Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Logo-Free TV Broadcast Organizations?

iluvpr0n asks: "I ran across The UK Campaign for LOGO FREE TV and admired their goals for encouraging television broadcasters to stop taking up valuable screen space with their annoying and brightly-colored logos. It's not enough to be bombarded with 8 minutes of commercials during programs, but they also need to deface a supposedly artistic work (yes, for most of television that's highly debatable) to enhance their 'brand identity' initiatives. Is anyone aware of groups with this goal operating in the US (or other non-UK locations)?" Do we really need these things anymore? I'm sure most television viewers out there can associate shows to networks, these days.

35 of 485 comments (clear)

  1. Branding TV shows. by MarkusQ · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Do we really need these things anymore? I'm sure most television viewers out there can associate shows to networks, these days.

    This is silly. All the shows I watch are on the Sony network, but the only way I know is that they slap there logo on it. They've got it rigged now so that it's even there when my TV is off. I think that's going too far!

    -- MarkusQ

  2. Sometimes helpful by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes I find subtle, semi-transparent logos helpful when flipping around, since every house I go to seems to have a different cable system with completely different numbering scheme. It's really annoying. Perhaps they could standardize channel numbers....

    --
    m00.
    1. Re:Sometimes helpful by Jahf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed. They are helpful when done minimally, especially for those of us that don't have digital (satellite or digicable) services.

      I was working in a television station when these things started to get popular. In fact, I was one of the people who helped make our station's logo as transparent as possible.

      First it was just during the beginning of the news, then all through the news, then all day long ... then the broadcast networks left theirs on all day long ... then all of the cable networks left one on all day long.

      I have no issue with them when done "right". "Right" by my definition is as transparent and small as possible, preferrably -just- a logo and no text. If you're going to "tease" a special with an animation it should only happen once during a block of programming or -right- after the commercial and last no more than 5 seconds.

      Of the "educational" channels, Animal Planet is the worst ("Croctober" opaque full color animations? Made me completely avoid anything to do with that special). History channel is worse with it's solid gold logo and the word "History" on everything. It would be highly preferrable to have a transparent "H" and nothing else. HGTV seems to understand the concept of simplicity pretty well.

      Things got much worse after 9/11/01 ... all of a sudden there were waving full color opaque flags and bright stars on all the logos. I'm now to the point where I would happily see them all removed to get rid of the nasty ones. However, in an ideal world they would all still be there but very minimalistic. The only stations I don't want to see the minimalogos on is the pay-for-premiums like HBO, since I don't want to stare at the logo during a feature.

      As for the other issue, channels like CNNHN and Fox News scrolling every little quote they can scrounge across the screen, OUCH. This is specifically why I didn't watch Bloomberg TV. At a maximum I want the announcer, a well done graphic, and and explainer quote. I want all the text on the screen to relate to the story I'm watching. If you have to refer to additional stories, start additional channels and just run a miniature TV guide at the bottom so I can switch if I want to. Otherwise we're just further investing a culture of lack of concentration.

      I also don't particularly see need to make CNNHN or Fox "tag-team". I preferred the single announcer format, again, for focusability reasons.

      But then again, I'm known to be opinionated.

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
  3. How 'bout those Sony static stickers! by zulux · · Score: 3, Troll


    People who leave those things on their TV's should be gently throttled until they see reason.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  4. Put yourself in their shoes by FortKnox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most of the logo's are translucent. Like the scores/info of a football game, if its semi-translucent, you can still see the action when it happens where the score is.

    Honestly, you don't pay for local stations, the advertisers do. So its not really your choice.

    And another thing, when I post a message, do I really need to see that slashdot logo? Its taking up my valuable website art.

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  5. What's most annoying by uqbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Half the time you cannot read the captions on the screen bottom. Anyone try to watch MTV's pop up video lately? The have so many logos that you can't see the goofy "fact" pop ups half the time.

    1. Re:What's most annoying by JimTheta · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, we know you haven't associated shows with channels.

      Pop-up Video is a VH1 program.

      -Grant/JimTheta

  6. Logo's in the UK by Aztech · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "we really need these things anymore?"
    It's quite the opposite in the UK... we never really had them and we don't want them!

    All the mainstream channels don't include any tags and wouldn't dare to do so, however since the launch of DigitalTV around three years ago and the numerous stations that came with it... they started to put logo's on channels to differentiate themselves (so you can tell crap from crap).

    But it seems it caught on and even the new BBC channels include it like BBC Choice, Knowledge and News24, they all include a subtle alpha channelled logo in the top left, for MTV/Music and News it's not really that bad but if you want to sit down and watch a programme then they become annoying.

    But at least we don't have to contend with any adverts on some channels, I sometimes watch ABC evening news here, there is a break every 4-5 minutes, then the news is filled with sentimental dross in-between, you watch it and feel as informed as watching a brick wall, they call this news ?!? Fox News isn't even worth mentioning, do people serious watch that?

    At least CNN has something going for it.
    1. Re:Logo's in the UK by Christianfreak · · Score: 3, Funny
      Fox News isn't even worth mentioning, do people serious watch that?

      Sure, you are supposed to watch both Fox with its conservative/republican bias and CNN with its liberal/democrat bias and then take a moderate view between the two to get the true facts :)

    2. Re:Logo's in the UK by Christianfreak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah I know at least on the Israeli/Palestinian situation that almost nothing is reported here other than when Israelis get killed. No mention of how they take over palistinian land on whim.... Right now all of the stations here seem to be reporting how all of us American's should go hide in a hole because we're all going to die of anthrax!

      My original post was intended to be funny sarcasm as I don't believe there is much true journalism left at least on a national level. The current big boys seem more interested in fear mongering and bias to make more money *sigh*

  7. 8 minutes of commercials.. by josepha48 · · Score: 4, Informative
    .. I always thought that it was 10 minutes of commercials for every 30 minute show.

    I think that the small logo in the corner is a little annoying but I have seen it get worse. There have been times when I have seen the network, then the US flag and then other logos, all adding up to about 3 to 5 logos on the screen. On a 20 inch TV this makes for small viewing. :-(

    What is worse is AT&T's digital cable service now has advertisements in its on line TV guide. It used to be that you could see 12 channels at a time when you press the guide button, but now it is about 8 channels and 4 ad's. This makes it slower to browse the digital TV guide. I called and apparantly noone likes this but they don't care cause what can I do? Get satelite like my brother and then possibly not get the local stations (he doesn't)?

    While logos are bad I think that being bombarded with advertisements is worse. Look at yahoo and their new popup window ads.

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

  8. ...and now flags! by update() · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The US seems to be going in the opposite direction, with American flags now being added to the logo. The worst offender is ESPN, which not only broadcasts games with the logo, flag, score statistics, out of town scores and the score ticker on the bottom but sets them all well in from the border wasting even more space.

    On the other hand, with a zillion cable channels that I, at least, don't remember most of, it's useful to have a small logo. Anyway, it's not at all clear to me how this group expects to have any effect. A petition? "Demonstrate and calculate the cost of ignoring the problem logos."?

    I'm skpetical about the claim that the logos are there to discourage piracy. Is anyone really trafficking bootleg C-Span or Weather Channel broadcasts or Dharma and Greg episodes? And if so, are they going to be deterred by a network logo?

  9. Branding Folly by Baba+Abhui · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The logos annoy me too, away with them, I say.

    I've never understood why a movie studio, television network, or record company would go to so much bother to establish a brand. When I buy a movie ticket, CD, or choose a TV station, I do it because I'm interested in the content - the story or the music - not because I'm a fan of the production company. I couldn't even tell you what studios produced my all-time favorite movies or what labels produce my all-time favorite records, and I suspect I'm not alone.

    I don't watch much TV, but I would have a hard time believing that anyone would turn to a particluar TV station to watch a show they dislike just because it's on their favorite network. And the logos don't serve any other purpose.

  10. I Solved this Problem by telstar · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I wrote a program a while back that solved this problem. It was fairly successful in removing, or at least making-less apparent, the logos that broadcast companies are using. My solution was only implemented in software on pre-recorded MPG clips, but given the advances in digital video, and set-top boxes, I don't see why it couldn't be implemented as a hardware solution.

    • I accomplished the task by isolation the logo (scanned which pixels were relatively stationary, giving priority to the corners.
    • I then tracked the edges of the logos, and picked up the color values just beyond the borders of these pixels.
    • In repainting a pixel, I'd average out the pixels on the left, right, up, and down, and weight each one based on how close to that particular edge the replacement pixel was being drawn.
    You'd be surprised how well it works.
    Transparent logos are a bit more difficult to detect, but they're less obtrusive. In addition, if this were implemented as a full-blown product, it could easily build a library of company logos and associate those logos with the channel that is being watched, so the logo detection wouldn't be necessary.
  11. Re:OMG ... by Psion · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't know...videophiles have been annoyed about this for years. It reduces the quality of the program being viewed, and in many cases actually obstructs information...try watching some of the documentaries that air on Discovery or TLC. And Animal Planet has gotten ridiculous with their animated "bugs" filling the bottom of the frame.

    When it first started, I tried to vote with my remote and switched to stations that didn't use the annoying, distracting practice. That didn't last long as every one of them picked up on it.

  12. This isn't the reason they do it ... by SuperRob · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "... but they also need to deface a supposedly artistic work (yes, for most of television that's highly debatable) to enhance their 'brand identity' initiatives."

    Actually, they do it so that you always know who's PROPERTY the broadcast is. They could care less about brand identification ... they do it so that when PVR'd copies of programs show up online, it's easier for them to claim ownership.

    Now, when will we see software to EXTRACT these logo's?

  13. Station ID by astroboy · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's really not that obnoxious. Broadcast stations -- TV, Radio -- need by FCC regulations to identify themselves; this is a (comparitively) un-obtrusive way of doing this.

    Further, it means that if their shows are copied -- whether taped on a VCR, or stills shown on entertainment news or whatever -- that there's a little ``hey, this is the work of CBS/NBC/ABC/...'' sign in the bottom, which doesn't seem all that unreasonable.

    1. Re:Station ID by Monte · · Score: 3, Informative

      Broadcast stations -- TV, Radio -- need by FCC regulations to identify themselves; this is a (comparitively) un-obtrusive way of doing this.

      The FCC requires that broadcasting stations ID themselves by stating their call sign(s) - a minimum of once an hour, IIRC. I've yet to see a "bug" with a call sign in it. And this regulation doesn't apply to cable channels, as they're not broadcasters.

  14. The Slashdot Mindset by jea6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me see if I get this straight. Vocal slashdotters want PVRs that can skip the commercials that pay for the production of the programs. Vocal slashdotters also want the networks to air programming without product placements that pay for the production of the programs. And vocal slashdotters feel it is their right to dictate what programmers can put on the screen at any given time.

    My recomendation would be that vocal slashdotters stop watching TV as it is obviously not what you want. Listen to Geeks in Space re-runs for entertainment. OR, if you do enjoy The Simpsons, or god-forbid, The West Wing, you can pay for it out of your pocket or put up with the aforementioned "intrusions".

    I like The Sopranos so I pay for HBO. I don't know when quality TV programming became a natural right. I don't pay for The Simpsons out of my pocket, so I'm willing to put up with whatever the fine folks at Fox can dish out. And when I don't like it anymore, I'LL STOP WATCHING.

    --

    sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
    1. Re:The Slashdot Mindset by kyz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Let me see if I get this straight. Vocal slashdotters want PVRs that can skip the commercials that pay for the production of the programs.

      What if I told you that the UK has TV channels with NO COMMERCIALS! I'm kidding, right? No, there really is!

      And guess what, there's NO LOGO, either! (OK, so they've started putting one in for a second or two at the start and end of the program) Is this broadcaster crazy? How does it get its funding?

      Now, I know that THE MARKET must dictate everything, and socialism is an EVIL THING that has NEVER WORKED, but guess what, the people of the UK actually collectively pay for these TV channels! And they like that!

      They also pay for 5 radio stations (pop/rock/dance, easy listening, classical, current affairs and comedy, sport and talk) and local newsrooms up and down the country.

      The issue at stake is that the channel they own, because they pay for it, is doing things that they don't like, such as producing crap TV shows and bastardising their output. So they complain. And believe it or not, they can actually win this one.

      --
      Does my bum look big in this?
  15. Re:DOG.... woof by Erbo · · Score: 5, Funny
    I remember hearing the technical names for these logos are DOG.
    That may be true, but the usual industry term I've heard for them is "bug." Whether they call it that because it looks as garish as a squashed bug on the corner of the screen, or whether the logo bugs them, or whether they think it's a flaw in the television system that they have to put those things on screen (hence "bug"), I dunno.

    Eric

    --
    Be who you are...and be it in style!
  16. mangled credits by crow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is this really any different from the other mangling of the shows that networks have been doing? They've been talking over the credits for years, often totally destroying the tone set by a dramatic ending. More recently, they've squished the credits to the side, making them impossible to read, so they can show ads for upcoming shows. Personally, I would just as soon they not bother showing the credits; I suspect the only reasons they do are that one, they are required by contract to do so, and two they then don't have to count the time as advertising.

    This mangling the programming attitude has been taken much further by CNN and copied by its clones. First, they put financial tickers on. Then sports tickers. Now news tickers, even during live coverage of a major Presidential speach. Headline News is virtually unwatchable--it's like watching RealPlayer in the corner of a web page--ick.

    What is needed is a broad-based opposition to program mangling, be it logos, tickers, credits, or whatnot.

  17. This came up when TNT took over Babylon 5 by shutton · · Score: 3, Informative
    When TNT stepped up to fund/broadcast Babylon 5's fifth season, this issue came up, and was addressed by Dean Treadway of TNT programming. So, here's a broadcaster's perspective:
    Bugs (Logos) on Screen/Voice-Overs During Closing Credits: The strong leaning in programming (and we know this won't be a popular decision with fans) is to leave the TNT logo on the corner of the screen throughout a large portion of the episodes. This is something that we have to start doing to foster recognizability of the TNT brand, not just during B5, but during movies and Lois and Clark and everything on TNT. Why? Look, there are 70 channels out there for the average cable subscriber to choose from (let's don't even get into satellite). In the age of remote controls, people don't pay attention to chennels or numbers or anything like that. The days of "ABC's on 2, NBC's on 11 and CBS is on 5" are over. Networks must do something to make themselves and their locations on your "dial" much more noticable (Sci-Fi Channel keeps their bug up 24-7...). Therefore, the logos (bugs) will be a regular fixture on B5. Same goes with voice-overs during the credits. B5 is programmed where it is because we want it to lead in to our prime time programming; we want to create an audience for what we have on the rest of the night. Voice-overs are necessary to keep people tuned into the network, to let them know what's coming up next. Again, we know this won't be a popular decision for people looking to tape the show for posterity. But remember: we are not an archival service designed to provide the public with programming they can tape so they never have to watch our network again. That's the kind of thinking that will send television out of business for good forever, and then you won't have any B5s or Crusade or anything to enjoy ever again, because we won't be able to pay for it. In short: we are not a taping service, we are a network, and that means we'll be carrying all the trappings of any other networks, including bugs, commercials, and voice overs. Sorry...

    The full discussion is here -- page down to the entry from "97/07/18" (that's 07/18/1997 for us 'mercans).

    -Scott

    --
    -Scott Hutton
  18. Re:Logos no longer serve a purpose by Zathrus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, I'd say it's the other way around.

    The idea is not for you to be able to identify what station you're watching - by looking at an onscreen guide - but it's to ENSURE you know what station you're watching.

    Once people stopped watching TV when the networks wanted them to watch it this became important. Tape something to a VCR, play it back when you want, and you may very well not care what station it came from; but the broadcaster certainly does want you to know.

    With TiVo and other digital recording devices it's even more endemic. You may not have even told it to record the program. It just did because it fit some set of criteria. And you're going to be skipping commercials! All YOU care about is the program name and content. This doesn't give the broadcaster much sell room.

    A lot of pundits and PDR users know that commercials are ineffective now -- the only time I "watch" them is when I'm not paying attention to the show much anyway and don't pick up the remote to FF through them. I suspect that eventually TV networks will move to banner ads or something similar, with side-band information available to those with "interactive" digital TV sets.

    Would I love to see the logos go poof? Sure. Do I think they will? No way. Not unless you want to pay for the right to have a TV (ala the UK) or pay for every channel you receive.

  19. Re:You won't remove that icon by Xibby · · Score: 3, Informative

    OK, got myself going. :) Went and looked:

    All other TV questions should be sent to viewer_relations@discovery.com. For a quicker response to your television questions, please call viewer relations at 1-888-404-5969.
    Don't file your complaint here...look up the contact info and let the networks know what you think. Anyway, I have a letter to write...

    --
    I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
  20. It's about recorded copies by dcavanaugh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The logos are on the screen so that any recorded copies that pop up will have a logo on them. It's probably some kind of legal trick so that the networks can scream about copyright infringment, theft of service, or their "campaign du jour" to outlaw fair use.

    One possible problem in search of this solution would be low-budget independent stations taping re-runs from other channels and replaying them. Then again, I wonder if there are any independents left.

  21. MSNBC banners are much more annoying by tswinzig · · Score: 4, Informative

    Those little logos don't bother me on things like live sports, but they are totally distracting when watching a movie or good drama. Especially those that show up really bright when the full frame is dark.

    But the most annoying trend on television is the MSNBC-style banners. I noticed this especially during the September 11 coverage. I swear, the huge banner on the bottom of the screen took up almost 1/3 of the height of the screen, and had basically NO information on it. WTF is up with that? These people need to get some designers in there that know how to put the most information in the least amount of space.

    I don't need a huge banner to tell me the name of someone who's face I can't see because it's half covered up by said banner!

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
  22. Channels are easy to identify. by VA+Software · · Score: 3, Funny
    A quick guide
    • Closeups of ugly jewellery : A shopping channel; I don't care which one.
    • Stock tickers and/or sports scores (News may be happening in one corner) : A news channel; I don't care which one.
    • Crap music : VH1 or the country music network
    • No music : MTV.
    • Adverts : The Sci Fi channel.
    • Not quite adverts : Oregon Public BroadcastingB (or your state's equivalent, obviously)
    • People in a contrived, yet curiously unamusing, situation : A situation comedy on channels 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,12 or 13 (this is specific to my TV and you may have to consult a TV guide to determine which channels show crap sitcoms 24/7)
    • Animals shagging : Discovery channel or channel 11 (see note above).
    --

    ---
    http://slashdot.org/moderation.shtml
  23. Re:DOG.... woof by GlassUser · · Score: 3, Insightful

    BUG == Big Ugly Graphic

  24. Burnt in logos on projection tvs. by BrookHarty · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My wife didnt know you cant leave the TV on a channel too long or the logos burn in on your projection tv screens. She was letting the youngest watch disney tv all the time, and it started to burn in.

    I didnt notice it, cause I only use the bigscreen for dvds which are letter box, but catch Enterprise, and there it was. At least they could move the logo or have it time out.

    So logos are not just annoying, they are destructive.

    1. Re:Burnt in logos on projection tvs. by pr0nbot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dude, your kids watch way too much TV.

  25. The networks need them, not the viewers by mblase · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Fifty-seven channels and nothing on." Nowadays, thanks to cable and digital satellite TV, it's more like five hundred seventy. Each channel needs to somehow distinguish itself from the others, and with syndication further muddying the waters, it's getting harder and harder.

    Hence the corner logos. They're more brightly-colored these days because the networks keep weaving American flags into them post-9/11, but usually they're monochromatic and very subdued. They sit in the corner, out of the way and not interfering in the program, giving everyone a ready reminder of whose network they're watching so that they can find it again in a sea of dozens or hundreds of cable channels.

    As for the complaints: is anyone really complaining about them? As I said, they're subtle and subdued, and nearly all channels have acknowledged that they're better off not animating them on a constant basis. The only people who have cause to be annoyed about them, as near as I can tell, are the people who tape shows or movies and archive them for posterity -- something the networks don't like you doing anyways, since if you're using a VCR then you're not watching the commercials those networks rely on.

    There's no nationwide American movement to remove these logos because there's no real need to remove them. They provide brand awareness for the networks, they don't interfere with the program, and they're not nearly as obnoxious as, say an X-10 popup ad or the flashing ThinkGeek banners I'm forced to stare at right now.

  26. The ADs bother me, not the logos by evilviper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've not minded the icons that much. Obviously they don't want you to make a copy that cannot be distinguised for the non-free product.

    What I do mind is the very annoying trend I've seen mainly on the USA Network, TBS Superstation, and perhaps others. Not only do they leave a transparent logo, but they also have very active ads for other movies, specials, etc. This is during parts of movies that I'm trying to WATCH mind you. In fact, USA has a bad habbit of actually including audio with these ads during slow parts of movies.

    I must say, the first time I saw this, I removed both those channels. If other people do the same when they see crap that they don't like, stations WILL stop doing it.

    The same thing applies to anything you don't like... If you just complain about it, nothing gets done. If you cost them a few bucks, then they'll rethink their activities. The entire capitalist system is based on the idea that people will choose some other competing product when they don't like the company's features, price, or practices.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  27. Corporate Bashing by scoove · · Score: 5, Funny

    I swear I am getter less sympathetic to corporations each day.

    Speaking of getting really annoying. Sorry to rant, but corporate bashing is just so nonunique and tiresome.

    I found myself doing the same with the cable company, the local newspaper monopoly, McDonalds (for lying about its fries - yea, I know, lame issue, but it pissed me off). Etc. I found I was whining about tons of stuff.

    So I fired them all. It really has to come down to that. Don't like the station IDs on the screen? Fire them. Yank the cable. That's your choice.

    Warning: Be prepared to be totally amused when you do this.

    Cable: I returned everything except the cable modem (I do have my limits). Apparently nobody ever does this. The guy at the counter thought I must have been shut off for not paying when I returned all the other junk. His announcement "but your account is fine" confirmed the suspicion. Oh, apparently they don't have a process for this either. After returning all the converter junk, I discovered I now have better cable for free than I got when I paid for it (HBO is unblocked now). Guess that cable modem needs a few more things live.

    Newspaper: Hell, they couldn't make three out of five successful deliveries. Fired them. Now I get every sunday (for the past two months) free and on time.

    Give it a shot. Don't like the service? Fire them. Don't rant. Don't threaten. Pull the trigger. You might actually discover you like it.

    Now if I could just fire the postal service...

    *scoove*

  28. Some aren't so bad... by DennyK · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't mind the stations that have small, unobtrusive transparent logos in the corner. These blend right in and you usually don't notice them after a few seconds unless you look for them. Sometimes they're almost TOO hard to see when channel surfing or trying to guess what number my cable company decided to put The Foobar Channel on *this* week... ;-D

    What do annoy me are:

    - Big, colorful logos that don't go away. (i.e. Discovery Channel...ick!)

    - Moving, blinking, hopping, skipping logos. SciFi is bad about this...I keep thinking their logo is a part of the show and wondering when it's going to eat one of the extras for breakfast... ;)

    - Bars and borders. Come on, it's a station logo...it doesn't need the entire width or height of the screen. (This also applies to squishing the ending credits to show your damn ads for shows that suck...sometimes I want to read the credits for a movie for one reason or another, but good luck without a microscope or a 60" screen... Oh well, just more hits for the IMDB ;) I hate bottom bars on sports channels, too. If I'm watching NASCAR and I for some inexplicable reason really cared how the AAA-League Arkansas Mud Puddles are doing today, I will change channels and watch the damn game. ;) )

    - ADS that show up on the screen during broadcasts. NBC and TNT do this crap all the time with their NASCAR broadcasts. I swear, if I'd seen the flaming Witchblade logo cover Rusty's car one more time during a race, I would have chucked something through my TV. (It's even worse when it's those lame TNT series, because then you get an ad for them every commercial break, and a dozen or two in the broadcast itself. "And we'll be right back!" "Tonight on TNT: Watch Witchblade, it's the awesomest awesome show ever!" "Welcome back! Today's broadcast is brought to you by Witchblade. Here's our leader, Jeff Gordon. Hey, Jeff can't wait to watch Witchblade tonight at 9/8 Central! You should too! Here's a great battle for third which you can't see because our kewl Witchblade logo is blocking the view. Did I mention Witchblade is on at 9/8 Central? Hey, here comes a challenge for the lead, but it's time for another commercial break. We'll be right back, and don't forget about Witchblade!" "Tonight on TNT: Watch Witchblade, it's the awesomest awesome show ever!...")

    ;-D

    DennyK