Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TV Outside the Box

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the watching-some-internets dept.

C|Net has a story up looking at ways TV stations are moving online. An event on the subject was held during the annual marketing conference sponsored by the Television Bureau of Advertising. From the article: "For the first time, the conference was devoted to a single topic: the importance of the 'multiplatform'--that is, offering content and advertising not only on local broadcast stations but also online, on cell phones and other wireless devices, through video on demand and video iPods. The sole topic was intended to underscore that 'advertisers and their agencies are increasingly demanding a multiplatform strategy from all their media partners,' said Christopher Rohrs, president of the bureau, in a speech he gave to almost 1,200 attendees to begin the conference. "

5 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. is there a television bureau on quality programs ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful


    thought not, oh wait

    people go online to watch media because they are FED UP of being treated as advertisings bitches, TV was an art form now its just a sad classified advert deployment platform, Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd et al are probably rolling in their graves in what TV/Cinema has become

  2. Sucks to be them by Y-Crate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's unfortunate, but the iTunes Video Store has completely robbed me of whatever tolerance I had remaining for advertising. The picture quality isn't the best, I can't burn it to a non-data-only DVD, but for $2 I can get any episode of any show right now with no ads. I can watch it on my 20" LCD, or take it with me.

    If The History Channel and HBO sign deals (and I know for a fact HBO is interested in working with Apple) I'll be tempted to give up cable TV altogether.

    The response to this is natural and expected. The advertisers are trying to be more and more invasive with their product, and are moving it away from "Necessary Annoyance" to "Shove It Down Our Throats". They spend millions to research the most effective campaigns, but fail to see that having scripts written around their products, forcing their ads into our pockets or similar efforts will only alienate the public and increase the adoption of services that shut them out of our lives even more.

    They are in a bad spot with few clear strategies for turning things around, but saturating every aspect of our lives with advertising and making it utterly impossible to escape it cannot be a sustainable solution. You will likely see a telemarketing/spam-esque backlash arise as a consequence.

    1. Re:Sucks to be them by flogic42 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not all marketing firms are evil. Google has done an admirable job of promoting their services in the most non-invasive ways possible. And that is simply word of mouth. One person uses it, likes it, and tells his friends about it. And so on. That's how I heard about google back in '99. Most other forms of advertising are quite simply the art of deception. Paid commercials are a less reliable source of information than dictatorship-owned propaganda radio stations in third world countries.

      --
      Check out my women's designer clothing store.
  3. On-line for sure by Bullfish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course people are going to go on-line. If you think of it, how many must see movies, TV shows or games are produced each year. And don't get me started on music. Frankly all these industries have fallen into a bankruptcy of creativity and guts. Too much of what we see and hear are hackneyed remakes of shows and songs that were fine back in the day, but repackaging them is not the path to glory. They can cry piracy all they like, but Spielberg said it best when he said that if Hollywood wants people to see their movies, they should make movies people want to see. At least on-line you can have your choice instead of what some entertainment executive thinks he can sell you. Is there some good stuff out there? Sure, but by comparison it is buried often by the volume of crap out there. Apple has done well with their kitschy little units, but it wouldn't be the same without the complicity of the industry. Hell, I could probably buy all the stuff I want for about 10 bucks a week. But then, like the music industry, once it takes off, they'll be whining that two bucks a show is too cheap.

  4. Re:Who Needs Apple by rblum · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And the $210 DLink streams video from...? The Ether?

    Ah. Wait. Let's add at least another $300 for a PC. That gets me what kind of cost savings? Almost none, you say? That's right. And I can have Windows hassles, too, while my macMini just works.

    Brilliant plan!