https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

ABC vs. USA

Because, of course, skipping commercials is tantamount to theft. ABC HAS HELD DISCUSSIONS ON the use of technology that would disable the fast-forward button on DVRs, according to ABC President…

Because, of course, skipping commercials is tantamount to theft.

ABC HAS HELD DISCUSSIONS ON the use of technology that would disable the fast-forward button on DVRs, according to ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw, with the primary goal to allow TV commercials to run as intended.  “I would love it if the MSOs, during the deployment of the new DVRs they’re putting out there, would disable the fast-forward [button],” Shaw said.

I would love it if everyone stopped watching ABC shows.  That’s what happens when you try to screw your clients.

Except, of course, the viewers are not the clients.  We don’t pay for commercial TV.  Advertisers to.  We’re just fodder for the advertising mill. 

Shaw also threw cold water on the idea that neutering the fast-forward option would result in a consumer backlash. He suggested that consumers prefer DVRs for their ability to facilitate on-demand viewing and not ad-zapping–and consumers might warm to the idea that anytime viewing brings with it a tradeoff in the form of unavoidable commercial viewing.

“I’m not so sure that the whole issue really is one of commercial avoidance,” Shaw said. “It really is a matter of convenience–so you don’t miss your favorite show. And quite frankly, we’re just training a new generation of viewers to skip commercials because they can. I’m not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don’t fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand (options), that you can’t skip commercials.”

La-la-la-la-la … I can’t hear you … la-la-la-la-la …

Has Mr Shaw actually spoken to, oh, anyone about this?  Or is it just his devout hope that this crazy opinion is reality?

People hate commercials.  They really do. The only blessing of commercials — with the exception of the occasional amusing one — is that they give you time to run to the kitchen or the bathroom.  If people didn’t want to skip commercials, they wouldn’t do so, right?  To make up reasons otherwise is to live in a fantasy land.

DVRs are popular for two reasons, based on all polls that have been taken:

  1. They allow relatively painless time-shifting of TV shows to view.
  2. They let you skip through commercials.

That ABC is conspiring (openly) to get rid of the latter just shows the contempt that they hold their viewers in.  You will watch our commercials, whether you like it or not.  If we could, we’d shackle you to the chair while they were playing.

Now, as much as it galls me, I will confess that Shaw has a point:  commercial networks get their money from ads, and advertisers pay money for folks viewing those ads.  So if fewer people are viewing the ads, the advertisers will spend less and the networks will make less money. 

 But a cardinal rule of commerce is you don’t make the customer settle for less than what they are getting.  That’s part of Shaw’s acting now, while DVRs have only a 10% penetration, but even now it’s too late.  People are used to (or are used to hearing) about how DVRs let you FF through ads.  Take that away — be seen as the folks conspiring to take it away — and you become the first up against the wall come the revolution.

I could see maybe doing something to digitally flag commercial breaks, so that you couldn’t FF once you were within two seconds of a commercial starting or during it.  That would let folks FF across shows to the point they want to see or show or share or look up, but would protect those precious commercial breaks.  But that’s a last resort.  How about thinking outside the box?

What are the alternatives to commercial breaks that people want to skip over (if they didn’t want to, after all, it wouldn’t be a problem)?  Maybe make ads more interesting (incent people to watch them) or briefer (disincent them to bother FFing).  Product placement in shows is another option, which is aesthetically annoying but less so than explicit ads. 

Hell, like I commented over on Les’s site, double my cable bill and send the monthly difference straight to the networks (esp. the networks I watch).  I’d pay more to see fewer commercials. (Though I can also then hear the cry for federal subsidies for the poor who can’t afford to skip commercials and thus are victimized by the advertising industry …)

But whatever the answer is, don’t cripple the technology some of us — the early, influential adapters — have come to love.  That’s a great way to get a grudge going that will never do your company any good.

Are you listening, ABC?

(via Les and BoingBoing)

52 view(s)  

5 thoughts on “ABC vs. USA”

  1. We’ve been through this any number of times, and some advertisers don’t get it. They need to reward me, the viewer, in some way for watching their ad. The abstract reward of paying for the program won’t cut it; I have to be interested in what they’re telling me.

    Last night watching Numb3rs, there was a Hyundai ad that contained no spoken words. It consisted of hauntingly beautiful piano music, beautiful sequences of the very attractive Azeria swooshing down various scenic roads, and captions about the quality ranking of the car compared to BMW, Mercedes, etc. On a screen all-too-full of ‘ugly’ it was a relief just to see it.

    I normally ‘mute’ commercials but when that one came on again later, I ‘un-muted’ and watched every frame, even though I’m not in the market for a car. Message to advertisers: make me laugh, give me something beautiful to look at, or something to think about. Or all three, if you can manage it. But if you force me to watch a crappy commercial, you’ll only piss me off.

  2. Hmm. Do we have any ABC programs currently queued up for later viewing on TiVo? Not as far as I know, although Boston Legal was a possibility. Will we in the future? Nope.

    Why? Because there’s stuff we prefer to watch on other channels that conflicts with the “major” ABC shows. Admittedly, we’re weirdos – we’d rather watch a Mythbusters or Stargate rerun over just about anything on ABC.

    And yes, the fast-forward button is for speeding past commercials.

  3. It seems to me DOF has hit the nail on the head. Commercials are uninteresting and a waste of time, so people don’t want to watch them. If commercials more closely matched the viewer’s interests, viewers might watch them more often (by comparison, I read print media ads about things I care about but I don’t read print media ads about things I’m uninterested in).

    DOF focuses on making advertisements entertaining, but another route would be to make advertisements more closely match the viewer’s interests. This is tough since there are so many people watching TV, but perhaps this is an opportunity for the application of technology. Advertisers should embrace this, since it will help them to target their advertising much more closely to people to whom it will be relevant.

  4. Commercials are uninteresting and a waste of time, so people don’t want to watch them. If commercials more closely matched the viewer’s interests, viewers might watch them more often (by comparison, I read print media ads about things I care about but I don’t read print media ads about things I’m uninterested in).

    Which should be a cautionary note about electronic media. Imagine e-magazines which force you to have an ad up for 30 seconds when you flip to the next page …

    … another route would be to make advertisements more closely match the viewer’s interests. This is tough since there are so many people watching TV, but perhaps this is an opportunity for the application of technology. Advertisers should embrace this, since it will help them to target their advertising much more closely to people to whom it will be relevant.

    This is where I disagree sharply with privacy advocates who worry about vendors knowing what my buying preferences are and protest mightily at targeted advertising (as though it will somehow exploit my … well … desire to get the stuff they’re targeting). I think targeted advertising would be faboo on TV — especially if I could noodge the preferences to express my interests.

    But, again, that’s all a lot of work. Easier for the networks to simply collude with the hardware vendors to keep us from skipping over commercials.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *