Slashdot Mirror
Our Ratings, Ourselves
Ant writes "This long New York Times article (10 pages; no registration required) reports on the mismeasure of television (TV)." From the article: "One of the great contradictions of modern American life is that almost everyone watches TV while almost no one agrees anymore about what it really means to watch television....when it comes to figuring out how many of us are watching these shows, and whether we're paying attention while we're watching and even whether we're actually noticing the advertisements among the shows we may or may not be watching -- well, this is where things get tricky..."
From the article:
Obviously, these 'Nielsen' boxes are emitting some sort of toxic radiation that slowly poisons the brains of all in the area.
No? Well, then, YOU explain reality TV shows!
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
As someone who is recently starting to advertise (see below), that's one of the things that I'm finding much more difficult to determine.
For instance, advertising on google adwords, I see that my link gets 4,000 or so impressions. Does that mean that the person is even looking at the sponsored links on the side of the page? Taking it a step further, I had one day on google syndication that had 100,000 impressions. Only 60 or so people clicked through. I think a lot more internet viewers nowdays just glaze over ads.
I started doing advertisement by promoting on StumbleUpon. How do I know that the people reaching aren't annoyed with being redirected to a page they have absolutely no interest in? After all, on StumbleUpon, my page ends up fitting under web development. I'm sure all those people who are looking for things like SQL, CSS, or PHP tutorials must love me. 1600 hits. 0 emails. 0 signups. Maybe if they added a hosting section.
I'm thinking of moving my campaign off the internet, and into print / radio. But even then, how many people are just going to glaze through the ad when it's being played on the radio? For how many people I *might* appeal to, how many people will I *not* appeal to?
Ultimately, I guess advertising comes down to how much money I spend, versus how much I get back, relevance be damned. And I guess that's why spammers are around, after all. No, I will not start spamming people. That's just evil. Then again, Bill Hicks said, "Those of you who are in marketing and advertising, kill yourselves. You are satan's little helpers."
I really wish there were a way to just have my ad pop up for people who actually are interested in what I have to offer. Then I can leave everyone else the hell alone.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
Just last night we watched a movie on free to air and there was a 2-3 minute commercial break every 8 minutes. It was absurd (but a reminder why we pay $85 a month for Foxtel - which still gives you adverts, but not quite so often]).
We had plenty of time to go to the toilet, get drinks, fix snacks, let the cat in, feed the cat, let the cat out - cripes, and check emails.By the end of the movie we were so sick and tired of these products that we actively resolved to not ever by the damn things again.
Advertising works, but if you try and force feed and literally brainwash your potential customers we will eventually say - up yours!
RFID first, apparently - they're determined to mainstream it, either mixed under the audio (as detailed in the article) or Ad-ID...
<grrr>
okay, so that's not totally true, but for all intents and purposes, it is. and what isn't propaganda is mostly shows for stupid people ("lets see who'll get voted off the island next!") or for people who need to be told what they like ("you'll love this new mccdonalds deal").
The Cryptography Forum is new and needs help
Television agrees with you.
I don't think I've watched more than 3 minutes of advertisements my entire life. Break comming up? Switch channel. And again. And again. And.. again.
I think it's probably a minority of viewers who actually wait around to see the advertisements, even switching to the news is better than the mind-numbingly-stupid-cheesy-advertisements.
I do not watch TV! -- Oh believe me, Puerto Rican TV stations suck man! You sit in your sofa, get confortable to watch TV and after 3 minutes you go like "Oh-ah, sckk!!" and pass out. Seriously, stay way off the Puerto Rican TV channels!
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Whether or not you're doing it consciously is debatable, but I know that when it's on in the background I zone back in to it and all of a sudden have a craving for Whataburger... mmm, Whataburger...
Mens et Manus
One of the reasons for the failure path of advertising is that free, advertising-supported TV is a terrible deal for the viewer.
Common CPM for TV ads is $10, meaning one cent per viewer. The network gets a penny to show you a 30 second ad. If you watch 5 hours of TV, you will see an hour of those ads, and they get $1.20.
In other words, you get $1.20 worth of programming for watching an hour of advertising. $1.20 per hour is an illegal wage by a long margin in most places these days, and a terrible deal. It's no wonder we want to reject it.
The other big mistake the TV industry has made was in thinking the grail was full video on demand. Tivo and Netflix have shown that delayed-gratification video is more than satisfactory, and a lot cheaper to produce.
Some of these ideas are explored in my essay on the future of TV advertising and Poor Man's Video on Demand, which you may want to read.
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
One thing I've noticed over the past few years is that TV advertising just doesn't register with me any more. I'll be watching TV with my partner, ads will come on and she'll ask me what I think about product X. I'll ask "What brought that question on?", she'll point at the TV and the ad will still be showing. It simply never registered with me at all.
After 42 years, it seems I've developed an excellent TV content filter, that just needs a bit more tweaking to filter out reality and "talent contest" programs to make me happy.
I'm curious: is anyone else in the same boat? Has advertising become effectively invisible to you?
So many aspects of marketing are so squishy that it is easy for everyone to fool themselves into thinking that the ads are effective. All of the participants have a vested interest in spinning the impact of ads -- TV stations, ad agencies have obvious conflicts of interest in promoting TV ads. But even the marketing execs at companies do to as they judge their personal "size" by how many millions they spend on big ad campaigns.
I have no idea if TV ads are really seen or not or if they really work or not - they may well create some subliminal warm fuzzy about some heavily promoted product or brand.
I do know that ads can backfire. When a major (potato) chip maker launched a multi-million dollar "taste-test" TV ad campaign against its biggest competitor, the competitor's sales went up because the campaign got people thinking about the chips and they bought more of the competitor's brand. This anecdote suggests that ads are seen, but may not have the intended effect.
I suspect that the real problem is that companies are so desperate to reach and influence buyers that they will try anything.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Americans love watching punishment. So many of these reality shows have as their basis a climax which determines who amongst the contestants will be punished, either by banishment, being fired, or being told to eat disgusting things.
"What percentage [of viewers] were young white men? .... The marketers -- the people who want to make sure they're reaching the right fragment with the right ad -- would love to know. But it's been getting hard to say."
As a member of that particular demographic I'd wager it's less than they think. I cancelled my cable a few years ago and barely watch TV at all anymore. Most of my friends don't watch as much TV as they used to either. My entertainment hours are mostly spent on gaming and movies. I get my news from the web (IMHO TV is a medium unsuited for news). I do rent TV shows on DVD now and again.
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Your sig is what I'm talking about. I tune out "Try risk-free for 14 days!" I tune out price tags.
If it didn't feel like a human-less advertisement, I'd pay more attention. Think of how you'd tell a friend about something. "There's this cheap whatchamacalit with really friendly people. You should check it out." I feel like they're talking TO me instead of AT me.
I'm no advertising genius, so I can't offer genius alternatives to your sig. But I guess if I was running a web hosting service, I'd just be upfront with something like: "I run a cheap web hosting service for $9.95. I even give your money back after half a month if you're unhappy. Please check it out."
Gee, has anything changed in the meantime?
The only reason television exists is because of advertising, for companies to sell you stuff you don't need. They don't care about you, and in many instances insult you. You don't need a doctor to diagnose you, instead we'll tell you what you need and you shop to find a doctor to write you a prescription.
I wish I had back all the hours I had watching TV. It has harmed me. It lowered my attention span. It made me blow my money on crap I don't need, and really did not want, but was so taken in by models who look so hot convincing me I really do need it.
How many people come home from a long day at work, pop open a beer while tossing a frozen pizza in the oven, and then spend the rest of the night laughing at 3rd grade jokes?
And even for the good things that TV can do, it has failed us miserably. Did anyone catch Dean's comments to Democrats? Dean said democrats need to get better at the 10 second soundbyte, more catchy phrases, and to mainstream their message. The TV could be so much more. Chances are you can get more from the editorial section of the newspaper than in a half hour news program. And where is the science and history on TV? Maybe we will get a science channel once cable hits channel 700. *sigh*
How do I get all those hours back? How do I go on living knowing my formative years were spent watching the Dukes of Hazzard?
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
I used to watch TLC. But now TLC is a bunch of reality show BS. I used to watch Star Trek. But Next Generation has become Enterprise, and I don't care for homogenized crap. I used to watch Stargate, but it got to the point where I didn't care if the Wraith killed all the humans or not.
/me flips back to Ghost in the Shell:SAC 2nd GIG Episode 17...
Of course at that point I found that, contrary to my previous experience, there was such thing as good Anime. Ever since I discovered this, I haven't watched a single second of TV...
Well, I read the first few pages. Let me start out with a disclaimer, lately, I've come to hate TV. There's very few shows I watch and most are a waste of time.
I've always thought... isn't there some technical way to find out what people are watching, anonymously? Like, from PVR prefs or recordings, draw on broadcast antennas (radio or broadcast tv/cable)? I mean, I know my website sucks because it gets like 150 hits a month if I'm lucky. And that's only the ones I probably do myself.
Hell throw out incentive. My grocery store gets my "vote" for what sort of laundry detergent I like because our family buys it all the time, amd obviously its popular because there's tons of coupons for it. Can't they do that with TV? I'll sign up for HBO if you knock a couple of bucks off the bill every month for having me do some (online and accurate) poll.
Maybe this is some kinda weird test by the NYT. Since when did they start having articles you could read without going through their silly registration process?
FLR
anyway most stuff on the tv stinks...seinfeld is good and saturday morning cartoons are awful...
the cartoons have losted it and they are so repetetive and uncreative...its no wonder why we're starting to borrow anime from japan...sigh... the "NEW" TMNT, transformers, and sonic are not up to par with the old versions...its a really sad and boring lineup that's living off the old stuff
I remember seeing the new disney channel movie was being shown 3 times in a row STRAIGHT!
Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
I always sleep with the TV on. I also have Tivo, which often changes the channels while I sleep. It could be that the shows and commercials I hear during that time have a subliminal influence. Sometimes my dreams interact with the tube. And a well-trained Tivo should reliably reflect my taste, but it is not there yet - it needs a better AI. I think Tivo has the best potential to rate shows.
Didn't even notice the sig, my fault. You're right though, that's what I've always said about everything from advertising to tech support, the key is people need to be friendly and human while still being intelligent, I try and remember that when contacting a tech support or even someone who runs a smaller website about a problem with it. They probably have the hear the same thing eighty times a day and if you make their job easier they'll be more likely to go that extra mile to help you out, it's one of those simple things humanity really helps.
I'm sure many others will say this.
;-)
I've been living without a TV for almost 2 years now, and honestly I missed it badly only during the first few months. After that, I discovered that I'm actually getting much more rest while at home, feel generally less-stressed, and most importantly - can concentrate on strenous coding tasks for longer stretches at a time.
And following the tv show "you can't live without" is just as easy thanks to bittorrent..
Don't go silently into that peaceful night
I don't watch Television. Period. Ever. I don't have cable. I don't have sat. I have nothing. I bought a 32 inch Sony Vvega for the sole purpose of hooking up my TG16, SNES, GENESIS, SATURN, N64, DREAMCAST, PS2, XBOX, and GAMECUBE.
With that much quality entertainment, I never miss reality television.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
I'm a teen, yet I never (NEVER) watch TV. Ironically, I have one in my room.. It gets used as a blue light source but nothing else. Honestly, I don't miss it. Programming is crap from what I'd experienced, and it bores me. I'd rather chill out with any book on my shelf. (Several Jim Morrison biographies and The Outlaw Bible of American Poetry right now)
;)
TV is boooring. Get my news online, get my entertainment from playing guitar, writing poetry, reading, listening to music, playing games, hanging out with my gf. Honestly, it doesn't hurt to work the brain muscles a tad. Or the fingers.
The ultimate advertisement would get into your subconcious without you realising it.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Due to an unusual work shift, I have to record any TV show I want to watch. I converted an old system into a DVR (using SageTV and couple Hauppauge tuner/capture cards). Works great.
When it comes to playback, I copy the files to my main system. I strip out the commercials using Pegasys TMPGEnc MPEG editor. Knowing that most commercial breaks are three minutes, I can just jump around the timeline until I find where the show resumes. Then I watch the shows on the pc or burn them out to a DVD-RW for later TV viewing.
Really quite simple.
Anyone remember when there were 2-3 seconds of black silence between commercials? I remember noticing it, as the years passed, decrease and decrease. Now, there is no gap at all. One commercial blasts away, ends, and the next one comes immediately blasting away.
At least let me take a breather between "commercial messages!" I genuinely think commercial watching was a more pleasant experience just ten years ago. There are a few gems ("It's so easy, even a caveman can do it"), but for the most part even the jokes are completely unfunny, and the car commercials are so phoney that I know nothing about the car other than it looks good on a wet mountain turn.
I didn't used to feel this way. There used to be a time I'd sit through commercials and didn't mind them. They've gotten steadily stupider and repetitive, even ripping each other off.
You made the news!
I saw something at Best Buy the other day that really stopped me in my tracks: A refridgerator with a television built in. I thought to myself, "Who the fuck watches television to the point that they need one on their fridge?" And yet there it was, manufactured by LG(Koreans taking us down!). Now, I'm not saying that TV is totally worthless, I personally enjoy the Daily Show and South Park, but I think Americans are way too addicted to the television....it's time to back away before it's too late....
Monstar L
I'll admit that you make several valid points, but overall your post reaks of intellectualistic superiority. First of all, it's dangerous to condemn the 'masses' for enjoying television after a long day at work. I'm sure you waste your time on something as well, although slashdot.org may seem like a more stimulating pursuit, for example, it is still really not accomplishing anything.
The TV could be so much more. Chances are you can get more from the editorial section of the newspaper than in a half hour news program. And where is the science and history on TV? Maybe we will get a science channel once cable hits channel 700. *sigh*
Perhaps it's because I'm up here in Canada, but it seems as if we have plenty of quality programing. Documentaries on CBC constantly interest; a recent one documented a National Guard battallion deploying to your ongoing War in Iraq. Television as a media can convey things that you can't read about to the same degree, and television allows lower-quality productions.
As for history, our History channel here does occasionally present valuable historical documentaries, although I'll conceed that their presentation of 'JAG' three times a day does diminish their esteem. But heck, sometimes it's fun to kick back and watch 'JAG', ridicule the rediculous plotlines and turn off the brain.
So while I do understand your argument, and conceed its validity in some parts, I find it hard to pass blanket condemnation of television.
"There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
- Bob Dylan
I am a free man!
What?
A New York Times article that doesn't require registration?
What's next?
I'm scared...
PLEASE tell me that TV shows are not rated by one monopolistic "media research" company. I only ever hear about Nielsen Media Research, they seem to be the Alpha and Omega of ratings.
I can't believe a single corporation would have so much power.
You can't take the sky from me...
I do not watch television, but there are some exceptions. I will watch formula 1 races, but I do something else during commercials. Other live sporting events that don't suck, like hockey, might make the cut also. But I only watch those when I'm at my parents house because I wont pay for cable.
I will also watch television shows I deem to be quality if they have commercials removed. That includes stuff like DVDs, fansubs, tivos and downloads of anything I consider good programming. Let me tell you, there is not a lot on that list. With all the time I save not watching TV I spend it playing video games, programming, reading books riding my bike or working. You should try it.
I think not.
I did, in 1989, and haven't looked back since.
I've seen some shows at friend's houses. Sienfield, 90120, etc. It's crap, tripe, purile and pointless.
In place of a TV, I have a library of over 2000 books. History, sciences, arts (H.R. Giger rules!), fiction, biographies, the list goes on.
I've taken up writing (short stories written already, novel due soon) playing the guitar, building models, doing SCCA Solo II, and find the time not wasted by watching the boob tube to be so much more.....valuable, productive, enjoyable, you name it.
There was a video link on ebaumsworld recently which was a compliation of the crap that's currently on TV. I was appalled and it only reinforced my view that killing my TV in 1989 was a good thing.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
Ads are almost always something I don't like (McDonalds, etc.)
Ads are for something I loath (random name-brand items that have nothing going for them other than, they are, well name-brand. E.g. clothing.)
In fact, I will actively avoid advertised brands in some cases, figuring they spend a lot on advertising. Example: When I purchased an "air bed" (a la, Select Comfort) I found a non-name brand at ½ the price. I am still happy with it 7 years later.
What do I buy? If it is small stuff, I get whatever Costco or Target sells, etc. If it is something where quality might actually matter, I carefully research it first.
I.e. I don't think I am ever "sold" anything - I "buy" what I need/want (and I know the difference).
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Nielsen is god, you must refer to nielsen for the patent issues. Nielsen runs netware, and nielsen is running linux. linux us now.! doom us to eternity. oh holy nielsen, show us what is wrong with this system. Tell us now that money is gone, that nothing remains. Let us crown upon your stores and gaze in advertisement.
*ducks*
FOX News Channel
Score: -1 Flamebait
Family Guy
Score: +5 Funny
Golf Channel
Score: 0 (who the hell watches it?)
I don't have a TV, so I don't watch it.
You'd be surprised at how much more time you have. I also find that the bullshit I hear about from our "elected" representatives shocks me quite a bit more.
TV: Societies' prozac
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
is how there will be able to be any TV advertising revenue at all in the future.
Unless technology is hobbled via DRM, people will have the capability to skip ads. The only ads which will get watched will be watched voluntarily (as opposed to being watched out of lethargy).
Here's something of interest, though:
https://adwords.google.com/select/tips.html
From the page here:
Use a strong call-to-action.
Example: "Register for membership now," "Save on DVDs," "Get cheap stereos," or "Join now for 20% discount."
I think what's going on here is that I'm targetting a different market (oh God, what have I become), than on Google adwords. Since it's an expected advertising environment, they want you to use strong "advertiser" words like that.
Here, since it's just a forum, people don't want stuff that's as blaring or strong.
Lesson learned. I do programming for a living, so I'm new to add this. Thanks for being patient :)
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
You (and most internet advertisers) are missing one important part of advertising: name recognition. McDonald's is well aware that nobody suddenly says "I'm hungry, lets go to McDonald's" when their ads come on. They just need me to remember them when I am hungry latter.
If they thought the ad was a factor in the decision they wouldn't waste their money advertising outside of meal hours. There is no reason to think I will go to McDonald's at 3pm when their ad comes on. They just want to be sure when I'm hungry their name is considered. (And because it is fast food, when I'm hungry I get satisfied then)
You need to target your ads in the same way. It isn't about click thorough, it is about name recognition. So long as you are targeting the right people, and they see/hear your name, you have succeeded even if they don't click your ad.
Well, there is one other reason to advertise: You like and want to support a program. Not a good one, but if you are choosing between two otherwise equal (band for buck) forums, it is a good one.
McDonald's is a good example. I haven't been to one in a long time, but they are the first thing that comes to mind when I want an example.
http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=248
What really pissed me off (thus no more cable) is that I'm paying for cable channels and after prime time almost all of them are infomercials!
Why should I pay for content that I'm not getting while these TV spammers pay to show their commercials all night?
I think we deserve 50% off for those 12 hours of infomercials.
Don't even get me started on 8 minutes of content between commercials. You barely get interested again before the next break. Then they run another lower third animated graphic over the top of the current show telling what comes on later.
Greedy bastards.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
When I used to watch TV regularly, it was during the work week, to relax a bit before sleeping. Ads did not help that at all. I would get interested in a program, until the advertisements came on, at which point I would start flipping channels. Inevitably I would stop on something else that I found entertaining, until it got to ads, where I would start flipping again, and often return to the original program I was watching. Of course, this habit led me to watch three or four different programs simultaneously, and not really understanding any of them. To address this, I started staying on one channel, but would mute the ads as soon as they came on. I kept a novel at hand to read while the ads were on, and would periodically glance up to see if my programming was back on. More often than not, I got absorbed in the book I was reading and ended up ignoring the TV. Now, my television sits on a shelf collecting dust. I read more, I get my news from the BBC and CBC websites, and I seem to be much better insulated from the juvenile and nonsensical drivel that is popular culture. The television medium needs to improve, or die.
"I get my news from the web"...yes and thats why your on slashdot... Actually im going to agree with your young white male theory. Ive grown to hate tv. I avoid it as much as possible. Many of my friends were tv junkies 'till around the end of high school when they realized how dumb it is. We have all been happier, creativer and productiver without it. I still like some tv shows but it's not worth it to watch them on tv (bittorrent or rent/buy dvds).
really bored? My blog
"This long New York Times article (10 pages; no registration required) reports on the mismeasure of television (TV)."
Thanks for letting us know that "TV" refers, in fact, to "television" in the article synopsis. I was ready to pull up Webster's, had you not interceded.
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Think about it, if you watch TV just two hours a day, over 52 weeks (one year) this boils down to 104 hours. That's more than four days (and if you subtract sleep time - a whole week) lost to fuck knows what.
I think what's going on here is that I'm targetting a different market (oh God, what have I become), than on Google adwords. Since it's an expected advertising environment, they want you to use strong "advertiser" words like that.
:)
Here, since it's just a forum, people don't want stuff that's as blaring or strong.
Lesson learned. I do programming for a living, so I'm new to add this. Thanks for being patient
Here's what I don't get:
When I want to find a hosting solution, i fire up google. Or I grab the latest issue of my computer magazine that has a review of different hosters. Or I ask some friend that already has hosting.
But I definitely do not go to slashdot and hope to find some solution in a random sig.
So if I am here, reading slashdot, you can be pretty sure that I am not interested in something like this.
Are there that many people that are?
("Oh, interesting story, lets read the comments. Oh, shiny ad for a hosting solution, lets stop reading slashdot and look at that instead.")
Seriosly, I can't imagine that.
But I think I see your point... I watch the Simpsons, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Six Feet Under etc., but I watch them on DVD.
There is a lot of good content on TV still, but I refuse to wade through a million crappy shows to find it and subject myself to a billion aobnoxious ads to watch it.
I don't own a TV, and I wouldn't watch broadcast TV if I did. I don't want ads. I want to watch a show when I want to watch it, not in the arbitrary window where it's been scheduled. I won't pay a monthly cable bill when I'm only interested in >1% of the product.
There actually are lots of people who have clicked.
I get more referrals from slashdot than I do from google adwords. I wouldn't have imaged that either.
But then, there are a lot of things that people order online that I wouldn't fathom.
For instance, I could never imagine buying jewelry online. There's a large market for it. I couldn't imagine buying flowers, or gift baskets. I couldn't imagine buying sunglasses. I'm one of those people who has to simply buy some things in person.
But yes, people actually do click the links on this site. Strange as that may be.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
I don't mind RTFA but 10 pages is too much /snore
What is TV? Anything without hyper links is dead.
Oh well, what the hell...
I disconnected cable long ago. I was tired of paying $50/mo for tripe.
TLC killed off all their worthwhile shows and turned into the "home improvement and biker channel".
Scifi channel turned into the "John edwards show".
Paramount pretty much permanently killed star trek with "Voyager" and "Enterprise".
FOX cancelled Futurama.
The rest? Well, I can get them in DVD box sets, an entire season at a time, with commentary and extras, without any commercials, and watch them whenever I want. It's a hell of a lot cheaper, too.
I recall reading somewhere that for the first time in history since the introduction of television, viewership is actually going down . It honestly wouldn't suprise me.
You forgot to close your grrr tag. Now the whole rest of this page is going to be grrred. =(
We think that TV is paid for by the toothpaste company because people see the ads and buy toothpaste. That isn't quite how it works. What is going on is an ad company goes to the toothpaste company and does their sales show (which they get paid for even if they don't get the job) and then the toothpaste company pays them even more money. Next the ad company pays someone else to tell them how many people are watching and then they do a nice song and dance and give those numbers to the people that are paying them. The real facts of how much toothpaste is sold rarely is ever considered in the whole game and the end consumber is just reduced to a mostly made up stistical number.
Never forget, YOU are the PRODUCT being sold to the advertisers. The shows are produced to maximize sales. Of you. To advertisers.
You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
cancel cable.
save yourself the $50/mo and read a book instead. you won't miss tv at all.
In Soviet Russia reality TV shows explain YOU!
Rediculous is ridiculous!
I think Slashdot signatures are actually an *exceptional* way to advertise geek-related things. What other way can you get advertising INLINE with the comments people are already reading? Additionally, people subconsciously trust "real humans" (as much as a Slashdotter can be considered a real human) more than faceless ads on webpages.
I know I myself signed up with my current hosting provider because I saw a link in someone's sig that looked like a great deal. Turned out to be a fantastic deal, I signed up, and that guy assuredly got a kickback.
Actually I'd like to see a point by point comparison between the Survivor Show and the 2004 Presidential Election. I bet the content is actually pretty similar.
-- No matter how great your triumphs or how tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less.
Is as much as radio has become, TV has become more or less a source of background noise. Unless it's a first run episode or movie most can't resist watching, most of us tune it out at least as much as we tune it in.
Take soap operas, for example. They have moving pictures and moving colors and stuff, but how many viewers actually focus on anything other than the "John, I thought you were dead! So did I!" audio track?
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
"One eyed, one horned, flyin' portable people meter"
Sure sounds strange to me.
Ok all of you folks who wrote "I've gone X years without a TV!" and "cancel your cable!" ... quick question... do you have a family? The people I live with would lynch me if I removed the TV.
My wife likes TLC because sometimes it has some good ideas, every once in a while, and they have a genuine appeal to make people happy. (ie, look we took this slob and redid his wardrobe or gave him $1000 for his neighbor to remodel a room, and now he's happy!).
Her son likes his shows. Me, I like comedy or news. But I usually find myself watching something they're watching, getting annoyed and getting up and doing something else.
The PVR gets used quite a bit and commercials are pretty funny when you whiz by them at 8x speed and make your own fake chipmunk-sounding voiceovers to them.
FLR
How about an over the air science and history station? Something more than just cooking shows?
...and honestly, I haven't noticed a difference. That is, except that I think more clearly, I've wrapped up about ten books that I'd been meaning to finish, and I no longer know (or care) what those wacky bints on "Charmed" are up to.
I think people follow links in sigs because it's coming from an individual that's promoting something that actually means something to them instead of some corporation that's just trying to squeeze more cash from people. I completely ignore all web ads (text or otherwise), but I followed your sig.
I currently have 500 MB of space and 5 GB/month free for 3 years through 1and1, but I'll probably check your site out again when that expires.
Do you mean the original show, or the remake? If the remake, I have no idea why people like that show. I mean it is really bad Sci Fi, they took a great show, and then just basically cut it to shreads and made a whole new show out of it with bad plots and even badder acting.
The only way the new Battlestar Galactica can get worse, is if they made it a reality show.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
When she's gone the TVs in the house are OFF. If she's gone for several days, the TV is OFF for all that time. When I'm in a room by myself, the TV is OFF. When we started living together six years ago, she had a TV going 24 hours a day including while we were sleeping. I finally convinced her that she could sleep if it was off and she told me the next day that she had not slept so well in years, I said, "DUH!".
I get my news from the Internet and I get it when I want it and in the degree of detail that I select. I don't want things predigested into a 30 second story and force fed to me. Entertainment on TV? Blech!! There's no entertainment worth watching on TV. "Reality" shows are NOT reality, they are garbage. The various series are uninspired nowadays, or maybe I'm just jaded, but what's the difference?
I don't know if there's much hope for TV, but given the braindead majority of the population, it'll probably go on like this for decades to come. I'm just glad those of us who are capable of thought have options like the Internet, books, live performances and lots of activities that don't involve TV.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
They're measuring the wrong test point. There's no real understanding of the causal relationship between watching an ad and buying the product, let alone watching a show containing an ad and purchase, or hearing a show and making a purchase. It's all statistical correlation, which implicitly takes many causal paths into account, like word of mouth. They should stop pretending they have the mechanics understood, and just need some data about the human/receiver interface. They should instead study the mass psychology, sociology of ad messages, and other statistical dynamics that actually help predict the group behavior they're trying to control. But of course they won't: Arbitron and Neilsen are in the "measurement" business, and don't know how to sell anything else. However, as measurable webcasts become more of the media market, they'll get their data easily at the servers, and their model stil won't be complete. So they'll eventually have to turn to the statistical analysis anyway. Bottom line: TV will continue to suck indefinitely, and misinformed TV execs will continue to think they're geniuses.
--
make install -not war
There are some things on TV worth watching. Just not enough to justify paying for advertisements. If I want to see something (which is rare), I maybe download it or ask somebody who'd be watching it anyway to copy it for me or something. Put the bill at the feet of somebody who gets more benefit out of it. It's more efficient and you free yourself from the control of the magic box.
...but is it art?
Ironically, I believe that broadcasters would take some comfort in your warning of "don't overdo it!" Broadcasters will show as much advertising as you will tolerate. That someone is unhappy with the amount of advertising, yet still watches, tells them that they are advertising the right amount. Unless you actually stop watching, it won't change.
Then the american version appeared. Louder, noisier, with inane hosts and manufactured "conflict" between the teams where there used to be good natured competition. Less and less science, more and more "garage cam". Builds where clever engineering was forgotten in favorite of getting the best planted junk.
Now, it is no more. Instead, I can watch decorating show marathons. Or not- I haven't turned on TLC in months.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
Along those lines, it's also more convincing because it's a real person who is putting their personal credibility on the line on a board like this, as opposed to a blurb written by someone you'll never meet, much less be able to bark out should it be fake.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
I haven't watched television in my house since late 2000 (I've seen about 2 hours total in others' houses since). I think it's pretty clear-cut in my case: I don't watch television.
Television is not for education. Or entertainment. It's for idling your mind after a stressful day of work or for forgetting that there are thousands of people somewhere in the world that want to kill you. After 9/11 (in a post 9/11 world...), I watched so much news, I got addicted. Now, I try not to watch or listen to the news due to the depression I got afterwards. I still am addicted to checking the news on the web, but reading about it doesn't burn out the mind as much as seeing and hearing images of death and misery.
Targeting emotions IS targeting the brain.
Nice Marmot
Two hours a day is pretty freakin' insane. If I meant two hours a day I wouldn't say "just".
Damn, I think I got myself a new business model :)
I don't think it is a necessary human reaction, though. there are plenty of people who find that stuff repulsive. i think the proportion of such dissenters is different in every country. maybe we have so many people who love this crap because we are so obsessed with competition that we love it when people fail.
What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
I can't remember whose law it was, but whoever said it was certainly right here: you cannot measure something without changing the measurement. Of course it's easy to see how entrusting someone to keep a diary of what they've watched can be abused. The set-top people meter illustrates this: if my preferences were being recorded, of course I'd be much more discerning in what I watched. If I came home one evening and really wanted to switch my brain off and rest, without a people-meter box I might ... conceivably ... though of course this has never happened ... I might watch Survivor or Idol. But if this activity was directly supporting the creation of such crap I would make sure I NEVER watched it.
Same goes for the Portable Meter. If my perferences were being recorded, I would OF COURSE avoid commercial radio stations, Muzak I didn't like, and the myriad other things that I'd suddenly become aware of. I'd want to buck the system, baby. Everything I did would suddenly become a moral judgement: "If this little box detects that I'm doing this, then there'll be more of this in the world: Do I want that?"
And anyway, what type of person volunteers to wear a Portable People Meter? Is it someone extroverted enough to not mind having their lives analysed by advertising industry grunts? Is it someone idealistic enough to want to mess up these measurements? Is it the cunning and selfish person who is willing to sacrifice a little privacy in order to get more of the type of TV shows that they like? Are these normal people?
American television is in the business of farming, farming willing consumers, farming willing corporate citizens, farming conformance. THey are in the business of breeding, of evolving a particular brand of American, one who works a lot and consumes a lot. One who is patriotic (translation: is easily manipulated by trigger cues appealing to sentimentality). One who is for the most part apathetic about voting and who accepts authority. One who accepts people of different cultures/races in the workplace (the better to flood the labor supply, my dear). One who is easily scared by TV propaganda so that military power can be used to invade and open new markets for the corporations that own the TV stations and networks.
Just as prehistoric hunters, pastoral peoples and farmers domesticated cattle and sheep and dogs, etc., so too has the economic elite (through TV, primarily) domesticated a certain breed of homo sapiens. Just as those humans of long ago bred their domesticated animals generation after generation for certain desirable characteristics, so too has the economic elite produced us Americans by altering our culture. THey didn't evolve us physically, but culturally. And TV is the primary tool.
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Why is this modded troll? Are you implying that the Bush administration is not anti-science? Please check with all major science orginizations (not coroporate "think tanks") and you will find that within the scientific community the Bush administration is largely feared and disdained.
TLC has gone from The Learning Channel to The Ladies Channel.
You are my new king!
For real, people who brag about not watching TV need to get over themselves. I stopped watching TV for a while in college, then I watched it for a while, now I'm not again, but, shit, bragging about it is retarded. TV is entertainment. Heaven forbid people enjoy watching TV instead of reading a book, which is so totally different and holier. Apparently, all entertainment must be painful or else it's evil.
I will reveal the dark secret of the 0-15 demographic.
Outside of brand and product awareness, most people over the age 25 are "statistically unaffected by advertising"*. Most people under the age of 16 are heavily influenced, with a significant decrease each year after, ending at the age of 25. This is not because "brand loyalty" is established by that age. "Brand loyalty" does not exist. "Brand laziness" does exist, but it is really the opposite of loyalty and is almost impossible to advertise for.
The 0-15 demographic is called the 18-24 demographic when speaking to the public for obvious reasons. This is the dirty secret of the industry: You are not targeted because it is so much easier to convince a seven year old of something than a 40 year old. The amount of money it would cost to convince you is more than the profit to be had.
On an end note: The 0 - 15 demographic was previously known as the 4 - 18 demographic. We all seem to be getting more sophisticated.
* "statistically unaffected by advertising" = cost to influence > profit
I have a TV set for ONE reason and ONE reason only: To watch sports. Once in a while I might catch something on TLC or Discovery or Public Access that is halfway educational but otherwise TV is just an annoyance to me. The annoyance/waste-of-time of the commercials completely negates anything positive I could gain from watching something like reality TV. Personally, I feel dumber after sitting in front of a TV for two hours watching this so-called entertainment. If I want entertainment I'll go get fucking drunk and go to a titty bar. Why TV is such a dominant form of media is beyond me. I went with a TV for almost a year and everybody would always be shocked when I told them I didn't have a TV. Now I have one so I can watch some baseball and football on ESPN. Other than that I'll watch commercial-less DVDs that I get unlimited rentals to for $10/month at Hollywood Video.
I read a book once where the author mentioned having a shirt with the words "Kill Your Television!" and a picture of a smashed TV on the front. He said it made people around him nervous when he wore it.
I stopped watching TV about 4 years ago and haven't missed it in the slightest. When I'm not at work, I play computer games (sometimes including MMORPGs), I have an SNES and a GameCube, I read science fiction and programming books, and I go for walks in the local park.
Even the shows that I used to like when I was younger (Star Trek: TNG, Law & Order, that sort of thing) seem like mindless pap now when I happen to see them at someone else's place. The sad truth is, 95% of television content really sucks ass. *Really* sucks ass.
Even if you don't have useful things to do with that time--give up television anyway. Fully 14 minutes out of every hour are commercial advertisements whose SOLE PURPOSE is to make you want to buy things that you otherwise wouldn't want to buy. Much of this advertising is targeted at young children, which is really disgusting. Children's brains are not the same as fully-developed adult brains, and the advertisers use psychologists to craft commercials which will have maximum impact on your young child's mind, making them want to nag you to take them to McDonalds or Disney World or buy them whatever it is. Simply by being on, a television is probably doing some amount of harm to anyone viewing it uncritically. Influencing their subconscious, making them want to buy Coca-Cola so they too can have a Bikini-Chick(tm) and be Cool and Refreshed. Ugh.
Do yourself a favor, and unplug the damn thing for a few weeks. You might find it liberating, as I did.
I've been a nielsen weenie since 2003. I boycott almost all reality shows (some exceptions include monster house/garage and overhaulin') and MTV shows. I tend to float shows on the History, Food Network (Rachael Ray/Iron Chef/Good Eats), Sci-Fi (Stargate/BSG/Andromeda and some of the novelty ones like Ghosthunters), and of course Adult Swim and other venues of Family Guy. The only network shows I conciously try to float are The Simpsons (obligatory) and House on Fox (I really this show) and my roommate likes Smallville, which is ok. Enterprise needs to die, so I haven't floated that at all. While waiting for House to start, I have sometimes floated NCIS to start. I conciously avoid hitting American Idol. I also like CSI, but I only watch the reruns on SpikeTV, which only counts toward syndication numbers and never new episodes on NBC.
So, I am definitely not your typical Nielsen person. The problem is, my market is located in new england. Our metering is scored lower than the People Meter participants in the big cities (NYC, LA, Chicago), so my contribution is probably washed out by the overwhelming number of the people to whom you referred. But I'm still proud that I'm doing my best to subvert Hollywood.
Instead of spending mind-numbing hours wasting our lives on television, we should instead invest those hours in...Slashdot? Either way you still end up with a fat, pasty-faced loser killing time until the Big Macs eventually choke his arteries into submission.
I don't really see much of a difference here.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Yes, yes... you are so above it all. Please go off and die now. Thaaank yooouuuu. OK. Buh-bye.
FOX news fearmongering! Nevermind 9/11, a few thousand people died and the economy got a short-term boost. How about the tens of thousands who starve to death every single day? How about the tens of thousands of CHILDREN who work in SWEATSHOPS getting paid like 8 cents to make that $100 shirt you're wearing?? How about hundreds of millions of tonnes of garbage produced every year by Americans? How about Monsanto's BGH being added to nearly all American milk, despite clear evidence that it causes lots of medical problems in the cows and leads to Americans consuming more bacteria and antibiotics through their milk?
This world is so fucked up, I can see why we all need television for fondling our minds. Its just easier to ignore all the shit that's really going on out there. But even if we're numb to it, all that shit is still happening. Maybe we should turn off our TVs and start trying to fix this world, a little bit at a time.
I didn't like Seinfeld either, but I'm not going to declare my comedic tastes as the end of all things, and that other people's tastes are the result of numbing.
You're a boorish prick, plain and simple. I'd wager a month's salary that all your "friends" (if you have any) laugh at you behind your back.
Remember The Terminator, the scene where two kids are sitting in front of an old TV box and then the camera goes around the box and shows that the box is burning inside (I guess they used it as a fireplace.) I suppose the director wanted to convey the feeling of ultimate distruction :)
You can't handle the truth.
Memo to the television-free: WE DON'T CARE! No one cares if you choose to not watch television. We are not impressed. We do not give a damn. We read books, too. And have hobbies, just like you. There's nothing special about you. You are boorish little stains on the bedsheets of society.
So when it comes to televisionr elated issues, please be so kind as to just shut the fuck up. You don;t watch television, therefore your opinions on it are unwanted, irrelevant and useless. No one cares. Please piss off to your happy little la la land in your parent's basement.
Thank you for your time.
We return you to your regular messages.
Our picture tube died on the old TV, and it was a month before I got around to replacing it. Other than the occasional "I wonder which of the 15 Simpsons reruns Fox has in rotation tonight," I didn't miss much.
Thats 'set top box' for those not in the know. They paid me and my roommate 50 bucks for every six months we had it and handed us a remote. Everytime one of us turned on the TV, the person(s) were supposed to press a number on the remote. If there were any outsiders, they were to press yet another number. We kind of did it for about a week, after that we sort of _lost_ the remote. And its crap anyway. My roomie would leave CSPAN on all day and night on Saturday just to _quote_ fuck with the eggheads ... with MBA's _quote_. Since then I have met a two more people who had the STBs and did pretty much the same, although their sentiments regarding that were expressed differently.
And I still havent figured out how they can extrapolate from the miniscule (relatively speaking) slice of society that they listen in on (a large %age of whom would most probably behave like us). I am no expert in polling, but even assuming that they have a statistically relevant set of subjects as in a scientific poll, it still seems flaky at best. And yes I know that estimating properties/behaviors on a collection is far easier and more accurate than estimating properties of an individual entities. Its just that humans are not atomic particles who have to obey the laws of physics, and AFAIK group pschycology still has some way to go.
I do not doubt the fundamental correctness of their assumptions, algorithms and techniques, but somehow I have a feeling that someone quite like Karl Rove figured out that they could fleece a shitload of money off of PHBs in tv land by using fancy math/science words, which they knew the PHBs wouldnt understand (and probably wouldnt care about), while promising them the marketing dept's holy grail, did it, and are still getting away with it.
Heh. I laughed out loud when I read William Gibson's latest book - Pattern Recognition. The main character sanded the logo off of her watch (among other things). I have done the exact same thing, many times - "de badging" products. I have taken labels off of clothes (and won't buy them if the label is incorporated in such a way as to be non-removable).
Maybe it is because of those stupid "alligator" shirts that I never had as a teen - but now that I can afford "labels", I avoid them. Maybe it is the engineer in me - if it doesn't have a purpose, I "simplify" the product.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
yeah.. now only if you would've learned how to speak english:
we have all been happier, *more* creative, and *productive*...
My question is simply this: is it that we should be should be 'unwinding' our minds with ironically mindless, repetitive and predictible content on TV? Or rather that we should allow our minds to 'gently uncoil', if you will, by reading, listening to intellectually stimulating music, and by light interaction with others (e.g. Slashdot)? Which sounds more soothing to you?
I won't even pretend that I should or even can tell you or anybody else how to spend their free time. But I can attest to the fluctuations in my own life caused by watching TV as opposed to more classical forms of entertainment. I must tell you, there's a big difference between watching an hour of Law & Order and kicking back with a beer or a coffee and reading some decent literature. Even if the book sucks, you're still using your mind without straining yourself too much.
-AT
Working in a DevOps shop is like playing in a band made up entirely of keytarists.
today half the ads are sociopathic. I am not just talking about the content of the ads, but the actual ads themselves (the way they are filmed and the manner in which the actors deliver their lines). Companies like McDonalds seem to think that "stalking" their potential consumers is a good way to get them to remember their products/foods... i think marketers are going to learn a very harsh lesson very soon and for a very long time.
Thank you very much.
And what is so bad about reality television? Take Survivor for example, it's a fake situation but real people who exhibit a broad range of emotions and interpersonal relationship skills (and when we are lucky, no skills at all).
These shows aren't about drama, although they use that to get you hooked, they are always about human behavior and interaction. If you looked at it that way it would be a lot more interesting.
Then again, I'm talking to fellow slashdotters who don't know the first thing about "interpersonal relationships".
Get your Unix fortune now!
When I was growing up, my parents kept a tight reign on how much TV we watched. How tight? Well we averaged about 5-10 hours a month. (Contrast that with kids who watched that much in one afternoon.)
Game shows used to be more popular, Some of them even ran during prime time on the major networks. Today there is even a cable channel devoted to game shows.
If you're bored, it can be interesting to watch really old game shows and try to figure out how the celebrities became celebrities. Many of them had real careers that were cut short by the fickleness of Hollywood or public taste.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Live sports is the only reason to pay for cable/sat TV IMO, if you are a sports fan it is a must. Watching a sport once the result has being broadcast on TV or you over hear someone say the result is simply not an option.
Saying thing I personally enjoy watching the occasional Rugby and Soccer matches on TV but am not prepared to pay the amounts that sky want for this service.
When I was growing up, my parents kept a tight reign on how much TV we watched. How tight? Well we averaged about 5-10 hours a month. (Contrast that with kids who watched that much in one afternoon.) The TV was reserved for watching the news (even then it was Dad who watched, not us); home videos; various family films; and occasionally video games.
Strange as this may appear, I am actually grateful to my parents for basically banning TV. Why? Because instead of wasting hours in front of the TV; I was stimulating my mind. For instance, when we lived in an apartment complex in north Seattle, the neighborhood kids would all get together to play various versions of tag and hide'n'seek. We would stag contests of strength and achievement, and many other games. This playtime helped me develop social skills and kept me in decent shape. I whole-heartedly agree with the sentiment that most of the anti-social behavior and obesity of today's kids stems from hours of watching TV.
What else did I do with all of my free time? I read. I read mysteries, adventure, science fiction, historical fiction; you name the genera, I read it. I read anything I could get my hands on. In the long months of summer, when a trip to the library seemed like a trip through the Sahara; I read old encyclopedias that we had lying around. For his first year in high school, my brother was home schooled. So that summer, when I ran out of other material, I read his text books. I read his science, history, and literature books. Let me tell you, there is nothing more satisfying than acing a science placement test on your first day of ninth grade science. Reading really broadened my horizons; for example in the sixth grade, for no reason other than that I was curious, I read a college level book on the twenty or so major religions of the world. I followed that up by reading every available book on the myths of various cultures.
Now I am not trying to brag, I am trying to make the point that had I been allowed to watch TV, I would not have been able to do all that I did. Now I am not saying that there weren't times when I wasted hours in front of a TV watching the sludge that is pushed as entertainment or playing video games; but those times were few and far between.
The point is; in the absence of TV, kids will turn to other pursuits. They may not become Einsteins or philosophers, but they will do something with their lives. Some will turn to sports, to invention, to repair, or as in my case to academics. I am grateful to my parents for restricting my TV use; and a serous note to the parents out there, provide your kids with some sort of stimulation. Do not allow them to waste all of their time in front of the TV.
Its intersting, reading your post made me think about my own viewing habits. I certainly pay for cable every month, but my tv viewing is limited to DS9 (never saw it before), cooking shows (good eats mainly), and Angel.
I am watching effectivly long plot driven stories (Angel moreso than DS9), and cooking shows which really makes more sense than learning cooking out of a book.
Also of note is that I don't watch commercials. I have a mythtv box, and the commercial skip is worth the 500-600 dollars I spent on it.
The broadcasters may be happy with more advertising, but the advertisers, the ones who write the checks, are increasingly unhappy with buying time that is devalued by excessive amounts of advertising per hour. How can your message stand out when it is dumped into a long commercial break that alienates the viewer and has 10 other companies hawking their products?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
From the article:
Can everything with sound be coded, I asked? ''Yes,'' Morris said. Will everything with sound be coded? ''Yes,'' he said.
"Look, Ma, I'm ON TV!"
And that's, I'm afraid, is the main reason why the programming will just go worse and worse. Because at any time there will be a guaranteed watchers base, if not for the sheer excitement over watching those poor dumbasses being abused in front of the camera, then for the chance that "ONE DAY I could be THERE too, Ma!"
Years ago i decided *not* to have a TV.
Am i missing something ? I think not.
News: online and radio
Series: online (torrent) and dvd
Movies: going out in the real world (and dvd)
Sport: most bars in town have a big screen (and an ad-free game)
European Linux user, living in Antwerp
I don't much care about the old style set top box monitoring; but the proposal to watermark every last bit of media output that hits the environment seems distinctly dodgy. Especially given that, depending on the number of unique IDs that can be practically encoded, they could easily enough tie them to times, locations, and specific audio tracks. Once this gets tied into the billing information we give up when we purchase the stuff(oh, test consumer#3423523424 heard John Smith playing his XM car radio when he was shopping downtown this afternoon) it won't be about anonymous data anymore.
That someone is unhappy with the amount of advertising, yet still watches, tells them that they are advertising the right amount.
No it isn't. The free TV was a temporary side trip from the already established alternative. The studio did nothing right to keep him watching. It may be a long time before he returns.
Unless you actually stop watching, it won't change.
Have you driven through your neighborhood lately? Have you counted the houses with TV antennas? Have you seen the market share stastics for the local television markets?
It is changing. Over the air TV is just waiting for the funeral. It just doesn't know it's dead yet.
The truth shall set you free!
The broadcasters should'n forget that their viewers with short attention spans might just get bored during comercial breaks, and just turn off the TV.
I noted these and other behaviors when I kept a log for one research group. My summation was that for a very large chunk of time when the TV or cable was on, we weren't watching what it looked like we were watching.
Badger badger badger badger badger badger badger mushroom mushroom.
Flash animations, they really replace low-quality television with something better...
Don't worry, I'm in the process of patenting it. The methods detailed include the specification of a "(1),(2),'(3) ???','(4) Profit!'" system, the registry of computer-directed users, the use of computer-directed users to post contextually appropriate messages and the inclusion of advertising taglines in the signatures.
I'm at the ??? stage with respect to guaranteeing succesful sales from this method: I can't find a way to ensure that the materials advocated by my system will be attractive and high-enough quality to get sales. Perhaps that's Someone Else's Problem.
I call it: the slashbot. Comes with Free iPod.
...is that you have difficulty exercising your third brain cell.
It's the delivery bit. A while ago my wife ordered flowers online for her grandma's funeral, which we could not attend -- it was in another country. The only alternative would have been to ask someone else to buy the flowers for us.
For example you can get an idea which of several shows is innovative (as opposed to formulaic), hilarious (not serious), entertaining (not boring), never missed (as opposed to missed), and so on.
Of course this is all very approximate, and a lot of the text on the web is written by the TV networks themselves, but at least you can ask any question you like (which program to people watch in bed, or watch eating pizza, etc).
Never forget the first rule of Fight Club...
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
Let me say I've watched all these shows first run, so I *get it*.
The original battlestar gallactica wasn't that good. But it was science fiction, so we watched it. Along those lines, I think the first season of Buck Rogers was awesome, but mostly because of hot chicks in leather outfits. OHFG.
But ST vs TNG...you are a little right, mostly a whole lot wrong.
ST as a series has far better plot ideas. Like, miles ahead. TNG, the first season is unwatchable. It didn't hit its stride until 3 years in. And then we got 3 decent years of programming. Some of them were quite good.
The trouble with TNG overall is that some ideas were just too forced. They had too many formulas on how to solve plot ideas.
I guess what I'm saying is that the ST:TOS kicked ass.
The coming of PVRs will "help" gather accurate statistics on who is watching what and when. This could then be correlated to who buys what and when. You could even measure how effective your commercials are by seeing who skips over them and who doesn't.
This is turn probably explains why a lot of the so called content providers have been resisting this type of technology. All their claims about the effectiveness of advertising will come up against the reality. Same arguments apply to advertising agencies.
sad that so many people watch so much trash.
...sad
imo the vast majority of tv that people choose to watch is a crap substitute for the life that these people WANT to live.
tv is destroying american culture (at least at present).
I KUT J00 M4NG!!!
personally i've found television a lot more enjoyable ever since i started downloading it. :)
no one agrees anymore about what it really means to watch television
Huh? There is nothing deep about watching television. It is a physical activity, albeit minimal, that requires little in the way of user interaction. Now you can ask yourself do cats and dogs watch television? And if they do, what are they really seeing? So the original question would be valid for a dog or cat but not a couch potato.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Reality TV: I'm watching it, because it's often funnier or more exciting than scripted shows. I don't watch sitcoms anymore. The good reality shows have funnier one-liners and more interesting personalities than I'm going to find in the seventy-eighth season of "Will & Grace". The good reality shows' storylines are less predictable than most scripted shows, and the characters are often more interesting.
I'm really sick of people grouping all reality TV together and dismissing it as a lump. Just like with scripted TV, there are different types of reality shows of varying quality. Just because "According to Jim" is kind of lame, does that mean "Battlestar Galactica" isn't worth watching? Hardly. One is a sitcom, the other is a sci-fi drama. One is about pandering to the lowest common denominator, the other is about quality storytelling.
Some broad categories of reality TV are Competitive, How-To, and Candid. Examples of each type would be "Survivor," "Trading Spaces," and "Real World." Each category has its good and bad shows, and there are enough out there to suit any taste. But if I can recommend a few for the reality-show skeptic:
- America's Next Top Model: come for the beautiful girls, stay for the wacky cast of judges who steal the show
- The Amazing Race: travel around the world, it's one of the best-edited shows of any kind on TV right now
- Semi-Homemade Cooking with Sandra Lee: it's supposed to be serious, but it's funnier than any sitcom; this lady just ain't right
Your fantasies contain the seeds of important concepts.
So with the Internet "doing away with" so-called Big Media, doesn't that mean any monkey with a webcam ought to be able to "produce" his or her own shows?
If you're sick of the pabulum the networks are shoving down your throats, get out there and make something better!
If Podcasting is "the next big thing", then certainly "Vidcasting" (or some such) has to be right around the corner.
We need to lower the barrier to entry.
Why is it that TV should come from the "Studios"? (Why is it Music has to come from the Record Labels?)
We should encourage every broadcast enthusiast to get out there and start producing content. Some "hobbyists" will eventually hone their craft to create some fantastic work. That's how all good film students get started...
Sure, 99% of it will look like an Open Access cable network, but when the remaining 1% is good, it will be Very Very Good -- footage from war-torn nations; independent interviews with local officials; an inner-city youth documenting the struggles of clawing himself out of the ghetto, etc.
"Reality" TV has potential. Fear Factor, The Bachelor, and The Simple Life are *IN NO WAY* based on reality...
One item I didn't see mentioned in the article is how the growing popularity of DVRs (be it TiVo, ReplayTV, MythTV, or Windows Media Center) might impact the view information gained from cable boxes.
Admittedly that is bypassed by the PPM that the article spent most of its time on, but viewer measurements from their cable boxes is something the article did mention.
Standalone DVRs (i.e. ones that aren't built into the cable or satellite box) appear to leave the cable box on continually. Even when they are recording it might be something equivalent to a TiVo suggestion, where a program is recorded in case the viewer might want to watch it.
This would appear to really muck up any statistics pulled for such a cable box, since it is going to claim the viewer was watching something 24 hours a day, usually just whatever happens to be on the channel the last program was recorded from.
A few of these wouldn't throw the numbers off to badly, but the article was talking about 17 million DVRs by the end of the year. (Admittedly it wasn't broken down by integrated vs. standalone) That might be enough to mess up any scheme to measure audience through the cable box...
Am I incorrect in saying that digital television service providers can log all this stuff without any type of voluntarily-installed meter?
That's the point. It's a personal webpage, so I can rant about whatever I want, and only those who care have to read it. If you're on a public webpage like slashdot, what's the point of bragging about how cool you are for not watching TV, when the topic has nothing to do with that? The topic is television market fragmentation, but basically no one talked about that for this whole thread, so whatever it's too late now.
neilson ratings are the reason why star trek enterprise got cancelled. It may have had a huge fan following, but because of the innacuracies of neilson's rating system, it makes it look like low numbers, when in fact it's nothing but an estimate.
My Gawd WTF...
When my wife and I got married, neither of us owned a TV (though each of us had a roomie with a TV prior to getting married). We decided we didn't need one. We've gotten along fine for 27+ years without one.
I have to confess, we did go to her mom's house to watch Dukes of Hazzard most weeks. And we certainly saw bis and pieces of things when visiting folks. But we pretty much ignored TV.
We do have a few DVDs of some of the old sitcoms. But we don't just crash and burn in front of the computer (where we play DVDs) like so many do with a TV.
We haven't missed it. Our kids survived without it. They enjoyed watching it at friends' houses, but never got addicted like so many do.
It's still fun to watch visitors at our house, as it suddenly dawns oin them they don't see a TV. They start looking all around, peering carefully at wooden panels on the wall, convinced we've just hidden it. Nope. Not there.
People ask how we survive without TV. I wonder how some of them function with TV. We read books, We listen to music. We hang out with friends. My wife works in the garden. I play guitar and build/repair guitar amps. We go to movies. Our kids go do stuff with their friends. We play with the dog. We take care of the house and cars. My wife cooks meals from scratch. We sit on the porch and watch the sunset (live! technicolor!) We spend time with teenagers.
We do't have *time* for TV. To make that time would (IMO) definitely dilute our "quality of life" by taking time from something more worthwhile.
Every once in a blue moon, I hear about something on TV that makes one of us wish we had one. But it's rare enough we haven't bothered to get one. Our daughter, 20, hasn't bought one, yet. Our son, 18, in the army, hasn't bought one yet. Either or both of them may, but it doesn't seem to be a priority.
Most of my friends have TVs. That's fine, I don't look down on them or think I'm superior. But I have found that the people I most enjoy spending time with turn out to be people who don't watch that much TV. We don't plan it that way or look for it, that's just how it turns out. Interesting, huh?