AOL-Time/Warner's PVR to Skip Ad-Skipping

btempleton writes "Echoing recent comments that PVR users are thieves a story from CNET announces that AOL's set-top box plans may not allow skipping ads. Broadcasters continue to be afraid of the PVR, admitedly with good reason for their current business model. As I point out in my essay on the future of TV, PVRs and Advertising, TV ads are a terrible bargain for the user, paying us about $1.20 per hour of our attention, and something has to change. It's worth noting that they say they like the Tivo over the Replay because the Tivo does not have 30 second skip, but in fact it does."

Comments

Well who'll buy that then?

[johnburton]

I certainly wouldn't buy one if it didn't let me skip the adverts and I can't see that anyone else will either

Re:Well who'll buy that then?

[Bobb Sledd]

I don't care what kind of content-delivery method you can come up with... if I don't want to see the ads... YOU CAN'T MAKE ME!

Look, when I buy a newspaper or magazine, if my eyes "skip" over an ad on a page, am I stealing the magazine? When I go to the movies and decide to "skip" the previews, am I stealing the movie? Well then if I'm not interested in your stinkin' TV commercial, TOO BAD!

The author hasn't put as much thought into this as I have. You want to make it so most likely people will see your ads? Ok, here's what ya do:

1. Make them entertaining. I probably won't watch it if I don't get a chuckle.

2. Have a system similar to a PVR where the commercials are downloaded seperately from the program being recorded.

3. Don't make me watch the stupid commercial over and over and over and over and over and...

4. Don't make it impossible for me to watch the commercial over and over again. I might want to share.

5. Some storage of the commercial might be nice... later when my ass itches, I might go to TiVo to find out what the name of the product is so I can put the fire out. (What was it... Preperation G?..hmmmm)

The best method of advertising that a lot of companies don't realize is "word of mouth." I can be your company's best promoter. I got a big mouth. Make my job easier, and you'll get the benefit.

The added benefit of this system I just described is that you could even add some kind of statistics on who is watching the ads, who likes which ads (by placing them in a "favorites" folder) or who deleted them before the end of the commercial. Plus you reduce bandwitdh for showing the same ad to the same user hoping they saw it, and that increases the worth of the ad displayed. And, now I don't have to take a stupid test on commercials.

Information wants to be free

[selderrr]

Many ./ adepts adhere this slogan, which also applies to advertising. No matter how many skipping systems, popup blockers, spam filters, etc are invented, there will always be unwanted advertisment. Just as much as Falung Gong pamflets for instance just can't be killed in china.

That aside, offcourse you're free to block anything you like. I've personaly found that little on/off switch on my TV to be an excellent advertisement filter !

Re:Information wants to be free

[C_nemo]

Kinda reminds me of the Atlanta Olympics, when us networks thought soccer was cool since they could film from afar and place advertising on the part of the pitch where the ball wasn't

Re:Information wants to be free

[mpe]

Advertisement blocks can be replaced by advertising during a show. In a show, the actors could wear certain clothing, use certain cars, eat certain foods.

There are plenty of things you cannot do with product placement. Especially if you have something set in the past or future. Let alone that you cannot advertise specific promotions and if your sponsor goes the way of Pan Am you have no revenue from repeat showings.
The advantage of advertisments which are not part of the actual programme is that they can always be current when the broadcast is made. Even if the programme itself is decades old (or was made several thousand miles away). This is also one problem broadcasters have with programmes being recorded let alone transfered around the planet by the time things get watched the advertising may be either out of date or utterly irrelevent (viewer could not buy the product or service even if they wanted to.)
Also product placement will only even make sense to large (especially trans-national) business. By using it broadcasters have just thrown away most of their potential advertisers...
What's needed is some kind of system where the PVR never records adverts in the first place. But can generate its own ad breaks, pulling material either from an online source or ads only broadcast channel. Where each ad comes with some kind of header which specifies start and end dates for running the advert, metrics for running the ad including what type of programme is being watched and current location of the PVR.

Remember Kids... if they build it we can "fix it"

[cdtoad]

How long will it take for one of their "compliant" boxes to be reversed engineered and a 30-60-90 second skip function added? Maybe a month? The firmware will be on a flash chip. Now as for AOL Timewarner you're going to start seeing a lot more product placement ads (ie:Spiderman & Dr. Pepper (PepsiCo)) and Rosie O'Donald & her Wendy's salad. Not that this is anything new, but were going to start seeing more of it.

Umm... well Maybe I won't ... I don't own a TV or a Tivo or any of those "advertainment" devices. I choose to IGNORE all advertising... even though I work in print media and my livelyhood depends on ads.

---

no workable alternative

[dirk]

I agree that TV ads are annoying and overall not all that desirable, but the key point is no one has come up with a good workable alternative that will still give TV to the masses. Paying per channel is likely to be expensive and cost prohibited to many people (think cable, but about 10 times as expensive as most cable channels also have ads). Placing ads in the corner of the screen is IMHO worse than regular ads. You end up losing part of the show because it's covered up with an ad. And eventually those will go the way of the banner ad and become more and more loud, obnoxious and annoying. Product placement has to be the worst choice though, as you will quickly end up losing creative control of the show to advertisers (much worse than now). Do you really think any product is going to want to pay to be used by the murderer or rapist on the show? Do we really want every person on the show wearing big banners on their chest for whatever product is paying the most? And what happens when a show takes a chance and has the good guys do something controversial? No one will want to advertise on them or the bad guys at that point, effectively eliminating that show (or at least that episode).

So the question is, if 30 second ads aren't the answer, what is?

Silly analogy

[micromoog]

TV ads are a terrible bargain for the user, paying us about $1.20 per hour of our attention...

This is just silly:

• The viewer isn't getting paid; the network is.
• The advertisers aren't just paying for the viewers' eyes; they're paying for the whole infrastructure of the network too (which ain't cheap).
• The viewer isn't going to be giving full attention to every (any?) commercial.
• The viewer isn't doing any "work" as such, so there goes your "minimum wage" argument.
• That $1.20 also goes to subsidize viewers like you that don't watch any commercials.

Expecting to get paid a "wage" on par with what you make at work is completely ludicrous. If "something has to change", then that something will be the viewer writing a check to the network for television instead of receiving the signal for free. Somebody has to pay for the programming, and right now it ain't you.

Re:They will force it on you

[milo_Gwalthny]

The only problem is the automatic recording thing... the PVR needs to be able to decide on the channel and if downstream of the cable box it can't, directly. I have seen people with IR emitters taped to the top of the cable box so the PVR can change the channel by pretending its the remote. Not especially elegant, but it works.

Re:Subtler than that...

[GMontag]

Sticking the names of real companies and products into drama can make it look very dated, especially if those companies or products cease to exist (including simply through changing their name).

Problematic in movies about the future too, like PanAm in "2001: A space Oddessy" and Control Data in "Colossis: The Forbin Project"

Haven't advertisers partially addressed this?

[87C751]

Back when VCRs first became popular, and I was time-shifting a lot of programming, I noticed that some commercials seemed to be designed to be "buzzed through". It's illegal, you see, to use subliminal cuts in commercials. But that restriction only applies to the normal-speed reproduction of the ad. I remember seeing many, many commercials that, when seen at fast-forward speeds, had the effect of subliminal cuts. The visual presentation was pretty obviously designed to work in the absence of a soundtrack, as well. (in many cases, this visual bias held even when the ad was viewed at normal speed, which appeared to be a reaction to the mute button)

So what's the problem with the 30-second fast-forward? Ad producers don't want to take advantage anymore?

TiVo 30-second skip, NOT..

[c.derby]

Actually, the 30-sec skip was not included in the 2.x version of the software (currently on 2.5). I neverf really like the 30-sec skip, anyway. I tend to fast forward through commercials on the 2md fastest FF speed and always stop for something that looks interesting. I at least -skim- the commercials.

-- derby

What would be great

[jhines]

Is if the pvr had the ability to recognize repeated commercials, and would allow the user to skip over a commerical they have already seen.

I mean seeing the same damn cell phone ads over and over again isn't going to make me buy something I don't have any use for.

Re:Possibly I'm overlooking something here...

[Our Man In Redmond]

I remember those ads, and while they didn't exactly draw me in, I thought the idea was pretty clever.

Television is going to have to change to keep up with technology. I'm not sure how to do it, but if I were doing a TV show I'd find a way to work the sponsorship into the content of the show. It's been done often enough before. On radio's Fibber McGee and Molly show, for instance, the ads for Johnson Wax were written into the show's dialogue, with pitchman Harlow Wilcox taking part in each show and there being no continuity break between the ads and the dialogue. More recently, Elizabeth Taylor was on some show or another pitching one of her products.

The idea is not without its flaws but it wouldn't surprise me to see something like this become more common as time goes on.