Slashdot Mirror


Youngsters Skip DVR Ads Less Than Seniors

Dekortage writes "Analyzing DVR viewing research, Ad Age has noted something unexpected: older DVR users are more likely to skip ads than younger DVR users. The skew is particularly apparent among men: 50% of seniors skipping all the ads, but only 20% of teens do so. Women of any age group tend to be around 35%. Ad Age hypothesizes that younger viewers 'just pay attention to other media when the ads are on TV or, worse yet, perhaps the TV is just 'background music'... I always thought that ad skipping was a major benefit of DVRs. Do you skip all the ads?"

460 comments

  1. Do you skip all the ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes.

    I also have Adblock. I guess we are the minority here.

    Also first post.

    1. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by moderatorrater · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I also have Adblock I wouldn't equate skipping ads with a dvr to adblock. With the DVR, it requires forethought and actions on my part whenever an ad comes on. With adblock, I just turn it on and occasionally right-click on an ad to get it to work. I also usually watch TV with my wife, so we can talk and "interact" during the commercials; sometimes we even get so into the interaction that we have to pause the commercials.
    2. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, you.

    3. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Pestilence · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I would. MythTv skips my ads for me with near-zero intervention, just like adblock. Once in a while it misses one and I have to manually skip.

    4. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by ccandreva · · Score: 5, Informative

      I wouldn't equate skipping ads with a dvr to adblock. With the DVR, it requires forethought and actions on my part whenever an ad comes on. With Then you have the wrong dvr.

      MythTV automatically marks and skips all commercials , with fairly high accuracy. It's a rare event that I have to manually do anything. Most commercials are just gone.

      http://www.mythtv.org/
    5. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the flip side, once in awhile it'll screw up and skip over entire sections of the program because it thought they were a commercial. Unless MythTV's commercial skip feature has gotten better in the last few years I found it to be very hit-or-miss and found it was much more reliable to just 30-second-skip forward over commercials.

    6. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by drsoran · · Score: 4, Informative

      The trouble with claiming to have the lowest user ID in a thread is that someone with one lower will inevitably show up just to post and annoy you. N00b.

      Now, as for the topic at hand, MythTV does allow automated commercial skipping, but you have to remember that most DVRs consumers use do not support anything more than a glorified fast-forward like a VCR. My Scientific Atlanta PVR from the cable company is like that and doesn't even offer skip feature. I believe TiVos are the same way unless you use the code to unlock the 30-second skip feature.

    7. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by dwater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My ReplayTV 4000 skips adds automagically and still works after all these years (so I'm told - I let my old room-mates use it since I'm out of the country and last time I visited it was working just fine).

      It isn't 100% reliable though, so I noticed that they will often skip back 5 seconds to see if it skipped forward too far ...

      --
      Max.
    8. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to hunt around in your DVR config menu. Most have customizable skip periods.

    9. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use this little trick to enable 30-second skip on my Comcast DVR. I forget the brand... I think it's Motorola, but I'm not sure. It's certainly not a Tivo. http://dcortesi.com/2005/05/04/motorola-dct6412-comcast-dvr-30-second-skip/

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
    10. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by ccandreva · · Score: 1

      At least for me in the US, it as close to perfect as one could expect. Yes it does sometimes go to far, but you can skip from back and forth to marked points, so if it does, it's easy enough to jump back where you were.

      The few times it's wrong is more than made up for by the usual convenience.

      It is, however, US centric, as the developer of the skip code is in the US. Reports are that it does not do as well skipping on non-US stations.

    11. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by ryszard99 · · Score: 2, Informative

      roger that. i've been using mythtv in NL where the ads are seem to be more arbitrarily placed in a programme. ad skip doesnt work in NL for me.

      --
      -- $_='ab-bc ratvarre';tr"'a-z'"'n-za-m'";print
    12. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by meshmaster · · Score: 1

      I have a pvr that records satellite. I just edit the ads out of movies before recording to dvd for later playback. No skipping involved if you have the right software that automatically detects the ads.

    13. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Kozz · · Score: 1

      The trouble with claiming to have the lowest user ID in a thread is that someone with one lower will inevitably show up just to post and annoy you. N00b.

      As another Slashdot Senior, I need remind you that you've neglected to tell him to get off your lawn.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    14. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by livewirevoodoo · · Score: 1

      The trouble with claiming to have the lowest user ID in a thread is that someone with one lower will inevitably show up just to post and annoy you. N00b.

      As another Slashdot Senior, I need remind you that you've neglected to tell him to get off your lawn.

      And turn down that damn music!
      --
      If its stupid but it works, its not stupid.
    15. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      OTOH, a lot of stuff is mutilated to begin with.

      This mutilation is getting worse and with some shows
      it's pretty easy to see where they have started to
      cut out even more stuff than they used to.

      Even without commercial skipping you are bound to want
      your own pristine digital copy.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by GWLlosa · · Score: 1

      For those in the Windows world, there's a program called "LifExtender" which will automatically remove commercials from your Windows Media Center PC's recorded TV, as well.

    17. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UID 666 ftw!

    18. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Nethead · · Score: 1

      My DirecTV R15 has a 30 second fast forward button that allows stacked presses (and shows the number of presses on-screen.) All current DirecTV DVRs have this function.

      And remember, when ordering DirecTV use promo code 51666 and I'll get $50!

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    19. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Evil+Kerek · · Score: 1

      Actually, the problem with saying you have lower user ID...is the fact you felt the need to say 'I have the lowest user ID'. Hopefully he's a troll..because the alternative is...sad.

    20. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      As does mine, I find myself skipping over nearly all of the ads, but because I have to watch the commercials in a half-assed manner I do find myself going back to watch an ad every once in a while. But it's just ads that I might possibly be interested in rather than the 98% which are advertising things that I'd never buy. So as a result, even if I watch the couple of interesting ads, I still get a so called 30 min episode finished in like 20min.

      I'm not really sure that me sitting through tampon commercials, ED or incontinence commercials is really a worthwhile proposition. If I'm not going to buy an item in that category, how is anybody benefiting from me wasting my time to sit through the commercial?

    21. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      As another Slashdot Senior, I need remind you that you've neglected to tell him to get off your lawn.

      Maybe he doesn't have a lawn, you insensitive clod!

      /shakes fist

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    22. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      The trouble with claiming to have the lowest user ID in a thread is that someone with one lower will inevitably show up just to post and annoy you. N00b. Fuck you, my UID is way lower than yours.

      (I'm using Hillary math)
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    23. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      I've never seen it not screw up at least once per show, so I stopped using it altogether. Interesting to know it works for someone though.

    24. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Eccles · · Score: 3, Funny

      The trouble with claiming to have the lowest user ID in a thread is that someone with one lower will inevitably show up just to post and annoy you.

      I hate people like that.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    25. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by assassinator42 · · Score: 1

      They disabled that last I had Comcast. It was working fine, then they rolled out a firmware update that enabled VOD but caused the button to do nothing.

    26. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by slapout · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about the TiVo fast forward was that when you hit play it was smart enough to jump back a couple of seconds so that it started playing where it was when you're brain saw the scene you wanted.

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    27. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by tchuladdiass · · Score: 1

      What I do is go into Edit mode, hit Z to create a cut list from the commercial flags, then validate that visually (check a few frames before/after each cut mark). Also, I check to make sure the cut out sections are all about the same size and positioned fairly evenly.

      I noticed that the latest version tends to be a bit more accurate, requiring fewer manual fixes.

    28. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 1

      Lame.

    29. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      This mutilation is getting worse and with some shows it's pretty easy to see where they have started to cut out even more stuff than they used to.
      Even without commercial skipping you are bound to want your own pristine digital copy.
      Are you suggesting that the studios are deliberately making programs that will be so badly mutilated by the advert break-ins that the sales (by the studio) of the DVD versions of the program increase, adding to the studio's income directly without adding to the network's revenue.

      My, we are being cynical this morning. Try a little of the milk of human kindness in your coffee in the mornings. You're probably right though.
      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    30. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by mokumegane · · Score: 1

      We don't have DVR but basically, when the tv is on, I pretty much ignore the ads or turn the channel. There seems to be a pattern with how long the ads are during an ad break, when it will happen, etc. so it's fairly easy to skip them without missing a part of the show. Some ads are entertaining, though. Most of the ads I like are- for instance- the Discovery Channel Boom-de-ah-da one. On the internet, I have a script blocker and if it's a site that's for an ad, I block it. Actually, it automatically blocks until the first time I tell it to unblock and I can always change it. I never see ads on the internet unless I want to. On Slashdot, I have 2/3 scripts allowed. Google-analytics and Slashdot are allowed but doubleclick isn't.

    31. Re:Do you skip all the ads? by AragornSonOfArathorn · · Score: 1

      That's odd. I've had VOD since I got Comcast 3 years ago, and they even gave me a new DVR box a few months ago when the old one was having problems. The 30-second-skip button still works great.

      --
      sudo eat my shorts
  2. what is this television? by opencity · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I barely watch tv and when I do the ads are the best part.
    well ... there's bbc world news

    --
    Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
    1. Re:what is this television? by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

      Ditto. If I happen to see an add that's humerous or otherwise catches my attention, I might watch it a few times. But then, yeah, "Select - Play - Select - 3 - 0 - Select" is your friend.

      Only sort of related: I'm moving to Verizon's FIOS TV service. Anyone know if their DVR device does cable skipping?

      --
      Bark less. Wag more.
    2. Re:what is this television? by DarkSarin · · Score: 3, Informative

      It sort of skips ads. Not intelligently. I have it, and the button on the remote can be set to one of several distinct time frames, and that's about it. It's a 'dumb' feature in that it doesn't try to figure out how long the ad is or anything, it just moves forward a set amount of time. I can't remember off the top of my head what the options are, but generally you can get through ads in about two or three clicks. It's a bit annoying, but not "I'm going to kill the programmer" annoying.

      No the "I'm going to kill the programmer after I hunt him down and torture him for three weeks" 'feature' that FiOS has is the general buginess of the on-demand stuff. You push the button and about 1 out of 3 times it will simply get confused and refuse to give you access to anything for about 2 minutes. If you are scheduled to record ANYTHING during that time, you are screwed because it will not start recording, and it will not let you fix that fact either (grrr).

      Another annoyance where I'd love to hunt someone down is the recently discovered 'feature' that means if you are going to watch something on DVR, but have 2 shows scheduled to record, you can't have it paused at the moment they are scheduled to start recording, or it will malfunction and fail to record, but if you try to fix this like 2 seconds after the fact because you've realized what's happening, you can't because the machine thinks its already recording (but isn't) and it will only give you the option to cancel the recording (which doesn't work). Argh!

      That said, overall, if you learn to avoid the one bug, and that starting to watch something On Demand just before a taping is scheduled to start is probably a bad idea, then you'll be okay. Annoying (as in, let me shoot someone so their replacement will have motivation to fix it), but not a deal breaker, because overall they have an excellent selection of channels for the price, and their internet service is quite good and very reliable (at least it has been for me so far), which is something I really appreciate. I've never hit bandwidth caps or shaping or anything, and I'd know--I use torrents and isos quite frequently, so there.

      --
      "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
    3. Re:what is this television? by yuna49 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No the "I'm going to kill the programmer after I hunt him down and torture him for three weeks" 'feature' that FiOS has is the general buginess of the on-demand stuff. You push the button and about 1 out of 3 times it will simply get confused and refuse to give you access to anything for about 2 minutes. If you are scheduled to record ANYTHING during that time, you are screwed because it will not start recording, and it will not let you fix that fact either (grrr).

      I'm really surprised Verizon hasn't fixed this problem by now. AFAIK, the program guide is basically just an HTTP client with all the content stored off-site. The only obvious reason why it should take two minutes to get a listing is if the servers are horribly overloaded.

      Why they don't rsync the data to the STB once an hour and run it locally escapes me.

      There should never be waits as long as I've had using the FiOS program guide.

    4. Re:what is this television? by electrictroy · · Score: 1

      I've been skipping ads ever since I got my first VCR (1985). I was 13 at the time, and even then I didn't want to sit and watch an advertisement unless it was something I cared about (like commercials for the "new" Star Trek spinoff).

      Why's today's youth would be any different from how I acted in my teens is something I cannot fathom.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    5. Re:what is this television? by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      So you're the guy writing all those 'Damn Kids Today' articles.

    6. Re:what is this television? by Kpau · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Disclosure: I am 50, I don't watch more than a few hours per week. I'll watch *entertaining* television ads. However, they stop being entertaining after the fifth or sixth viewing. When I see the *same* commercial 5 or 6 times in a two hour block, the advertzoids have lost my willingness to view their ad. Non-entertaining ads lose immediately. Shouting at me loses immediately. Gross repetition of the same ad loses immediately. Ads I'm really willing to watch are the ones that evolve or tell a story over a few chained commercials. I don't care if it costs them more - if they want me to watch it, they have to work harder. Frankly, I'd like to see fewer commercials per hour, or bundled at the hour marks -- and I'd be willing to tolerate product placement within a series like they used to do in the 1950s and 60s. Believe it or not that was less intrusive and actually more enticing to buy the product because you saw it used in context. (mmmmmm, Blammo's Evaporated Milk made these cookies scrumptious, don't you think, George?)

    7. Re:what is this television? by DRBivens · · Score: 1

      @Kpau: I agree with you WRT the repetition. There is a fine line they (advertisers/programming folks) have tried to walk in the past but it seems greed is now overriding other considerations.

      I don't have a problem with ads, per se, but there seems to be a school of thought among some advertisers that says, "Pound it into their heads and they'll buy more!" and "Repetition or volume or, better yet, both!"

      Try either of these interesting experiments:

      -- Record a TV show. Any show. Extract the audio and look at it with a waveform editor. Normal show dialog == the peaks and valleys you'd expect to see. Commercials == solid bar of over-compressed audio. (By compressed, I mean the low-volume sounds are raised to full volume, reducing the dynamic range and making the whole thing pretty much the same volume.) Not illegal by any means but will jangle almost anyone's nerves.

      Here I am, watching a show at night with the volume set at the low end of audibility so it won't wake up my wife. Then comes "TRICKY EDDIE'S USED CARS! EASY WEEKLY PAYMENTS! BUY NOW! BUY NOW! BUY NOW!" at jet-engine volume, followed by the inevitable "Honey, turn off the TV, please."

      -- Get DVD copies of a recent and an old TV show. Since the DVD version is just the meat, it's easy to see how many minutes per hour are set aside for commercials. For example, original Star Trek episodes (~1968) ran about 50 minutes. Deep Space 9 (~1998) ran around 45 minutes and the newest, Enterprise runs about 41 minutes. Old Twilight Zone shows (~1963) ran even longer--a little over 52 mins.

      Personally, I don't have trouble sitting through 8-10 minutes of commercials in an hour. Fifteen is pushing it, though, and twenty is over the line. In the VCR days, I'd tape a show and watch it an hour later just so I could fast-forward through the crap. DVRs make it even easier.

      If you think about it, the business of TV stations and networks is not to provide shows; it is to deliver eyeballs to advertisers. More eyeballs == more revenue. I wonder how far it will go? Is 30 minutes of commercials per hour very far off?

      --
      You have the right to remain silent. If you don't, anything you say will be misquoted and used against you.
    8. Re:what is this television? by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail on the head and I think it explains this study. Before DVRs, I use to dive for the remote to mute the TV before I even had to hear a single second of the commercial. I couldn't stand hearing the same jingles over and over again. I hated commercials with a passion and even boycotted products that went overboard (still haven't been to a Taco Bell after hearing "drop the chulupa" 80 million times). But I now, find myself occasionally watching them if they're interesting. And I'm no longer in a rush to fast forward. I'm more receptive to them because I haven't heard them a million times. Older adults have had enough commercials to last several lifetimes while younger kids aren't so shell shocked. This study makes perfect sense to me.

    9. Re:what is this television? by pennyloafer · · Score: 1

      I will hit mute/skip at any cost. I'm not sure why, but commercials in the past few years are pretty offensive to my tender senses (not for content, but presentation I guess). The major networks are the worst.

    10. Re:what is this television? by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      You must be in England. I lived there for 2 years, and your adverts are awesome (well except for the annoying ring-tone ones). Maybe it is cultural difference interest, but man as an American, I can say that US commercials blow and UK commercials are (mostly great...cillit-bang not included, but then again, that is a direct rip-off of a loud-talking us version).

  3. Ads? by elvum · · Score: 4, Insightful
    1. Re:Ads? by Bazman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What about all the ads for other BBC programmes? Trailers, promos, Radio 1 DJ ego-vertising? I sure skip those! I even skip the credits of most BBC shows now that they shrink them down to 1/8 screen size...

    2. Re:Ads? by jcupitt65 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't have ads on my tech news site ... because they are now so intrusive and annoying.

    3. Re:Ads? by It'sYerMam · · Score: 1

      They're only a minute or two long though, and generally I'm more likely to want to watch some other BBC program than I am to buy $BRAND shampoo $MAKE air freshener or $COMPANY loans/insurance/mortgage/whatever.

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    4. Re:Ads? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't have ads on my tech news site ... because they are now so intrusive and annoying. Why not have Inline Infotainment? I found out InfoTourettes patented scripting system will add tailored product DIET COKE! placements that don't MARLBORO LIGHTS! LO FAT VEGETARIAN SALAD! disrupt the flow of the article TAMPONS! WONDERBRA! and adapt your site's likely audience PONIES! so as not to annoy them or seem intrusive PERSONAL TRAINERS! MANOLO BLAHNIKS!

      You probably haven't even noticed, but I'm using it now.
      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Ads? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Ponies? Relevant to Slashdot's interests.

    6. Re:Ads? by Dannkape · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are only between programs, so no skipping them when watching something you recorded.

    7. Re:Ads? by Mushdot · · Score: 1

      It's funny you should mention that, the BBC - in particular Radio 1 - always harp on about not having adverts compared to commercial stations, yet they spend probably just as much time self-advertising and time-filling.

    8. Re:Ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yet they spend probably just as much time self-advertising and time-filling.
      There is no "probably" at all. They don't even spend a fraction of the time that commercial channels like ITV spend on advertising.
    9. Re:Ads? by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 3, Funny

      You probably haven't even noticed, but I'm using it now. You're right I MUST STRANGLE YOU! didn't even notice you were.
    10. Re:Ads? by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      Yeah, these days the BBC ads are just as annoying as commercial operators. YES I know about HD and how wonderful it is. YES I know that people talk on the radio and I can listen on-line. YES I paid my TV licence, stop trying to scare me. Today there are almost as many adverts on the BBC as there are anywhere else.

    11. Re:Ads? by dwater · · Score: 1

      I wonder what the fraction is for PBS. It seemed like they were on for the majority of the time advertising with their 'pledge breaks' or something (it's been a while since I was in the US).

      --
      Max.
    12. Re:Ads? by Mercano · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that's only for a week at a time three or for weeks a year. There's still the "This program was brought to you with support from..." at either end of a show, though. It's really just extra-expensive advertising. (Is it tax deductible?)

      --
      #include <signature.h>
    13. Re:Ads? by boris111 · · Score: 1

      As I was watching Dr. Who and admiring the production value the other day, I was wondering how much you guys pay for the license. £139.50 per year is what it said on Wikipedia. That's not bad considering what we in the States pay for cable WITH COMMERCIALS errr adverts. Is this what typical household would pay? Does this include cable access, or just OTA?

    14. Re:Ads? by electrictroy · · Score: 1

      >>>"I don't have adverts on my television channels... [bbc.co.uk] ;-)"

      No, you just spend ~$300 on a television tax. Whereas those of us in America, Canada, and a few other countries get our television for FREE over the air (or nbc.com, fox.com, cw.com, et cetera).

      I've always prefered free. $300 is about 30 hours worth of hell, er, work to pay the bill. I'd rather not do that; I'd rather have free entertainment.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    15. Re:Ads? by Snowgen · · Score: 1

      I don't have adverts on my television channels... [bbc.co.uk] ;-)

      And I don't have government officials driving TV detector vans down my street looking to fine me $1000 because I didn't pay my mandatory $250/year tax for just owning a television. What's your point?

      Disclaimer: I left the UK 20 years ago (this month!), so my memory might be a little rusty...

    16. Re:Ads? by LrdDimwit · · Score: 1

      It's not free, when you total up the opportunity cost of time spent watching adverts (this time is essentially wasted). I'd be curious to see whether the sum total of all the ads you watch for this 'free' service total more than 30 hours' time. I'd be very surprised if it didn't; that's slightly less than five minutes' worth of ad breaks per day.

    17. Re:Ads? by electrictroy · · Score: 1

      Well let's see.... I stated that paying the BBC tax equates to about 30 hours of week. A typical American program has 9-18 minutes per hour of ads. I rarely watch the ads (prefering to fast-forward or go visit the bathroom), so for me the total should be "0 minutes", but for the sake of this debate, I'll figure I watch 5 minutes per hour of commercials.

      My favorite shows are approximately 20 hours per year, and include Heroes, Medium, 24, Smallville, and CSI. 100 hours total. 100 hours * 5 minutes == 8.3 hours wasted watching advertisements.

      Conclusion:

      I'm better off with FREE television that having to work to pay a $300 BBC tax. Free television has a lower opportunity cost (less time spent on it).

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    18. Re:Ads? by electrictroy · · Score: 1

      Let's try that again, but without all the typos:

      Well let's see.... I stated that paying the BBC tax equates to about 30 hours of work. A typical American program has 9-18 minutes per hour of ads. I rarely watch the ads (prefering to fast-forward or go visit the bathroom), so for me the total should be "0 minutes", but for the sake of this debate, I'll figure I watch 5 minutes per hour of commercials.

      My favorite shows are approximately 20 hours per year, and include Heroes, Medium, 24, Smallville, and CSI. I sometimes watch other crap like reruns of Timecop, but that's negligible. So approximately 100 hours total. 100 hours * 5 minutes == 8.3 hours wasted watching advertisements each year (on free tv).

      Conclusion:

      I'm better off with FREE U.S. television than having to work to pay a $300 BBC tax. Free television has a lower opportunity cost (less time wasted) than BBC's annual tax. (American free television also has better programming; I can only think of one program on the BBC worth watching, and thus I'd really be getting screwed to have to pay $300 for just one show.)

      (goes off to don the asbestos armor)

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    19. Re:Ads? by elvum · · Score: 1

      My point was that there aren't any commercials on the BBC channels I watch. Since magical horses that shit money are as yet unknown to science, I don't think it should come as a surprise to readers that some other means of funding is involved.

  4. I skip ads the right way... by ludomancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    .. by not watching at all! This is trite, but I stopped watching TV specifically because of advertising. If I had a DVR, I would most definitely skip them, but from the few shows I've downloaded in the past I can see they're just putting the ads in the show itself now, so... Guess I'll keep not watching TV instead.

    I just really hate that everything in our society has to be about selling you something, or pushing something else into your view.

    1. Re:I skip ads the right way... by teebob21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The last bit in your post made me think...so prepare for a little ramble... Is today's society really any different than in the past? Corporate sponsorship of such things as stadiums is relatively new, but every time I read an old newspaper (I'm talking Wild West to Great Depression) I am fascinated by the blatant advertising for snake oil remedies and get-rich-quick gold rush schemes. It was right out there on the front page, too. Are we really any different today in America than the rowdy Chinese and Indian markets of yesterday? Perhaps the only difference is that these ads come faceless, in print or in video, rather than a hard-up vendor pushing his wares on the market corner.

      To that end, why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*. If they didn't, there would be no marketing departments and no billboards, no jingles on the radio, no Super Bowl extravaganza commericials.

      I also think ad dollars (and the inevitable ads they pay for) save the average American a lot of money each year. How, you might say? Ad sales finance ventures that may otherwise be unprofitable or unsustainable. When Google became more than just the new kid on the block, and needed to finance a "real" business, they turned to ad sales for revenue. Broadcast TV is free to the public only because advertisers pay for airtime. I cannot imagine a scenario where ABC/NBC/CBS could stay in business broadcasting for free, without the life support of ad sales. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so. Even if 13 minutes of every half hour program is advertising, I get to watch an episode of [your favorite show] for free, courtesy of Tide or Tampax or Ford or whichever ad was on while I was digging in the fridge for some mustard on my sandwich. Unfortunately, those broadcasters (and most cable networks) are now addicted to this revenue and try to find more new places to sell ad space, like in-show interstitials.

      Does some advertising go to far? Certainly. There's no need for annoying interstitials during a show, especially when it covers up an important part of the action. Do ad dollars shape the world we see today? Of course. Some of our most American retreats are named for advertising. Wrigley Field for example...possibly the first stadium named for an advertiser. It's a historic name now, but we're all weary of Pac Bell/SBC/AT&T Wireless/Minute Maid Park and the Nokia Sugar Bowl. (That said, I would have hated to see Candlestick Park in San Francisco fade away into the shadows over something simple like the naming rights...my all time favorite ballpark, and I'm not even from California)

      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society. Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement. Besides, I didn't buy a Tivo for nothing!

      --
      khasim (12/9/06): In a blind taste test, more people preferred Coke over the Pepsi that I had previously pissed in.
    2. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The last bit in your post made me think...so prepare for a little ramble... Is today's society really any different than in the past? Corporate sponsorship of such things as stadiums is relatively new, but every time I read an old newspaper (I'm talking Wild West to Great Depression) I am fascinated by the blatant advertising for snake oil remedies and get-rich-quick gold rush schemes You make a really excellent point, and you're exactly right! The poster you replied to just doesn't get it!

      I would actually go beyond what you said--you said that for instance, corporate sponsorship of stadiums is a new thing. Maybe corporate, but in years past it would have been an individual. Think of in the US have many buildings (universities, etc) are named after people who gave money to build them--Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.

      Going back even farther in history, Pompeii gives countless examples of graffiti that showed politics then was no different than today--slanderous and brutal! Same for advertisements, they were everywhere.
    3. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Eivind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes we're different. Not perhaps, different than a MARKET earlier, the purpose of a market is, afterall, to SELL stuff. But different in the pervasiveness. This has many reasons. One is a large selection of goods that are really quite equivalent to the buyer, where marketing tries to create incentive to select brand A over brand B on reasons other than price alone when really the differences are debatable. Another is the rising distance (physical and otherwise) between producer and consumer. You don't -know- the guy growing your potatoes anymore. And so mass-marketing has taken over from reputation and word-of-mouth. The worst is, though, that it is EVERYWHERE. Walk down a street in Berlin, and the Brandenburger Tor, one of the most famous landmarks there is is under renovation, and covered with a GIGANTIC telecom-banner. Your shopping-cart has advertising on the handlebar. So does the fuel-pistol-thing when you refuel. All the products you buy are packaged in advertising. TV has more comercials than programming, radio ain't much better. The Internet is filled with banner-ads and stupid flash-crap. Things wheren't always like this. And I'm not convinced we're better off for it. I'm not in favour of banning advertising or anything. But I *am* in favour of having a reasoned debate about under just which rules we want it. And I don't think "anything goes" is it. There is such a thing as visual pollution.

    4. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I wouldn't say that ads save anybody money...in the end those advertising costs just get passed on to the person buying the advertised product.
       
      For instance, in the US the big pharmaceutical companies spend a lot more on advertising than they do on R&D, but ultimately the ads are paid for along with the prescription (or the insurance that allows one to afford the prescription).

    5. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      To that end, why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*. No they don't. All scientific (psy) studies to establish whether or not they work (well, the ones I have read) have been inconclusive. They show a tendency/inclination towards familiarity, but have been unable to prove that advertising actually increases familiarity with a product.

      The advertising system *works*, but not in the way that it succesfully directs consumerism: it's a large market in and of itself, and I'd posit that it's become a self-sustaining ecology rather than a result-oriented practice. I see advertising as a self-fulfilling prophecy: it exists only because businesses believe it works, and continues to exist because consumers believe that the product with the most expensive advertising campaign must therefore be the best.

      Of course, that's not to say that new products shouldn't be brought to the attention of its intended target market (aka product positioning). But advertising is way past (below) that level of sophistication.

      disclaimer: yes I'm biased. I actually switched to another telecom provider because my current one managed to start a truly obnoxious advertising campaign (KPN Hi).
    6. Re:I skip ads the right way... by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I also think ad dollars (and the inevitable ads they pay for) save the average American a lot of money each year. How, you might say? Ad sales finance ventures that may otherwise be unprofitable or unsustainable.

      Then such ventures should fail. I have no problem with that.

      Advertising makes products that I do want cost more, simple as that. Without spending money trying to convince people who don't want a product that they need it anyway, companies would have a lower overhead and thus could sell for less. Of course, they would sell less overall, and only companies with legitimately useful products would thrive (with the occasional freak exception, of course), but I don't view either of those as necessarily a "bad" thing.

      Look at our society, look at the current economic crisis, look at Bratz dolls, and tell me we don't have an outright disease of buying crap we don't need. We have a problem, and we can thank advertising for hefty chunk of that.


      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society.

      Just as you can have dinner without gorging yourself to the point of bursting; Just as you can drink without passing out drunk; You can have capitalism without encouraging people to spend more than they have on crap they don't need.

    7. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement. Besides, I didn't buy a Tivo for nothing!

      Ooh, nice bit of product placement there! :-)

    8. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Jellybob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can have capitalism without encouraging people to spend more than they have on crap they don't need.


      I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

      The problem isn't that people are buying things, it's that they're buying things that are truly unneccesary, and in some cases actually harmful.

      Taking the example of Bratz dolls, if I had children, I wouldn't even consider buying them. As far as I can see, they're teaching children that being succesful is the same as being famous. For any reason, no matter how degrading.

      It appears that society agrees though. The person named as the most popular role model in the UK for teenage girls recently was Amy Winehouse. Which leads me to think I should probably leave the country, before another generation of kids grow up who believe they're entitled to fame just because they exist, instead of having to work for it. After all, if Amy can do it just by getting wasted in front of cameras now and again, why shouldn't they?
    9. Re:I skip ads the right way... by the_one(2) · · Score: 1

      13 minutes commercial / 30 min is way to much imho. i could handle maybe 10 min / hour

    10. Re:I skip ads the right way... by bit01 · · Score: 1

      Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind),

      Idiotic false dichotomy pushed incessantly by marketing parasites. This one statement shows that you have an agenda. You're either a fraud or an idiot.

      ---

      The majority of modern marketing is nothing more than an arms race to get mind share. Everybody loses except the parasitic marketing "industry".

    11. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Karma+Sink · · Score: 1

      "I know half of my advertising is wasted, I just don't know which half." John Wanamaker.

      The point is that there is no direct correlation psychologically that we can see between the two, but they obviously do the trick in some way. Be it familiarity or awareness or actually getting the consumer to buy shit. Things which are advertised tend to be purchased more than things which are not advertised.

      Mind you, I don't have a direct study backing that one up, but I think that Coca-Cola is still outselling Jones Soda Co.

      --

      When encryption is outlawed, ?o'AZ-,++o+i++##4AoA+-/-C++bI+/.+~
    12. Re:I skip ads the right way... by somersault · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The person named as the most popular role model in the UK for teenage girls recently was Amy Winehouse That is insane. So teenage girls want to be drug/alcohol fuelled nervous wrecks with their partner in jail (and from a quick google I see he almost died in freaking prison from a drugs overdose, how on earth do they manage to get that stuff in there?)? Amy has a spectacular voice, but I can't see anything else attractive about her life. Of course I'm a mid twenties male, not a teenage girl, so maybe my priorities are a little off. Who voted for her to be the 'most popular role model'? I dont think I'll ever understand these crazy women-folk.
      --
      which is totally what she said
    13. Re:I skip ads the right way... by StarfishOne · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course I'm a mid twenties male, not a teenage girl


      We know, this is Slashdot, no need to state the obvious. ;P ;P

      Just kidding. Good post!
    14. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      To that end, why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*.



      Ads work on the majority. On me, they usually have the opposite effect (not going to buy stuff that's advertised in particularly annoying/stupid/psychologically exploitive ways).



      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society.



      Ads take away the consumers freedom to chose the better product (yes - ads _work_ that way on many people. There are subconscious effects that are very, very hard to suppress. Most people can't do this at all, which is one of the reasons why ads work so well), shifting the focus on the product that is marketed best. Quite possibly, ads are what turns customers into consumers.



      If you came up with a formula for a soda that tastes better than the established alternatives while being healthier, do you think it'd fly off the shelves ? Nope. It's not Coke or Pepsi. You'd first have to fight a marketing battle against companies whose marketing budget is probably a few orders of magnitude larger than what your company is worth. And they'd fight your better product with tooth and claw - not by making their products better, but by stepping up their marketing efforts.

    15. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement.

      I almost believed you weren't a shill for some advertising or marketing agency until I read that hilarious line. "If we didn't have ads plastered everywhere, we'd have COMMUNISM!!!1!"

      Ads are not so much a product of a free capitalist society as they are a symptom of a culture that values money over things like time, aesthetics, and integrity.

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    16. Re:I skip ads the right way... by malsdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society. Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement. Besides, I didn't buy a Tivo for nothing!"

      It's not an either/or situation. It's totally feasible to have a free capitalistic society without unregulated advertising. In fact, unregulated advertising hurts capitalism.

      A central pillar of capitalism (from Adam Smith's original work) is that people buy things they need or desire. If people are tricked into buying things they don't need or desire (whether via deception, lies, force or just clever advertising), then classical capitalist theory breaks down and the efficiency which makes capitalism great, goes out the window!

    17. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To that end, why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*. If they didn't, there would be no marketing departments and no billboards, no jingles on the radio, no Super Bowl extravaganza commericials. Remember, you're not an ad agency's or a tv channel's customer. Whoever pays them to create and show ads is. So from that perspective, whether ads actually work or not is secondary. What matters is that the ads are thought to work.

      Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind) Funny, Britain's BBC came to my mind. And I don't think China is some kind of advertising free society. I don't know. Do you?

    18. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also think ad dollars (and the inevitable ads they pay for) save the average American a lot of money each year. How, you might say? Ad sales finance ventures that may otherwise be unprofitable or unsustainable.

      Then such ventures should fail. I have no problem with that. And yet, here you are on slashdot, an ad-supported website. Would you be in favour of Slashdot going ad-free, and then failing?

      I agree that some adverts are intrusive, annoying and/or tasteless. However, I also recognise that I use certain websites that are funded by advertising - websites like Google, Slashdot, The Onion and the NY Times. I can put up with ads which are not intrusive, annoying or tasteless, in order to access to said websites free of charge.

      Indeed, in the case of Slashdot if they went ad-free, I wouldn't be willing to pay a cent for a subscription unless the quality of editing was markedly increased.
    19. Re:I skip ads the right way... by garett_spencley · · Score: 0, Troll

      I just really hate that everything in our society has to be about selling you something,"

      You're free to move to a communist country.

    20. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen Brother!

      Seriously, I feel the same, but reading you say it makes you look like some fanatic.

    21. Re:I skip ads the right way... by DrLang21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Advertising makes products that I do want cost more There's a double edged sword here. Without advertising, new product awareness takes an extremely long time to mature. You are relying entirely on word-of-mouth from those who just happened to walk by and notice it in a store. This means volume will be extremely low and cost per item relatively high. The consequence of this is that the manufacturer must charge more for the product. It always costs a lot less per unit to make 1,000,000 of an item than to make 1,000 of an item. Advertising done appropriately spreads product awareness rapidly, informing those who would want the product that it exists, thereby increasing the product market and lowering the price. The problem with advertising only comes when advertising is done in excess and causes the prices to start to climb again.
      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    22. Re:I skip ads the right way... by garett_spencley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Taking the example of Bratz dolls, if I had children, I wouldn't even consider buying them. As far as I can see, they're teaching children that being succesful is the same as being famous. For any reason, no matter how degrading."

      Wow. Just wow.

      And I suppose that you never had anything like Ninja Turtle toys growing up ? I remember when they first became popular that parents everywhere were worried that the only thing TMNT taught children was how to be violent. Same reason toy guns were banned at my grade school in the 80's.

      If you didn't have any Ninja Turtle action figures I'm sure there's lots of other examples of toys from previous generations that you grew up on and are no worse off for it.

      The way you and the parent are talking is like people are sheep and the advertisers are pulling puppet strings and forcing them to spend their money on unnecessary crap at the expense of society. You're not giving people enough credit and it's actually a little insulting.

    23. Re:I skip ads the right way... by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      The single biggest suppliers of drugs in prison are the prison officers...

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    24. Re:I skip ads the right way... by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then such ventures should fail.
      Why?

      Advertising makes products that I do want cost more, simple as that.
      No, woefully bad advertising makes products cost more, and if a company's advertising fits that description, they can usually tell by the lethargic sales. If the advertising is effective enough to recoup costs, it will pay for itself through increased profits. Without it, those increased profits those shareholders demand must come from your pockets. You've got it completely backwards.

      Without spending money trying to convince people who don't want a product that they need it anyway, companies would have a lower overhead and thus could sell for less. Of course, they would sell less overall, and only companies with legitimately useful products would thrive (with the occasional freak exception, of course), but I don't view either of those as necessarily a "bad" thing.
      Wrong again. Companies wouldn't thrive, period. People would be completely in the dark about different options and choices, and would inevitably go to their inefficiently run local shop, which would almost always have a monopoly on whatever you're looking for. Products that can't be made locally would be done by big businesses, but at reduced inefficiency, and consequently everything would become a lot more expensive.

      Advertising is one of the most important tools of modern business. If you deny businesses the right to advertise, we'll have far worse problems than those catchy jingles.
      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    25. Re:I skip ads the right way... by WDot · · Score: 1

      I don't see what all the negativity is about ads. Advertisements have introduced me to some bands and singers I wouldn't have otherwise noticed. For example, I learned about Royksopp from Geico commercials, Regina Spektor from XM radio spots, and Sara Bareilles from Rhapsody ads. I don't use ANY of those services, but I thank them for informing me about some good music. It's a much better way to learn about music than commercial radio.

    26. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people write "Just wow" as if that's all they have to say and then go on to add three more paragraphs?

    27. Re:I skip ads the right way... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah.

      We can thank the Reagan administration for deregulating TV (it previously had a cap on number of minutes of advertising per hour), but the libertarian in me says so be it... the market came up with a solution (VCRs and now DVRs) and I can't really watch TV without one now.

      If I do find something on live TV that I'm interested in, I'll watch until the commercial and then pause it, switch to the other tuner and find something else to watch for a little while. Either that, or I'll just pause it and do something else for a little while... about 15 minutes an hour (well, Tivo only gives you 30 minute buffer, but if it's long I'll just hit "record" anyway").

      Sadly, the more we find technical measures to avoid watching commercials, the less advertisers want to pay, which makes the networks air more commercials per hour, which drives more people to find technical solutions to the commercial "problem." Now we have more and more product placement and in-show advertising, which you can't avoid with Tivo.

      Since I'm a cheap bastard, though, and only have basic cable, I'm thinking of dropping it altogether when I get an HD TV, since I'll get more HD over the air than I will on basic cable (which is zero). The kid's will be better off without Spongebob, I think. Luckily, they are savvy enough to skip past commercials... last Christmas they asked for a lot less than they did before, which was less than they asked for the year before.

      Thank you TIVO!

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    28. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Bombula · · Score: 2, Interesting
      why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*. If they didn't, there would be no marketing departments and no billboards, no jingles on the radio, no Super Bowl extravaganza commericials.

      It's a tempting logical leap to make, but I suspect this assumption is at least partly false.

      There are two kinds of advertising: ads that inform, and ads that create brand-awareness. TV and radio spots for Rogaine or a 3-day sale at your local hardware store are informative - they give you information about something you might want or need. Billboards with the Coca Cola or McDonalds logo or radio jingles with infectious memes (much more rare now than in the past, I notice) do not inform, they simply keep the brand in the public consciousness - and they serve as a sort of peacock's tail: they're a flashy, expensive demonstration that the company is thriving enough to throw money away on extravagances, which builds brand confidence.

      The extent to which either of these techniques really work is highly debatable. The strongest evidence that they DO work comes from ... wait for it ... studies funded by the media, which lives or dies by ad revenue.

      How often do you rush out to buy something because you learn about it in a TV ad? Do you ever really go to Carls Jr. for a burger because you glimpsed their $50 million ad campaign a few times? Would you actually buy less Diet Coke if they didn't have $500 million worth of billboard advertisement everywhere?

      Personally, I suspect most advertising barely works at all. But thank goodness TV has convinced companies it does, otherwise we'd have no Battlestar Galactica!

      --
      A-Bomb
    29. Re:I skip ads the right way... by fireboy1919 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ads work on the majority. On me, they usually have the opposite effect (not going to buy stuff that's advertised in particularly annoying/stupid/psychologically exploitive ways).
      And they'd fight your better product with tooth and claw - not by making their products better, but by stepping up their marketing efforts.


      Well, let me talk about the kinds of advertising that works on me - none of which do any of the things you're talking about.

      Its not like all ads are the same, and the reason for having them is not always the same. Sometimes it's as simple as "your life would be easier if you had one of these, but you've never seen them." That's the best case for advertising. In that case, it'll work well.

      Then there's the issue of ads for the purpose of adding choice. Sure, you may think that McDonalds is the best restaurant ever, but you don't want to go there all the time. See an ad for a new place, then you try it out.

      Then there's the only kind of blanket advertising that actually has a chance to sway things for me - when it doesn't matter one whit. I don't really care what kind of toothpaste I buy. From my experience, they're all cheap and they all work about the same. I'd be slightly more inclined to buy from the company that makes the funniest commercial. The Bruce Campbell ads for Old Spice are hilarious. Pretty much all deodorants work for me (until the bacteria living in my skin get used to them), so I'm more than happy to give Old Spice a go.

      Of course, commercials that insult my intelligence by making me think that their as-good-as-everything-else products are in some way actually better without presenting any facts have the opposite effect, and make me less likely to buy.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    30. Re:I skip ads the right way... by rickwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's interesting that this came up, because I've been thinking about this subject quite a bit in the last week or so. Interesting enough, in fact, that I'll undo my mods to reply in the affirmative.

      Manners demand that I preface the following by saying that I am not trying to brag, I am trying to provide some bona fides. I'm a smart guy with a strong engineer's mind. I read a newspaper, watch a television news program, and browse dozens of web feeds every day. My library contains more than a thousand volumes. I spend more time than the average person on introspection and self-analysis. Additionally, I'm extremely stubborn. The surest way to get me to not do something is to try to browbeat me into doing it.

      Like many of you, I didn't think advertising worked on me. Yet a couple of weeks ago I inexplicably found myself spending half an hour at marines.com looking into enlistment. That the Marines are heavily advertised during adult swim, which I often have on while coding, can't be a coincidence.

      World-class advertisers are very good at what they do. They literally have it down to a science. Even if you can use your intellect to protect yourself from the overt message, there's still the more subtle psychological cues and even sheer repetition if nothing else works. It wasn't that long ago the Marines couldn't get enough recruits. The AP reported this week that they've met 142% of their recruiting goal for April. That's not likely to be a coincidence either.

    31. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Mike+Savior · · Score: 1

      TMNT were entirely different types of characters, honestly. Parents might have worried their kids would grow up to be barbarians, but Bratz dolls teach girls how to be materialistic, airheaded zombies more than any toy I can recall. TMNT might have been karate-ing everybody, but at least they were upstanding, righteous turtles. The toys now are worse than ever at not being anything more than vessels to make the next gen of kids into mindless aliens.

      --
      space is pretty cool.
    32. Re:I skip ads the right way... by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      I very rarely whine about mods but really how the hell did my post come across as trolling ? I felt that I was making a very valid point. I wasn't trying to flame or bait.

      People constantly trying to sell you something is the direct result of capitalism. It's capitalism in it's truest sense. If you don't like it then there's an alternative: communism. I'm not trying to say that one is better than the other. I'm only pointing out that if you don't like capitalism then communism is an alternative. Why is pointing that out considered trolling ?

    33. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Ihlosi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Its not like all ads are the same, and the reason for having them is not always the same. Sometimes it's as simple as "your life would be easier if you had one of these, but you've never seen them." That's the best case for advertising. In that case, it'll work well.



      Well, kind of. More often than not this kind of advertising tries to sell stuff that's about as superfluous as a fifth wheel mounted on the roof of your car. My basement is full of junk that I bought when I still believed in this kind of ad. Maybe it's because an engineer - if there's something that will make my life easier, I'm quite likely to think of it first and then go looking whether there's an appropriate product on the market (which is usually the case :), if it weren't, I'd be running a couple of businesses by now).



      Then there's the issue of ads for the purpose of adding choice. Sure, you may think that McDonalds is the best restaurant ever, but you don't want to go there all the time. See an ad for a new place, then you try it out.



      That's a good point. However, the level of "intensity" to make your business known is very low. For me, even a mention in the yellow pages will do. You're running a restaurant that serves the type of food I'm interested in ? I'm probably going to find out by looking in the phone book.



      Then there's the only kind of blanket advertising that actually has a chance to sway things for me - when it doesn't matter one whit.



      Yep ... in that case, I'll probably go for the product that has the funnier ads. Not because it has anything to do with the product, but because it'll reward companies that make funny ads.



      Of course, commercials that insult my intelligence by making me think that their as-good-as-everything-else products are in some way actually better without presenting any facts have the opposite effect, and make me less likely to buy.



      And here's the scary thing: Even ads that blatantly insult the intelligence of the viewer work. That shows that most people don't realize just how stupid these ads are.

    34. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Simply put, people are much less likely to copy simulated violence because there are a thousand voices saying "No, that's wrong, you can't do that". These bratz dolls are more destructive because they're encouraging behaviour that isn't actively discouraged by other media, therefore more people are going to hear it and not hear anything else saying that it's wrong. It's a little like how alcohol poisons more people than arsenic - the solution is teaching kids that both are poisons, even if one doesn't seem to be.

    35. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 1

      common mods. that post is worth something...oh, it's AC, so you probably didn't notice it.

      --
      Max.
    36. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Things wheren't always like this... So true. Did you know there was a time when we didn't have TV or Internet? However, in both cases the means to produce and distribute content was expensive and had limited appeal at first. Over time, as adverting built a stronger base in the new medium the amount of content increased exponentially and larger portions of the population were included.

      Advertising sucks but it has it's benefits, so lets not paint a rosy picture of a past that didn't actually exist
    37. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society. Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind), I'll take a few ads and nearly constant product placement. Besides, I didn't buy a Tivo for nothing! Er, are you trying to claim that China has no ads? If so, you're very wrong. It's every bit as annoying as in the US (I used to live there before I moved to Beijing), and more so because I can't understand what they're saying (mostly).

      I can't speak for the other countries you listed...
      --
      Max.
    38. Re:I skip ads the right way... by AmaDaden · · Score: 1

      You make that sound like such a bad thing. A bottle of soda costs like $1.50 it's not like they force it up to $10 and blame it on funding your favorite tv show. It's a symbiotic relationship. The show helps the product sell and the product keeps the show running.

    39. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 1

      The kid's will be better off without Spongebob, I think. Blasphemer!
      --
      Max.
    40. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, he put that comment at the end of the post. If it were at the beginning I could have stopped reading there, but no, he conned us into reading almost all of it.

      Outrageous!

      --
      Max.
    41. Re:I skip ads the right way... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      The list of things people need is short. The infrastructure needed to supply the peoples are all owned already. The people who own everything you need don't need anything from you. So, how do you get what you need from those that own it and survive when they don't need anything from you?

      You give them things they don't need, like sports cars, recorded music and blowjobs, and hope they'll take care of you, like a pet.

      You have no choice, because property is all about "I got here first, I stuck a flag in it, and you can't have any", and everything has already been claimed.

      "Dance prettily little whore, and I'll give you a condo. Unless you'd rather wander the streets. You want dignity? Right. If you were deserving of dignity, you would be trying to kill me for the position I've put you in instead of dolling yourself up with fancy clothes and educational degrees. Go make me fanciful inventions and pretty things before I grow bored with you."

      That is the nature of this society.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    42. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 2, Informative

      And I don't think China is some kind of advertising free society. I don't know. Do you? I do and it most certainly isn't.
      --
      Max.
    43. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 1

      but reading you say it makes you look like some fanatic. Then stop reading it and he'll become moderate again :)
      --
      Max.
    44. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Are you saying you have a problem with teenage girls getting wasted in front of cameras?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    45. Re:I skip ads the right way... by yuna49 · · Score: 1

      Bratz dolls teach girls how to be materialistic, airheaded zombies more than any toy I can recall.

      You're not old enough to remember the arrival of Barbie. Barbie represented those same values in her day. Teaching children to be "materialistic, airheaded zombies" is a prime requirement for the continuation of the system of consumer capitalism we're discussing here. Marketers encourage children to leech off their parents and demand today's "gotta have" items. Why should we expect those children to stop wanting those gotta-have items when they grow up? Only problem is there's often no longer a parent to pay for it.

      So, Americans being an ingenious bunch, we've "fixed" that problem, too. We've extended credit to individual consumers on a scale unheard-of in human civilization. Americans now hold, on average, five credit cards per person (cite). Even with low balance limits, five credit cards together constitutes thousands of dollars in credit available to maintain those buying habits bred into American consumers from birth. Good thing all those American babies get to start life with five credit cards. They'll need them.

    46. Re:I skip ads the right way... by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1


      Is today's society really any different than in the past?


      Short answer: No.

      But, although society itself has not essentially changed, the degree to which we have been forced to endure saturation advertising has.

      We have now reached a point where marketroids have been permitted to believe they have some sort of divine right to cover every surface visible to mankind with their dross. It doesn't matter whether it is on the screen in front of you or on the loo-paper with which you wipe your ass, both are legitimate media for the advertiser.

      The fact that nobody seems to have dared to tell the marketroids to get out of our faces has to be one of the sicker aspects of our society.

    47. Re:I skip ads the right way... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Like many of you, I didn't think advertising worked on me. Yet a couple of weeks ago I inexplicably found myself spending half an hour at marines.com looking into enlistment. That the Marines are heavily advertised during adult swim, which I often have on while coding, can't be a coincidence.

      But which came first, you getting what you see as a well-targeted ad, or you having the mindset of a Marine?

      I could check off all the ways I am just like yourself: BASc (1984), news & web browser, thousand volume library (you meant DVDs, right? ;-). And my wife would definitely go for a -1 stubborn mod.

      That said, I love the Marines. I think they represent a standard of total commitment and excellence that is hard to match, and is certainly inspirational. I like to inspire others, so I am drawn to inspirational people. But does this mean if I see a Marines ad I immediately think "Wow, they found me!" Nope. [Besides, I don't fit the demographic they are after.]

      The whole time I have been reading this thread I have been racking my brain to think of _any_ time I have been influenced by an ad (1) enough to buy the product, (2) enough to speak favorably of the company based solely on the ad(s). Answer: (1) never, (2) never.

      But what I do remember is the first company that ever ruined a movie I was watching on TV but inserting an interstitial -- Safeway. Since that time (ten years ago or so), I have gone to Safeway no more than 3 or 4 times (and those times, to get something on sale). I hate Safeway and believe that if you study Safeway you will too. But I'm biased -- they made me biased.

      World-class advertisers are very good at what they do. They literally have it down to a science. Even if you can use your intellect to protect yourself from the overt message, there's still the more subtle psychological cues and even sheer repetition if nothing else works.

      So that would be the science of pile driving an idea into my forehead. Got it. Noted it. Permabanned it.

      --
      I come here for the love
    48. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Leuf · · Score: 1

      There's a double edged sword here. Without advertising, new product awareness takes an extremely long time to mature.

      True. Try starting up your own business some time and you have a new perspective on advertising. However, it seems like 95% of the national advertising stuff, including everything on tv, is for things that don't need it. It's not about new product awareness but instead just drowning out everything on the planet but your mega-corporation. But it's always easier to tell someone else how they ought to run their business than to do it yourself.

      You'd think that the tv executives would have a little more long term vision to see that if every other commercial is for penis pills that people are going to turn away. But then you remember that they are tv executives. I can't even watch a baseball game anymore because the announcers spend more time reading promos than calling the game. And they can't tear themselves away from the ad break until the first pitch is in mid air towards the batter.

    49. Re:I skip ads the right way... by lysse · · Score: 1

      Except that without her voice, Amy Winehouse would be just another wiped-out old junkie selling her arse on the street, or (best case) just another checkout girl on a council estate with a bloke that knocks her about and screws anything in a skirt... something tells me that those kids who regard her as a role model haven't quite internalised that bit.

    50. Re:I skip ads the right way... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      If all you're interested in is Spongebob then just get the DVDs...

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    51. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter whether it is on the screen in front of you or on the loo-paper with which you wipe your ass, both are legitimate media for the advertiser.

      Hah, more fools they. Don't tell them, but MY ASS CAN'T SEE!
    52. Re:I skip ads the right way... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      And the Nissan Xterra ads that featured Lenny Kravitz - Fly Away. Thank goodness for those ads, without which I would not have that song on my faves list. Now when I see an Xterra I think of the song, not vice-a-versa.

      --
      I come here for the love
    53. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When most people discuss capitalism, they fail to account for the crucial role of the
      consumer. A free market is an interplay between buyers and sellers with the consumer
      providing an ultimate check. If the consumer is uninformed and irrational -- which
      perhaps typifies our current society -- then the producers are free to run rampant
      with false or deceiving advertising and shoddy, unnecessary products. The government
      can step in to provide some regulation, but the most effective consumer protection can
      only come from the consumers themselves. There is no substitute for individual knowledge
      and awareness.

      Advertisers only exploit what is possible. If the consumer is easily tricked, then
      deceptive advertising will be prevalent. But if the consumer demands honesty and
      faithful representation, then the ad men will be forced to comply. However, given
      the proclivity shown by the average citizen toward self enlightenment, the latter scenario
      seems only a distant dream.

    54. Re:I skip ads the right way... by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1
      I'll usually just mute it if it gets loud. 'course I'm usually not giving full attention to the TV anyway -- often it's more 'background noise' than entertainment.

      For those shows that I do watch, I'll always record them and watch them later. Football games recorded at about a 1.5 hour lag are great. You catch up to see the ending in real time, and can skip all of the commercials and noise.

    55. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Is today's society really any different than in the past?

      What's different is industrial capitalism. Industrial capitalism demands continuous economic growth, which means continuous growth in consumption. As populations stabilize opportunities for colonialism decline, that mean you have to consume more and more stuff every year.

      After WWII, the U.S. government quite deliberately began to build a culture of consumption to prop up capitalism. (Great little artcile by David Suzuki here.) It's no coincidence that after 9/11, the one thing the government wanted everyone to do was to buy stuff. It's your patriotic duty to consume, consume, consume!

      And how do we get everyone to keep buying stuff? Advertising. Advertising everywhere. It was when they started selling ad space on the handles of gas pumps that I knew it had gone too far...

      It's a little more subtle than that "Ending is better than mending" of Brave New World, but not by much.

      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society. Considering the available societal alternatives (China, Myanmar, and Cuba come to mind)

      Riiiiiight. Those are the only possible alternatives: our current system, or even more repressive dictatorships.

      Thank you for more evidence toward Kreider's Thesis: "[T]he most fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives is not over issues of individual freedom vs. authority or progress vs. traditional values, but imagination. Conservatives don't have any."

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    56. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      If the consumer is easily tricked, then deceptive advertising will be prevalent.



      Let me fix that for you:



      If the consumer is human, then deceptive advertising will be prevalent.



      That's the whole reason why no theoretical form of society lives up to its lofty promises in the real world - humanity, as a whole, consists neither selfless drones, nor of sharply calculating, ever-optimizing, greedy-but-honest bots, nor any other simplified and idealized model that some sociologist will come up with.


      You can't build up a complete resistance to advertising unless your state of mind is so much different from that of what the majority considers "normal" that you run the risk of being stuck in a mental institution. It's the way the human brain works. You may as well try to get your heart to stop or to hold your breath for half an hour.

    57. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A new product?

      I am sorry to say, but new products are very few and far between. The vast bulk of
      our economic activity is due to products that are are essentially identical and perfectly
      interchangeable.

      Let's consider gasoline. Why should someone buy Brand X as opposed to Brand Y? Either
      one, when poured into a gas tank, will make an automobile or truck operate as intended.
      Neither brand has any real advantage over the other, and what applies to gasoline will
      also apply to the hundreds, if not thousands, of other products that compose our
      contemporary existence.

      Thus, the major role of marketing and advertising in our society is to somehow get
      the consumer to differentiate between identical products. But, needless to say, this
      is quite the impossible task. Only through illusion can one product be elevated
      in the mind of a consumer over another.

      Got a leaky kitchen faucet? Look up a plumber in the Yellow Pages. In most large
      cities, you'll find dozens of them, and any one could do an effective job at virtually
      the same price. So which one do you choose? Most likely you will select the company
      with the biggest or the flashiest ad. It's an irrational choice but it's really
      the only choice (assuming a complete lack of prior knowledge).

      Genuinely new products are a rarity and even when they do appear they do not remain
      new, in the sense of enjoying a monopolistic status, for very long. Very quickly
      an entire slew of producers will imitate the original item and then the standard
      problem of distinguishing among equals is once again confronted.

    58. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you're this guy!

    59. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Foolicious · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't that people are buying things, it's that they're buying things that are truly unneccesary, and in some cases actually harmful.

      So who gets to decide what's "necessary" versus "unnecessary"? If you're operating under some sort of global least common denominator for necessary-ness, then 99.9% of slashdotters are living EXTREMELY in excess. Note that it's not that I disagree with you, it's just that excess seems to be a product of freedom, and I like freedom even with its frustrations.

      In regards to the Amy Winehouse thing, I think you're off the mark. Not off the mark to disagree that kids are silly to label her as a role model, but off the mark to think that the best way to deal with this is to leave. I recognize this is just an expression or maybe hyperbole, but where would you go if you were to leave? And if you feel so strongly about this (and I think such strong feelings are indeed warranted) maybe you'd be better off trying to influence younger people than just whine about how pathetic things are, even if their attitudes are indeed pathetic. People have been labeling young people as slackers for hundreds of years, but not every generation has produced slackers. When those generations turn out ok it's been because their mentor generations didn't abandon them to their excesses and foolishness and tried, even when it was difficult or seemed futile, to discipline and train them up.

      In other words, my guess at why a lot of kids are so messed up today is that their parents were stupid and thoughtless in how they raised them, either by leaving them to raise themselves as the PARENTS pursued "unnecessary" wealth or by not providing any discipline because so many people are afraid of absolutes and lines in the sand these days. Either way, the kids are stupid, but it's because they've been abandoned, even when it would seem like many of them have everything going for them.

      I'm sure plenty of people would be willing to respond and point out that their parents failed them and they still turned out ok, but 1) they're most certainly the exceptions and not the rule and 2) some of those same people may not be able to be honest in their estimation of themselves. I can say I turned out ok, but this is a freaking forum. I could say I was good-looking and slender too.

      --
      Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
    60. Re:I skip ads the right way... by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      Advertising makes products that I do want cost more, simple as that.


      Sorry, but it is not simple as that. Economy of scale. With an increased audience and thus more people buying, any upfront overhead costs can be distributed among a lot more customers, and supplies/materials to manufacture each unit can also be purchased cheaper because the suppliers will also benefit from economy of scale.
    61. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Ads where I cannot understand the language spoken are far, far less annoying to me. Ads where I can't read any text on the screen: less annoying still. Fascinating to see how other cultures get brainwashed - sometimes it is quite different from the brainwashing we're accustomed to.

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
    62. Re:I skip ads the right way... by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      Quite. I buy charmin because it's soft. No dancing bear convinced me, and no stupid pillows or kittens will change my mind about their sandpaper TP. I use a mach III razor because when I got to university, they gave everybody a "hygene" pack, guys got soap, shampoo, and razors. Girls got soap, shampoo, conditioner, and who knows, probably body razors. Because they get you on the blades ;) Would I switch to a different brand? It would take collosal effort. The blades cost the same, and no retarded "Now we have 4 blades" "NOW WE HAVE 5" "YOU FOOL, HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITH ANY LESS THAN 19 BLADES? PLUS IT USES QUANTUM SONIC MEGAPULSES AND IS MADE WITH PURE TITANIUM" will convince me that the diffent blades that cost the same are actually superior. I shave my face. It's smooth. Product works, the end. I doubt that the Quatro Ultra Snakeoil Titanium PRO will shave me to a new level of smooth that I had no idea existed until I experienced it. That's nonsense. I'm not going to try Gilette's next big thing either though, for the same reason. I doubt their lies about how I've never known what shaved was until their new blades!

      One bit of advertising that does work on me: Quiznos. First "It's not lacking any meat, and that's what a real woman needs, urhehehehahaheayhaw!" "It's the ubermeat", then Rachael fucking Ray and her "sammies". Fuck you Quiznos, your sandwiches may indeed be better than Subway's but I'll never know. There, you got a LOAD of brand recognition out of me. Are you happy now? I hope so.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    63. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Interesting to note the differences in how this sort of thing affects certain people. That song became so irritatingly over-saturated through endless use in commercials that not only do I never want to hear the song again, I don't want anything to do with any product that uses it in their marketing campaign.

      It's like movies with "Hey Now You're An All Star" in the trailers or on the soundtrack, or any version of the song "Kung Fu Fighting" in anything. You just lost my money with that shit.

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
    64. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      I need blowjobs.

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
    65. Re:I skip ads the right way... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      After WWII, the U.S. government quite deliberately began to build a culture of consumption to prop up capitalism. (Great little artcile by David Suzuki here.) It's no coincidence that after 9/11, the one thing the government wanted everyone to do was to buy stuff. It's your patriotic duty to consume, consume, consume!

      Right trend, wrong instigators (linking to a trivial consumption piece by a living Canadian is not a good way of showing the U.S. govt instigated something massive 60 years ago). Check out The Century Of The Self (or the web site of your favorite conspiracy theorist) for the more likely culprits -- the biggest of the big boys. They realized if they could get us lost in ourselves we would be easier to control. Once they got all the money (i.e. the Federal Reserve treason), they just needed to keep us all doped up to ensure an uninterrupted flow of cash to themselves. That dope takes the form of consumerism, fashion, video and sports. GOAL!!!!!!

      --
      I come here for the love
    66. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't explain why I need to see commercial after commercial for Coca-cola. Everyone knows about coca-cola. They have a near monopoly on soda-sales in restaraunts. Why do they still need to remind me to drink Coke?

    67. Re:I skip ads the right way... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Fair comment. Would it help if I added that my faves list has 400 tracks? IOW I rarely hear that particular song... Anyway, it makes me think that advertising success is on a circular rather than 0 to 9 scale. Too much and you get a negative reaction that is equal to no advertising (or worse).

      Off topic, but speaking of which: can we get a new style of "shuffle"? I would like my player to track what songs have been played, and not include them in the random draw for the next song to be played -- and this should hold true even when I close the player and re-open it later. Write to an INI/dat file (or even, shudder, the registry) if you have to, just don't give me computer-random-i.e.-not-what-I-want shuffling ANY more! Once you have played the 400 faves, you wipe the INI/dat file and start again. Simple and better than the ubiquitous computer random approach that never plays 80% of my faves.

      --
      I come here for the love
    68. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Corporate sponsorship of such things as stadiums is relatively new, but every time I read an old newspaper... This is not at all new. The Colosseum was known to the Romans as the Amphitheatrum Flavium, or Flavian Amphitheater, named for the Flavians who sponsored it. Between 200 and 500 AD (when the Colosseum was nearly 100-400 years old, mind you) it required repairs to various damage that had accrued. Wealthy business owners would finance the repairs in exchange for having their or their business's name carved in huge deep letters around the perimeter of the Colosseum. They are still there, so this sponsorship and naming of stadiums is at least 2000 years old.
    69. Re:I skip ads the right way... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      "Ads work on the majority. On me, they usually have the opposite effect (not going to buy stuff that's advertised in particularly annoying/stupid/psychologically exploitive ways)."

      Yeah you talk big, but I bet you've got something under your sink or in your closet that was peddled by Billy Mays.

    70. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually only skip advertisements in TV Shows I enjoy, which is basically anything recorded. However, if I'm in front of the TV (live) I'm usually on my laptop during commercials.

      However, the commercial can definitely still have a subconscious effect. But then again, my family also mutes the TV during commercials and has a brief discussion. They really are avoided, a lot, in my family.

    71. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Methuselah2 · · Score: 1

      "It always costs a lot less per unit to make 1,000,000 of an item than to make 1,000 of an item."
      --
      Always?

      Is it cheaper to make 1,000,000 copies of Windows than 1,000 copies of Ubuntu?

      On the other hand, advertising can also keep the little guys out of the market, ensuring large corporations can set higher prices for a product category. Like just about anything, it can be used for good or for evil.

      And if he wasn't using Firefox with Adblock Plus, or some similar setup, he'd notice Slashdot has some ads.

      Obligatory additional Slashdot reference to Microsoft:
      It's hard to say the millions of ads done by Microsoft have benefited the consumer. My favorite:
      "Where do you want to go today? Oh, I think I'd like to use a bloatware and malware ridden OS that intentionally causes interoperability problems with others." ;0

      Not Listening to Ads:
      In reference to another poster's comments about younger people not skipping ads, using a TV as background sound without paying attention to the ads: Isn't that PRECISELY what many advertisers wish for? Ads not filtered by our conscious mind just enter one's brains as if the statements in the ad are fact. Subliminal ads have been outlawed in many areas.

    72. Re:I skip ads the right way... by boris111 · · Score: 1

      Think of in the US have many buildings (universities, etc) are named after people who gave money to build them--Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.

      That's true, but those names stick a little longer. It gets a little annoying in one of Philly's largest music venues. "Where is Radio Head playing this summer?" "At the E-Center, errrr Tweeter Center, errrr Susquehanna Center." Changing the name 3 times in 10 years is a bit much for me.

    73. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet a couple of weeks ago I inexplicably found myself spending half an hour at marines.com looking into enlistment. That the Marines are heavily advertised during adult swim, which I often have on while coding, can't be a coincidence. Ya, they almost got me too. It was that "yvaN ehT nioJ" one, wasn't it?

      Wow, way too coincidental captcha: enlist
    74. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      I'm not the one who modded your comment, but my guess is an issue in presentation. The parent post is fine, while the GP is so brief that it could easily be construed as flippant, particularly given that it's presented over the internet through text.

    75. Re:I skip ads the right way... by eharvill · · Score: 1

      The surest way to get me to not do something is to try to browbeat me into doing it. HeadOn, apply directly to forehead!
      --
      At night I drink myself to sleep and pretend I don't care that you're not here with me
    76. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're either a fraud or an idiot.
      I've been wondering that about most conservatives recently. They say things that any idiot should know isn't true. So are they liars or morons? If they are liars, you should be able to convince them that lying is not helping their cause. If they are honestly fools you should be able to learn that what they are saying simply can't be true. Sadly, I've decided it's a little of both.

      They are fools who think that winning an argument by any means including fraudulent tactics (name calling, straw men, etc) is worth it. It's a moral cause, so they must win by any means. Sadly, it's means that while they pretend to want civil dialog, what we have is a verbal slug fest like those phony debate shows on Sunday TV.

      You can see this with the whole anti-intellectual stuff. For some reason they assume that you can't trust anyone who knows too much about an issue. Instead, you need to go on gut feeling. Gut feelings don't change with new facts.

      We've gone back to the 80s when any idea that can be connected with communism is instantly evil.
    77. Re:I skip ads the right way... by level_headed_midwest · · Score: 1

      Hey, Bill, aren't you supposed to be out campaigning with your wife?

      --
      Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
    78. Re:I skip ads the right way... by potat0man · · Score: 1

      Capitalism also works best when people have perfect information. Is brand B really more durable than brand A or is just priced higher to trick me into thinking that? Consumer reports can help but not every purchase decision lends itself well to stopping and doing research. How many people are going to go home and look up reviews rather than just risk $20 on a new toaster while they are already there in the store?

      Ads, while they should serve to offer people "more perfect" information and thus be an asset for capitalism, often attempt to deceive with gimmicks or misleading presentations and then, ultimately, do serve to undermine capitalism as they are making people's information less perfect.

    79. Re:I skip ads the right way... by jmhoule314 · · Score: 1

      You can have capitalism without encouraging people to spend more than they have on crap they don't need.
      I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

      A lot of people who spend there lives trying to explain why capitalism is unjust would disagree with. Nathan Sayre, a professor of geography at UC Berkeley, talks about how when capitalism goes into full swing, after it has passed the Marxian threshold of labor being bought at exchange value and sold for use value, producers drive consumption and consumers don't have a significant impact on the demand part of the supply and demand ratio. The argument goes that a factory loses money every minute that it is not operating at full capacity. If you can run at full capacity by stretching the truth in your advertising or using some other underhanded tactic, you will.

      That is just one of the many soul devouring ethical conundrums brought on by capitalism. Under capitalism, in the conflict between altruism and money, the latter road is taken and to varying levels rationalized into the former.

      I'm not saying that capitalism is the worst system ever created, nor am I saying that the only people profiting from overly aggressive advertising are rich fat-cats. Think about it if companies like Mattel(who i believe sells bratz) went out of business and other companies that sold similarly useless crap, people would lose jobs and a lack of confidence in economic markets would probably send our economy straight for collapse.

      I know that what you will probably think is that, 'companies like Mattel should focus on making toys that build little girls self esteem or make products that cause a significant improvement in the lives of their customers'. I would agree but i think that it is obvious that that is a harder job to do and capitalism clearly doesn't reward the more laborious,time consuming task. 'Time is money' after all.

    80. Re:I skip ads the right way... by businessnerd · · Score: 1

      Is it cheaper to make 1,000,000 copies of Windows than 1,000 copies of Ubuntu?
      How about we compare apples to apples here. The poster's point was about economies of scale, not about whether Linux is cheaper than Windows. To revise your question: Is it cheaper to print 1,000,000 CD's than 1,000 CD's (both of which have the same media? YES!

      On the other hand, advertising can also keep the little guys out of the market, ensuring large corporations can set higher prices for a product category.
      True, the larger company has more money to spend on advertising, but at the same time, if it weren't for advertising, the little guy would have a much harder time breaking into a market that is dominated by the big guys. Plus, advertising is not just about outspending the competition. The ads have to effective at conveying your message and bringing awareness of your product. Just look at the Zune. I've seen tons of ads for the Zune, but the ads were so ineffective that if you asked most people what a Zune is, they would stare at you blankly and say "Never heard of it." To counterpoint, look at Apples recent Mac vs. PC ad campaign. Love it or hate it, it instills the impression that Vista is failing, while more and more people are discovering how great the Mac is. All of these people who have been using Windows because it's the most popular and therefore best are starting to wonder if this new version of Windows is all it's cracked up to be. The ads are simple and targeted. Even a monkey can understand it.

      Subliminal ads have been outlawed in many areas.
      There also has never been any conclusive study that could show that "subliminal advertising" even works. If anything, the only thing accomplished is brand awareness. Essentially, I've heard of brand x, but not brand y, so I'll buy brand x. Furthermore, it's not intended to be subliminal, people just aren't paying attention, so don't even go down the "subliminal ads are illegal" path.
      --
      "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
    81. Re:I skip ads the right way... by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      To that end, why are there so many ads? Well, ads simply *work*. If they didn't, there would be no marketing departments and no billboards, no jingles on the radio, no Super Bowl extravaganza commericials. Do ads really work or are marketing departments just really good at convincing people of things that may or may not be true? I often wonder about that.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    82. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like to like to "rearrange" the dolls at my local toy store, Bratz drive me nuts even Barbie is a better role model for little girls. Then the Bratz babies are just plain stupid, and pedophilia.

    83. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Baki · · Score: 1

      Advertisements are a waste of resources.

      You pay with your money to finance the advertisements, it makes the products more expensive. Part of the advertisements is "returned" to you by subventioning certain products (e.g. television channels).

      What do you get for that money?
      1. subjective information (a euphemism for lies and misleading information) on products
      2. a waste of your time
      3. free products of low value

      It would be better to abolish advertisements alltogether and have objective information on new and existing products and services instead.

      With the money saved because products are cheaper (no ads to finance) you could easily pay all the subventioned products/services that you really think are worthwhile, e.g. pay tv of high quality only instead of cheap and time wasting commercial tv.

      The economy as a whole waste a lot of people, time and money on sending out wrong and subjective information, without any benefit whatsoever.

      The bad thing is, even if you don't use those free (subventioned) products such as free television, you still have to finance it since you are paying for it through product prices whether you like it or not. So actually it is really immoral, you are forced to finance products/services that you may not even use.

    84. Re:I skip ads the right way... by darknb · · Score: 1

      Ads can be annoying and overdone, but they are a product of a free capitalistic society. Ads may be a product of having this free capitalist society, but that doesn't mean they are good for said society. Every economy class I've have taken has hammered home the point that the market, in its unmolested by laws form, best allocates resources into the products that the society needs. How then does advertising improve on this system. Lets say Old Spice has a deodorant that is the same formula as some generic knock-off brand Capt. Jacks Spicy Deodorizer. If Old Spice spends $100,000 on advertising aand Capt. Jacks spends none, when you go to the store to grab some of that deodorant and they are the same price, you will reach for that Old Spice. Is the Old Spice any better of a buy? no, but advertising has garunteed that the Old Spice will come out on top. How does this situation create the better allocation of resources and products for a society? It completely unnecessary, but everyone has to do it or you will lose out in the end. Eventually the situation will devolve to the point where Brands become so strong the knock out there lesser funded competitors and this is NOT healthy for a free capitalist society.

    85. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i assume you live in the west

      it is a consumption based society after all, sorry. however i do have some wonderful ocean beach front property in Liechtenstein where no one will ever try to sell you anything again....

    86. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Lijemo · · Score: 1

      About ten years ago, an incident made me aware of the subtle effects of advertising.

      I had my first apartment, and I needed a power screwdriver, I forget what for. I went shopping for one, thinking "Oh, I want to get such-and-such a brand, because they're good quality." It wasn't until I was looking at the selection in the hardware store that it occurred to me-- why do I think that brand is of higher than usual quality? It's hardly my area of expertise.

      After thinking a while, I remembered that when I was in elementary school, I loved to watch This Old House a lot. And during the same period of time, such-and-such a brand of power tools had a commercial where the This Old House host lauded the brand.

      So, at the age of 25, I almost bought a piece of equipment based entirely on advertising I saw when I was eight that I didn't even remember at the time I made the purchasing decision.

      (I ended up not buying that day; decided to do some research first in order to get a more trustworthy recommendation than from my eight-year-old self.)

    87. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wall street likes predictable growth.
      Public companies don't like their profits to peak and plateau, alienating Wall Street.
      The easiest way to control growth (read: burn money) is to throw it at advertising, sponsor some golf, name something, anything. It's not just because they absolutely need to convince anyone to buy a product, but also a quick way to control net profits.

    88. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Eco-Mono · · Score: 1

      Suggest an alternative system.

      --
      (rot13) rpbzbab@tznvy.pbz
    89. Re:I skip ads the right way... by dwater · · Score: 1

      ha. Good point.

      --
      Max.
    90. Re:I skip ads the right way... by baeksu · · Score: 1

      Also, there is advertising in China and Myanmar (never been to Cuba, so don't know about that). Not just billboards, but also on TV. And it's almost as annoying as on American TV.

      --
      Gnome: A never ending quest to make unix friendly to people who don't want unix and excruciating for those that do.
    91. Re:I skip ads the right way... by antic · · Score: 1

      "younger viewers 'just pay attention to other media when the ads are on TV or, worse yet, perhaps the TV is just 'background music'."

      My partner will generally have a show on in the background while browsing the net, etc so I think either of those possibilities mentioned could be likely.

      --
      'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
    92. Re:I skip ads the right way... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      >>Broadcast TV is free to the public only because advertisers pay for airtime.

      The funny thing is that TV we PAY for, like cable TV, has just as many ads as 'free' TV. Hmmm.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    93. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Moridin42 · · Score: 1

      Advertising makes products that I do want cost more, simple as that.


      Actually, it isn't that simple. What you say would only be true if advertising was functionally similar to withdrawing cash from the bank and burning it. (Although I feel obliged to point out that burning cash makes all the other notes in circulation ever so slightly more valuable.) But advertising budgets exist for reasons other than depleting business bank accounts. So if all businesses stopped advertising, yes that would eliminate a line on the expense sheet. But the probable resulting fall in sales volume, even on such products you deem legitimately useful, may very well result in higher prices as a result of economies of scale that the business can longer utilize. Not necessarily, but it is possible.

      You'd also need to consider the costs you'd pay for services you use that are currently partially or completely paid for by advertising. Which I feel pretty comfortable in assuming since, if you didn't use such services, you wouldn't have complaints about advertising. How much would you pay for a search engine? Is it less than you think you'd gain from lower product costs because of no advertising? I don't know what the answer would be. And that answer would be different for every person, besides. I do know, though, that it isn't as simple as you say.
      --
      I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
    94. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Capitalism also works best when people have perfect information. Is brand B really more durable than brand A or is just priced higher to trick me into thinking that?

      Actually, you're confusing capitalism with a free market. Capitalism doesn't necessarily require a free market ... in fact, certain restrictions to the market can increase the profits for the people owning "the capital" (i.e. the means required for production). Even more so if those people can control the restrictions (see things like cartels, protectionism, advertising, etc.). Having a monopoly on a certain good is wonderful for whoever owns the means to make this good (and can keep others from making it in whatever legal or illegal way), but it's pretty much the opposite of a free market situation.

      The other way around, a free market pretty much requires some degree of capitalism, unless you can convince people to compete for the sake of competition instead of for profit.

    95. Re:I skip ads the right way... by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      Why does making money have to rule out any chance of also making products that will benefit people.

      I think dolls (and toys in general) are one of the few products where advertising will actually make a difference to sales levels.

      Kids watching TV will see an advert for Bratz dolls, and then go screaming to mummy or daddy about how they want one. If enough children do that, then everyone else they know also needs one, because they won't be able to play with their friends otherwise.

      I have a feeling that they could be just as successful making dolls that don't promote being a shallow idiot.

  5. Young children... by Nutria · · Score: 4, Funny
    ... just get captivated by the high-energy movement and noise of commercials. At least that's how my 8yo & 10yo act. I'm constantly yelling (from the next room) "Skip over the commercials!!!".

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Young children... by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm constantly yelling (from the next room) "Skip over the commercials!!!". They watch the ads as an act of rebellion.

      Next they'll install Vista, put all their personal info on facebook and answer Nigerian spam.

    2. Re:Young children... by lysse · · Score: 1

      But they'll be giving your bank details to the 419ers.

    3. Re:Young children... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Never let them get used to "normal television".

      Get a PVR and have it automatically skip the commercials.

      They may end up watching Clone wars every day for 2 weeks but that's a small price to pay.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Young children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true, my son watches more TV than me and he's 4, so too young to skip commercials. When I'm watching TV I have to hide the remote so my 1yo doesn't try to eat it, so either it's out of the way, or he's eating it, when an add comes on. Comcast on-demand ad breaks are only 30s, so if you don't catch it soon there isn't really any point after 10 seconds.

      Younger folks also drink more and may take advantage of ad breaks to take a leak and/or grab another beer. ;)

    5. Re:Young children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo!! Well done sir.

  6. Television? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought tvrss.net and Miro kind of made that irrelevant these days.

    1. Re:Television? by antdude · · Score: 1

      Too bad companies still send DMCA. And yes, I had one a few years ago. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  7. Digital Video Recorder by Bwerf · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't know if anyone was confused by the abbreviation, but anyway, DVR seems to be Digital Video Recorder. Maybe it's just because I'm from sweden. Anyway, hope it helps someone.

    --
    If noone rtfa, then what's the slashdot effect?
    1. Re:Digital Video Recorder by mgblst · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Good idea. How was the time travel from 2001? Any side effects? Maybe you could also explain what you mean by the word digital?

      Ha, just kidding, your great, really!

    2. Re:Digital Video Recorder by LanMan04 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't know if anyone was confused by the abbreviation, but anyway, DVR seems to be Digital Video Recorder. Maybe it's just because I'm from sweden. Anyway, hope it helps someone. I believe the Swedish acronym is BBB. Then again, BBB is the Swedish acronym for just about anything; ask that famous chef of theirs.
      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    3. Re:Digital Video Recorder by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 2

      I think you have it backwards. Why use archaic DVRs to record television broadcasts when you can grab tv series from piratebay at your leisure?

      Legality is a poor answer. After all, the end result of a torrent and good DVR are the same: a video file with the ads removed.

    4. Re:Digital Video Recorder by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No.

      A PVR yields you commercial free television without having to BROADCAST YOURSELF TO THE MAN.

      A bittorrent download while achieving possibly a technically better result comes with a big fat "SUE ME" sign.

      It's amazing that this doesn't occur to anyone even after all of the thousands of RIAA lawsuits.

      Why waste network bandwidth when you can get multiple 24/7 9GB/hr video feeds?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  8. women by William+Robinson · · Score: 3, Funny

    Women of any age group tend to be around 35%.

    That proves, women never grow :P

    1. Re:women by somersault · · Score: 1

      Or alternatively (and far more plausibly InMyMaleOpinion) that men take 50 years to grow up properly

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:women by r_jensen11 · · Score: 1

      Women of any age group tend to be around 35%.



      That proves, women never grow :P

      Well, they do, but it tends to be once they hit 23 or so, stop running, stop eating healthily, and have already been in a relationship for at least 6mo, so the image of their body's shape is less obvious to whoever they convinced to be their boyfriend. Once they subvertly persuade you to propose to them and you both say your "I do's," it only gets more downhill....
    3. Re:women by dwater · · Score: 1

      I was wondering when it was going to happen. 7-and-a-bit years to go :)

      --
      Max.
  9. Brand Loyalty by Ixitar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It might also be that the older we get the more we don't change brands. If a person drinks Coke then he/she will more than likely not drink Pepsi or another brand. This is more prevalent as we age. One would then start to skip ads for Coke, Pepsi and any other cola drink, because it is not going to change your mind.

    1. Re:Brand Loyalty by Tuoqui · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually buying things is part of it. The other part is making you feel good about your purchases after the fact and maintaining that 'brand loyalty'... So if you're sitting on the couch watching the Hockey Game with your favorite beer in your hand and the commercial for it comes on, dont you feel better about buying your beer?

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
    2. Re:Brand Loyalty by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      No, not really.

      But then I buy my beer to drink it, rather then to jerk off into it.

    3. Re:Brand Loyalty by It'sYerMam · · Score: 1

      No...

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    4. Re:Brand Loyalty by somersault · · Score: 1

      Sounds like it would be an interesting product concept for the Pisswasser guys to think about :) They really know how to make a catchy advert jingle.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  10. I would, but by Spacejock · · Score: 1

    ... my DVR doesn't support it. They've put in a skip but it does about five minutes, or ten, or thirty (seems to be a percentage of the total) and it's right next to the button which leaps ahead to live, deleting all the paused recording in the process.

    You've just reminded me why I prefer DVDs.

    1. Re:I would, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean those that are infected with anti-piracy clips and unskippable ads for movies that will soon be obsolete but still annoying much later on, when you just want to re-watch a movie or series?

    2. Re:I would, but by somersault · · Score: 1

      I just fast forward at x120 speed, gets rid of those things pretty quick :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:I would, but by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Those are pretty trivial to get rid of.

      It's certainly less trouble than dealing with a PVR and commercial avoidance.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:I would, but by danomac · · Score: 1

      I used to have a satellite receiver that had the 30 second skip. I'm now in an apartment, so I decided to get a cable DVR, and I'm seriously disappointed with it. I can still skip, but there's no programmed time, it just fast forwards.

      I normally skip commercials unless I see a beer commercial. I'll actually rewind for those, cause they're usually funny! >_>

  11. Buyers vs non-buyers by Mike1024 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I always thought that ad skipping was a major benefit of DVRs. Do you skip all the ads? If you assume most people who pay for DVRs want to skip ads, one would expect DVR buyers to skip ads.

    Their teenage children may not feel as strongly about adverts because children of DVR buyers, unlike DVR buyers themselves, have not self-selected for wanting to skip ads.

    Jusy my $0.02.
    --
    "Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
    1. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by aztektum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pretty much the first thing that popped into my head as well.

      Younger people are more into popular culture, which is heavily marketed on tele. They have more of a propensity to stay in touch. "Older people" are going to be far more "set" in their way and less influenced by ads.

      Hence, as the parent suggests, their desire to purchase a DVR

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    2. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm one of those that only have TV (DVR) as background noise. Most of the time I will only pay attention when I am not actively doing something on my Mac.

    3. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which would also explain why women are more consistent than men (they're not the ones buying DVRs).

    4. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I didn't get my DVR to skip ads, I don't care about ads. Compared to some ads on the internet ads in TV shows aren't that bad. My reason to get he DVr was to record shows while I'm away. I like being able to pick a show to record over then net and I like being able to pause TV. Ads are the least of my concern. Just my $0.02

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    5. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm in a different camp of sorts. I have a DVR to record when I am not there, of course, but the main advantages are:

      1. Skip commercials, so I can watch 3 30 minute shows in one hour. It's a better use of my time and it makes the shows flow better to not have the interuptions.

      2. I let shows stack up on the drive, and watch a few in a row. I hate "to be continued" episodes without the next episode handy. I usually stay a couple episodes back just for this reason.

      3. I like to watch runs of old programs. I can tear through a whole years worth of series in 2 to 4 weeks. Shows have better continuity when you watch them closer in time. Same reason I buy DVDs of TV shows. (Firefly comes to mind, and Futurama)

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    6. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by jbarr · · Score: 1

      If you assume most people who pay for DVRs want to skip ads, one would expect DVR buyers to skip ads.

      We do skip commercials--quite a few, in fact--and we would probably would watch more if they weren't so lame or insulting.

      Interestingly, the down side of skipping commercials is that we miss all of the theater or DVD release trailers. (Of course HDNet has several "trailers" shows, so we can easily "catch up" if we choose.) And the phrase "...if we choose" is really key here. You see, skipping ads really is only one benefit of a DVR.

      For us, it's all about being able to watch what we want, when we want. Contrary to what broadcasters have historically wanted and dictated, we now do not plan our schedules around the TV schedule. We've been using DVR's way back since the ReplayTV days (ReplayTV > MOXI > SageTV > Dish Network DVR) and the convenience of "timeshifting" is really the draw for us.
      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    7. Re:Buyers vs non-buyers by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      That was my main reason for getting Tivo. However, over 90% of the ads totally suck, so the FF button gets a whole lot of use.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  12. Viewing habits would be an interesting correlation by GrpA · · Score: 1


    I tend to watch the ads while my wife skips them...

    The difference? I don't watch much TV so many of the ads are new to me... So I don't mind watching them. I find it more frustrating hunting for the start of the show that watching them, unless they are really long or really bad and annoying.

    And if the ad's interesting enough, I rewind and watch it twice :)

    GrpA

    --
    Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
  13. TiVo by riceboy50 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I love the TiVo easter egg for enabling 30-second skip. I don't know how I lived without it before. I've heard of Myth and other software DVRs stripping out commercials altogether, but I enjoy the TiVo service.

    --
    ~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
    1. Re:TiVo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed! I've noticed that with recent reboots my TiVo doesn't require me to enter the code to re-enable 30 sec skip again.

      Most commercial breaks are (6) 30 sec skips - then I add a few more and back up with the 9 sec rewind.

      During American football season, the 9 sec replay is just about perfect to watch an important play again and the 30 sec skip jumps from play to play for college football. Unfortunately, professional football needs a 25 sec skip between plays. They get the next play off a little quicker than the college guys.

      The skip and time shifting of my TiVo overrule HD. I've had an HD TV since 2000, but since I've gotten a Series2 TiVo, I only use the HD with DVDs and On-Demand movies. For everything else, the skip and later playback at lower TiVo image quality(480x480) is still a better trade off.

      MythTV's removal of commercials is less than perfect. VideoRedo uses the same method and, while extremely helpful, is far from perfect. BTW, VideoRedo Plus is fantastic if you want to convert TiVo files to MPEG and remove the commercials. Highly recommended for the $49 price.

    2. Re:TiVo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use mythbuntu and it took me a while to figure out that I didn't need to push the button to skip commercials anymore.

      It really is a cool feature, I have to do nothing, they are just gone.

    3. Re:TiVo by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1
      MythTV's removal of commercials is less than perfect.

      MythTV can be set to simply flag, but not remove commercials and uses (I think) about 5 algorithms to detect commercials. It also has a settable time limit to not skip beyond. I think MythTV checks for things like fade-to-black, station logo (usually displayed during shows, but not commercials), the ratings logo (usually displayed when a show returns) and I can remember the others.

      All in all, my MythTV box does a perfect job of flagging commercials with "well behaved" shows / channels and a pretty good job on all others.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    4. Re:TiVo by antdude · · Score: 1

      I wished the newer TiVo models didn't have required subscription. I would totally buy one. No, I am not building my own DVR since buuilding one is a lot of work and I don't trust PCs.

      Also, older people with DVRs skip because they're more busy with jobs, family, etc.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  14. Background by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've wondered if music, despite our need for it, is just a passive enjoyment source. What I mean is that it takes no energy at all to simply have background music play while we are actively engaged in something else. Through this, the value of music is diminished to the point of zero because in the end anything will do.

    Contrast this with TV or movies which require a much more concentrated effort to enjoy. While there are certainly some TV shows which you can tune out for half an hour and not miss anything, in general watching the boobtube means imposing a restriction on your activities for that time period. Because of this, the value of TV and visual media is perceived higher than music.

    With the advent of on-demand television/movies, the value of TV and movies drops considerably lower. While still higher than zero due to the inability to produce shows of any quality immediately (as would be possible with music throughhumming to yourself or singing in the shower), the value is lower due to the loss of time restriction. Whereas you would have to assign a timeslot to watch TV, now you can pick it up any time, even to the extent that video playback was just background noise.

    What's more, once viewers stop paying attention to anything they aren't really interested in, advertisers are going to start clamoring for both more technical restrictions built into the device and more in-line advertising (through advertisement bars and in-show placements).

    The future is going to suck for TV.

    1. Re:Background by somersault · · Score: 1

      Hold your horses there! The value of music even if you are doing something else is very high to some people, me for instance. I like listening to music while coding or playing computer games (which often have their own music). You can change an atmosphere a lot with music. And the music playing *does* matter, for example listening to some thumped up base superhappytechno or whatever its called would piss me right off, whereas listening to some decent rock or derivative, won't. Putting on a decent song can totally change your mood, for example when 1979 comes on the radio when I'm playing GTA IV :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Background by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

      Ah, but it isn't something that you are constantly focusing on. It is rather something that is filling in gaps in your concentration. It is not something that you are actively sitting and concentrating on (at least in the normal, everyday manner in which music is consumed*), so it is more like the color of paint on your walls. It may be worth something to change it, but in itself it is relatively worthless.

      * excluding concerts and other activities that require significant concentration on the music itself. This is a relatively infrequent activity compared to the normal methods of listening to music.

    3. Re:Background by somersault · · Score: 1

      I get your point, though personally I probably pay much more attention to music than average, since I drum and play guitar. I'm always tapping my feet or hands or bobbing my head along to music (sometimes when the music isn't even switched on and it's just playing in my head). That's while I'm working too, so it may not be my primary focus, but it definitely is nothing to me like the paint on the walls, it's more like the padding on the chair I'm sitting on, or the amount of power I have in my car's engine if you want a bad car analogy :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
  15. Damn right I skip all the ads! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Without my DVR I wouldn't be able to watch TV!

    Also, here in the UK, they seem to have started 'turning the volume up' on adverts to really grab your attention. That, the way they treat you as mindless consumers and the whole bullshit science of 'health food' and 'beauty' products make me really appreciate my DVR.

    1. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      I kind of enjoy the pseudo-science adverts... in a "my God, is anyone stupid enough to believe that" way.

      "Eat as many colours of fruit and veg as you can"
      "Now with pentapeptides"
      "6 blades and a vibrating massage strip"

      That combined with the volume increase for adverts is usually enough to make me just turn off the TV, and wait until my computer has finished recording the program so I can edit out adverts.

    2. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by somersault · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the colours thing make a bit of sense because having a larger variety gives you more chance of getting the different vitamin groups and all that crap?

      My favourite chemical name recently has been "nutrileum". They didn't make that one up, did they? *rolls eyes*

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by Jellybob · · Score: 1
      I can't find a definition for nutrileum, but I did manage to find one for "pentapeptide":

      Pentapeptide: A peptide consisting of five amino acids.


      Yup. It's got amino acids. Five of them.

      The different colours does faintly make sense due to vitamins, but it's just symptomatic of people's blind belief in advertising.

      You know the whole "5 a day" bullshit? According to my doctor the reccomended amount of fruit and veg to get (at minimum, more isn't going to hurt) is 12 portions a week.

      But of course then the supermarkets wouldn't sell as much fruit and veg, and yoghurt makers couldn't slap a "we have the bare minimum of fruit" sticker on the lid to get people eating one everyday.

      And then of course you have all these "friendly bacteria" drinks... if the bacteria in your stomach needs topping up every day, how the fuck have we survived thousands of years without tiny bottles of milk to keep us going?
    4. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      You do realise that all chemical names are made up? In fact all names are made up... in fact all language is invented. So not really sure what your point is.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    5. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by somersault · · Score: 1

      My point is that nutrileum is just pulled out of their ass, it doesn't have anything to do with the chemical structure, and is even named to suggest that it has nutritional properties, when it most probably doesn't (seeing as it's used on a shampoo advert, why would dead hair need nourished?), which is misleading.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by Vanders · · Score: 1

      My favourite chemical name recently has been "nutrileum".
      That advert always reminds me of bad episode of Voyager.
    7. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by somersault · · Score: 1

      12 a week does sound more sensible. Your body can only process so much at once, the rest is just thrown back out into the world, unless perhaps you're a bodybuilder and your body really needs all the extra protein and whatnot :P My mum totally goes in for all that stuff she reads in magazines though, it's depressing. I expect that friendly bacteria stuff could aid in digestion, but as you say we can survive without any of that stuff. We just might not be in as good a mood as we would otherwise have been. I know that the days after I go to for example Burger King for tea I do tend to feel a bit run down, and when I have stuff like fish and chips (the deep fat fried stuff, very common in Scotland but I hardly ever eat it) I can almost feel myself slowing down as if I'm getting clogged up by all the grease and starch, but that's more just my gullet I guess :P

      --
      which is totally what she said
    8. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by somersault · · Score: 1

      I don't even remember the ad it's for, apart from it being vaguely shampoo or makeup related. I often don't remember what product was being advertised either, even (or maybe especially) if I found the ad entertaining.

      I wouldn't say I have a bad memory, but it's just something I don't find interesting so I tend to just let the ads wash over me, or I use the time to do something more productive. If you're desperate for the toilet but don't want to miss the show (and you don't have a DVR), then an ad break can be a great thing! :P

      --
      which is totally what she said
    9. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by Raffaello · · Score: 1

      You know the whole "5 a day" bullshit? According to my doctor the reccomended amount of fruit and veg to get (at minimum, more isn't going to hurt) is 12 portions a week. Twelve a week will get you cancer, obesity and/or heart disease - you need more. The largest ever longitudinal diet study shows that minimizing animal foods and greatly increasing vegeatble foods leads to the lowest incidence of chronic disease:

      The research project culminated in a 20-year partnership of Cornell University, Oxford University, and the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine, a survey of diseases and lifestyle factors in rural China and Taiwan. More commonly known as the China Study, this project eventually produced more than 8000 statistically significant associations between various dietary factors and disease.

      The findings? ''People who ate the most animal-based foods got the most chronic disease. People who ate the most plant-based foods were the healthiest and tended to avoid chronic disease. These results could not be ignored,'' said Dr. Campbell.


      And before anyone complains that this is China and completely uniform, realize that one of the most surprising results was the huge variation in the rates of various chronic diseases across China and how they were very strongly associated with significant differences in the local diet.
    10. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by kehren77 · · Score: 1

      Also, here in the UK, they seem to have started 'turning the volume up' on adverts to really grab your attention. That, the way they treat you as mindless consumers and the whole bullshit science of 'health food' and 'beauty' products make me really appreciate my DVR.

      They do that here in the US too. I have yet to figure out what they are thinking? Do they honestly believe we'll pay more attention just because it's louder? All it means is that I either hit the mute button (if I'm watching live) or fast-forward on something I've recorded.

      Personally I rate DVR right up there with sliced bread. I can't imagine a world without it anymore. I rarely watch anything live anymore. The morning news is about it.

    11. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      And you don't think that names like "Plutonium" or "Curium" were just pulled out of someone's arse or do you believe these elements really have anything in common with either a planet or greek god or some dead scientist? And plenty of dead things benefit from being nourished: wood and leather spring to mind. Next?

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    12. Re:Damn right I skip all the ads! by somersault · · Score: 1

      Those are elements, not molecules, they basically have to be given arbitrary names. Molecules can be given silly names by scientists if they want over and above their chemical name, but I feel nutrileum was made up by marketers rather than scientists having a bit of a giggle.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  16. How would they know? by icebike · · Score: 1

    The nifty thing about DVRs is you watch when you want what you want.

    So how would they know what people do other than what they say they do?

    Self report is a pretty lame statistical tool.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:How would they know? by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 3, Insightful

      TiVo did a pretty impressive foot-in-mouth when, shortly after the Janet Jackson boob incident, they said it was the most rewound moment ever.

      Ever notice how they're always rather insistent that you plug the dvr into a phone or ethernet? Dish charges $5/mo per dvr that isn't plugged in.

    2. Re:How would they know? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      You realize it has to download your guide somehow right?

      It works fine without plugging it in ... you just get no guide, which is arguably a required feature unless you like to manually schedule all your recordings while flipping over a TV guide or something silly. Stop being so paranoid.

      Dish just sends the guide data out periodically via the sats rather than an out of band method of getting it.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  17. skip commercials by nycheetah · · Score: 1

    um...of course I skip the ads. Whats wrong with you?

  18. Scene releases = No ads by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thanks to scene releases, I get no standalone ads at all. Of course I do get the in-show ads, like the pushing of iTunes, Coke, and Fords, on American Idol.

    1. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too. Just tonight I was using my TV for something other than a really big low-res third monitor, because I was working on a spare machine. I thought I'd try this cable tv stuff I had. It comes free with my internet. So I was watching The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, and seeing commercials for the first time in a long while. "Huh," I thought to myself, "So that's what's normally in between the 'We'll be right back' and 'Welcome back'." After enduring through all that much nonsense, along with not being able to pause, rewind, or fast forward like I can with a video file on my PC, I've concluded that watching television is sub-optimal. I'll continue to scan the tvtorrents feeds.

    2. Re:Scene releases = No ads by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      I hope you leech those torrents just like you leech on society.

    3. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right. Not watching ads is stealing! You're taking bread straight from the mouths of babes if you don't sit and let the adverts wash over your consciousness and slip deeper into your soul.

      Watch the ads. Save the baby. Won't somebody please think of the children?

    4. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Jellybob · · Score: 4, Funny

      You download TV, and then decide to watch American Idol?

      Do feel free to jump in front of the nearest bus. You'll be doing the genepool a favour. Maybe if we get enough people removing themselves, "I should be famous because my mummy loves me" TV will slowly die out.

    5. Re:Scene releases = No ads by t0M$34v0 · · Score: 1

      I actually DVR American Idol just so I can forward through the whole damn thing and have the satisfaction of having actively ignored and rejected it!

    6. Re:Scene releases = No ads by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

      Hell no, gotta keep the ratio up.

    7. Re:Scene releases = No ads by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What's wrong with American Idol? Hmm... elitist attitude. Are you white, college educated, and voting for Obama, perchance?

    8. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Freeside1 · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with American Idol? Hmm... elitist attitude. Are you white, college educated, and voting for Obama, perchance? wow, you really showed him what it's like to not be elite!
    9. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You post on Slashdot just to tell somebody you don't know that his television preferences mean he should kill himself?

      Do feel free to jump in front of the nearest bus. You'll be doing the genepool a favour. Maybe if we get enough people removing themselves, trolls will slowly die out.

    10. Re:Scene releases = No ads by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

      "Elitist attitude" were the words.

    11. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      No.

      White, high school (equivalent) education, and in the UK.

      Things like American Idol just piss me off. To many people jumping up and down screaming to be rich and famous because it's their right.

      What happened to people becoming rich and famous because they worked hard, rather then managing to get the most phone in votes on a Saturday evening?

    12. Re:Scene releases = No ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elite means good dumbass. It is a desirable trait.

    13. Re:Scene releases = No ads by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen the show? The winners generally have good album sales, as do some of the losers. It's quite successful at finding real talent.

  19. here's an observation for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    youngsters, especially teenagers, tend to be a lot lazier. Skipping Ads? they probably just can't be bothered.

    1. Re:here's an observation for you by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      I'd post a stirring rebuttal but I can't be bothered.

    2. Re:here's an observation for you by somersault · · Score: 1

      Good thing too, because I couldn't be bothered to scroll down past it, so I'd have ended up reading the whole thing!

      GP has a strange idea of the amount of hassle involved pressing a button, and the amount of hassle of sitting there for 2 minutes while your caffeine addled body is screaming "I'M BORED!". At least that's what I've been thinking whenever ads come on (I stopped watching TV for a few years, but at the moment I rather enjoy watching reruns of Top Gear and QI on 'Dave' :) )

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:here's an observation for you by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      you had my thought before I had my thought. we must have something here!

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    4. Re:here's an observation for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I rather enjoy watching reruns of Top Gear and QI on 'Dave'

      I was pleasantly surprised by the content on 'Dave'; I expected it to be something like 'Nuts' which is abject shite.

    5. Re:here's an observation for you by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Well... we're computer geeks here. We should be very familiar with people
      that are too lazy to be bothered to deal with technology. Unwillingness
      to learn how to use the PVR and then to use it should be no surprise to
      anyone here really.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:here's an observation for you by somersault · · Score: 1

      The thing is that kids are usually just better with technology because they don't have the notion "I won't understand how it works so I won't even try" or whatever. A button saying 'fast forward' shouldn't be very hard for your average kid to figure out. The concept must have been around for about 40-50 years by now anyway, so even older people should be aware of it (and obviously are if the summary is correct :p )

      --
      which is totally what she said
  20. Solution by Tx · · Score: 3, Funny

    Advertisers should slow their commercials down so that the play at the right speed when we're doing a 32x fast forward. Think about it - everybody wins. The TV companies sell more ad space, because a 5min break only gives 9 seconds of ad playback time. We the viewers get really concise, focussed ads. And the advertisers will actually get their ads watched the whole way through. I am a fricking genius, am I not!

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
    1. Re:Solution by Dekortage · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of Fahrenheit 451, where the speed limit on highways has been raised really high (90 miles an hour?). In the story, billboards are stretched out double-width so that you can still read them at high speeds.

      --
      $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    2. Re:Solution by maxume · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that this is already occasionally done.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Solution by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      I've actually seen a few ads that were designed to be slowed down via DVR

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    4. Re:Solution by DataBroker · · Score: 1

      What they're doing instead is creating a separate type of commercial. While you're fastforwarding, they display a different add next to or overlaid onto the regular screen image. In short, they can be rather certain that you're at the controls (pressing the buttons) and watching the screen (so you know when to stop). That let's them play back very focused commercials which they sold at a very high price. You still get to skip the 3 minute commercial break, but you get to endure a single expensive ad while you're doing it.

    5. Re:Solution by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      I always had the impression that the speed limits in F451 were probably in excess of 400 mph.

      Weren't the signs completely unintelligible to people standing on the ground?

      And, speaking from experience, billboards seen at 90mph are about the same as billboards seen from a stationary position.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    6. Re:Solution by Dekortage · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely right -- I was thinking stupid. (I could make some excuse like "I was thinking 900 and missed a zero" but actually I just wasn't thinking.)

      I've seen billboards at 90mph too. Or even 120mph.

      --
      $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    7. Re:Solution by Carnivore · · Score: 1

      I think it was 200 mph. People drive 90 now and can read standard billboards.

    8. Re:Solution by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this was just a bit of cluelessness on Ray's part.

      Perhaps he had just never driven a car at 100mph or 130mph and didn't really have a good frame of reference.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Solution by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      I dug up an excerpt after my previous post. Bradbury doesn't mention speed, although he does use the phrase 'jet cars'. My gut impression is that he had a decent idea of how fast it would take for a billboard to be blurred.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    10. Re:Solution by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      Or make the commercial break 20 minutes long and play the ads at quarter-speed. That ought to really drill the message into everyone's skulls: "Apply directly to the forehead!"

  21. When your time is running out... by ettlz · · Score: 1

    ...every moment is too precious to be wasted on advertising.

    1. Re:When your time is running out... by stormguard2099 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and that's why they are watching TV in the first place?

      --
      http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
  22. Does the research differentiate by joeflies · · Score: 5, Insightful

    between channel surfing and ad skipping?

    Just based on personal observation, I notice most young people don't skip ads, but rather start watching another program. Their hyper short-term attention spans drive them to find new content instead of finishing the content they were originally watching. A teen will watch 10 minutes of 5 different shows in an hour, without having to use the skip button on the dvr at all.

    Older people, with greater attention spans, want to continue the program they were watching, and thus use the technology to skip the ads in order to watch the entire program.

    1. Re:Does the research differentiate by Neoprofin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a young person who, thankfully, doesn't really watch TV on a regular basis I can tell you the reasoning for this is part of why I don't.

      Say you're watching a show and an ad comes on, you've got a good three minutes, at least, before your show comes back. So you find something else good to watch until it goes to commercial. Then you switch back, but wait, show #1 is still on commercial, find show #3. When it goes to commercial #1 is probably back, if not maybe number #2. The way shows repeat themselves over and over again and the increasing length of commercial breaks means you can just about watch two or three shows at a time if you're intent on doing so.

      Finding three good shows to skip between, that's the challenge. I can rarely find one, which may explain why catching 50 minutes of one show or 10 minutes of five different ones all comes out about the same in the end.

    2. Re:Does the research differentiate by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      God that crap pisses me off. My flatmate does it all the time, and in the UK the ad breaks aren't even that long.

      If I spend any ammount of time watching TV with him, my head will be stuffed with information on how the Blue Breasted Chiggalillys of China are building a huge port out at sea to prevent the allies from getting the most votes for Nancy.

      All I can say is thank God I can record TV on my laptop and actually watch a whole show.

    3. Re:Does the research differentiate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why I record nearly everything I intend to watch, then watch it later after the kids have gone to bed and my work is done. About the only thing I watch live to air is the occasional news or current events show. Otherwise I get my news from the net, record the live to air stuff on my DVR and download whatever isn't broadcast here in a timely fashion.

    4. Re:Does the research differentiate by ghislain_leblanc · · Score: 1

      Over here in Canada, most channels show their ads at the same time to prevent you from doing that. Actually, it also happens that from time to time, the SAME AD is running at the SAME TIME over, two, three or four channels at the same time!

      Are you gonna buy that stick of gum or what??

    5. Re:Does the research differentiate by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      The key is to read a book during the breaks.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    6. Re:Does the research differentiate by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I watch football on Sundays a couple months a year, otherwise it's nothing but the shows I like of DVD from netflix.

  23. The majority of ads target young people *nm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *nm

  24. Hell yes I skip by davmoo · · Score: 2

    The only button on my TiVo remote with noticeable wear on it is the skip forward button.

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  25. Anyone surprised by this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's normal that DVR owners skip DVR ads since they already have the product.

  26. Do you remember that old website ? by dascritch · · Score: 1

    Zapavision : The ads are the show

    --
    (Sorry my bad French) Je fais parler les Guignols de l'Info. Le pied, quoi.
  27. Call me old fashioned.... by Dieppe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hell, I skip the articles about skipping the ads.

  28. Some ads better than the programs by pembo13 · · Score: 1

    Some ads are pretty funny. So I do get some enjoyment of watching them. But the fact remains, that I have never bought something just because I saw it on tv. So watch or don't watch, it's all the same to me.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Some ads better than the programs by ThJ · · Score: 1

      You do. Would you buy something you never saw an ad for? We instinctively trust advertised brands.

    2. Re:Some ads better than the programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hum? Name one brand that you trust because you saw one of their ads (and without sounding silly)...

      I trust brands because of their rating in independent studies (esp. for pc hardware), or based on previous experience, or on recommendation from my friends.

      I seriously can't tell you one brand that I trust because of advertising. I CAN tell you, however, what brands I shun because of their advertising.

    3. Re:Some ads better than the programs by somersault · · Score: 1

      Would you buy something you never saw an ad for? Yes, if I'm browsing for something I need in a hardware store or supermarket for example. If it seems to meet the requirements for the job I wanted to do with it (fix my car/eat), I'll get it. Of course you still have to go by what it says on the packaging, but at least there are laws which mean that the description has to conform vaguely to the truth of what the product does or contains.

      Advertised brands do engender a sort of trust, but only if you've had previous good experience with that brand, or know from word of mouth (which could be influenced by people who are stupid enough to believe everything they see in advertising of course) that it is good.
      --
      which is totally what she said
  29. Yes to skipping ads by JoshHeitzman · · Score: 1

    What cable TV I watch I do fast forward through ads. On rare occasion I see one that catches my eye (usually a movie trailer) and go back and watch it.

    --
    Software Inventor
    1. Re:Yes to skipping ads by ThirdPrize · · Score: 1

      Most teens watch the ads as that is the market most of the ads are aimed at. Apart from the odd SAGA/stairlift ad on afternoon telly, what was the last oldie advert you saw?

      --
      I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
    2. Re:Yes to skipping ads by maxume · · Score: 1

      I often have CNBC on when I am doing other stuff. They show old people ads constantly.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Yes to skipping ads by somersault · · Score: 1

      Apart from the odd SAGA/stairlift ad on afternoon telly, what was the last oldie advert you saw? What do these old people use the Simple API for Grid Applications for?
      --
      which is totally what she said
  30. Re:skipping tv-commercials by tankadin · · Score: 1

    Is there any thechnology that could be used to program tv to skip all adds? Change channel perhaps or to show the duration of the commercial and the time to the end of the ad-break

  31. Irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't watch or subscribe to cable or broadcast television.
    On-demand and internet-based programming is the future and DVR will be rendered meaningless.

  32. Not surprising by rts008 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I first started paying attention to TV, the commercials were between the half hour shows, or one commercial break (a word from our sponsors was the term used) halfway through an hour long show.
    Then it went to commercials between the half hour shows, with one commercial halfway through at 15 minutes. An hour show would have the commercials between, and then every 20 minutes.
    Then it went from two commercials between shows, and then one ever 15 minutes.
    Then two every 15 minutes.
    Then two every 10 minutes.
    When I finally could not take anymore, and just quit watching TV altogether about 5 years ago, it was 3-4 commercials every 4-5 minutes. I tried recording a 30 minute show-pausing during the commercials, and ended up with 18 minutes of show...the other 12 minutes were commercials...over one third of the 30 minute show was commercials, not the show.

    And those insidious 'infomercials'- 30 minute commercials WITH commercials...WTF?!?!?!

    Enough already!
    So yeah, I enjoyed being able to watch a show with only one or two SHORT commercial breaks, but I cannot enjoy the way it is now where the commercial breaks seem to be longer than the show breaks in between them.

    To me it seems to have done a complete 180. It started as a way for advertisers to use a show to get a chance to show an ad or two and provide the entertainment draw to increase the audience to view those couple of ads.
    Now the show is only an vehicle to drown you in commercials, the show be damned.

    So now, with a DVR (with say a 200GB HDD), you're filling up over 70GB's of it with commercials, and during playback, you end up having to either hold on to the remote, or pick it up every 4 minutes to fast forward through the commercials.

    No wonder most kids today have short attention spans, or just do something else and leave the TV playing in the background.

    This sounds like a study done back in the early 1990's (given an $86,000 USD grant) to find out if people preferred warm or cold showers, and why. Duh!

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:Not surprising by aXis100 · · Score: 2

      I know what you mean.

      Fortunately in Australia the government broadcaster (ABC) puts out some pretty good content and even does digital multi-channeling, all without commercial advertising. There are some internal ABC promotional bits, but thankfully they're between shows.

      The rest of the time I stick to downloaded series where someone else had cut out the ads for me. :)

    2. Re:Not surprising by IBBoard · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's why I liked watching things like Star Trek on the BBC (used to be BBC 2 at 6pm). You didn't get any adverts and so the show was 45 minutes long. Follow it up by a couple of episodes of Simpsons and you're done by 7:30pm instead of 8pm :)

      Ditto for Formula One and other sport - much better on the BBC when it doesn't get interrupted by adverts (football - the real one - they chat for a few minutes of the 15 minute break because of adverts and Formula One they have to put adverts during the race).

      I don't know if it is unfamiliarity with the adverts or an actual occurrence, but the few times I've watched American TV rather than UK TV then the American TV seems to have more adverts. Having said that, now that I've got Sky then watching some of the satellite channels evens the match up a bit. Maybe it was just terrestrial that had fewer ad breaks.

    3. Re:Not surprising by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a much better deal than we have here (USA).

      I really miss the www.tv-links.co.uk site.

      I went back to reading. My imagination is much better at providing the imagery while reading than most show/movie graphics.
      And I don't need a fast-forward button!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    4. Re:Not surprising by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      There are more adverts on satellite (and digital terrestrial, and cable) than there are on analogue terrestrial television. ITV1, Channel 4 and Channel 5 are subject to quite harsh restrictions on advertising, which don't apply to the likes of Sky or UKTV. A half-hour BBC show expands to 40 minutes on UK Gold.

      I'm not even sure what products are being advertised since I ditched Virgin Media for Sky Plus. Having a big ugly dish on the house is not good (makes it look like a Council house -- fortunately it's around the back so not visible from the street) but missing out on The Simpsons, Weeds and Lost was worse.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    5. Re:Not surprising by jrminter · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is actually worse than you mentioned on some cable channels. SciFi and USA network are two of the worst. They seem to have more time in commercials than in the shows. The worst part is when one watches a movie on one of these channels it has been cut terribly to fit.

    6. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I tried to watch Terminator 2 on Action a couple weeks ago. There were ten minute commercial breaks every ten minutes. They made a 2 hour movie into 4 hours.

      After starting to watch at 10:40, I finally gave up and went to bed at 1:30, with the movie nowhere near finished.

    7. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried recording a 30 minute show-pausing during the commercials, and ended up with 18 minutes of show...the other 12 minutes were commercials...over one third of the 30 minute show was commercials, not the show. Well, I'm going to call shenanigans on this one. A "half-hour" show is 22 minutes of content, and that's industry standard (in the US, at least).

    8. Re:Not surprising by somersault · · Score: 1

      I would have thought the tenants of council houses would be more likely to go with Freeview? I suppose satellite dishes are rather common these days, but I still see would link them more to affluence than poverty..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    9. Re:Not surprising by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      I still got the impression that US TV is worse than UK TV for adverts, though. Like I said, maybe it isn't and it's just that I blank out the UK adverts because I don't recognise them. Run times on Sky are certainly the same as on US channels, so it must be similar.

      I have noticed that some of the smaller channels on satellite seem to have more adverts, which is annoying, but I guess they think it's the only way to make money. On the plus side we probably watch more DVDs than TV so we don't see most of it!

      As for council houses, that's a somewhat odd comment. The normal indicator I've seen in Manchester is the mum smoking over the pram, the unkempt front garden, the toys discarded everywhere and the identi-kit appearance. Having lived in a 3-bed ex-council house, I'd rather have that than my current 2-bed mid-terrace or my last rental - a 70s/80s 3-bed semi that was really "one and two halves".

    10. Re:Not surprising by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      My dad is like you, constantly griping about the number of commercials on TV. But the weird thing is, he listens to political talk radio.

      Have you ever listened to political talk radio stations? They have three commercial breaks *between every caller!* It's crazy.

      "Yes, hello caller." "Hi Bob, I wanted to talk--" "Let me cut you off there, we need to break." "And we're back, talking about Obama's slip of 59 states, I have caller Dan on the phone. Hello Dan." "Hi Bob, I just wanted to say that people are taking this way too seriously, I mean everyone makes --" "Sorry Dan, we need to break."

      I'm exaggerating, but not much. I don't understand how he can gripe about TV commercials, and yet listens to radio stations that play 40 minutes of commercials an hour. Someone explain this to me.

      (BTW, personally, I'm in the "TV as background noise" school. I'm never *just* watching TV.)

    11. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto for Formula One and other sport - much better on the BBC when it doesn't get interrupted by adverts (football - the real one - they chat for a few minutes of the 15 minute break because of adverts and Formula One they have to put adverts during the race). Ever notice how popular American sports are both insanely boring and timed to allow commerical breaks every several minutes? American Football - commercials get shown between every huddle. Baseball - commercials between every inning and during each time out.

      The only stations you can watch (real) football on in the US are the Spanish language channels. The US sports channels have this annoying habit of interrupting the action in order to show commercials during the game. (They don't completely cut away, but you'll get a giant half-screen covering animation to let you know the banner ad across the top has changed.)

      US sports channels have also yet to grasp that action in football is not limited to the area directly around the ball. On American football they'll show people running forward to catch the ball - but not during football. Instead you get this small band of visible area around the ball, leaving each pass a mystery.
    12. Re:Not surprising by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yeah... but it's the broadcaster engaging in the shenangian.

      They will happily butcher a show to fit more ads in. With some shows
      we like to play a little game where we watch both the current broadcast
      versin and the DVD version and we try to spot the bits that got cut out.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    13. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, there's nothing wrong with Council houses. The Mayor lives in one!

    14. Re:Not surprising by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Ever notice how popular American sports are both insanely boring and timed to allow commerical breaks every several minutes? American Football - commercials get shown between every huddle. Baseball - commercials between every inning and during each time out.

      Let's be accurate here. You are half right about baseball's between innings ads, but not during each time out (baseball doesn't really have time outs), but rather during each pitching change (and there are maybe only 3 or 4 of those in a game). American football runs ads at predictable times but never "between every huddle" -- they are run after a change of possession, after a score and after a kick-off (so you can have a "score, ads, kick-off, ads" worst case).

      FWIW, baseball ads are easy to work around. They come at predictable times, last a very predictable time and then play resumes. Football ads are also fairly predictable and easy to plan around. Basketball has way too many timeouts and time stoppages, with little predictability. If you want to talk about a boring sport with annoying ads, go for basketball. I have seen the last 30 seconds of a game last thirty minutes due to timeouts, fouls, free throws, more fouls, timeouts, etc. etc. At the other extreme is the PGA Masters, with only 4 minutes of ads per hour.

      --
      I come here for the love
    15. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In much of the world, they do prefer cold showers. In my travels in Central and South America, while the only HOT water in the home was from the shower (electrically heated), the best temperature it could provide was luke warm. And yes, I did slow the water to a trickle, the temp setting was controlled by an allen wrench.

      But that has little to do with watching commercials. I don't - tivo and 30 sec skip. Guess I'm old.

  33. Skip live ads by Thirsty+Ferret · · Score: 1

    I skip all the ads unless I'm distracted by something else. If I want to watch something on TV when it's broadcast I'll start recording it and then start watching about 10 mins in, then when the ads come I can skip over them and gradually catch up with the broadcast. I don't like ads :P

    --
    Ferret
  34. It's simple... by kylegordon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Old folks know the value of time. Teens just love to waste time, until they realise how important it is.

    1. Re:It's simple... by prockcore · · Score: 1

      If it were really important, you wouldn't be here.

    2. Re:It's simple... by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      Old folks know the value of time. Teens just love to waste time, until they realise how important it is.


      Nonsense.

      First of all, people have always used adverts to get up for a drink, walk the dog, visit the loo. The difference from TFA is that younger people tend to have more friends and gadgets that might need attention or are available to insure the advertising slots are not a waste of time.

      When old folks are complaining about teenagers "playing" with their phones during dinner or some family meeting, this is what really is happening: the young person is simply continuing his/her daily social life. The old person is grumpy because the event probably is a major part of their social life and they feel left out. That is why they want to skip adverts: they have nothing left to do during them. Young people are far more likely to have someone they can text/chat/ring/MSN and so on.

      Also don't forget the "television as background music" part. This has actually also always been the case (when hoovering,cleaning or ironing, for example). Again here it is simply more likely that younger people are able to combine such tasks with television because they tend to live in smaller rooms/studios/flats.

      I'm with the teenagers on this one.
    3. Re:It's simple... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Why? /. often has interesting articles that expand your knowledge or can provide a bit of inspiration for something to do, whereas if you're always skipping everything because you consider it's not worthy of your time, you'll end up doing nothing anyway.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:It's simple... by shaka999 · · Score: 1

      As an "Old Folk" I don't think this is true. I do think that most ads target the "Young Folk" so it just makes sense that I'd be less likely to watch.

      --
      One should not theorize before one has data. -Sherlock Holmes-
  35. moral of the story by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    make good ads that aren't annoying.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:moral of the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations! You managed to create a post with only two errors!

      Granted, it was only a one sentence post, but it looks as though the remedial English classes are working.

      We are all very proud of you, keep up the good work!

      Next, we'll work on content.

  36. I skip ads by rolfwind · · Score: 1

    I watch little TV - mostly Futurama/Colbert Report on Comedy Central and some History/Discovery Channel. Nothing else.

    When I record something, I skip the ads -- but I usually make a mental note of the advertising and the brand being advertised. Not for any particular reason or obligation, but I think it's because I'm still focused on the show rather having zoned out earlier at the start of an advertising break.

    If an ad is particularly entertaining, I even back up and watch/rewatch it though:)

  37. As a young person... by Loplin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a young person(21) with DVR in my room, I have to say that I don't always skip the ads.

    Most often I am watching tv live, and I can only fast forward through something that has either already been aired and recorded, or is ondemand. Fortunately, the DVR will record two channels at once; either the one or two channels I specify, or the last channel I was at and the current channel I am at. This lets me watch two channels back and forth.

    Sometimes I have the tv on as background, or am only somewhat paying attention to it. The second most common reason for not skipping, for me(aside from watching live), is that I simply forget that I can fast forward! I frequently wake up from some kind of mindless daze in the middle of a commercial and realize... "oh, WTF am I doing?!", then start fast forwarding. This can even happen more than once or twice in the very same program.

    1. Re:As a young person... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That never happens with me. I usually (well, used to) watch tv late at night, just before bed or something. I regularly doze off, and only half-consciously watch the show. But every commercial break is like an alarm clock: the volume gets turned up +10dB, the screen starts flashing vividly and I'm immediately awake again.

      So now I've stopped watching TV altogether, and when I do I always have the remote in my hand, my finger on the mute-button...

    2. Re:As a young person... by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      I frequently wake up from some kind of mindless daze in the middle of a commercial and realize... "oh, WTF am I doing?!", then start fast forwarding. This can even happen more than once or twice in the very same program.


      I speak from experience here... if you put down the bong, and watch something with some actual content, then that's less likely to happen ;)
    3. Re:As a young person... by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      Well I am exactly double your age and I do exactly the same thing. Thanks for making me feel half my age ;-) Or perhaps you should be worried...

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    4. Re:As a young person... by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Nah, you're both senile at 84. He's just twice as good as you, and you're already twice as good as the average TV-watcher.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  38. I'm not young anymore! by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The skew is particularly apparent among men: 50% of seniors skipping all the ads, but only 20% of teens do so.

    Because the seniors realize they haven't got much time left to watch ads? [ducking]
    1. Re:I'm not young anymore! by blackjackshellac · · Score: 0

      Probably this has something to do with it. Be careful though, time flies once you hit 30, and you won't believe it when you're almost 50. I can't comment any further but it looks like this trend will continue.

      --
      Salut,

      Jacques

  39. Picture in picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have a DVR, unless you count BitTorrent and eMule as one .-) but they come with no ads at all.

    Things are different when watching TV. Luckily I've got a TV set with Picture in Picture, so I just switch to another channel when ads start and keep an eye on the original one in the PiP window. When ads stop I switch back, unless the other show is more interesting.

  40. I thought... by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 1

    the major benefit of DVRs was being able to record sans tape.

  41. I find myself forgetting it's recorded TV by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    I'd guess that 1/2 the time I watch DVR'd TV, I watch through the ads simply from being so accustomed to the pacing of commercial breaks, that it's not a nuisance to watch them during my favorite shows.

    The exceptions are shows like Meet the Press where the last EIGHT minutes is a huge commercial break.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  42. ad skipping by theeddie55 · · Score: 1

    why do we make it sound like ad skipping is new, even beta max and vhs had fast forward buttons.

  43. In an unexpected suprise, why youngsters... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ....don't skip ads as much, was found to be a matter of not being old and experienced enough to know better.

  44. No need by chrylis · · Score: 1

    I don't skip commercials... MythTV does it for me!

  45. Non-DVR owner by ledow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't have a DVR but I think I can explain this quite simply. I don't buy a TV to watch ads. Myself, being an old fart, just wants to watch the highlighted programs that I know I will like. I no longer want to "try" watching much unless it really grabs my interest. By flooding me with ads, the TV companies have made it almost impossible to get me interested in any new series that I might want to watch. I'm more likely to read about it in a paper/online or pick up on it via word of mouth once it's been established for about two or three series. Thus, I have a tendency to totally skip all ads for anything.

    If I was a kid today, I wouldn't see the point in TV at all. It's all just ads. When I was younger, there were a handful of ads that, even back then, I used as a convenient break in my programs to use the bathroom, make a drink etc. But now there's nothing of interest to them, and if they manually skipped them all they'd never get anything done. They are actually doing what the TV companies would fear most - they are learning to completely ignore ads in all media because they are saturated with them from an early age in all media. That's a good skill for them to have, I say. Thus, they can leave them playing and it makes little difference.

    Myself and my wife gave up on broadcast TV about five years ago. By that I mean that the TV is now just a display device - we watch DVD's (and even still videos) and we play games on it all the time. But that's pretty much it. We have a satellite subscription on the lowest paid rate because then we get the "old programs" channels and things like Discovery but we're even considering giving that up because it's no longer of much value to us. We watch a "new" program about once a year, if that. But if I stumble across a favourite, I'll watch it if I'm in the mood.

    The chances are that we only watch maybe one or two half-hour programs a night now and only about three or four nights a week unless we are working hard. That's WAY down on our previous rates. Most of the programs we do watch are re-runs that we know we are going to enjoy (although they are being slowly ruined by being edited for broadcasting during the day and then repeated with those same edits during the evening - so we "jar" on the gaps because we know the programs well enough to know something "naughty" was cut out, even though it's way past most people's bedtime). We have the remote on hand to mute all the adverts (because of the "let's raise advert volume levels" stupidity) and wait for the channel banner until we turn it back on. In the gap, we read, make phonecalls or prepare food. A lot of the time we just switch the thing off or, if our interest was peaked by a favourite program being on but it being yet another repeat of that episode we've watched a thousand times, what we will do is dig out our "complete set" DVD and choose a better episode of the same series.

    Broadcast TV is slowly dying under the weight of the ads, for which the good programming has given way - it has been for years. They are poor quality (especially the ones that seem US-based when broadcast to a UK audience - the Cillit Bang man really needs a volume-reduction operation and the "US advert with dubbed fake UK voices" is just too grating when it's every other advert), uninteresting, not well targetted, over-used, over-frequent, and too forced. And the programs that they are replacing are becoming more like adverts every day. Even the bloody movies are adverts now (the bit in "I Robot" about the trainers really annoyed me in an otherwise very enjoyable film).

    I can remember a time when I was younger, when a Saturday night was a non-stop run of fantastic programs, some old, some new and some which even then were 20-year-old repeats but it didn't show that badly - that made you stay in front of the TV all evening. The example that my wife likes to use is Tony Hancock (although we're both far too young to remember it the first time around, that's our sort of humour and type of era/program

    1. Re:Non-DVR owner by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      I'm seriously waiting for the first music CD to come out with adverts between each track.


      I doubt it. Download sales increasingly popular and will they eventually completely overtake compact disc sales. Also, music is no longer the sole (or even the primary) form of income for artists: the real money is in merchandise, live performances, making appearances as a brand at events (and in.. adverts, ironically).
    2. Re:Non-DVR owner by AngelofDeath-02 · · Score: 1

      Truthfully, I think I'm an exception within my age group (Young 20's) in that I don't channel surf. It annoys the Fuck out of me because I'll get sucked into whatever is on and want to finish the show, which is impossible ...

      Anyway, I've learned to tune out advertising, as you say. This seems to be why ads are starting to progress to within the show itself. Take Heroes for example. Why do you think the Nissan Versa and Nissan Rogue are so prevalent? That Heero made such a point about getting the Versa? Well ... Nissan paid a -lot- of money, that'd be my guess. If you watch these episodes online, Nissan has transitioned the advertising to match with the shows progression on vehicles as well. (The other two major advertisings were Chase and Cisco, fyi)

      Anyway, you really can debate the legitimacy of advertisements, and how excessive they've become. You can debate and quantify how they ruin content, but I don't think you can deny their evolution. They will adapt, and so will we. The slow will be annoyed, and others just won't give a shit.

      --
      No, I am not an English major. My posts are subject to typos and incorrect grammar. Do not expect perfection.
    3. Re:Non-DVR owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus, Tolstoy, this isn't your personal blog.

    4. Re:Non-DVR owner by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Then short ads at the beginning of free music files... I'm so glad I don't listen to music.

    5. Re:Non-DVR owner by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 1

      Anyway, I've learned to tune out advertising, as you say. This seems to be why ads are starting to progress to within the show itself. Take Heroes for example. Why do you think the Nissan Versa and Nissan Rogue are so prevalent? That Heero made such a point about getting the Versa? Well ... Nissan paid a -lot- of money, that'd be my guess. If you watch these episodes online, Nissan has transitioned the advertising to match with the shows progression on vehicles as well. (The other two major advertisings were Chase and Cisco, fyi) There is some evolution of advertising going on. Where Heroes used product placement in the content, Lost spills content into the ads. At the end of the last couple seasons they've had B-plot stuff that was embedded in the ad breaks. So in order to find out more stuff about the DHARMA Initiative, you had to visit a Sprite-sponsored website. To encourage people to watch the sponsors' ads they'd throw a random fake ad for things that exist in the show. People were actually rewinding and freeze-framing the ads rather than skipping over them.
      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    6. Re:Non-DVR owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even here in the states the advertising is often poorly targeted. I live in New England, and constantly see ads for places such as Jack-in-the-box, Whataburger, Sonic, Tractor Supply, and others whose nearest retail location might be 1000 miles away. Surely they don't expect me to drive to Colorado to partake of their 99 cent slush sale, do they?

    7. Re:Non-DVR owner by jollyreaper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      'm seriously waiting for the first music CD to come out with adverts between each track. It's got to happen eventually and if it doesn't, it'll only be the premature death of the CD that would stop it. Would you read a book where every fifth page was a full page colour advert? I don't know about ads on CD's (if you consider Britney Spheres and her ilk, I'd say the entire CD is one long marketing jingle), but they're putting all manner of ads in the theaters. I give trailers a pass, I love them when they're well-done, gives a good preview of what's coming up. But fucking coke ads, cell phones, etc? I paid my $8 for high def marketing? No thank you, sir. Bittorrent to the rescue.

      As for ads in books, that used to be done in the 80's. If it was a paperback of a movie, there would be four or five glossy cardstock pages in the middle with photos, sometimes also did that with paperback history books as well. And a few of the really cheap books like National Enquirer UFO report (same kind of publishing "quality" as porno novels) would have ciggie ads in the middle. Not sure why this sort of thing stopped happening but I'm not complaining.

      I agree with you 100% that the greedheads are driving people to the video on demand model. People are sick of ads and just want to get their shows without the cruft. The biggest drawback is they don't have the price model set properly. They're still charging too much per episode, the same as the ebook publishers do. I'm not paying no goddamn full hardback price for a PDF! Same goes for Daily Show or Colbert Report.

      What's funny is I have an Xbox 360 and it's my only HDTV media player. I don't have blue-ray or hddvd. I think the rentals from Microsoft are too expensive and too restrictive (basically $5 for 24 hours of unlimited use) but I've been planning on trying it out at least once when the right movie's come out. Oddly enough, they have Surf Nazis Must Die but not Cloverfield or the Mist. I paid full price to see those two in the theater, plan on getting the DVD's, but would still pay the $5 to see how they compare in 1080i quality.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  46. Unexpected? by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

    Ad Age hypothesizes that younger viewers 'just pay attention to other media when the ads are on TV or, worse yet, perhaps the TV is just "background music"...'


    How was this an unexpected result? People have always used advert slots to get up for a drink, walk the dog, visit the loo and so on. Younger viewers simply have more distractions (friends, choirs) and more gadgets (mobiles, computers, consoles) that might need attention, or could provide the necessary distraction during the interruption.

    And using television as background music isn't exactly new either.. anyone who has ever hoovered or ironed can vouch for that. The difference between young and old is quite simple here as well: younger people tend to live in smaller houses (think of a studios) where it's more likely primary tasks are nearby a television set.
    1. Re:Unexpected? by Rary · · Score: 1

      I also thought it strange that they found this result unexpected.

      Does it surprise them that people who grew up in a time when they weren't constantly bombarded by advertising, and who watched as advertising became more and more pervasive in their lives are less receptive to advertisements than people who grew up in a time of pervasive and intrusive advertising?

      Does it surprise them that people who have lived a long time and are less interested in acquiring more junk in their lives are less receptive to advertisements than people who are interested in acquiring more personal possessions?

      Does it surprise them that people who have, on average, less disposable income are less receptive to advertising than people who have, on average, more disposable income?

      There should be nothing surprising in this result.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  47. Skipping Ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats like stealing Television how are the channels going to make money?

  48. When you pick a user name, think about the future. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, lowest user ID, but I'll bet you're sad you called yourself "Pestilence".

    On topic: I notice that almost every ad I see contains something dishonest or adversarial.

    TV ads are a good source of information for me. They tell me what not to buy. If it's on TV, it's over-priced or unnecessary, with few exceptions. Otherwise the advertiser would not be able to pay, or be willing to pay, the huge cost of TV ads.

  49. absolute numbers? by Tom · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd rather suggest that it's a selection bias. Among young people, TV is a lot less common than among older people, who often use it instead of social contacts (who are either dead or old and not very mobile themselves).

    Lots of young people don't even have a TV anymore. It's definitely a pattern. Far from a majority, but while in our parents generation a TV simply was part of every home, in our generation you're not looked at funny anymore when you say you don't have a TV. It's not a big deal, because it's fairly common.

    So, the study group self-selects. Those who have a DVR have a TV as well. First link. Those who have a TV aren't simply "everyone", but those who more or less decided to have a TV. Second link. Why do you decide to get a TV in an age where half of the program is ads? Because you don't care much about that. Third link. If you don't care much about ads, you don't expend much energy to skip them. And that's what the study has shown. Any correlation to age probably goes more through this self-selection than through any other age-related attribute.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:absolute numbers? by r_jensen11 · · Score: 1

      I'd rather suggest that it's a selection bias. Among young people, TV is a lot less common than among older people, who often use it instead of social contacts (who are either dead or old and not very mobile themselves). I think you have a different perspective of what the summary considers "old people." I'm guessing they are referring to baby-boomers, not the boomers' parents. So this would include people in their 50's.

      Then again, I havn't RTFA, so I probably shouldn't even be talking.
    2. Re:absolute numbers? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Lots of young people don't even have a TV anymore. It's definitely a pattern. Far from a majority, but while in our parents generation a TV simply was part of every home, in our generation you're not looked at funny anymore when you say you don't have a TV. It's not a big deal, because it's fairly common. The important factor is not having a TV or cable no longer means you don't have access to the programming. Lots of people are foregoing landline service at this point but that doesn't mean they don't have a phone number, they're just using the mobile as sole point of contact. A landline would be a useless redundancy.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    3. Re:absolute numbers? by Animats · · Score: 1

      Lots of young people don't even have a TV anymore. ... Why do you decide to get a TV in an age where half of the program is ads?

      Right. The TV industry, having crapped on their own medium, now complains that viewing is declining.

  50. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by Pestilence · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why would I be sad about having such a kickass user name to go with my super low user id?

  51. I don't skip the ads.... by shippo · · Score: 1

    ...but only because I only watch channels without ads in the first place.

  52. Subliminal advertising by SKPhoton · · Score: 2, Funny

    or, worse yet, perhaps the TV is just "background music" Worse? Advertisers love that. Their messages then seep right into the listener's subconscious unimpeded!
    1. Re:Subliminal advertising by lowsinon · · Score: 1

      How true. I don't watch TV (except the occasional episode of House), but often I can hear it when my wife watches. I don't know how many adds have slipped into my head when I'm not even in the room.

      --
      What is it with layered approaches? Is it because it works from cakes to network security?
  53. Re:skipping tv-commercials by jim.hansson · · Score: 1

    I think you can can have programs look for the channel logo, and if it's not showing then it is a commercial, someone with more experince in image processsing maybe can tell if it's doable. Getting TV makers to put this kind of technology inside TVs that another problem, and then most channels will leave the channel logo on under commercials too :-( .

    --
    preview button, my computer does't have any preview button
  54. That just proves old point by mapkinase · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Younger people do not have brains.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    1. Re:That just proves old point by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      It seems like a started a huge flame here. I apologize.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  55. Yes! by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    I deliberately start watching late; then I just rewind to the beginning of the programme, and fast-forward through the advert breaks.

    Visiting people who don't have Sky Plus is really annoying!

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:Yes! by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      >> Visiting people who don't have Sky Plus is really annoying!

      You may want to try talking with them next time, instead of just sitting down at your host's couch to watch their TV.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
  56. Re: Youngsters Skip DVR Ads Less Than Seniors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I pre-record almost everything and skip through the ads. I hate them so much. I'm 21. I'm not sure if that makes me a "youngster" or not.

  57. Here's an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Television content is becoming irrelevant. I gave it up when I moved away from home and I don't miss it. The internet is a far more efficient resource for timely and targeted news. I can get current news on topics of interest all day long and I'm not forced to sit through ads that make my stomach churn (they can be ignored) or content I feel has no relevance to me.

    I find these days that the little television I see is worse than my email inbox. Lately the ads on tv are for the same type of "products" I mark/delete as spam every day, only worse because I can't just press delete and move on.

    Ultimately, any form of media that pushes content to a user rather than give them the content they want when they want it will fail.

  58. Well known by jandersen · · Score: 1

    How can that be a surprise? Young people are less experienced and therefore often less critical of what they see and hear. Advertisers already know this, which is why so many adverts are targeted for the young. This is also supported by research - one one project found that where people under ~30 would often show interest in the adverts in magazines, people over that age tended to simply skip/discard advertising material out of hand without even looking at it. The one exception was the adverts from the local supermarket(s), because they tend to list the prices on daily items. The morale of the thing is that younger people are interested in things like image, whereas more mature people go for things that have a practical value.

    1. Re:Well known by lowsinon · · Score: 1

      Which is why adds regarding new and practical innovation are so popular among older people?

      --
      What is it with layered approaches? Is it because it works from cakes to network security?
    2. Re:Well known by Weedlekin · · Score: 1

      "Young people are less experienced and therefore often less critical of what they see and hear. Advertisers already know this, which is why so many adverts are targeted for the young."

      Advertising tends to be targeted at the young because:

      1) They're less likely to have already made decisions about what products they like / don't like, and are therefore more open to trying new things.

      2) Although they tend to have less income overall, they also have significantly fewer commitments, so they a spend a greater proportion of what they do have on themselves.

      3) Peer pressure is much more prevalent in younger people, so advertising that can convince some of them that a particular item or image is desirable stands a good chance of selling those products to some of their friends and acquaintances.

      "This is also supported by research - one one project found that where people under ~30 would often show interest in the adverts in magazines, people over that age tended to simply skip/discard advertising material out of hand without even looking at it"

      Perhaps this was due to the fact that most of the ads in said magazines were targeting people who are 30 or under, just like most of the ads everywhere target people who are 30 or under.

      "The one exception was the adverts from the local supermarket(s), because they tend to list the prices on daily items."

      That's just a reflection of the fact that older people tend to have families and other commitments which means (a) they use much more of what supermarkets sell, and are therefore (b) receptive to offers that can save some of what is a significant, regular expense.

      "The morale of the thing is that younger people are interested in things like image"

      A lot of older people are interested in image as well, especially women, who will happily spend large sums on plastic surgery, cosmetics, creams, corsetry, hairdressers, and a host of other things that are specifically aimed at middle-aged (and older) women who want to look younger, fitter, and more attractive.

      "more mature people go for things that have a practical value"

      Mature people with plenty of money to spend on themselves tend to be equally easy to sell impractical things to as younger ones. The fact that most mature people aren't in the market for such things is therefore largely a reflection of there not being very many whose commitments don't consume the bulk of their income.

      --
      I'm not going to change your sheets again, Mr. Hastings.
  59. What ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use bittorrent.

  60. I skip some (well most) ads. by yotto · · Score: 1

    I watch the ads until something comes up that I've seen several times, or is for a product I don't care about, or is particularly lame. Most commercial breaks, that's the first one, but sometimes I'll watch several commercials.

    As soon as I hit that bad commercial, though, I skip the rest of the break. If I'm already hitting skip I may as well go all the way.

  61. Habit by MBHkewl · · Score: 1

    When I used to program the video recorder to record TV shows while I'm busy, then watch the shows, I tend to forget that what I'm watching is recorded, and forget to skip!

    I don't watch TV much anymore, and if I do, whenever an ad is on I switch to other channels then go back.

    --
    Mod points are a dangerous tool. Abuse them wisely.
  62. Another way to look at it. by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would think that older folks know that yes, it is only a 3 minute commercial. And to a youngster, what's three minutes. The older person has done the math:

    watching 2 hours of TV a day (avaraged, could be light for some, heavy for others)
    Guesstimating 10 minutes per hour of commercials
    You are now up to 20 minutes per day on commercials
    Or 7300 minutes per year
    Or over a 30 year period of watching Ads (again, some may be hitting 60 years+ of TV, 30 just seemed to be good round number)
    So, 30 years of ads means you'll have potentially wasted (perspective based) 3650 hours on ads.

    Or to put it another way, you would have to work 2 years (40 hr work week - 10 holidays) to make up for that time.

    --
    There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    1. Re:Another way to look at it. by maxume · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure. That's 21,900 hours of TV watching. If they were really worried about the 2 years of advertising, they would probably also be worried about the other 9 years of TV watching.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Another way to look at it. by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      You forgot to divide by 60 minutes to get hours.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    3. Re:Another way to look at it. by maxume · · Score: 1

      Nah.

      2 hours * 365 days/year * 30 years = 21,900 hours.

      That's 10.95 2000-hour work years. Take away the 2 2000-hour work years that are watching ads, and you have 9 2000-hour work years left.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Another way to look at it. by maxume · · Score: 1

      Another way to look at it is that you calculated ~1/6th of the watching time to get the ads number, so the total watching time would be 6 times what you calculated, and the program watching time would be 5 times what you calculated.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:Another way to look at it. by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, you are correct. Though I have a feeling that for a lot of folks, none of those numbers are that far off. Scary.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    6. Re:Another way to look at it. by maxume · · Score: 1

      If half of it is after dark or before dawn, that's not so bad.

      It certainly isn't the best possible use of time, but I think for the most part TV watching has displaced other fairly inane activity, not high minded self enrichment.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Another way to look at it. by ukemike · · Score: 1

      Double all of your numbers because there is typically 20 minutes of commercials in an "hour" long program. So that's 7300 hours of ads in 30 years... 304 days. Almost a year's worth!

      --
      -- QED
  63. Re:skipping tv-commercials by somersault · · Score: 1

    Last time I read about it, they detected ads via the rate at which the scenes were switching (which wouldn't be that difficult to detect by itself, unless maybe there was a lot of movement like people walking directly in front of the camera, which could seem like a scene transition to an algorithm looking out for stuff like that, but you would then get back into view the stuff you had before and the algorithm could compare it to stuff that it's seen in the last few seconds, etc), though that method won't be infallible as scenes in TV shows could end up with a similar style to adverts. Perhaps they could train the DVRs to recognise the types of tone progressions used in "friendly but condescending market speak".

    --
    which is totally what she said
  64. I (mostly) skip TV altogether. by TractorBarry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just don't watch TV to any great extent. If I do then when the ads come on I either mute the volume, switch channels or lose interest, go off and do something else.

    I am simply not going to sit there for 5 minutes listening to inane jingles advertising tampons, crap loans, household cleaning products and cars.

    When I (rarely) watch a DVD then they've either been ad stripped by the uploader :) or I strip the ads myself before I watch it. And now that pressed DVDs come with "non skippable" ads (yeah right) I've mostly stopped buying them.

    If I'm interested in buying something I go to great lengths to find out about the available products before I make an informed choice as to what I want to buy.

    Sorry I'm just not interested in advertising.

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
    1. Re:I (mostly) skip TV altogether. by danomac · · Score: 1
      I understand the not being interested in advertising, but I do have a point to make:

      When I (rarely) watch a DVD then they've either been ad stripped by the uploader :) or I strip the ads myself before I watch it. And now that pressed DVDs come with "non skippable" ads (yeah right) I've mostly stopped buying them.

      You do realize there are DVD players out that do not follow the UOP instructions on the disc, don't you? Oh, UOP=User operation prohibition. My current DVD player is slowly dying... when it does I will get one of these players.
  65. Ads are a nuicance by Ticklemonster · · Score: 0

    I'm over 50, and I consider the entire ad industry to be a self perpetuating maggot fest. I normally ignore all ads because I know that tons of money is spent in trying to find sure fire ways to coerce me into spending money on stuff regardless of it's merit. Nuke the lawyers, but first, send them to an advertiser's convention... tee hee hee

    --
    Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
  66. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeh I bet you get all the girls at the parties.

    "Hi, I'm Pestilence the ass-kicker and I have a low user id on Slashdot."

    "er, Slash-what?"

    "Never mind bend over so I can kick your ass

  67. Wait, what? by Waccoon · · Score: 1

    You can skip ads on DVR but not on DVDs?

  68. Mixed bag by warlorddagaz · · Score: 1

    Just to start with, I'm 17, and the main reason I use a PVR/DVR is not to skip the ads, but so I can watch stuff I'd otherwise miss, due to there (rarely) being 2 programs on at the same time, or me being out of the house. Sometimes when I watch the TV, it is essentially "background music", so I have something to look at whilst I'm compiling. Other times, the computer acts as background music until I find something interesting and end up missing the rest of the program. This "background music" is often something I still have on disk, and feel like vaguely watching. It's times like those when I don't skip the ads. However, on a Thursday and Friday, I catch up with Wednesday, Thursday and Friday's episodes of TNG once I get home from whatever I was doing, and will skip through the ads (I've just about got the hang of FFing at 32x, and not missing the first couple of seconds), taking 15 minutes out of the program. This is actually quite annoying though, as whe I watch them live, it takes me a couple of seconds to realise why it won't fast forward! But to further complicate it, I actually find ad breaks quite useful - they give a couple of minutes in which I can use the loo or get a drink, and I'll often wait for a break, even if I can pause it. That's my 2 pence, which probably goes to prove how erratic teenagers habits are.

  69. Makes sense by markdavis · · Score: 1

    It makes sense to me. Younger people have more to learn and probably want to absorb more. They are also more impressionable. Older people have seen 1,000,000 commercials for bleach... they probably don't care as much.

    Speaking for myself- I skip about 95% of the ads, but that is because, again, I have seen it all or they are products for which I have absolutely no interest. BUT- I can see most everything flying by, even at high speed, and I will frequently stop and watch an ad that seemed like it was interesting or for for something in which I do have interest.

    The net result, for me anyway, is that advertisers have lost nothing on me.

  70. Definitely against ads, but not in the majority by zuki · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As an old foggy and ad-hater, although we pay around $60 a month for cable in our residence for our family's benefit, I seldom if ever watch anything at all, as I much prefer to wait and download the stuff I like later (even weeks or months later) totally commercial-free, or buy the DVD if I really like it that much.

    But when thinking more about it, the part I am actually not sure that I get anymore is that we are paying almost $800 a year for the privilege to watch advertising-sponsored shows. We actually are paying to have the chance to watch ads.... Increasingly, this part doesn't make much sense to me, as it was a business model that was clearly designed for over-the-air free viewing.

    All the same, in observing my family's viewing patterns, I have noticed that the younger ones tend to accept the advertising content much more naturally, almost as if it was an integral part of the programming. They also clearly identify the cutting-edge bits in ads which incorporate mind-blowing special effects, or revel in their witty humor, and to them it rates just as high as the programs themselves.

    As for the real benefits of DVR's, they seem to still clearly be first and foremost their time-shifting abilities. When they get home after work or school, many people are just too passive or exhausted to bother dealing with hitting the 'Forward' button repeatedly.

    In the end, just like vegans, there is a minority of people out there who are violently and religiously against any ads; but the huge majority doesn't care at all, it's just a minor inconvenience to them, and this further carries over into how they watch the DVR recordings they've made.

    I would find it most interesting to know what these patterns of ad skipping become when it's automated, as with Myth TV.

    As an aside, I would also love to have the option of watching HD programming in real time with no ads whatsoever. How much would this cost? Why isn't it widely offered yet?

    Z.

    1. Re:Definitely against ads, but not in the majority by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 1

      But when thinking more about it, the part I am actually not sure that I get anymore is that we are paying almost $800 a year for the privilege to watch advertising-sponsored shows. We actually are paying to have the chance to watch ads.... Increasingly, this part doesn't make much sense to me, as it was a business model that was clearly designed for over-the-air free viewing.
      Z. If only I had mod points - this is what I've been saying for a while now - I won't even consider paying extra for the privilege of WATCHING MORE COMMERCIALS. It's insane. They really know exactly how stupid their customers are. The lowest service tier of Time Warner in NYC actually blocks a lot of channels, both analog and digital channels, at the cable box level that you can easily tune in simply by connecting the cable to the TV directly. No special TV or descrambler required, it Just Works - though obviously you'd need an ATSC cable-ready TV to get the digital channels. That's the sort of contempt they have for you, the paying customer.
      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
  71. DVR? Seriously? by Randall311 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just use BitTorrent. I have a client that broadcatches my favorite shows from RSS feeds. They are always in matroska format 720p (half hour shows run about 500 MB, hour longs about 1 GB). I have a cron job that runs every 15 minutes detecting if a torrent has finished downloading and I am seeding. If it has, then the file is unrared, extracted from it's mkv format container, audio gets converted from AC3 -> 6 channel PCM -> 6 channel AAC, video is kept as is (H.264), then it is remuxed into mp4 format and served up to my media server (uShare). Then the file automatically shows up in my media server when I turn on the PS3 (I have a Perl script for all this). This whole process takes from 20 mins to 2 hours for the torrent download, then 10-15 minutes for the file conversion. The result is ad-free beautiful 720p shows that I can watch anytime. I thought this was the Slashdot way! Who needs a DVR? All you need are seeders... Seed plz!

    1. Re:DVR? Seriously? by Durrok · · Score: 1

      Mind posting that script? I'd be interested in checking it out.

      --
      I keep telling myself I'm not the desperate type.
    2. Re:DVR? Seriously? by Mab_Mass · · Score: 1

      Although your hacking prowess is impressive, I personally just can't imagine spending that much effort to watch TV.

      If I want to consume quality media, I'd rather just get the DVDs of what I want to watch.

      Then again, I think I'm a bit of an oddball on /. in that I have never lived with cable TV (or satellite or ...). In fact, my TV was made in 1984, has faux-wood grain on the outside, and when it stops working next year, I'll probably just stop watching altogether.

    3. Re:DVR? Seriously? by fbartho · · Score: 1

      I'd really like to do that myself, would you mind posting the script somewhere? I know my sibling poster asked this too, but I thought I wanted comcast until I went 3 weeks watching tv only 2 days a week because every other day when I tried to sit down there was absolutely nothing on.

      Please?

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    4. Re:DVR? Seriously? by Randall311 · · Score: 1

      I posted the link to the first person that asked. Good luck with it.

    5. Re:DVR? Seriously? by fbartho · · Score: 1

      What bittorrent client and what RSS feeds do you use? / What do you download?

      I totally intend to set myself up the same way, and possibly even get rid of comcast tv service.

      Thanks for the script!

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    6. Re:DVR? Seriously? by Randall311 · · Score: 1

      Ideally I would like to use uTorrent, but since there is no Linux version, you can either use wine to run uTorrent, or use Azureus with its RSS import plugin. There is a promising new client and server application that essentially does what we are looking for http://swarmtv.nl/ but it's still in alpha. There is a good engadget article that shows you how to set Azureus up to download these torrents http://www.engadget.com/2004/11/23/how-to-broadcatching-using-rss-bittorrent-to-automatically/ After that you just need the cron job and maybe a shell script to serve up your completed mp4 files to uShare.

  72. Re:skipping tv-commercials by kalel666 · · Score: 1

    My ReplayTv Model 5040 skips them automagically. Really handy. It occasionally doesn't skip them, or skips early (so you miss a minute or two of the show), but mostly works very well.

    Of course, the manufacturer was sued for providing this capability and pulled it from the market. Thanks eBay!

    --
    I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
  73. Do I skip the ads? by Zastil · · Score: 1

    Nope. See, what I do is I mute the TV and read between each segment of the show I'm watching. It's actually easy to do this since the channels usually follow a predictable pattern when it comes to the ads; there's always an ad about the channel itself before the show starts again. All I have to do is give the TV a glance every 45 sec. or so and I don't miss my show while being able to do some reading on the side.

  74. Re:skipping tv-commercials by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

    Entirely feasible, at my old job we made overlay applications for television shows (sms voting, chat, for example) and the "bug detection" you described was exactly how to decide whether the application should be active or not, when no playlist was available.

  75. No surprise to me! by Fuzzypig · · Score: 1

    I'm only 35 and I absolutely hate advertising on TV, painting rosey pictures about how our lives should be lived! Feck orf! As for younger viewers, ie over the age of 14 say, I can well believe the TV is on as simply a background noise, I used to do that many yonks ago.

    --
    Windows guys please stop pissing on everyone and the Linux guys stop pissing in the wind, hoping to hit Windows guys!
  76. Yes and No for this over 50 by smchris · · Score: 1

    I probably will take 4 or 5 30-second jumps per commercial break on stuff I've put on the MythTV. But, in truth, I'm not timeshifting 80% of the time. Remember, more than half of my TV viewing years were before VCRs were inexpensive and before DVDs were invented so everybody watched live or missed it.

  77. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by thegnu · · Score: 2, Funny

    You would think that, but I normally swoop in and cock-block. I'm all like, "Hey, honey. Me thegnu. I'm a tagalong. Let's do it."

    And then I date-rape them.

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
  78. Easy answer: Multitask on 2 TVs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least that's what I do if I'm watching live cable news on one TV. I just go to the adjacent TV and play video games on it during commercial breaks. I just listen for audio clues to tell me when to go back to watching TV. If these youngsters are anything like me, then sometimes they may just give up watching, and stick with the video games. While most commercials are just background noise, some commercials are so annoying, I just turn it off altogether.

  79. Forgetting by erikmf · · Score: 1

    I find myself forgetting that I'm watching a recorded show. I usually realize it half-way through a commercial break and skip the rest.

  80. A thing I always do by Daimanta · · Score: 1

    When there are ads on tv, mute the sound. Why? Because it won't pollute your ears and watching them without sound makes people in ads look like complete retards. Don't believe me? Try it. When you cut the sound you notice quite easily that people are completely acting.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    1. Re:A thing I always do by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Because it won't pollute your ears and watching them without sound makes people in ads look like complete retards. Don't believe me?



      If you leave the sound on, they sound like retards, too. Why should that impression change one bit when you turn the sound off ?

    2. Re:A thing I always do by geekoid · · Score: 1

      In 1978 I built a device that mutes the sounds on the TV if the gain spiked.

      I couldn't get funding to market and mass produce it. I'm pretty sure I would have made a million bucks.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  81. Maybe... by Staylecrate · · Score: 1

    ... People just think its a good way not to miss their favorite shows and are to stupid to release there is a fast foward button

  82. Skipping Commercials is what your thumbs are for! by FewClues · · Score: 1

    Until the networks synchronized their ad timing I used to be able to watch two programs by flicking between two (or 3) channels. Having grown tired of the increased frequency of commercials near the end of a movie or drama I learned to go through the daily grid and simply mark anything I intend to watch for recording. Then I can zap through the commercials quickly. A football game only takes two hours instead of three, a movie takes 75 minutes instead of 2 hours etc. etc. I would switch to myth in a heartbeat but my signal source is satellite and no TV card can handle it. Life is good - as long as my controller and my thumbs hold out

  83. Not really by tkrotchko · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "companies would have a lower overhead and thus could sell for less."

    Unless there is perfect competition, the overhead a company has is only marginally related to the selling price.

    If I can sell a widget for $100, that's what I'll ask for it, regardless of cost. If the market is buying my widgets as quickly as I can produce them, I would be stupid to reduce the price, even as efficiencies reduce costs to produce.

    It's the same incorrect argument that people make that "shoplifting costs everyone more money". No, it doesn't. Shoplifting costs the store owner money, and is morally wrong. But the shop owner can't raise prices because the store next door (who has a more efficient loss prevention program) will undercut their prices.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    1. Re:Not really by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's the same incorrect argument that people make that "shoplifting costs everyone more money". No, it doesn't. Shoplifting costs the store owner money, and is morally wrong. But the shop owner can't raise prices because the store next door (who has a more efficient loss prevention program) will undercut their prices. And yet both stores are paying for the loss prevention program - and passing that cost on to the consumer. (That being said, I agree with what you're saying as relates to the topic at hand ...)
    2. Re:Not really by slarrg · · Score: 1

      Thus, advertising increases demand which drives prices up.

  84. this is not surprising because ... by mbaGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Younger viewers are the prized age demographic in advertising circles. Why?

    the theory is that the younger viewers haven't established "brand" preference for most products - and therefore can be more easily convinced to try a different/new brand older viewers probably have made their "brand" choices and won't consider changing unless something drastic happens

    this is why beer commercials are geared at people too young to drink and also why the tobacco industry got into so much trouble

    my guess is that "young male" viewers are simply more open to the "advertising message" and aren't as annoyed by them (i.e. younger viewers see them as "information" not "advertising") and therefore (slightly) less likely to skip them

    this study confirms what marketers already knew - targeting "younger" viewers is more profitable than targeting "older" viewers (obviously there is for "most products" - I don't know what age groups the AARP targets with their adds - but it probably isn't 15 year olds or 90 year olds...)

    ...and if I have DVRed something with commercials I turn on the "commercial auto skip" but I also fast forwarded through commercials with by VCR way back when...

    --
    It ain't what they call you. It's what you answer to. http://mylyceum.us/
  85. I actually like ads by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    I like to know about new products and services. I don't consider myself a brain-dead consumer monkey, so I don't really care if someone wants to spend a bunch of money promoting something to me - if I don't need or care about that product, or don't like the company, I am not going to buy it, period.

    However, when a new product comes to market, it is nice to be told about it. There are many times I see an ad for something on TV and think "hey, that looks neat. Wonder if it is any good", then I do some searches online for reviews and more info, and then potentially buy it to try it. Often this product makes my life better in some way. If it wasn't for the ad, odds are much lower I would have heard about it. I know this is true because I have friends who only download TV shows now from the web and never watch TV anymore; I find they are always asking me "where did you see that?" or "where'd you hear about that?". Ads, duh.

  86. Obligatory by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    So how often do youngsters skip seniors?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  87. Give it all a skip by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

    "...' I always thought that ad skipping was a major benefit of DVRs. Do you skip all the ads?"

    I just skip the TV. Problem's solved from my end...

  88. What are commericals? by Barleymashers · · Score: 1

    ads? What are ads? Ever since I got the Tivo Series 1 (now have HD Tivo) I haven't watched many commercials unless they were playing during the Superbowl - oddly enough I end up watching more commercials on youTube or something else like that when my friends email links to the funny ones.

  89. I skip 99.9% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a DVR from ATT Uverse - works pretty well most of the time, but it does have a 30 sec skip button... Everytime an ad starts, I hit that button about 5-6 times... Then if I end up in the program, I just jump back a few sec...

    The long and the short of it is that I often see some portion of the first and last ad in the sequence... Granted it's a few seconds, but I do see it. Occasionally, if it's interesting, I'll watch it ONCE.

    The Mac v. PC commercials are usually funny the first time... But other than that, I skip them all... The simple reason being that there's too damn many of them, and they repeat them ad nauseum. If advertisers had a brain, they'd show LESS commercials, and they'd repeat them fewer times.

    Basically if you want to advertise M&M's - make 7 or 8 different commercials. Run each commercial ONE time during an evening - and give it up after 2 weeks with that ad... Ad breaks shouldn't be more than 2 minutes, the volume shouldn't be jacked up (or "equalized" or whatever they're fucken calling it), and there should be ONE 2-minute ad break every 15 minutes... 8 minutes per hour.

    Charge more for it - you'll get it too, because people would be willing to watch 2 minutes if they knew it wasn't going to be the same shit everytime and wasn't annoying...

    Anyone remember those Levi's commercials from the 70's? Now those were cool... This crap now... feh...

  90. Bathroom break! by jedi_gras · · Score: 1

    I try and use the bathroom during the commercials because if I'm not watching TV by myself which is usually the case, it seems rude to just pause it just because _I_ have to pee. Because of this, I use the commercials as a good time to excuse myself.

    What do you guys do?

  91. Re:Viewing habits would be an interesting correlat by KevMar · · Score: 1

    When I am watching TV, I try to find 2 shows to watch. When a comercial comes on, I pause the channel I am watching and flip over to the other show. after a few flips, I get a good buffer on both channels. So I either skip them or I find myself on live tv and flip over to the other side.

    If I can only find one show to watch and I am stuck on live, I tend to skip back and rewatch clips where I didn't quite hear what they said. Or if a funny comercial does come on, I will flip back and watch it. I use the rest of the comercials to burn off the buffer. (I also have a 3 year old and a 6 month old, they produce enough noise sometimes that I have to skip back alot. That or they create several events that require me to pause the show from time to time building more of a buffer)

    If I am watching a DRV recording I will skip every comercial.

    thats how I manage my dvr when I am watching TV. Most of the time it is on as background noise. I sit in the living room with my laptop and pick my head up for the interesting parts of the show. When I do that, I tend to just let it play.

    --
    Im a gamer, not a grammer major. This post is full of spelling and grammer mistakes.
  92. Value of Time by speedy1161 · · Score: 1

    Older folks most likely skip ads as a convenience to save time, not just to avoid advertising. The value of time to someone who works or has hobbies is much greater than a teenager who can just waste away an afternoon watching tv.

    I personally skip ads because it the only way to watch an hour of tv in 40 minutes.

  93. ads no more by vosester · · Score: 1

    After reading this article I came to the realization that I am what the media companies fear the most. tech savvy,young,high IQ (seams I have big ego as-well)

    Why because I know enough about the internet to stop ads , why do I block all internet ads because there's to many of them, I sick of them so I put a stop to all of them it's the advertise own fault.


    I also download all my TV show even UK show, Why because I don't like been interrupted during a show for five-ten minuets, and I have the bonus of been able to watch when I want to.

    But I also don't want to rip off the shows I like, so why can't they just drop the DRM. Say I go to my show website and when I get the download page some light ads, and during my show about half way through it show a 30sec ad and then goes back to my show. So what if some one uploads to a P2P the ad spreads across the internet. yes some people might remove the ads but why for 30sec?

    Also itunes is just to expensive £1.99 a show WTF!!! All tho I suspect that this is on purpose to make us by Physical media instead, because they get higher margins and with the writers strike all about digital distribution, there margins are even smaller now so they are going to resist as much as possible.

    As for channel skipping when at my relatives house I just go to a music channels for a bit until the ads are over.

  94. I skip the whole show by whistlingtony · · Score: 1

    I skip the whole show. I don't own a TV. I like my brain. I like my bicycle. I like my guitar. I like my books. I have homework, a garden, a lawn to mow.

    Life's too awesome to waste it on laugh tracks.

    -T

  95. Distracted by Gewalt · · Score: 1

    We don't skip the ads because we aren't really paying attention to the show. We're multitasking. Also, since we're not really paying attention, we don't actually watch the ads. The captive audience is dead.

    --
    Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
  96. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by Inda · · Score: 1

    No, my whites really are whiter than they were ten years ago. The patented new formulas are better, newly better, newly improved.

    My wife's legs are much smoother than they were. She is one of the 9 out of 10 women who said so (compared to using the leading brand of hedge-clippers).

    And if I see another YouTube spinoff advert I'm going to puke. I saw it 10 years ago!!!

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  97. Advertising is for the young... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

    There are very few ads directed to those 50 and over. While the vast majority of ads are directed to the young. It only makes sense that those over 50 would skip over those irrelevant ads while young people might take the time to watch them.

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    1. Re:Advertising is for the young... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      There are very few ads directed to those 50 and over.



      Two words: Drug ads.


      "Ask your doctor if Blahkillenozil is right for you."

    2. Re:Advertising is for the young... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

      If you're talking about drug advertising during episodes of Matlock and Murder, She Wrote, I totally agree.

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  98. skipping commercials is too hard anyway. by shadowrat · · Score: 1

    I'm an old man, and I find it's too much work for me to skip commercials. I've got to push that button, then push it again. I often overshoot the show, so i have to rewind and zero in on the end of the commercial.

    I'd rather fill the space with some conversation, or make a peanut butter sandwich, or work on my laptop.

  99. older than teenager still does not skip by amigabill · · Score: 1

    I don't. I'm often wandering the net on my laptop and pay more attention to that during commercials. I also get up to pee, get food from the kitchen, pay more attention to tidying up and cleaning, etc. during commercials. I'm 32. A previous roommate did skip commercials when he watched TV, though he's not that much younger. He did pick on me for not doing the same. I just don't care I guess. A bad AV switch helped sortof, it did a poor job of passing through bright scenery signals, and things like the Macbook Air commercial went out of valid signal range to my projector and I didn't see them. :) Happened during shows and games too so I trashed that and bought a better switch, now I see all those commercials again.

  100. Perhaps we like it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps I like watching ads? Perhaps I enjoy seeing what products are out there to spend my allowance on?

  101. Background noise - ad agencies worst nightmare by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    I'm a 32 year old IT guy with a wife and kid. I love all things technology.

    I got our DVR the minute our cable company offered it - why? Because it was available.

    My wife uses it to watch Lost at her convenience - she skips the ads. My daughter uses it to watch Elmo (no ads there).

    That leaves me - I never use the DVR - why? I hardly watch TV - it's background noise when I exercise or work on my laptop. There is no show I regularly watch. I see this trend happening with my kid sister in college and her friends. They don't watch TV - it is left on in the background while they do things online.

    Some networks are posting their content online and forcing ads to the end viewer, but I doubt that will work. I've seen my wife watch back episodes of Lost online while she works. During commercials, she switches to her work, and switches back to watching the show after the commercial.

    Ad agencies will have a hard time with this phenomenon. Expect to see more blatant product placement in shows instead of 30 second ad spots.

    -ted

  102. Re:skipping tv-commercials by dwater · · Score: 1

    I have a 4000 series. IIRC, it works by detecting the fade-to-black and fade-from-black, which only happen with the real show, not the ads in between.

    --
    Max.
  103. New Ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally I wouldn't mind commercials if they only played new ones every time. If I see a "Head On" commercial I just immediately switch the channel I've seen it a million times.

    Maybe if they had like 30 or 60 second commercial "episodes" of new content instead of some rehashed crap like the "Viva Viagra" commercial I would probably watch more commercials.

    Then again I don't watch any TV. If i do it's on www.surfthechannel.com which really isn't tv. :-p

  104. MPEG punishes you more than you think. by professorguy · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So now, with a DVR (with say a 200GB HDD), you're filling up over 70GB's of it with commercials

    It's worse than that. Every time there is a small incremental change to a scene, MPEG records only the changes--very efficient. But when there is a screen wipe (every pixel changes) a new entire 'reference frame' must be added (which is much bigger than just incremental changes).

    So if there are more camera changes, the resulting MPEG file is larger. So even though commercials take only one third of the TIME, they take much, much more of the FILE SIZE. It is likely your 200GB has 70GB of show and 130GB of commercials.

    Movie trailers are the worst. I saw a 30 second commercial with 75 separate scenes (with 75 full wipes)! Why do kids have such sort attention spans? Could it be that they see hours and hours of this input every day, where the average scene duration is 0.4 seconds.

  105. One simple explanation by NotPeteMcCabe · · Score: 1
    My wife and I (47 and 41, respectively) skip all the ads. Our sons (8 and 5) watch the ads.

    Forgive me if this is obvious, but the bulk of ads are targeted at kids. So it makes sense that kids will watch them.

    I bought a ReplayTV in 1999 and the "skip forward 30 seconds" button wore out on two different remotes. It was by far the most often pressed button. Then we switched to cable (from DirecTV) and got a "Moxi" box with built-in DVR, and lo and behold it had a 30-second skip button.

    Finally it died and Time-Warner replaced it with a Motorola box with no skip. Sad day here in the household. Unfortunately the comparably equipped (i.e. HD0 Tivo was much more expensive.

    1. Re:One simple explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI:

      Those Motorola DVRs are not as bad as you think. You need a programmable learning remote like a Pronto or a HomeTheaerMaster, but for the determined, there is a way to get the right code sent to the box to make it do what you want. Happily using it since the day I got the DVR.

  106. 1 hour show = 45 minutes commercials 15 mins show. by Layzdawg · · Score: 1

    I would agree younger people let the commercials play because they are mutlitasking while there on. Probably surfing the net or texting friends in between the show. Heck I am not that young and I let commercials play wile I go online and do homework for class and I have a dvr! I get pissed when I fast forward through commercials.I realized that for an hour long show there is literally between 15 and 25 minutes of actual programming between all the junk! This has driven me to read!

  107. You are missing the obvious by freetolio · · Score: 1

    Old people have less time left to live, therefore they need to skip the ads to minimize the chance of passing away before the show ends.

  108. Dogs, laptop, sex etc.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of time the TV is just background. If I am cozy I _might_ forward through a commercial. More likely I will make a trip to the fridge, play with my dog for few minutes, check my e-mail on my laptop, or give my wife a squeeze to see if I can get sex before bedtime.

    It's not hard to imagine why seniors skip through commercials. Despite not wanting to get up from their comfortable chair during the commercial there is the actual commercial content. Most TV today including commercials is mindless, offensive garbage made for an out of control generation. I've got 25 years to go before I am senior and can barely stomach it myself. If I ever get within arms reach of Flava Fla....

  109. More complaining here than in an old folks' home! by yyr · · Score: 1
    All I see here are people complaining about how broadcast TV is now inundated by ads, all commercials should be skipped, TV is not worth watching, etc. etc.

    Well, call me crazy, but I actually ENJOY quite a number of the American networks' shows. CBS has several comedies that I enjoy, NBC has Heroes, Fox has House and 24...

    Are they laden with ads? Yeah. But that's the whole foundation of the business. Broadcast TV is free BECAUSE it's ad-supported.

    /. is a minority. The average American watches... what was it, 6-8 hours of TV a day? The majority of that is most likely broadcast network TV, and millions of Americans would rather watch ads than pay monthly for it. There is a demand for this stuff, so it will continue to exist, period.

    And now I'm going to go off on a limb and actually answer the question posed by the original post: I am a male in my 20s (surprise, surprise), and fast-forward roughly 50% of the ads in my recorded programs. If I see an ad that looks interesting or relevant to my interests (movie trailer, Mac ad, anything that looks out of the ordinary, etc.), I'll go back and watch it from beginning to end, so the advertisers are getting roughly the same mileage out of me that they would if I wasn't fast-forwarding. I won't fast-forward at all if I prefer to use the 2-3 minute break for some other purpose instead.

  110. Wonder how this factors in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all the slo-mo and rewind/rewatch Victoria's Secret Ads?

  111. Advertisements SUCK! by BlueF · · Score: 1

    About the only media I'll 'consume' containing ads is magazines, even then I'll rip out large sections (the thick pages anyway).
    I have basic cable only for my 10MB internet. Subscribe to ReplayTV for exactly one show (Sunday Morning). Beautiful thing about the ReplayTV is is skips ads automatically for you. And in those rare instances when it doesn't, the 15-30 second advance works just as well.
    Bottom line; I'm not interested in advertisements one bit.
    Be it TV/radio (won't watch live TV, ads FAR too obnoxious and mind-numbing), internet (ad block plus), or any where else I can reasonable avoid ads... I will go out of my way to avoid.
    32 years old.

  112. But but but ... by blackjackshellac · · Score: 0

    I'm not even 50 yet! I probably skip about 90% of the adverts. Hopefully someday I'll make it to 100%. I've always thought that it would be cool if an advertiser would do their ad in super slow motion so that it looks normal to ad skippers.

    --
    Salut,

    Jacques

  113. Not very accurate for me. by pavon · · Score: 1

    On my system it seems to get the commercials in the middle of the show alright, but does a very poor job with false positives at the end. Pretty much anytime a show has a short extra scene at the end, MythTV will skip it, jumping back to the main menu, since the show is done. Then you have to reopen the show disable auto-skip, fast-forward to the end of the show to see if you missed anything or not. I find that to be a bigger hassle than having to press the skip button when a commercial comes on, so I just leave the auto-skip feature off.

  114. There are better ways... by mengel · · Score: 1
    One can have, for example, online websites where if I want information about new cars, etc. I can go looking, when I want it. For example, I pay money for Consumer Reports, which goes out and finds products and tests them for me and sends me useful reviews which I read when I'm interested in something. This is a far better way to get me information about a product.

    Blaring annoying, clearly biased, and content-free advertisements at me just annoys me, and makes me want to avoid the vendor who is thusly advertising.

    Now if the advertisers simply had an announcer type quietly and politely saying "We make beer, and some people really like it" or "We make cars like this and this" I wouldn't mind so much; but when they torque up the volume, make my TV flash like a strobe light, and then make statments like "Better tasting" (than what?!?) I just hit the skip-forward button on my MythTV remote. It makes me wish for the Good Old Days on WXRT here in Chicago when most of their ads were just a few lines read by the DJ's between songs...

    --
    - "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
  115. Why I Don't Skip Commercials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because I'm too stoned to remember I can.

  116. Watching Modes by moskrin · · Score: 1

    My wife & I have definite watching modes... the TV is almost always on, but there are only certain shows we actually actively engage in watching, mostly because you have to or a lot of things get missed (csi, lost, house, family guy). Other shows it hardly matters if you just glance up at it from cooking, cleaning, the laptop, whatever.

    The shows we actively watch, the commercials get skipped. The background ones they usually get to play.

    I don't mind some commercials, as there is a good amount of pop culture buried in the commercials we all become familiar with... After all, who doesn't love the freecreditreport.com songs?

  117. I like some ads by maclizard · · Score: 0

    I don't have a DVR so I can't skip the ads, but even if I did I wouldn't skip all the ads. Some ads are funny (Mac v. PC and alltel wizard) and some ads are actually for things I am interested in. Plus, I use the time between show segments to do other stuff like dishes or using the bathroom.

  118. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by Nethead · · Score: 2, Funny

    Super low UID? That would be Malda.

    Now get off my lawn, punk!

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  119. RAWR I HATE SUBJECT LINES by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

    Has anyone considered that maybe the younger folks like the commercials because they actually do find them informative? Maybe there's a psychological benefit to horrible flash and glamor advertising at that age.

    I'm just talking out my ass because I want to post something and have an excuse to stop washing the walls and scraping the gunk out of the part where the hardwood floor sets with the wall. I'm not sure, but I think all the mopping's actually made it worse.

    I don't watch TV. I don't mean I just leave it on and ignore it or only take a peek when it's already on, I actively avoid seeing broadcast media. Sometimes there's not much escaping it like at the old folk's home, but I really do hate television so much it makes the veins in my neck bulge when I just think about it.

    I do like to watch shows, though. I download House and stuff, and I'd probably buy series on DVD if they didn't cost more than a weeks worth of sustainment.

    --
    "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  120. This isn't a suprise for two reasons by geekoid · · Score: 1

    1) By and large the ads are geared towards younger people.

    2) Older people ahve seen it. They have been told what to buy and don't want to hear it any more.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  121. Dammit! by crunchly · · Score: 2, Funny

    If I hadn't been fast forwarding through the commercials on my VCR all these years, I'd have known about this new fangled "Digital Video Recorder" long ago!

  122. Young Men? by Toonol · · Score: 1

    Ads Got Babes. Sometimes more babilicious babes than the show itself. Why would a red-blooded young man skip them?

  123. The only logical way to watch tv these days by Seraph321 · · Score: 1

    is to research shows ahead of time, setup recordings for each you want to watch, and then never watch anything unless you sit down and see that the DVR has recorded one of these shows for you. For me, the question of "what's on tv?" has completely shifted to "what has been recorded?" and sometimes "what's free on-demand?"

    This is the same for all of my twenty-something friends, so I question the results of this study.

  124. Was that the US way? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems so from old TV from the US anyway.

    But the paper is a passive thing. You can skip it without wasting time. Ads on TV or in the program either knock you out of the "reality" or have you waiting for the end.

    And in a capitalistic society, you rely on informed consumers. Marketing (i.e. lies for consumers) is not informing the customers of anything other than the product will cost money and they want your money.

  125. commericials = discussion time by AdmiralWeirdbeard · · Score: 1

    Really the only shows i dont wait to netflix are Lost, Battlestar, and Heroes.
    My friends and i tend to just mute commercials and have the requisite 'omg, mind is blown' discussions then, even if we're watching it dvr'd.
    There's also always That Guy Who Can't Remember What Happened Last Week to contend with, and i much prefer dealing with that during commercials than missing more dialog just to confirm, yes, last week's ep involved X.

    --
    Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles
  126. Time takes its toll by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    When I was a young squirt, commercials didn't bother me much. However, by now I've had bad ads pounded into my head for many decades, and I'm sick of them!

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  127. Jerry Seinfield is finally happy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old people skip commercials more often because every show they watch could be their last!

    Watching TV faster beats driving faster any day.

  128. Even with a DVR I still watch ads by kb9vcr · · Score: 1

    If I'm planning on buying something already I'll watch them. I find myself rewinding to catch cell phone ads now since my plan is almost up. A couple months ago when it was time to buy a car I did the same thing.

    If a commercial is funny or advertises something cool I've never seen before then I'll watch it, otherwise, only if I'm thinking about buying already. Because I have a DVR I probably watch more ads that matter to me. Otherwise, I'd be in the other room or, it'd mute the volume.

  129. I don't mind ads! by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

    I really don't mind watching the ads! Once. But I am not going to watch the same damn commercial over and over. I've seen it already.

    Well even that isn't true. There are a few commercials I wouldn't mind seeing more than once, if they're funny, shocking or interesting enough.

    --
    "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
  130. Too many ads by jgoemat · · Score: 1

    The amount of time allocated to advertising has greatly increased over the last 20 years, maybe older people can't stand the increase having been in on the "good 'ol days". Also advertising is getting more spastic and flashy. After watching a little drama it can be disturbing for old people to see all those lights and loud noises. I get aggravated myself when I see the same commercial over and over. It's not unusual for me to see the same commercial 4 times in a half hour, twice in the same commercial break. Saturday night I was watching SNL live in HD because my TiVo is still SD. The last half hour I remember 3+ minutes of commercials, one song, 3+ minutes of commercials, a 2 minute skit, 3+ minutes of commercials, another song, 3+ minutes of commercials, and maybe another short skit before the show was over, I don't know because I turned the TV off.

  131. It's only natural by rholland356 · · Score: 1

    The youngsta's play the whole show with commercials because they use the breaks to do bong hits, or make out.

    Besides, they grew up watching Dad hog the controller, zapping past commercials and hollerin' at everyone to hurry up from their pee breaks so he can resume the show. (Yes, we DO fast forward and then pause.) The kids don't want to be like that and are happy with simple time-shifting.

  132. Skipping is too hard.... by Kegaleg · · Score: 1

    Back in the day, you actually had to get up from the couch to change the channel - which is why people would stay locked on to a particular network, not just a certain TV show. When the remote came along, it allowed us to jump from channel to channel. Now with the DVR, we can actually skip the commercials.

    The reason that younger audiences, especially males, don't skip these ads is that....they're too frickin lazy to find the remote! Older people are too stubborn to ignore the commercials and will dig under the couch for 10 minutes just so they can skip 2 minutes worth of commercials. There's your explanation for these responses.

  133. Kids don't care what's on the TV by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 1

    When My kids watch TV they are never at it full time they are awyas doing something else at the same time so when the ads do come on they just do more of that something else. But when older people watch TV they turn it on to wach a specific program they like and don't multi task so the ads are more annoying to them hence they are more likey to skip the ad.

    My kids simply turn on the TV, they don't turn it on to watch any specifi program just "whatever is on"

    I think those that skip ads are simply those who want to watch the program

  134. skipping ads by freeasinrealale · · Score: 1

    Right now I'm watching Cable TV - the weather channel on my NTSC tv - Sony 32" I picked up recently on sale. I'm feeding cable to 1Ghz PC with 720Meg ram 40gig hd and AGP Radeon AIW. Can only get this sucka running win98 - I cant get any Linux distro to run this hardware combo due to fact that X server will not give me a video selection THAT WORKS WITH THE RADEON FOR S-WIDEO OUT TO THE SONY. ARGHHHH ETC. However I am currently downloading the new Fedora 9 via bit torrent. Simultaneously I have nasa tv running on realplayer. I end up watching nasa most of time, switching to cable tv for 'interesting' stuff, then usually go back to nasa, or occasionally check out download status email or go surfing. I tend to switch out of TV at start of commercial, or when some interesting event happens on nasa. The ultimate surfers paradise. My wife watches cable on XP system media centre. She usually watches PBS or TVO (Canadian PBS in Ont. Canada) or BBC. She uses the XP as a DVR if not in mood for TV watching and will play solitaire while recording. She usually watches commercials, if any (or self-o-mmercials?). Her biggest nouveau tv thrill is Free downloadable content (Grey's anatomy etc). All this on a 600K 'low' speed cable feed from Jolly Rogers. My next upgrade is to get ATSC tuners for the PC's for 'free' OTA 'digital' teevee. We are both 'seniors' (60+) and enjoy our 'entertainment'. We don't mind paying for our entertainment whether it be print or electronic. I will buy the Discovery 'Earth' DVD's (blu-ray) when and if I get a PS3. I will let my purchasing power vote by buying DRM free content. I will vote for content that is freely (as in speech) available to all. I will actively participate in the publicly(non-governmental) owned and democratically run information infrastructure that is free from private ownership, greed and control, and is free from governmental and bureaucratic control and rot. The web is an extension of our freedoms, and is definitely worth fighting for. I have lived through a generation that saw private industry co-opt the telecomm arena, both cable (teevee!!) and telco for greed profit and control. Lets fight to prevent this from happening again

    --
    A man spends the first half of his life accumulating stuff, the second trying to get rid of it all.
  135. Only watch recorded... by Evil+Kerek · · Score: 1

    What little TV I watch is only when there's something recorded. I can't stand the number and length of commericals combined with jacking up the volume (which I could have sworn was against broadcast regulations). Part of that is the show switching from HD (5.1) to SD (stereo) - in any case, whatever on the people that sit and watch them. You obviously have too much time on your hands.

    EK

  136. Why Skip Ads? by Astrogen · · Score: 1
    I don't tend to skip ads. The fact is that advertisers keep me watching ads by making them interesting. Add to that the fact that I prefer to use my DVR for other purposes.
    • Rewinding when I miss part of my show.
    • Pausing while I'm on the phone or otherwise occupied.
    • Saving a show I have already watched to watch later.
    Because I tend to watch in real time I can't skip past commercials that are on even if they really suck. If something is on when I would otherwise miss the show I do skip commercials though I forget to do so often, and sometimes I see a commercial that makes me laugh and I watch it. But in this regard the DVR is no different than a VCR so why is it such a big deal now? I think most people are the same way.
  137. Yep by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

    Yes, I do skip the commercials sonny, Methuselah

  138. Skipping the ads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course I skip the ads. I will typically begin to watch a show once its half way over. That way when I skip the ads I finsih pretty much on time with the end of the show.

  139. my daughter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My daughter is 5. One time I turned on a show for her and left the room. When the commercials came on, she called me in from my office, because "the TV was broken". it wasn't until i skipped through them that she was satisfied i had "fixed" the tv.

  140. Skipping commercials, Yes. by generic · · Score: 1

    99% of what is being advertised on tv is sh*t. Why do I want to be force fed that stuff? I suspect the younger generation hasn't realized this yet. (I'm 33)

    --
    Microsoft aggravates my tourettes syndrome.
  141. Maybe they skip without the button by TheDormouse · · Score: 1

    Sometimes a commercial break is just the right amount of time to get off the couch and grab a frosty beverage, use the toilet, etc. Maybe even enough time to have a short conversation with the family about the program we're watching. Commercials are usually placed at strategic places during the show that make them perfect for a short break. Just because I'm not skipping through the commercials doesn't mean I'm actually watching the advertisements. I can always turn down the volume a bit during the loud commercials.

    I think most folks with DVRs bought them for the time-shifting feature first; ad-skipping... maybe second.

    For what it's worth, my grandparents don't have DVRs and they all mute the television during commercials. And they usually don't un-mute it until at least 30 seconds after the show is back on. Television producers take note: don't have anything important to the plot happen just after a commercial break if your target age group is seniors; it just confuses them.

  142. Wait by duckInferno · · Score: 1

    people still watch TV?

    --
    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, watch it -- I'm huge!
  143. Yes if applicable by ^_^x · · Score: 1

    I did back when I fired up the DVR regularly. I have too many games to watch shows it seems.
    26/M

  144. Seniors are using DVRs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not the ones in my family at least not yet.

    Two factors I can think of right off, 1.) Seniors might be more conscientious of where they spend their time. 2.) Seniors are way past the advertiser's most desired demographic 18-35.

  145. Make relavent ads - tag them - let me choose by jroysdon · · Score: 1


    I'm a MyhtDora user (MythTV + Fedora = automated install with little work required, but plenty of hacking available if you want to). I already have automated commercial skip.

    Here's what I'd like the ad buesinss to do: tag commercials in some format. If you tag commercials with what they're about, and an "episode" number, I might watch some of them. The episode number is so I can give you easy feedback and thumbs up/down stuff, and mark it that I've seen it, and unless I mark it funny, I don't really need to see it again.

    What you really need to do is get people I trust to recommend products. I'm less and less in the minority now as a geek who likes computers, the internet, and high tech stuff (who doesn't these days) - give me geeks who I trust recommending products, and perhaps I'd watch.

    I'm thinking folks like from the old TechTV crew. Or other folks in my social network. I don't care if my in-laws recommend some bird commercials - I'm not into birds, but if they recommend some high-tech commercials, I'll watch.

    I want the tags so I can filter stuff I don't care about. I don't care about buying a car - unless you want to show me a few cool techie things. I don't want to buy any diapers - I have no babies. I don't need . How about I fill out a profile that only I have access to, and my box will download commercials that fit my profile, if you properly tag them?

    I've no idea how you'd sell such a revenue model. I suppose the same as Google does, but it's a bit different with TV. I guess the shows would just get the revenue for the ads sold because they collected the eyeballs. But guess what, they'd need to mark "insert commercial here" and only the folks with OTA would see those broadcast commercials. The rest of us with DVRs get to decide what we see. You have to trust us - we may just turn off commercials altogether.

    And don't get your hopes up, I'm not going to watch more than 2-3 commercials a day. But everyone has to go to the bathroom - you can run commercials while I pause for that (as the females in the household require more breaks, and us males are just polite and wait for them... or usually hit the kitchen for a snack, but we'll still be listening and may catch a bit of a commercial).

    Here's the thing, you can't lock in any sort of DRM or restrictions. You have to trust that we'll do the right thing. But guess what, you'll get better product sales - and if you build it right we'll probably shop and buy things on the spot. But even if you don't, we can easily pop over to or PCs and buy stuff (why can't I buy stuff on my phone yet? That's so lame).

  146. anonymous goober by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    hello

  147. More ads coming in the UK by trmcdougle · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately the regulator OFCOM want to relax the rules on advertising. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/20/ofcom_tv_ads/

    Any fellow UK people may wish to respond to the consultation here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/rada/ We have until the 28th of this month.

  148. Ahem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That statement is so dumb, you just made the baby Jesus cry.

  149. Re:When you pick a user name, think about the futu by Jellybob · · Score: 1

    Remember - it's not rape if you shout surprise first ;)