Printable View
http://www.technologyreview.com/arti...kins070302.aspQuote:
Turner Broadcasting System CEO Jaimie Kellner, who asserted that television viewers who skipped commercials using their digital video recorders were guilty of "stealing" broadcast content. Kellner told an industry trade press reporter that "Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots."
Maybe it's time to lynch a few TV executives.
:cool:
by "skipping the comercials" do you refer to fast-forwarding past them so that you don't have to watch them?
it's a good point. P
Gawd. From which mental institution did he escape? :)
Not long ago, I heard about a company in the UK that was actually inserting advertising broadcasts (half-hour commercials and such) into the machines of those who subscribe to TiVo and other such services, whether requested or not...(NOT seems more likely :) )
Welcome to the world of Adware, TiVo...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/25436.html
Ouroboros
Guess it's time to outlaw VCRs, too - HOW long have these things been out? About 25 years or more?
<edit>
Yeah, TiVo does that already, but supposively won't erase or not record anything you've previously asked it to record. Figured all that valuable marketing/demographic info had to go towards something.Quote:
Not long ago, I heard about a company in the UK that was actually inserting advertising broadcasts (half-hour commercials and such) into the machines of those who subscribe to TiVo and other such services, whether requested or not...(NOT seems more likely )
Welcome to the world of Adware, TiVo...
I usually go to the toilet when the ads come on... even if I don't need to.Quote:
One wonders whether it isn't time for television viewers to form a union, demand that people like Kellner sit down at the negotiating table, and cut a better deal with us, if they continue to expect viewer loyalty
THEIF!!! I now declare toilets illegal under the DMCA as they give you something to do and as such facilitate your theft of the show you are watching!Quote:
Originally posted here by jethro
I usually go to the toilet when the ads come on... even if I don't need to.
I love it. Users are now circumventing the technology to add ads to everything faster than they can come up with them, and they're getting pissed! Faster! Faster! Drive the ad exec's insane!!!
<quote>Turner Broadcasting System CEO Jaimie Kellner, who asserted that television viewers who skipped commercials using their digital video recorders were guilty of "stealing" broadcast content. Kellner told an industry trade press reporter that "Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots."<quote>
Contract? I don't remember signing any contract. Advertising is getting more and more ridiculuous.
Just one more reason to hate the boob tube, aka the idiot box. I watched a show on discovery the other day, it was the first time in nearly 12 years or so that I had watched TV. I saw the "Dell Dude." God I hate that F$%#ing TV. If that's the kind of crap you all deal with all the time, I say never again, at least as long as my hands are able to control the remote.
Also I heard that A TV station over here, made peoples TIVO's record a certain program even if they did'nt want it, This filled up the hard disk annoying people who had wanted to record other things.
I can't remember much else, because it was quite a while ago now. Does anybody knowing anything about this?
..... as if these media moguls don't make enough money. As stated in the article I can only see a "contract" would only exist between the TV company and the company seeking air time for their inane advertisments.
I didn't sign any "contract" to watch ad's, to the contrary when I first signed up for a pay-tv service it was sold as ad's free - now all but two channels carry annoying ad's, I don't know about elsewhere but I am sure that Australian advertising companies recruit from the local mental asylum.
If this is their stance I might sue them for breach of contract and bill them for wasting my time, electricity and the life-time of my TV tube by broadcasting such drivel.
As a dear old friend once told me "Money talks, bullsh*t walks" and I guess they have the money which only leaves me with the ...... smell, I do have the ulimate power though, the OFF button on the remote - or is that stealing too :) ...... wait, whats that knock at the door, oh no, its the TV Police coming to take me away ............................ now where do I get one of these digital recorders LOL
I’ve seen this statement before over the last few months. Lets face it these people are from TV and who they learned from Radio, and well they have held on to that Network belief that if people tuned into the station they stayed. They have yet to figure out that people use commercial breaks to well go off and do other stuff, and the Marketing people say we have these numbers pass it to ad people that then pay big bucks to air or show their ads that most people never watch. Like what point is there in a MS ad, they have 94% of the desk top market and use that fact to say how many choices they are giving us when in fact they only reduce them and then charge us money for them Fact is the DMCA has to be voided in that Fair Use for consumers are to record TV shows via the old VCR, and lets face it a good commercial is fun but make me buy a product or service answer is not at all. Just because the technology moved well beyond these corporate pinheads thinking is their fault not mine. Could it be most of the music traded is on MP3 has been around for a bit of time and the fact that we no longer see true artists and musicians works but some sort of marketing fluff. Take away say Britney or what is the boy ban N’Sync what are their music abilities filters and fluff and learned dance steps. CD sales lag for one reason most of the crap is just that crap has nothing to do with art, music but all about money and marketing.
BBC made people's Tivo boxes record things that the user did not, that is this company you are all refering to. So stop call it "this comapny" :). And people do steal from the tv companies. They provide a service and you pay them for it watching the commercials that they get paid for airing, how else did you think they got paid? So then you people expect them to..., what? Just provide all those shows and pay all those behind the scenes people from nowhere? Where do you expect them to generate the revenue?
I meant calling it notQuote:
So stop call it
How are you stealing from them? Are you legally bound to watch their commercials? Have you signedQuote:
Originally posted here by khakisrule
BBC made people's Tivo boxes record things that the user did not, that is this company you are all refering to. So stop call it "this comapny" :). And people do steal from the tv companies. They provide a service and you pay them for it watching the commercials that they get paid for airing, how else did you think they got paid? So then you people expect them to..., what? Just provide all those shows and pay all those behind the scenes people from nowhere? Where do you expect them to generate the revenue?
I meant calling it not
any papers agreeing to watch the commericals?
OK, maybe stealing is the wrong word, mooching sounds better. :) But in either case, it is true, you can't use the service without paying or you would bankrupt the stations and then you would have nothing to watch. You have to understand how frustrating this must be, to have millions of people watch your programs that you pay for and then when all they have to do is watch a simple 2 minutes of ads to support you and keep those programs alive they say no. I would find that pretty annoying.
It's a lot more than two minutes of commercials. And how do they know if you're watching or not,
unless you happen to be a Nielsen household with a gadget hooked up to your TV? And if not watching
the commercials makes you a "moocher," does that mean you have to buy the products too? What if
the products are bad? What if they are against your morals?
Very true, they don't know whether you are or not, but they are more than fairly certain that when people record these programs that they aren't going to waste time with the commercials, annoying though these adverts may be, they provide the revenue for the station to continue functioning. When just watching TV well they can still watch the ratings and they can't force you to watch adverts but they know that you aren't forwarding them. And you don't have to buy the products, nobody ever said that TV adverts always work at making customers buy things, but many do and that helps keep the adverts on the air which helps keep shows on the air.
I never signed a contract, I was never shown some kind of EULA nor was it requested that I view these commercials. Broadcasters operate on the theory that they hope you will see a few of their commercials...there is no contract or obligation, and there is certainly not a moral one. (Do you really want to get into morals when you're talking about largish companies here?) Basically, they put out something to lure in consumers and hope that they stay around to see the ads. It's not an obligation at all. Maybe I'm atypical, but I can't say I've been prompted to buy something based on an ad...ever, as far as I recall. Does this mean that I'm violating some sort of social contract by not being affected by ads? Most of these arguments don't hold water.
Are you reading the posts? Nobody said you were, but I am sure you enjoy TV and adverts pay for it, well have fun with your measly cable when all the good stations move onto satellite and digital cable to make enough money to stay afloat.Quote:
I never signed a contract, I was never shown some kind of EULA nor was it requested that I view these commercials
Do you mind explaining this? Do you know anything bad done by these bug networks? Spill it if you do, if you don't then don't assume and lead others to assume.Quote:
Do you really want to get into morals when you're talking about largish companies here?
There isn't? So you think that the stations provide all this for free? Think again.Quote:
there is no contract or obligation, and there is certainly not a moral one
OF COURSE THEY DO!!! THATS THEIR BUSINESS!!!!!Quote:
Basically, they put out something to lure in consumers and hope that they stay around to see the ads
Then why do you care so much if you waste 3 minutes of your time watching silly ads that don't even affect you??Quote:
but I can't say I've been prompted to buy something based on an ad...ever, as far as I recall
P.S. Don't complain about being ripped off when the good stations move to satellite and digital cable and you are forced to pay more money for the shows you enjoy watching.
um, i dont know where you are from, but where i am cable isnt free; you pay a cable company, which in turn has to pay stations to carry them, which pay for shows.Quote:
Originally posted here by khakisrule
There isn't? So you think that the stations provide all this for free? Think again.
here's a question for you: supose i dont watch a whole show, but only a small ammount then i look for something better. at what point am i obligated to watch the ads and in what proportion? do i have to watch an add for viewing 10 seconds? 20? 30? 90? at what point does it become "required"? what if i have to use the bathroom? am i suposed to go durring the show(which is the ONLY REASON that i have that particular station on) and miss part of the story, or am i to become a thief by going durring the part i dont want to see anyway?
i can think of a billion reasons to walk away durring an add(as oposed to durring the show i'm watching), but not one(other than satisfying some money-grubbers) to literaly force myself to watch every add they show.
also, i think an important point is that the networks sell add space based on predicted ratings for the show(if they think the ratings will be high, it will cost more than if they expect low ratings), and once the show/add has aired they correct for what the show's ratings actually were. not once have i heard of a correction based on ratings so subdivided as to show about how any people actually sat through a spefic add. "why not?" i hear you ask. well, they KNOW that people are going to go to the bathroom and change channels and go to the fridge, ect. and they also know that the PERCENTAGE of people to partake in this is going to remain about constant and they KNOW that everybody who watches the whole show or parts thereof is NOT going to watch the adds. that is why they gear the adds for each show twards the demographic that watches the show. this makes the adds interesting for the people watching the show, and those who arent interested in the adds are NOT going to be interesed in buying the products. these are the people who change channels and such. so i guess that i'm basically saying(through the haze of sleep deprivation) is that they know its going to happen, and they arent losing any money anyway.
No one is forcing them to put their worthless programs
on in the first place, and no one would cry if the screen
went black.
TV needs a whole new business model.
It needs to be strictly "pay per view".
Charge whatever viewers are willing to
pay, and lose the advertising, since
people aren't watching them anyway..
I do not own a TV, and I'm not suffering
from it.
:cool:
good god, 12 years!!! :DQuote:
HAHAHAHA, They do that now!! Adverts for prime time cost more than adverts for sunday morning shows. Lol.Quote:
also, i think an important point is that the networks sell add space based on predicted ratings for the show
Do you know how much the cable companies pay?? I don't think you do. What you are paying for is the cable that connects your TV to wherever the station broadcasts are recieved. If you think your $40 a month are paying for all those shows than you have been sadly mislead. And is also paying for also those different networks, I think you do not fully understand the whole cable TV thing.Quote:
i dont know where you are from, but where i am cable isnt free; you pay a cable company, which in turn has to pay stations to carry them, which pay for shows
Do you understand the topic of this thread? The topic is that people are using recorders to competely skip the adverts and watch only the show. When you are watching a show then you are probably watching at least a few adverts anyways, if you are recording it then you will probably watch no ads at all.Quote:
here's a question for you: supose i dont watch a whole show, but only a small ammount then i look for something better. at what point am i obligated to watch the ads and in what proportion? do i have to watch an add for viewing 10 seconds? 20? 30? 90? at what point does it become "required"? what if i have to use the bathroom? am i suposed to go durring the show(which is the ONLY REASON that i have that particular station on) and miss part of the story, or am i to become a thief by going durring the part i dont want to see anyway?
Do a little research first then post something with proof. That way you can shut me up. :)
Come on...........People really what commercials??...........No way!!
First of all that made no sense, so plz delete it and I'll delete this. Second I'll refrain from hitting you with negs because I want this thread to stay extremely positive so more people post to it. But others may do so. So I would advise you to actually post something.
an FCC ruling in 1957 stated that we are free to receive anything broadcast on public air waves, that would also mean we are free NOT to receive anything. that choice is ours.
advertisers pay to have their ads 'broadcast' and the expected popularity of the broadcast sets the fee. When they start paying me to run their ads from my VCR, ill start playing them. The TV stations who state that we must also record the ads and play them are contradicting the us government (fcc) ruling on air-wave freedom.
with this action they will try to charge more for their ad time with no benifit to the public. ****'em.
I just use the mute button, ads arn't so annoying if you don't know what the hell they're talking about.
They are giving you something, shows that you watch, why should they pay you on top of that?? They don't give enough already? Those shows cost a lot of money.Quote:
advertisers pay to have their ads 'broadcast' and the expected popularity of the broadcast sets the fee. When they start paying me to run their ads from my VCR, ill start playing them
lolQuote:
I just use the mute button, ads arn't so annoying if you don't know what the hell they're talking about.
Did'nt they also have another service like Tivio that went through a bunch of lawsuits then went belly up. Then somebody released a way to add another hard drive to it to increase the space for movies. They even have VCRs that will edit out the commercials and tv's thaat will mute them. The entertainment industry will be forever a tit for tat situation. Just like all the hoopla around the Sony cd fiasco. It defeated computer copies until someone figured out they could defeat it with a magic marker.
I found the article to be a little irrational, people should not be forced to watch commercials, but there are reasons for everything. That's why it costs so much more to watch premium channels on cable or satellite, for that commercial interruption free concept. Advertisers do pay a lot of money to display their advertisements during commercial breaks of programs with high Nielsen ratings trying to promote their product. Television may have been invented to provide entertainment, but it's a great way to produce an income venue, and even before television, radios were the thing and had commercial interruptions.
But forcing you to watch one is plain ridiculous, in real life, if you don't want solicitation of products at your front door, you can post a sign that says no solicitation, and people should respect that. If you're not interested in a product, why must you continue to watch the sales pitch? And if you're seeing the commercial again for the billionth time, why should you have to watch it again? I'm sorry, but it doesn't matter how many times you make me watch a commercial on Miracle Whip, no matter how cute the commercial is, it's not going to make me buy it, I personally can't stand the stuff. I still can't believe how much an advertiser pays just to broadcast their commercial during the Superbowl, due to the amount of people watching and the chance to really get their product out there for the people to see.
I liked the Microsoft planning to sell ad space in their error messages joke in the Tech Humor forum, I think it sheds so much light on this situation, sort of a humorous irony. Where do you go where there is no advertising? Advertisers are everywhere, you drive down the road, you're staring at their products all around your house, clothes are nothing but advertising logos that you're not forced to look at...So can't they just keep it at that...they must be doing something right, people are buying their products. I'm sorry if Ted Turner isn't receiving enough revenue from the profits or whatever he does receive. I just don't have sympathy for him, doesn't he get enough money? Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it. So a few thousand people don't buy a pair of Nikes cause they skipped a commercial to watch something more appealing to them. That should save some slave labor in producing them. Nikes are overpriced anyway.
K, I'll admit I haven't read the article, I just jumped into the debate because I love debating so much. Butthey can't force you to watch but at least they know that you may be keeping the TV on or somebody other than you may watch the adverts. With things like Tivo they don't even have a chance. And this isn't about ted turner, respect that he's a smart businessman and he didn't get rich losing money in TV stations.Quote:
But forcing you to watch one is plain ridiculous, in real life
And GG your comments are very specific, like nike and slave labour, but not everybody uses slave labour and they pay loads of money to start their business and try to get rich, they pour everything they have into ventures that may not suceed because even though their ad was on prime time everybody recorded the show and skipped the commercials.
OK, thats fine, but next time somebody says "HEY GG LETS GET SOMETHIN TO PUT ON OUR SNACKS" maybe you'll reply with something like this "OK, GET MIRACLE WHIP" because you just saw miracle whip on TV and know that they are at least an OK company to be able to afford ad space. THAT IS PART OF HOW TV ADVERTS WORK! THEY MAKE YOU THINK OF THEIR PRODUCT!! Edit: I just kept adding to my postQuote:
I'm sorry, but it doesn't matter how many times you make me watch a commercial on Miracle Whip, no matter how cute the commercial is, it's not going to make me buy it, I personally can't stand the stuff
I have developed an extremely rare nervous condition that makes my thumb twitch anytime it is on the channel selector button of the remote and a commercial comes on. This, of course, changes the channel. The condition was merely an annoyance at first, but it has become more complex in that if I am not holding the remote when the commercial comes on, my thumb convulses in a manner that forces me to seek out the remote and place my thumb on the channel selector button before the convulsions will stop. I'm not sure if it's related, but I have also begun to exhibit symptoms of pyromania when advertising media appears on my P.O. box that seem to result in tiny piles of ashes scattered randomly about my backyard. Am I a thief for not watching the commercials and reading the ads, a raving lunatic like my mom always said I was, or is this just a severe allergic reaction to having big corporations attempt to dominate how I spend my disposable income?
i suggest you actually read before you mock moron, i clearly stated that it was an important point, as in THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS NOW.Quote:
Originally posted here by khakisrule
HAHAHAHA, They do that now!! Adverts for prime time cost more than adverts for sunday morning shows. Lol.
Quote:
Do you know how much the cable companies pay?? I don't think you do. What you are paying for is the cable that connects your TV to wherever the station broadcasts are recieved. If you think your $40 a month are paying for all those shows than you have been sadly mislead. And is also paying for also those different networks, I think you do not fully understand the whole cable TV thing.
um, yes that makes perfect sence that you pay a monthy fee(which never stops being charged) for something with a fixed price(the physical cable aparently). what you are claiming is that the cost of that bit of wire has an infinate cost. if you think that that single piece of cable costs any more than a SINGLE $40 fee YOU are sadly meslead. i did not say that it was enough money to fund the whole station or anything, i merely said there is still money in the system.
the actual method used does not matter as the end result is the same(ie if you go to the bathroom, you dont see the adds and if you use the 30 second skip button, you dont see adds), but to point it directly at the recorder thing, what if they watch the first five mins and decide they didnt like it? do they then have to watch the first few sets of adds just to make up for what they DID watch? the only reason they are targeting the digital part is that the government has been messing with technology to protect buisness models recently(DMCA) so they think they have a chance here.Quote:
Do you understand the topic of this thread? The topic is that people are using recorders to competely skip the adverts and watch only the show. When you are watching a show then you are probably watching at least a few adverts anyways, if you are recording it then you will probably watch no ads at all.
Do a little research first then post something with proof. That way you can shut me up. :)
you act as if companys come out of nowhere and all of a sudden buy an add with all their money. if advertising is the only reason people are buying your products, you shouldnt be selling them at all. quality sells products. word of mouth sells products. good reviews in magizines/net sites/whatever sell products.Quote:
Originally posted here by khakisrule
And GG your comments are very specific, like nike and slave labour, but not everybody uses slave labour and they pay loads of money to start their business and try to get rich, they pour everything they have into ventures that may not suceed because even though their ad was on prime time everybody recorded the show and skipped the commercials.[/b]
good advertising does not make a good product, but a good product creates money for advertising.
actually, like she said, it doesnt matter how many times you see an advertisement for a product you dont like, you wont get it. i dont like stuid hugely expensive tee-shirts that look like they've been thrown in a mud pit and run over by a pick-up truck and no ammount of ambercrombie and fitch ads are going to get me to buy one or even THINK about one when sombody suggests shoping for clothing. i dont eat liver, and even if every show on TV ran nothing but advertisments for different types of liver, i wouldnt buy it. your logic is flawed when you imply that advertising = sales. a good product and the right consumers = sales, and nothing else.Quote:
OK, thats fine, but next time somebody says "HEY GG LETS GET SOMETHIN TO PUT ON OUR SNACKS" maybe you'll reply with something like this "OK, GET MIRACLE WHIP" because you just saw miracle whip on TV and know that they are at least an OK company to be able to afford ad space. THAT IS PART OF HOW TV ADVERTS WORK! THEY MAKE YOU THINK OF THEIR PRODUCT!!
I realize that people pay a horrifying amount of money to broadcast their advertisements to potential consumers, and of course they are losing out because people choose to edit out the commercials when they tape/record something, or they channel surf. I'm sympathetic in a way, I know companies have to survive, but at the same time, it's not the only avenue of advertisement. Like I said in my previous post, everything is advertising whether you choose to accept that or not. If you ever go to grocery store or whatever, pick up a copy of Cosmopolitan. It's a great magazine, but 40% of the damn thing is advertisements. That's how the magazine gets out on the markets, by the person who pays to have their advertisement put into the magazine, same as television. The world runs on material objects...blah, blah, blah...It's a world of buying and selling products, that is the reality. But I'll be damned if some CEO of a crappy network of television stations, except for the occasional WWF fest is going to tell me I'm violating them by not watching their commercials. Basically, I'm going to watch the shows that they broadcast, and not pay attention to their sponsors. Like a few people said, I didn't sign a contract that obligated me to watch their sponsors trying to sell me something. I'm watching TV because I like the show. That may be selfish not to watch the things that keeps a station running, but I can be a selfish person.
Side Note (WARNING: only slightly related to the topic, felt like it was a semi-valid rant since we're talking about commercials/whatever.)
Some commercials don't even need to be on TV, in print, spoken or whatever. One of the examples of this is FEMININE PRODUCTS. Excuse me, but I HATE watching these commercials and I WILL mute them. When I'm ragging it, I do NOT wear tight white clothes, go horseback riding, discuss my yeast infection with my friends, or the fact that I may have an STD with friends. I don't care if your pad comes with wings, has better adhesive, comes in a pretty box, and has a pretty actress doing to ad.....What I DO care about is every month I need these products, you don't have to sell them to me, show me what they can do. I really do prefer a pad over a sock or a rag stuck in my pants. I don't buy my pads/tampons/whatever based on the content of some advertisement or "if she can go swimming in that white bathing suit and roll around on that fluffy white bed without any leaks, maybe I can too."
NO, it doesn't work like that. I know the products are there. I WILL buy them regardless of your ads, they're just there to embarrass you and remind you of the monthly curse that you have. You buy them based on your needs, what works better, not what they say. You may want to TRY something new based on what you see on TV or some other venue, may look like it's going to be a little better than what you had, but most likely, unless there's a way to stop it completely besides a hysterectomy, menopause, or whatever...don't advertise it. Most women don't give a crap. I certainly don't. Instant MUTE or channel change.
Maybe that's cheated Turner out of some bucks, and it may not be fair, but damn it...I'm not watching a pointless disturbing commercial.
Good point! I love that!