Slashdot Mirror


Disney Says, You WILL Watch the Ads

smooth wombat writes "ABC and ESPN, both owned by Disney, have struck a deal with cable operator Cox Communications to offer hit shows and football games on demand, but with the condition that Cox disable the fast-forward feature that allows viewers to skip ads. This is the first agreement of its kind. It only applies to Cox's video-on-demand service and will not affect viewers using DVRs to fast-forward through ads. The companies will also test technology that will place ads in shows based on ZIP Codes and geographic area, and 'freshen' the ads with new ones every few days."

87 of 456 comments (clear)

  1. Well, then by pak9rabid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even more reason to build a MythTV box..

    1. Re:Well, then by DJCacophony · · Score: 4, Funny
      --
      Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
    2. Re:Well, then by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      Even more reason to build a MythTV box..

      Even more reason not to watch TV at all.

      I probably haven't watched TV in at least three months.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Well, then by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sounds great. so how are you going to get your mythTV box to record cable when they encrypt the firewire connection and nobody has cracked a cablecard tuner to work with it?

      comcast detroit is ready to switch to all digital cable. your fancy QAM A180 tuner card will not get many channels and your high end NTSC tuner card will get nothing.

      thiat is where it is going for CableTV. It SUCKS for Mythtv right now as NTSC is going away and Cable is hell bent on putting unsanctioned PVR's out.

      Your only choice is a Tivo Series 3 with 2 cablecard tuners or wait for the Vista-blessed-edition-MCE with cablecard capability.

      The cablecard makers have vowed that it will NEVER work with linux or regular unblessed MCE pC's.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Well, then by russ1337 · · Score: 5, Informative

      >>> ..for people who want a DVR and not an ongoing project...

      I'd say that traditionally you would have been correct. But I just built my second mythtv for the house (Dual core, Ubuntu 7.04, Mythtv 0.20). It took me less than a day, and most of that was just messing with stuff I didn't need to mess with. Last time, a year ago, it took about a week.

      The Ubunut7.04 recognizes the PVR-150 out out the box and has a full mythtv package in the repo's. It was a case of one click. No more IVTV rubbish and just follow the instructions to get your remote control working. All not that hard even for a noob like me.

      Haven't seen any TV ads for a couple of weeks now.... Unlike Cox cable users....

    5. Re:Well, then by russ1337 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>>> The cablecard makers have vowed that it will NEVER work with linux or regular unblessed MCE pC's.

      Somewhere in China, a night-shift manager in an electronics factory that supplies PCI cablecard adapters to the USA, just thought of a new business opportunity.

    6. Re:Well, then by russ1337 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you continue to insist on stealing our content, and engaging in piracy, we're left with no choice but to replace your computer with a DRM-enabled appliance. Please, let us know if our customer service department can be of further assistance ;-)
      Funny you say that. It was this very morning one of my colleagues called me a Pirate (Aarrr) just because I use Open Source software.

      I said "so to not be a pirate I have to use Windows?" His answer: "Yep, If you use free software you must be pirating something."
    7. Re:Well, then by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You act like this is an uber-hacker solution. 15 years ago there were consumer level VCRs with IR dongles to change cable channels, back when every cable company was scrambling standard cable TV. An idea out of style because the problem went away doesn't make it inappropriate as a solution to the same old problem.

    8. Re:Well, then by Dancindan84 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's funny, since most pirates I know have more copies of Windows than anything else.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    9. Re:Well, then by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

      I trust you then stabbed him in the face and plundered his booty?

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    10. Re:Well, then by Darby · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a cheap shot, I'll assume you dont have one because if you did she'd be bitching about it. Trust me, MythTV has an almost subzero WAF...

      It's through the roof in my house. The wife gets all of her British shows off of UKNova, podcasts, etc etc etc and they download right to the shared directory. Boom.

      She just bought a used XBox to use as a frontend in the bedroom.

      So given how solid MythTV is and has been for some time now, your argument is both wrong and sadly out of date.

    11. Re:Well, then by poopie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      one of my colleagues called me a Pirate (Aarrr) just because I use Open Source software.

      I said "so to not be a pirate I have to use Windows?" His answer: "Yep, If you use free software you must be pirating something."

      Oh, man... that is *so* inaccurate. Windows users have very little useful software that is free. Most software is commercial or shareware. Windows users seek to fill the gaping functionality holes with commercial software and get nickeled and dimed (more like $20 and $50) to death. That, I believe, is a major factor for *Application* piracy.

      Linux users on the other hand, explore all their well integrated, easy to centrally install, free options and find tools that work great, or pretty well, or at least do some of what they need for free.

      Running MythTV, I have more than enough content that I'm paying for to watch on TV - I have no interest in looking for bittorents of video content.

      Likewise, using streaming audio, I have more than enough access to audio content to keep me busy for the rest of my life.
    12. Re:Well, then by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wifey is the biggest compu-dunce in town, and she loves MythTV.

      She likes to sit and flick through the movie listings. She loves the fact that it records every episode of Scrubs.

      Extremely high WAF.

      Conflict resolution? Three tuners, and a small instruction to wifey to use "find one" instead of "record this". Change the background image? Why the hell would she want to do that?

      Seriously, if the moaning about downtime when I'm upgrading it is anything to go by, it's by far the most adored piece of technology in the house, bar none.

    13. Re:Well, then by LoveGoblin · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...and plundered his booty?
      I hope he at least bought him dinner first.
    14. Re:Well, then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You idiot.
      Usenet is dead, no one uses it, don't waste your time, piecing together uuencoded files and that whole 7bit-8bit thing is overrated and way confusing. Let it rest and stay away from it and please never mention it again....

    15. Re:Well, then by d3ac0n · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cable labs approved doesn't mean squat as long as cable companies are using a burned-in MAC to provision the cards.

      It's the same thing with Cable modems. As long as they are Docsis compatible, the low-wage tech on the other end of the line has NO CLUE that your Motorola SB5102 that you are calling in to provision is actually from cablemodemhack.com and has the blackcat mod chip on it.

      (not that I endorse uncapping your modem, or doing anything blatantly illegal, of course.)

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    16. Re:Well, then by cheater512 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thats what a IR Blaster is for.

    17. Re:Well, then by mcb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i just set up a mythtv box for the first time on friday and had it working and recording shows within 5 hours or so. i've never tried it before but it's pretty solid in its current form.

    18. Re:Well, then by NeoManyon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but i didn't do a cartoon about it so i didn't get fired!

      --
      Your thoughts form your reality.
  2. Well then by edizzles · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At least i stil have my mute button and a laptop with wirless to distract me

    1. Re:Well then by mandelbr0t · · Score: 2, Informative

      I haven't watched conventional television in over a year. All fed by RSS now: Thank you EZTV for the advertising killing service :)

      --
      "Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
  3. Sounds good to me by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just won't be signing up for this idiotic service. As the other poster said, MythTV for me.

  4. Customer says by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I will not watch a Disney owned channel. Easy as that.

    Content is neither bread nor air. I don't need it to survive.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Customer says by CowTipperGore · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Unfortunately, most customers say "Are you ready for some football?!"

      The average American ranks cable (or satellite) TV and cell phone service up there with food and water. It will be a lonely boycott.

    2. Re:Customer says by decipher_saint · · Score: 5, Informative
      IF Wikipedia is correct they own;

      Disney-ABC Television Group

      * U.S. Television Networks:
      o ABC, Inc
      + ABC Television Network
      # ABC Daytime
      # ABC Entertainment
      * Greengrass Productions
      * Victor Television Productions
      # ABC Kids
      # ABC News
      # ABC Owned & Operated Stations
      * WLS Chicago - Channel 7
      * WJRT Flint - Channel 12
      * KFSN Fresno - Channel 30
      * KTRK Houston - Channel 13
      * KABC Los Angeles - Channel 7
      * WABC New York - Channel 7
      * WPVI Philadelphia - Channel 6
      * WTVD Raleigh-Durham - Channel 11
      * KGO San Francisco - Channel 7
      * WTVG Toledo - Channel 13
      + ABC Radio (ABC Radio & ABC Radio Networks have been acquired by Citadel Broadcasting, the sale has not yet been completed)
      o Disney ABC Cable Networks
      + Disney Channel
      # Playhouse Disney
      + Toon Disney
      + Jetix
      + ABC Family - formerly Fox Family & The Family Channel
      # BVS Entertainment - formerly Saban Entertainment
      # Jetix Latin America
      # Jetix Europe (Disney 74%, public shareholders 26%)
      # SIP Animation (undisclosed minority stake)
      + SOAPnet
      * U.S. Cable Network Equity Holdings:
      o Lifetime Entertainment Services (joint venture between Disney (50%) and Hearst Corporation (50%))
      + Lifetime Television
      + Lifetime Movie Network
      + Lifetime Real Women
      o A

      --
      crazy dynamite monkey
    3. Re:Customer says by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 4, Funny

      No!! Not SOAPNET!!!

    4. Re:Customer says by ZiakII · · Score: 3, Funny

      I will refuse to watch Lifetime now!

    5. Re:Customer says by contrapunctus · · Score: 3, Insightful
      about your cell phone comment (I just want to show an opposing viewpoint):

      how fast things change, 15 years ago nobody had one and behold, we did live and not worse than we do now My car broke down and I was without a cell phone 10 years ago. I'd say that was "worse than what we do now". Now I carry a cell phone with me especially in a car (and before anyone goes there, I don't talk and drive).
  5. DVRs are saved by Tivo by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason they haven't put these restrictions on the DVRs yet is that they have to compete with TiVo. Once the competition is gone and they've gotten the market sealed up again you can expect these sort of restrictions to start appearing on their own DVRs. MythTV boxes don't count either. It seems to me that the cable companies only embraced DVRs in an attempt to kill them off, I imagine if they manage to drive TiVo out of business then they'll go back to their old tricks.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:DVRs are saved by Tivo by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only reason they haven't put these restrictions on the DVRs yet is that they have to compete with TiVo.

      If you had not noticed, Tivo signed a deal with Comcast to help develop and supply Tivo branded devices as Comcast DVRs, instantly making Comcast their biggest customer. Tivo is a partner to the big Cable companies now, not a competitor (which might be why we're seeing this stuff happening now). The writing was on the wall long before the deal was done as Tivo repeatedly refused to implement features that benefited their customers, but were opposed to the interests of the cable companies (skip ahead without an easter egg, commercial skip, export to DVD/VCD at a reasonable price, export to laptop in mpeg format, etc., etc.)

      It seems to me that the cable companies only embraced DVRs in an attempt to kill them off, I imagine if they manage to drive TiVo out of business then they'll go back to their old tricks.

      The way cable companies make money is by getting you to watch as many commercials as possible. This means getting you to spend more time watching ads and more time watching reruns with ads. The consumer buying a DVR wants to watch as few commercials and reruns as possible. These two goals are directly in conflict, which is why no one in their right mind should expect a good experience buying from a DVR manufacturer that is also their cable company or partnered with their cable company. They will give you the minimum features needed to keep you from going elsewhere, rather than the best feature set. The cable companies were smart to pay of Tivo, while they were still the only big player in the space. It redirects all the momentum in the space to ground, and gives them time to buy legislation to make sure only cable co. approved DVRs will work with "new improved" TV services. This space is ready for a revolution and a couple of new players, if only they can get by the cable company's monopoly leverage where they provide DVRs at under cost, while overcharging everyone for service to subsidize it.

    2. Re:DVRs are saved by Tivo by PMuse · · Score: 2, Funny

      It seems to me that the cable companies only embraced DVRs in an attempt to kill them off, . . .

      Silly Jedi!

      Why would the Sith kill the DVR if they can turn it to the dark side. The DVR is strong in content delivery. Together, they could rule the galaxy.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
  6. huh by stoolpigeon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One of the things that I really like about the on-demand stuff I get from brighthouse is that there are no commercials at all - other than sometimes before the program begins. Like Anime on demand will often have a short commercial, then the show with no commercials. It's nice too when my kids want to watch Avatar or something because they get to see the whole episode but takes less time.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:huh by Artifakt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And you're getting one more advantage - since your kids watch a continuous 22 or 45 minute show, instead of seeing it broken up into blocks possibly as small as 8 minutes long by commercials, they cultivate a longer attention span. Quite possibly, they will do better in school and even adult life because of their home environment. Sadly, proving any of this is unlikely, as any realistic, controlled experiment would involve something like a test group watching 3 minutes of programming followed by twenty 15 second long commercials, for lots of hours on end. Any parent that would let their kid be in this test group would be unfit enough to serve as an alternate explanation for all the kid's problems.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  7. I hope they're careful by cfulmer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Every rewind backwards by 10 minutes so you could compare what you just watched with what happened earlier? If they disable fast-forward, you'll have to watch those 10 minutes over again.

    I wonder if it will be possible to reinstate the fast-forward button by running the on-demand movie through a DVR.

  8. Ludicrous by u-bend · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Utterly stupid. You pay for cable. You pay for DVR service. You pay for in-demand. Then you get penalized for being a consumer and you can't use your DVR on paid-for content. Kinda pisses me off, even though I never order any ala carte content.

    --
    u-bend
  9. Pay Per Ad by TGTilde · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So I'm paying for a TV show using on-demand and then am forced to watch ads also? Or is the on-demand service otherwise free. It sounds like a scam to me.

    --
    --- Bah, who needs a sig?
    1. Re:Pay Per Ad by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 2, Informative
      Yes, that was covered in the article:

      The deal could make it easier for the major networks to make their most popular shows available on demand free, according to the report.
      --
      www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
    2. Re:Pay Per Ad by CowTipperGore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So I'm paying for a TV show using on-demand and then am forced to watch ads also? Or is the on-demand service otherwise free. It sounds like a lucrative new revenue stream to me. Fixed that for you.
    3. Re:Pay Per Ad by CowTipperGore · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess the general public is not paying enough for their service to be ad-free. I would like to know, for once, how much money each cable subscriber would have to pay for their TV service if it paid for all the advertisement that would normally be there? I had free television for years with fewer advertisements than what you see today. Cable television gets monthly subscriptions from all viewers (with rates that seem to double every five years), more advertising money than over-the-air ever dreamed of, and kick-backs from all the home shopping channels that they won't let you remove because it subsidizes the cost of your television service.

      I can promise you that any number claimed to be adequate to eliminate advertising would be a die roll with a bunch of zeros on the end. And, it would be so large that most wouldn't consider it. Yet, the same folks will accept their annual cable bill increases while getting more ads per hour.

  10. Next they will eliminate the third-party DVRs by CowTipperGore · · Score: 2
    This is obvious and should surprise no one. Of course companies who make money from advertising want to make sure those advertisements are being seen. And, Cox stands (uh huh huh) to make much more money from this agreement than they may lose from customers who may go to dish or a third-party DVR.

    The big killer will be in a few years when cable providers have everyone on digital cable and include DRM in the cable boxes that prevent you from using third-party DVRs. Just as they don't want you putting a VCR on the output of a DVD player, they will no longer allow anything but TVs on the outputs of their boxes.

    1. Re:Next they will eliminate the third-party DVRs by businessnerd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The big killer will be in a few years when cable providers have everyone on digital cable
      My hope is that we can have some legislation in place that in the event a cable company decides to stop offering their analogue service, that they are forced to send the signal unencrypted, so that all that is necessary to watch the digital tv is a digital tuner. For most this still means a set-top box, but it will also open the door for "Digital Cable Ready" TV's. HD becomes the new digital with the encrypted feed. The original reason for digital cable being encrypted in the first place was to make sure that you couldn't watch digital tv without paying for the service. Since it comes down the pipe as long as you have an active connection, someone paying for analog service could watch digital tv if they went out and bought a digital tuner without paying for a digital subscription. They also get to "rent" you a set top box (grrr).

      However, the way things are changing, I don't think it will even be necessary. Verizon is changing the way people think about TV and the Internet with their FiOS TV. What I really want is to pay Verizon (or some other ISP) for my fiber optic connection, and then subscribe separately to my othe r services like TV and Phone. Then the real competition begins between television content providers, and also VOIP providers have a fair chance.
      --
      "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
  11. Earth to Disney... by Tuoqui · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...Its called an OFF button and I know how to use it.

    --
    09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
  12. Stuff like this by C_Kode · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Stuff like this makes me not feel so bad that China has a government owned Disneylan.. err Shijingshan Amusement Park. http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=1678

  13. Doesn't change a thing by tarlos25 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On the rare occasion that I actually watch TV, I change channels or get up and go do something else when a commercial comes on. Commercials are one of the primary reasons I stopped watching TV. If I want to see ads, I'll watch them on my own time.

  14. You know... by VE3OGG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    TV, like magazines, newspapers, and radio are financed through ads and sponsors. While I realize that it is convenient and preferable to not have to watch all those damned "Mr. Clean, Mr. Clean, do dah dah do dah dah" ads, sometimes back to back, in between sections of your favourite show, that is what finances your show.

    Besides, I have a feeling that with the popularity of DVD sets being what it is, cable TV will likely start to dwindle and the box sets will be released at the beginning of each season. This way people can choose what shows they absolutely want to watch with no commercials, and which ones aren't really that important.

    Kinda free-market at work there.

    Then again, I haven't watched TV in several years so I don't know, maybe I missed something vital here...

    1. Re:You know... by operagost · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then again, I haven't watched TV in several years so I don't know, maybe I missed something vital here...

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:You know... by gosand · · Score: 4, Insightful
      TV, like magazines, newspapers, and radio are financed through ads and sponsors.


      Huh?


      Let me be more clear...


      TV (over the airwaves) is financed through ads and sponsors. What about Cable TV, which I pay for? Why do I have to watch ads on those channels? And moreover, this article is about on-demand pay-per-view... why have ads in that? It isn't about financing it, it is about making more money. Unless they are going to lower the price because now the ads will assist in financing it. I think not.


      If magazines are financed through ads (which is clear from their HUGE percentage of the magazine content) then why do I have to buy them?


      Newspapers - same as magazines.


      Radio - OK, here is the one area where you don't pay for it, so you endure the advertisements (or just change the station).

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  15. skip VOD by not_anne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    VOD is just a rehash of shows are already on the channels anyway. Just DVR the show that's on VOD and skip the ads.

    --
    My comments here are my own; I do not speak for my employer.
  16. Eye Staples by Cytlid · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wonder what other sort of medieval torture devices they can think of to force us to watch ads?

    --
    FLR
  17. 20 minutes into the future... by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
    > ...Its called an OFF button and I know how to use it.

    Janie Crane: "Edison... an off switch!"
    Metrocop: "She'll get years for that. Off switches are illegal!"

    - from Max Headroom, Episode 1.6, Blanks

  18. Not necessarily good by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a commercial producer, your goal is to get the attention of people and get them to remember your product. Because, well, that's what your customers pay for.

    So far, commercials aren't even seen as a nuisance by many. They are an often welcome interruption for various personal needs, from bathroom to fridge. When you overdo it, people get annoyed.

    And don't underestimate the negative effect of force. If you outright force people to watch an ad, they will connect no good feelings with it. So far, what makes people accept ads is that they enjoy the program around them and that they're in a generally good mood when they watch an ad. When they now pick up the remote and can't FF, they're pissed. And if this isn't carefully watched, the general mood when it comes to ads will be a very negative one. Not only on the "conscious" level, where people complain about ads, but also on the subconscious level.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  19. Neither is it "content" by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Content" is a metaphor intended to make people think of creative works as products to be wrapped up and shipped around like any other commodity, when in fact creative works are natural expressions of our humanity and civilization.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Neither is it "content" by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, I simply don't agree that "it won't exist unless you pay for it". People do things -- sometimes incredibly impressive things -- for many reasons. To reduce human creativity to an economic transaction is, frankly, insulting to my notion of civilization.

      By your logic Emily Dickinson's poems do not exist, since she had no expectation of being paid for them and even wanted them destroyed upon her death.

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    2. Re:Neither is it "content" by MBraynard · · Score: 3, Interesting
      You are right - to an extent - that some people do things just for kicks or publicity or because they seek some other kind of psychological trilogy.

      However, there would be no Battletar Galactica or The Office or 300 without paying. And in the case of The Office, the program is ad supported. There is a causal relationship between creative works - real or intellectaul - and most of the times that relationship is financial.

      Here's a thought - Dickenson's poems might not have exited had a publisher not been able to profit by publishing/printing them. This was before the internet.

    3. Re:Neither is it "content" by value_added · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Content" is a metaphor intended to make people think of creative works as products to be wrapped up and shipped around like any other commodity, when in fact creative works are natural expressions of our humanity and civilization.

      Well said.

      The problem is they've already won the battle and set the terms of the discussion. The other metaphor is that of the "consumer". If we're all consumers, we don't have natural expressions of anything. You wouldn't suggest that we're "individuals", would you?

    4. Re:Neither is it "content" by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2, Informative

      The original British version of The Office was a commission for the BBC, by the way. Yes, it was paid for, but out of a budget that costs only $20 per person monthly for that, plus two mainstream 24/7 channels, 6 other channels, 11 national radio stations, a worldwide radio station and regional radio stations covering the bulk of the UK. Most of this I can record in broadcast quality via the DVB-T cards in my MythTV box, free to air, no encryption. Plus the commercial channels, which have to raise their game to live up to this fine example.

      They remade it for cultural reasons, of course, but also because it was so damn good. The remake is certainly for profit, but the original was made to fulfil the requirements of the BBC Charter (part of which is to entertain the British public).

    5. Re:Neither is it "content" by Nevyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not forced - if you don't have a TV tuner, you don't have to pay it. It's not a tax (not collected by government, and the BBC is not a government organisation), it's a license fee, and if you don't watch TV, you don't have to pay. (never mind the slightly overzealous collection department).

      Speaking as an ex-English person living in the US, it's 100% forced. And it is a Tax, it is collected by the government and given to the BBC (which is only accountable to the government). If you want a TV+DVD combo. just to watch movies, you are legally required to pay the Tax (which could not possibly be argued to have benifited from). I've lived without Cable in the US for significant amounts of time, getting DVDs from the local library etc. ... I wanted to do the same in the UK, but that was not possible (I couldn't afford the TV tax).

      All Britons who pay the TV license benefit from the BBC, whether they watch it or not.

      This is obviously not true.

      The quality is higher (anecdotally, from every American I've ever heard comment on the relative quality of TV in each country)

      If you compare everything on US TV with the small subset of UK TV we import ... then, sure. Just as if you compare everything on UK TV to the small subset of US TV you import, the averge easily swings back (but, of course in the later case you are forced to pay for the BBC anyway).

      Execs on the commercial channels are not empowered to take the risks the BBC can, but they reap all the benefits

      Sure, not being accountable to those people you can force to pay you money is a big help in many lines of business (esp. if that is practically everyone) ... I believe the RIAA know a song about that.

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
  20. Re:Good... by rainman_bc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a TV commercial producer, this makes me very happy ;)

    And what's next? Prevent people from changing channels while a commercial is on? Colluding with other networks to ensure all commercials are run at the same time?

    Really, you can ram it down our throats, and we can backlash.

    Cover my TV with ads, I'll switch to an on-demand service like Apple-TV instead of cable.

    TV can push, but we consumers can push back too.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  21. hehe: try to parse this sentence from TFA by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The agreement could also provide broadcast networks a way to give viewers an alternative to the convenience offered by digital video recorders , without allowing them to avoid the ads, according to the report"

    Sorry what is being "given" to viewers here?
    -An alternative to convenience (i.e. annoyance)
    -"without allowing them to avoid" (i.e. "while forcing them...")

    Maybe I'm old-school, but usually giving things to one's customers is, um, phrased positively like e.g.
    "giving viewers quality programming *without wresting control of their devices from them

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:hehe: try to parse this sentence from TFA by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They have 2 types of customer, one of them being their advertisers. They are in the business of selling their other customers to these customers.

      Perhaps the future is this: as consumers all gain the ability to circumvent ads and the value of advertising on cable declines, that the charges for cable service increase by at least double, since cable providers wouldn't be able to get any money from advertisers. (Ideally, this would be accompanied by a decrease in the cost of other goods, but I suspect that advertisers would simply keep the same marketing budgets and look elsewhere.)

      One wonder what things like ratings would mean in a truly post-advertising world. Why spend millions more on a show just because it gets better ratings, if ad revenues don't exist? Would all cable become like the Discovery channel? Or will pay-per-view become universal?

    2. Re:hehe: try to parse this sentence from TFA by capebretonsux · · Score: 2, Informative

      I second the motion. I'm so sick of commercials appearing more than once during the same commercial break. I'm sick of promising shows being cancelled before their time and replaced with more 'reality-tv' type stuff. (The show that immediately comes to mind is Fox's 'Drive', cancelled after just 3 episodes! I haven't watched any reality tv since the first season or two of survivor.) I'd gladly pay an similar monthly fee for commercial-free programming and an uninterrupted run of a show with no threat of premature cancellation or extended abscences from the air due to 'sweeps'. I like a good story, and more than that, I expect a logical and fitting ending to a story. But maybe that's just me, but I really don't think so. I should think that satellite radio owes at least some of its success to the fact that there aren't any commercials in its broadcasting. So why can't television be based on a similar model? As it is, I've cancelled my cable and gone back to reading books, while waiting to download the entire seasons of the shows I wanted to watch, and enjoying them as I'd like.

    3. Re:hehe: try to parse this sentence from TFA by Sj0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can see the new Star Trek now.

      Some dude: "Captain Nestle! The sensors are picking up unusual tachyon emissions on that uncharted planet, planet Ford Escape 8! Shall I set a course with our EA Sports warp drive?"

      Captain: "Make it so irresistable, like boating. For more information on boating, call 1-888-555-2104"

      [The USS Enterprise car rentals, shaped like a giant bottle of cool, refreshing 7-up, travels to the planet Ford Escape 8]

      Some dude:"Captain Nestle! Sensors by Calvin Klein are detecting enormous quantities of awesome! Ford Escape 8 is the best ever!"

      Captain:"This is great! Quickly! Call headquarters and buy stock in this planet using the money in my ING bank account, where I [pause] Save [pause] my money"

      It would be entertaining, but only if it wasn't serious.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    4. Re:hehe: try to parse this sentence from TFA by leenks · · Score: 2

      But you forget that, generally, the people of the UK are trying to abolish the licence fee, and thus the income for the BBC. I can't bring myself to think what will happen to the BBC once that happens, which it will if the idiotic masses get their way.

      I've yet to subscribe to Sky - Freeview seems to have most of the decent programming these days that I want to watch in my little spare time (maybe I don't know what I'm missing). How do people find time to watch any more than say 30 minutes, 60 at a push, of TV each day to fit all these shows in anyway?

  22. Not going to work by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The harder they try to control viewing habits, the harder people will work to thwart whatever system is put in place.

    Sometimes when I'm watching something on TIVO I'll forget I can zip through the commercials. I'm more prone to forget and watch the commercials if there are fewer of them and they're interesting. The really obnoxious ones will spur me to either mute the TV if it's live, FF on TIVO and go to great lengths to find an alternative if some company like Disney tries to make me watch. Not happening.

    I love the way advertisers treat viewing like a one-way street. You watch what we give you. Well, screw you, Disney. The local ads are the worst. There are several that get me diving for the mute button. Where if they were more informative and less obnoxious, it might make reaching for the remote more of an effort and I might not bother.

    But broadcasters thinking they can squeeze 20 minutes of commercials into 60 minutes of broadcast and advertisers thinking we'll calmly sit through whatever annoying crap they throw up there...yes, I'm looking at you, Oxyclean guy...they can kiss my butt.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Not going to work by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sometimes when I'm watching something on TIVO I'll forget I can zip through the commercials. I'm more prone to forget and watch the commercials if there are fewer of them and they're interesting.

      Well that's the funny thing, too. Since getting my DVR from my cable company, I've noticed that there are times when I actually stop fast forwarding, rewound, and watched an ad. Do you know why? Either the ad got my attention with something that was going on, or it was an ad for a product I might actually want.

      I think that bears repeating: "an ad for a product I might actually want." For the good of our cultural/socialogical sanity, the various groups in the advertising industry should be trying to find ways to deliver ads people are willing to watch without a fight, shielding consumers from ads that will only annoy the crap out of people. That was the whole idea of ads on television, after all-- to make the ads worth watching. Ads today are so fricken annoying, though, that it's usually not worth watching them anymore.

      And I'm not suggesting that the advertising industry damage themselves by showing restraint out of purely altruistic motivations. On the contrary, if they don't scale back and find ways to avoid annoying the crap out of people, we might just keep getting more inventive at blocking all ads all the time.

      Take the web as an example: A lot of people have become so annoyed with horrible pop-ups, pop-unders, complicated flash junk, etc., and the result is that we've developed extensions and plug-ins that block pretty much all advertising everywhere. If advertisers showed a little more restraint, ad-blocking might not be so common.

  23. Compulsory Viewing? by youthoftoday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I don't understand is, time after time, people think they HAVE to consume media.

    Just go outside! Enjoy the fresh air once in a while. I watch no TV (though there's one downstairs). Disney is probably doing people a favour.

    --
    -1 not first post
  24. Oh well... I'm not exactly spoilt for choice... by advocate_one · · Score: 2, Insightful
    http://thepiratebay.org/tv

    the more unpleasant they make it, the more people will go to the p2p sites instead... what you want to watch, basically when you want to watch it... and none of the crappy adverts or stupid digital restrictions on how you can watch it...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  25. TV? Why? by dazedNconfuzed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    8+ months for me. When I moved, I deliberately did not have cable TV hooked up. Broadcast TV is pretty much pointless where I am. No TV? it's wonderful. There's too many other things to do than stare at the tube, and if I _am_ going to watch something it's deliberate, worthwhile, and ad-free: DVDs.

    When I _do_ happen to watch TV (somewhere else), all I can think is how lame it is.

    --
    Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
    1. Re:TV? Why? by giorgiofr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I concur wholeheartedly and I have to add that I've been TV free for a few years at least by now. Sometimes I can't join a conversation where recent TV-related stuff is being discussed but that kind of conversation is lame anyway, so I don't care. Something unpleasant that has happened, however, is that over time I have lost the ability to tune out TVs in the environment; every time I go somewhere where a big TV is on, I keep gazing over to it and back. It's like I am way more sensitive to moving pictures in the background now. Pretty annoying!

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    2. Re:TV? Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    3. Re:TV? Why? by Deagol · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How true. My family has been w/o broadcast TV for about 5 years now. It's great. We watch DVDs, but that's it. It's amazing how much free time one actually has when no TV to be a slave to (I'm sure DVR users can vouch for this), and without all the blipverts tweaking my brain, I actually sleep a lot better than the days with TV. It's amazing the anxiety television watching actually creates. It's weird.

    4. Re:TV? Why? by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have mod points (or at least did for this page until I posted this), and couldn't find -1, clueless. You keep your karma for now.

  26. So glad I gave up on TV years ago by grasshoppa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Between crap like this and the crap they subject you to in the name of "entertainment", I'm so glad I gave up on TV years ago.

    Disney, and any other oppressive media company out there, can blow me if they think they are getting a single dime outta me.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  27. Re:Good... by Mattintosh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    TV can push, but we, the product, can just walk away. And when the product walks away, you have nothing to sell. Don't push or I'll take my (eye)ball(s) and go away.

  28. This is fine by me... by drgroove · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For the sake of underwriting "free" television, I'm OK with broadcasters putting ads that can't be skipped, but that are refreshed occasionally in shows that I record. Additionally, if a show has non-removable advertisements, that removes the ability for a broadcaster to prevent me from re-distributing the show on P2P networks or video sharing sites. The show's original broadcaster and advertiser information is now bundled with the show, so no material harm occurs to those parties if I redistribute the material - in fact, they benefit from the additional exposure.

    For shows that I purchase, however, I want them ad-free. If I purchase a show, that means I am subsidizing it (at least, a very very small portion of it), and don't want to deal with ads as a bonus to purchasing it. I would also be willing to waive my right to re-distribute the material, but not willing to waive my right to create copies of the material for my own backup & archival purposes.

    I think that's a fair arrangement. In fact, I'd be willing to have my representative sign legislation to this effect.

  29. There are other ways to ignore the ads... by cjmnews · · Score: 3, Informative

    10. Take a nap
    9. Fix a snack
    8. Let the dog out
    7. Check your email
    6. Get a drink
    5. Go to the bathroom
    4. Stare into space
    3. Read an article
    2. Smooch
    1. Mute the sound

    --
    You can lose something that is loose, so tighten the loose item so you don't lose it.
    1. Re:There are other ways to ignore the ads... by LordEd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      0. Change the channel

  30. Wanna bet? by notabaggins · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unless they can find a way to stop me from leaving the room, I still won't see their ads. I see the "If you make your customers mad and hate you, you'll make more money" school of marketing is alive and well...

  31. Short-term memory problems? by w3woody · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I understand why they want us to watch the ads; because if I'm not reminded every 15 minutes that Ditech has low mortgage rates and my erectile problems can be solved by using Cialis, I may start forgetting. And God knows we cannot allow people to forget that Ditech has low mortage rates and erectile problems can be solved using Cialis. Because if they ever need to refinance--something that apparently people do every weekend, by the rate of Ditech ads--they'll know they can refinance with Ditech. And God knows everyone on the planet has erectile problems that can be solved with Cialis, so if they should have erectile problems they can solve them by using Cialis.

    Isn't the whole point of ads to sell me what I want? There is a ton of stuff out there I'd love to have if I knew about it--and refinancing through Ditech or having a hard penis using Cialis aren't it!

    --
    This message brought to you by the Mortgage Experts at Ditech and by the Erectile Dysfunction experts who make Cialis.

  32. Re:Am I still allowed to go to the bathroom? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    or will that violate my Terms of Service?

    The former head of TBS is willing to put up with bathroom breaks, but thinks part of your contract is that you have to watch the commercials:

    JK: Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming.

    CW: What if you have to go to the bathroom or get up to get a Coke?

    JK: I guess there's a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you've got that only for one reason, unless you go to the bathroom for 30 seconds. They've done that just to make it easy for someone to skip a commercial.

    (Did you sign a contract where one of the terms is that you have to watch the ads? I rather suspect not, Mr. Kellner's belief to the contrary nonwithstanding....)

  33. the problem by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is the main problem of open-source. Marketing and the public perception. If we cant get past that, then OSS will never get out of the geek world.

    "if its free, that means they can get into your computer, you know all those hackers are bad" "if its free, it cant be any good" "why do they give it away then"

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  34. Why should we watch Disney content anyway? by secPM_MS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And the studio's wonder why TV viewership is declining? After trying for a year, I dropped my cable subscription -- I don't think what is on the networks is particularily good for my young kids. I get movies / video's from my public library, which is quite good. I truly despise the 10 minutes of adds for other video's that Disney puts in their headers, so only occasionally do I check out a Disney video for them to watch. My kids watch the occasional video, play outside, play some on the computer (I have done extensive filtering and if I see to much usage of a site such as neopets, I blacklist it), and read. Given few alternatives, even athletic kids will take to reading when they can't be outside with a ball. I have one TV in the house, a ~ 4 year old HDTV ready CRT. If the content suppliers think that I will replace my system to get DRM-protected content, they are sorely mistaken. I would rather read. With Google's book scanning project (books.google.com) and the Gutenberg project, there is a mass of older books that are free to complement what you find in your library and bookstore.

  35. I've run across this, too by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, this is a bit off-topic, but I just had to chime in and say that I've run across this attitude towards open source software, too.

    A coworker of mine bought a cheap computer a couple of years ago. He commented on how he didn't want to spend a lot of money of Microsoft Office for it, and was thinking about getting one of the second-tier office suites. I told him, "Just download OpenOffice."

    He had no idea what I was talking about, and thought I was referring him to some seedy warez site. I explained what FOSS was and told him about some of the more popular FOSS applications out there, but he just couldn't bring himself to believe me. He was absolutely, positively convinced that you end up "paying" for free software in one way or another; that even if OpenOffice didn't charge you to download and install their software, that there was some kind of hidden catch where it had to be adware or spyware or something. I even showed him the copy of OpenOffice I have installed alongside Microsoft Office on my work machine. He seemed really impressed, but I think he still ended up buying a copy of StarOffice or Corel WordPerfect Office because he just couldn't believe that it was free.

    Needless to say, I don't think he's going to be a Linux convert anytime soon.

    It almost made me wish that OpenOffice.org would set up a web site, something like OpenOffice.com, that has the exact same software, but charges you a $50 or so fee to download. Unfortunately, regardless of the best of intentions, some people just don't get it. At least then, I could point these people to the site where you can get the "real" copy.

  36. Fuck it - don't watch cable! by pestie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know how I'll work around it - I won't watch cable. Seriously. Fuck that shit. There's nothing so compelling on cable that I feel any need to keep it. I've posted before about how I have a MythTV project in the works and when it's done I'm going to drop my DirecTV service and just stick to over-the-air HDTV. And I haven't done it yet, since real life keeps getting in the way, and right now there's just no pressing need. But as more and more things like this keep happening, I have more and more reason to escape from the deadly clutches of pay TV. For now I can make do with getting the few shows on cable I care about via Bittorrent, but if they somehow close all those holes and goes away, I'll either get a Netflix subscription and get entire seasons of shows at once, or I'll just watch less TV! I've been without a TV before and, really, it's not nearly as traumatic as people make it out to be.

  37. Or... by Gription · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Then you'll have to manually select and run all the on demand shows individually so the MythTV box can record them. Or you could simply start your "on demand" show feeding into your DVR, go to the bathroom, make a snack, let the dog out, and then start watching your show and then skip past the commercials with the time buffer that has built up. (You will have to live with the stigma of knowing that you could have seen you show 5 minutes earlier...)

    I wonder how many years it will be before we are required to have our eyelids mechanically clamped open with our heads aimed at the screen, to enable the 'premium' content from our entertainment provider.

    (I feel a patent coming on!!!)
  38. Re:Just curious by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The feeling of being forced, and the feeling of being ripped off.

    People accept paying for content. They know that kind of venue. You go out and "buy" a DVD (yeah, yeah, you don't buy the content... and so on). You pay for it, you watch it.

    People accept ads paying for their content. They know that well too. You sit down and watch without buying it first, so you accept the ads.

    People do NOT accept both. When you pay to watch something, you expect that you paid for it and thus are now entitled to watch the content without interruption. Having to watch ads after you already paid smells a bit like double taxation.

    It's also the feeling that, when it works for others to provide content without ads forced down our throat, why not for Disney?

    Additionally, we currently have two models for content. Either you pay for the channel, then you expect to see your movies without interruption. You paid for it. Or you get the channel for "free" (aside of general cable fees), then you accept the ads. The ads pay for it.

    What would work without a doubt is giving people the choice. Ads OR payment. First of all, people get the impression that they actually have a choice. There is no "you must", which people resent out of principle.

    But paying for it AND being forced to watch the ads is annoying, to say the least. How would this be different from using a VCR on freely broadcasted shows? Aside of being able to FF through the ads...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  39. Oh, the irony by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Funny

    Playing on my iPod while reading this thread: "Professional pirate" (from the movie 'Muppet Treasure Island', produced by... Disney Pictures).

    Some say that pirates steal and should be feared and hated
    I say we're victims of bad press it's all exaggerated


    and also
    We'd never stab you in the back, we'd never lie or cheat
    We're just about the nicest guys you'd ever want to meet