full nuns, orphans and puppies off the road it will be on your head.
Evil marketing demon!
[sub]someone please assure me I’m being whooshed – I got the humility to spare[/sub]
