Slashdot Mirror
ABC Wants DVR Fast Forwarding Disabled
Anonymous CE Worker writes "The television network ABC is looking to develop technology that would disable the fast-forward button on DVRs, and allow commercials to run as intended on their channel." From the article: "Some research executives — even at networks with sales departments that acted differently — had argued before the upfront that ads viewed in fast-forward mode generated value for advertisers, since consumers were at least partly exposed to their messages. But Shaw said ABC was only interested in finding a way to receive compensation for un-skipped ads."
Why, ABC, do you want people to stop watching your programs?
NEWSFLASH: If your channel is the only one disabling fast forwarding then people aren't going to bother watching your shit in the first place.
So long as it's just blocking fast-forwarding on ABC shows and not other channels, let me be the first to say that I have absolutely no problem with this.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
When I see an ad even in fast forward that catches my attention I usually rewind and watch it. Maybe I'm just weird, but I dont enjoy watching crap commercials for tampons etc., its not as if I use them! However good beer commericals on the other hand...
More of the same ol' same ol' of screwing the consumer.
-PB_TPU_40 The trick to flying is to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
If I'm watching a TV program on my DVR and I catch up to the live program, and am thus forced to watch the commercials, I get a little annoyed, but I live with it. If I were watching a pre-recorded program on my DVR and I was FORCED to watch the commercials because they decided to disable a primary function of my DVR, I would be pissed off, and feel very hostile toward the network and the advertisers involved.
Sure, an important part of advertising is getting people to hear your message. However, it's also important not to inspire feelings of hatred toward you by trying to force your message down people's throats. If the net result of your invasive advertising is that everyone hates you, how is that a good thing for the advertiser?
Because the only reason to fast forward a DVR is to skip commercials. You really want to watch that 20 minutes of the baseball game that is on before the show you were trying to tape. Or if you rewind to see something at the start of Lost again, you really want to re-watch the 30 minutes of the show you've already seen.
Any DVR manufacturer that goes along with making a DVR less useful than a VCR is going to suffer in a huge way. In 1988 we had a VCR with a 30-second fastforward button.
I'm not even going to get into how making someone watch commercials is wrong.
ABC was only interested in finding a way to receive compensation for un-skipped ads
Whoops, time to change their business model!
Let me introduce myself. I'm an olde farte. I was a teenager back in the 1970's when they were laying the first cable around our neighbourhood. Back then people (the They as in "they say ...") said "nobody will pay for what they already
get for free" and "nobody will pay to see advertising." Well... "they" were wrong as it turns out, people now pay upwards of
50$US for the honour of watching bad programmes and watching Enzyte Bob lose his shorts (tell me those floats in the pool
aren't phallic, go on).
Now it's the content providers who are insisting the viewer (those with satellite and cable) watch the advertisements they are already paying to see.
<Stimpy>Ironic, huh, Ren?</Stimpy>
Time for network execs and particularly the viewers to wake up and smell the coffee.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
they should get TV makers to prevent me from changing the channel when commercials start too.
I'll just stop watching TV... oh wait, I already did.
No commericials, no annoying crap. I get more done, and if there is anything I want to watch, then I download it off of one of the many sources of free video.
Quality and instant (yet horribly scheduled) access is the only thing TV networks have going for them, now.
I purchase a LOT of dvd movies. these has DRM content such as the fbi warning and sometimes trailers or just film studio propaganda which is non-skippable on my sony dvd player (otherwise very nice)... what's up with that? we have to first buy the content, then HAVE to watch crap like that?
yes I do understand that if I copy this disc I just bought I will get into trouble, yes, I known this since vhs cassettes in my youth thank you very much
that will probably never change, but I think dvd player fabricants should enable skip option on content you paid for...
...cars that are pissing me off on the highway.
...cell phones of people in the grocery store with those stupid BlueTooth headsets.
...push-to-talk on cell phones.
...Blackberries.
Is there any reason why ABC should be allowed to disable someone else's equipment that they don't like, and that I should not be allowed?
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
/flame ON. (and sorry for the meta discussion)
:-)
What would it take to MOTIVATE you not to use the word "incentivise" ever again? Do you think that using (not utilizing!) large words makes you sound more intelligent?
It makes you sound like a blathering idiot who doesn't know the language.
Ok -- there -- I feel better now. My co-workers thank you for diverting my flames from them for the rest of the day.
P.S. I'm waiting for someone to post that incentivise is a perfectly cromulent word.
Ian Ameline
I would say I see more commercials while fast forwarding with Tivo than live tv. If I am fast forwarding, I am staring at the tv, noting every commercial, to see when I can hit play. We often stop to watch funny or interesting commercials (like Apple's new ones). If I'm watching Live TV, I often get up for commercials knowing that I have 3-4 minutes (what happened to 2 minutes of commercials) until I need to come back.
And what's with commercials being twice as loud as the show you're watching!
-Ben
-=Down Syndrome in Maine
From the article, an opinion by the ABC tool Shaw:
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong! Mr. Shaw! What a tool you've turned out to be. People are not grateful for the timeshifting of their shows... they're grateful for being in control of their watching preferences. Some will watch commercials and will do so whether or not they can skip the ads. Others don't ever watch ads, don't ever want to, but happen to inadvertantly bump into ads every once in a while -- that's the best you're going to get with them.
You want to piss off the customers? Disable the fast forward during commercials... Plain and simple... there will be a backlash.
Let's assume:
You are watching 1 hour of Television a day.
Ads on US television, 3 minutes every 10 minutes - rough estimate.
1 x 6 x 3 x 365 = 6570 minutes per annum = 109 hours per annum.
What's your time worth $10/hour (conservative figure)?
So that's $1090 p.a. for pretty crappy programming vs £150 p.a for what is without a doubt the best television in the world.
You've been had, mate!
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
Whenever commercials come on TV, I SWITCH TO ANOTHER CHANNEL without commercials.
I bet next they'll try to disable the chan up/down buttons, the mute button, and the power button during commercials. Then they'll try to mandate all chairs have restraints that are activated right before commercials come on. Ooh, and little things to hold open your eyelids and ears...
When there were 8 commercials per hour, it was not be worth people's time to skip the ads.
With 22 commercials per hour, it is not worth the time to watch the show live.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Advertisers are relying on a couple of things in their current business model: that inertia will keep a significant percentage of the viewership on that couch, passively sucking up the message, during the ads, and that ads are allowing them to influence the purchasing habits of a significant number of viewers even despite their better judgement. The quite obvious tactics of manipulation in advertisements work. Stoned dude sits on the couch and while he could just get up and walk away, or mute it and page through a magazine, the activity barrier is higher than just clicking through on FF, and so he sits there, and that taco ad works on him. I'm hungry, I want a taco. The whole point of advertising is influencing the decision of the viewer: making them buy something they didn't think they wanted (and probably don't need and will get nothing from). Does it work? Look at the stupid cars people drive, the rancid garbage they eat, the price they pay for bubbly sugar water.
Advertisers are concerned about DVR fast forwarding diminishing the reach of their advertising and they are right to, it is diminishing the reach of their advertising. Advertisers pay networks for that reach so networks are justifiably concerned about the rise of DVRs impacting their revenue. ABC's arguments that people don't have the right and (most amusingly) don't really want to FF through ads are idiotic, but the counter-argument that ad-skipping is not going to mess with the business model of sponsored television doesn't hold water either.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
This is why I only watch movies at the Alamo Drafthouse Cinemas here in Austin. No children except at special showings (for Superman, no children under 6 and then only with parent). Even then, if they are noisy they will get thrown out. Also, no commercials and special movie-themed pre-show entertainment. (Unless you consider previews commercials, or 60's-era Car commercials before the movie Cars to be annoying commercials rather than fun pre-show entertainment... which I don't).
Also, they have good beer. Hooray, beer!
Seriously, if you like movies, the Alamo is a good reason to move to Austin. Or, at least, to visit.
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
What I don't understand is why they don't just drop the 30-minute model of television sitcoms and 1-hour model of "reality TV" and invest in more immersive, well-defined shows that have longer run times and are more story-oriented like movies. Then, you can plug in a ton more product placements to help make up for decreased revenue regarding skipped ads.
Of course, I lie when I say "I don't understand". I fully understand: that would be hard. It takes talent and dedication to sit and come up with an engaging story that people will stick with, and that undermines the formulaic "churn 'em out" policies of network TV's reality TV cash cows. They'd also have to stop paying the outrageous 1/2 million an episode for big-name actors, which wouldn't go over at all, and god knows it would just be a horrible loss for the world if Jennifer Aniston couldn't make enough money to buy a goddamn Ferrari after every episode.
Whatever. I don't care what they do. Until my fiance moved in I had bunny ears that picked up PBS, CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox, and the only things I ever watched anyway were Nova, the local news, and Simpson reruns. I don't care what they do. Hopefully more people will wise up and stop plugging into the boob tube every night and send their stupid little marketing schemes into a death spiral with or without DVR.
I was thinking the same thing. ABC is missing out on a chance to really increase their advertisement revenue. Here's how: instead of selling regular 30-second commercials, they tell everyone that with the advent of DVRs, that what they really need to do is buy five minute ads, and then play their normal advertisement at 1/10th normal speed for everyone who's watching it in fast-forward.
Of course, the obnoxiousness of watching a five-minute commercial would immediately cause the folks still watching normal-speed TV to go out and get DVRs in order to FF through them; the end result would be that everyone would buy a DVR, and everyone would watch the same 30-second clips!
In time, there would be an 'arms race' between the networks and DVR companies, to see who could have faster fast-forwards, and who could have the slowest commercials. Just think: a two-hour Rogaine ad, transmitted at 0.5 fps.
Isn't technology beautiful?
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Should this ever happen, I will be cancelling my DVR and cable, and not watch any more TV.
;-)
I can't tolerate live TV as it is, and I have occasionally rewound an ad which looked funny which I had skipped. (Like those great VW ads about unpimpin' your ride
I won't watch yout (*&#^ Kotex, McDonald's, or Huggies commercials because I can guarantee I will ever be a consumer. Your ad contract with ABC does not extend to me.
I wish advertisers would outgrow this belief that I am somehow morally/legally bound to watch the stuff I don't want to see that they paid someone else for. Pay me a few hundred extra/month, and I'll personally watch all of the ads during all of the TV I watch. Otherwise, go away!!
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Oh please do this! I hope all channels do this!
There would have to be some signal that "commercial starts here" and "commercial ends here," otherwise how would the DVR know when to disable fast forward? The OSS DVRs, such as MythTV, could key in on the signal and outright block the commercials entirely. Wow... sign me up!
Just slow the commercials way down so they play at normal speed during FFWD!@
When I get sick of comercial television or just want to watch something with actual merit I switch over to WPT (Wisconsin Public Television, Wisconsin's PBS station) or to TPT (Twin Cities Public Television, in MN). They have short little recognitions for sponsors/donors but thats it. The pledge drives can be a little annoying but on the other hand if its for a show you like you get a good 6 hours worth of episodes to watch. And yes I do donate to WPT and to WPR (Wisconsin Public Radio), I'd rather pay for high quality shows then have to sit through commercial breaks that seem to be lasting longer and longer.
/. ;D )
Just my two cents,
(I would expect lots of geek and nerd comments but I am posting to
~Petaris "The world is open. Are you?"