Slashdot Mirror


Broadcast Industry Wades In On Dish Network's Hopper

gollum123 writes "As with past technological threats, network executives are closing ranks against a Dish Network device that undermines the broadcast business model. The disruptive technology at hand is an ad-eraser, embedded in new digital video recorders sold by Charles W. Ergen's Dish Network, one of the nation's top distributors of TV programming. Turn it on, and all the ads recorded on most prime-time network shows are automatically skipped, no channel-flipping or fast-forwarding necessary. Some reviewers have already called the feature, called the Auto Hop, a dream come true for consumers. But for broadcasters and advertisers, it is an attack on an entrenched television business model, and it must be strangled, lest it spread elsewhere."

24 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Don't do that. by busyqth · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you skip ads, you stand with the child pornographers.

    1. Re:Don't do that. by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dish has already had the ability to skip forward in 30-second intervals on their DVR anyway... the only diff is that now you can completely avoid catching a glimpse of an advert. It's part of why I rarely bother with live TV anymore (outside of the local news stations, anyway) - I'll just DVR what I want in advance, and watch that.

      As for the channel owners? Screw 'em. I'm sorry, but I already pay for the service, and paid a bit extra for the channels. Why the hell should I be forced to become a source of further income to them?

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Don't do that. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      As for the channel owners? Screw 'em. I'm sorry, but I already pay for the service, and paid a bit extra for the channels. Why the hell should I be forced to become a source of further income to them?

      Because they are the job creators and unless you submit to their advertising you are siding with the islamomarxists who are trying to force you to have health insurance.

      Plus, they're only forcing you to look at their advertisements for your own good, because those very advertisements are the last line of defense against the evil informed consumer.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Don't do that. by Technician · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And Netflix. Sorry, sources of ad free program are already out there. This was why I bailed on cable TV years ago. They charge me, and then still cram it full of ads. Internet sites full of time wasting ads simply get bypassed for sites with content. Pay TV has been on a decline ever since.

      GM tried to follow the eyeballs from TV to online social media. If the ads don't block content, they are ignored. If the ads do block content, the pages are mostly ignored. Take a clue from Yahoo and Google. The viewers leave, followed by the advertisers. Want to kill your site, load it with ads. This is why I expect Facebook to follow Yahoo, Geocities, Myspace, etc, unless they highly restrict advertising damage to the site.

      The biggest mistake is to try to increase revenue by selling more ads at the expence of the users. Lose the users, you lost.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    4. Re:Don't do that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Those who cheat the public out of public domain media are also thieves.

    5. Re:Don't do that. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or perhaps they have judged that people wouldn't pay what it would cost without the ads.

      How would they have "judged" that without offering an ad-free service to see how well it's accepted?

      Or perhaps they just don't give a shit what people want, because their customers are the ad advertisers, not the viewers. The people that watch Hulu are the consumables, not the consumers. Welcome to the "free market" - where you just don't get a choice. Funny how that works.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:Don't do that. by Torg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From one of many Hulu's own case studies, 13 million views, 106K total votes
      http://www.hulu.com/advertising/case-studies/oscars

      So if you go strictly by the view rate, 13 million. That extra cost for a $1,000,000 advertisement would be a whole 7 cents. Since most adds are well under $1M it would be even less.

    7. Re:Don't do that. by Genda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The point is that everyone, everywhere, will take every opportunity to squeeze a buck out of every orifice they can legally get a finger in. This is why, you go to a movie for which you paid $15 dollars to see, and they subject you to 20 minutes of commercials. That is why people are driving around with advertisements on their cars. That is why if they ever figure out how to project images on the inside of contact lenses you best be prepared to be seeing commercials on them for at least an hour a day. The corporate machine is hawking its proverbial ass off and it has you square in its sights. How dare you deny them the opportunity to scream at you every waking moment of your life.

    8. Re:Don't do that. by isorox · · Score: 4, Funny

      The corporate machine is hawking its proverbial ass off and it has you square in its sights. How dare you deny them the opportunity to scream at you every waking moment of your life.

      Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?"
      Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.

  2. Shades of Adnix and Preachnix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Welcome to the future.

    Years before, he had invented a module that, when a television commercial appeared, automatically muted the sound. It wasn't at first a context recognition device. Instead, it simply monitored the amplitude of the carrier wave. TV advertisers had taken to running their ads louder and with less audio clutter than the programs that were their nominal vehicles. News of Hadden's module spread by word of mouth. People reported a sense of relief, the lifting of a great burden, even a feeling of joy at being freed from the advertising barrage for the six to eight hours out of every day that the average American spent in front of the television set. Before there could be any coordinated response from the television advertising industry, Adnix had become wildly popular. It forced advertisers and networks into new choices of carrier wave strategy, each of which Hadden countered with a new invention. Sometimes he invented circuits to defeat strategies that the agencies and the networks had not yet hit upon. He would say that he was saving them the trouble of making inventions, at great cost to their shareholders, which were at any rate doomed to failure. As his sales volume increased, he kept cutting prices. It was a kind of electronic warfare. And he was winning.

    ... He suspected that the takeover was only a pretext, that his real offense had been to attack advertising and video evangelism. Adnix and Preachnix were the essence of capitalist entrepreneurship, he argued repeatedly. The point of capitalism was supposed to be providing people with alternatives.

    "Well, the absence of advertising is an alternative, I told them. There are huge advertising budgets only when there's no difference between the products. If the products really were different, people would buy the one that's better. Advertising teaches people not to trust their judgment. Advertising teaches people to be stupid. A strong country needs smart people. So Adnix is patriotic. The manufacturers can use some of their advertising budgets to improve their products. The consumer will benefit. Magazines and newspapers and direct mail business will boom, and that'll ease the pain in the ad agencies. I don't see what the problem is."

    - Carl Sagan, Contact, 1985.

    Wish you could have been here to see it, Dr. Sagan.

    1. Re:Shades of Adnix and Preachnix by htnmmo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ironically doing a Google search for "Adnix and Preachnix" and clicking on the first page gets you a page full of ads, a popup and a warning message when you try and browse away. :)

  3. Either pay or ads by benb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm from Europe, but aren't you paying for receiving Dish?

    From my standpoint: Either pay or ads, but never both.

    The pay-TV in Europe is ad-free (well, at least during the show), pay-TV companies are treating their customers like dirt. Free-TV is rich, has many consumers, but is continuously degrading in quality (both the kind of content, and amount of ads) since 15 years.

    1. Re:Either pay or ads by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm from Europe, but aren't you paying for receiving Dish?

      From my standpoint: Either pay or ads, but never both.

      Your unwillingness to "pay both" is exactly why the Eurozone is collapsing into a tyranny of universal health care and subsidized education.

      Here in America, we realize that we're supposed to pay everyone except the government, who we hate as God intended.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Either pay or ads by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm from Europe...

      I'm from America, where big corporations aren't just free, but actually expected to the point of being obligated to rake in obscene profits. There's no such thing as consumer rights here, it's all about the bottom line. They make you pay to get television, then they make advertisers pay to present it to you. Don't forget having companies pay to place their products subtly (or not-so-subtly, many times) in the shows themselves. Then you have to pay yet again if you ever want to watch it on another device or in another format, and there's a pretty durn good chance that they've sold yet more advertising, such as on Hulu, or in the form of non-skippable ads on DVDs, etc.

      America used to be the land of the free. Now it's the land of the rape-everyone-for-as-much-money-as-you-can.

    3. Re:Either pay or ads by diamondmagic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's nothing wrong with profits, it means you're producing things of value effectively. The alternative is losses which means you're just wasting resources, and that's bad.

      When profits do become bad is when you're using lawsuits to protect yourself against honest competition. Which is practically the whole entertainment distribution industry, software patents, and other legal monopolies.

    4. Re:Either pay or ads by Plunky · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Humans are social creatures, they usually feel more comfortable when not diverging from the social group. This has been demonstrated many times with psychological experiments where people will act against all common sense when others are setting an example to follow (see: Stanley Milgrams New Hampshire experiment, for an extreme example). Those people who wear branding and/or follow fashions slavishly are just belonging because it makes them comfortable to blend in with what everybody else is doing.

      And that is why mass market advertising works too.. they show you pictures of other people doing what they want you to do, and large segments of the population follow suit.. Its not [any longer] about telling you truthfully what the benefits of this product vs that product are so that you can make a reasoned decision about which to use, it is solely about getting the images into your brain so that you prefer to use that product because you have seen other people using it.

  4. Re:Then maybe they shouldn't charge CATV/Sat by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Local broadcasts are free. Well sort of. You can still get over the air local channels most places but maybe 80-90%+ of people receive their local channels through cable tv, satellite, fios, whatever.

    These companies can't just tap into the local airwaves and rebroadcast these channels. They have to pay for it and ever year or so there's a major issue with the contract of some channel holding out for more money.

    Which just illustrates the extreme level of greed in the TV industry. The old days of free TV supported entirely by commercials is gone. All of the cable and satellite companies must pay many millions of dollars a year to every network if they want to carry their programming. Add it all up and it easily runs into many billions of dollars. The fact is, you could completely eliminate commercials from TV and the networks would still make an enormous amount of money from broadcast fees, syndication, dvd sales, etc.

    Of course, in Hollywood, no amount of money is ever enough.

  5. Inside View by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was at last weeks Dish retailer conference when this was announced. Dish is well aware of the controversy they are creating. Every one with a DVR already skips over commercials, this is just making it easier. The Commercials are not removed, someone at Dish actually has to go in and manually ad triggers at the start and stop of every commercial in every show. That takes a bit of time which is part of the reason you can't auto skip (auto hop) commercials until the next day.

    It will be interesting to see what happens next, but as was stated previously, I think the current advertising structure is dying.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  6. Commercial for you by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Business model tired, worn out?

    Unable or too lazy to come up with new ideas?

    Loaded down with cash from when consumers had to take it your way or hit the highway?

    If this describes you, call 1-800-BUYCONGRESS.

    We'll do ALL we can to screw over you customers and keep your worn-out way of thinking in the public eye.

    Cause everyone else is obviously a pirate or a terrorist!

    BUY A CONGRESSMAN TODAY!

  7. Hulu disappointment by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    True, but I've noticed that over time, the ads have gotten longer and longer. When I started watching Hulu way back when, most ads were only 15 seconds long. Now, it's quite common to get 1:00 ad breaks, and I've had some go as long as 2:00 (and I'm not talking about the ones that sometimes pop up at the beginning of shows that let you watch the rest ad-free, these are in mid-show). Plus, they've started playing around with stuff that requires you to interact with the ad, such as the "Which ad experience would you prefer?" (I don't CARE, it's all just noise to me.) Or the "Which of these movies have you seen in the past seven days?" interstitials.

    It's not surprising, since Hulu is owned by the broadcasters. Still, I was hoping that they would keep the ads short and really be revolutionary. When they were, I actually diligently tuned in to all of them because 1) I felt kind of obligated to since they were providing a valuable service, 2) they were MUCH less obtrusive, and 3) with a 15-second ad, you really don't have much time to do anything else. Now, though, I regularly walk away from the computer for a few minutes, then backtrack to where the show picks back up, kind of like how when ads come on "regular" television (which I hardly ever watch), I would get up and get a drink or go to the bathroom.

    Oh well, just goes to prove yet again that there is little that is cool that Hollywood can't screw up royally.

  8. Re:This the same DISH that drops channels all the by Brad1138 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This the same DISH that drops channels all the time will they end dropping one of the big 4? over this?

    I have to call you on this. When Dish (or DirecTV or Comcast-it has happen to all of them) "drops a channel" it isn't because they are trying to screw the customer. It is because the channel is trying to raise what it charges Dish for rebroadcast rights. Dish is saying no, trying to keep your rates down. If it ends in a stalemate, then the channel comes down. Everyone blames Dish/DTV/comcast, They know they will loose customers over this but it is the right thing to do. This does happen to dish more then the others, because they more aggressively try to keep rates down.

    As for the locals ("the big 4"), they are supposed to be free tv, but they are trying to charge like they are a cable channel. They are really the most greedy.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  9. Advertisements are mostly double dipping by VinylRecords · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most people who pay for satellite or digital cable don't realize that most of the money that you pay goes straight to the television channels and not the cable/satellite provider. When you pay your $100 cable bill, a couple of dollars goes straight to Disney/ABC/ESPN. I think just for ESPN alone some cable companies are on the hook for five dollars a month per subscriber. So you are paying to watch channels with advertisements.

    On top of the money that goes directly to those channels they also bombard you with advertisements and commercial interruptions. And while for many channels advertisements allows them breaks to reorganize, which can be critical for news and sports programming, there aren't too many reasons other than simply making more money for running commercials during the middle of a sitcom or drama. I don't mind when an NFL or MLB game goes to commercials when the players are running on and off the field. But I stopped watching South Park on its premier night years ago because the commercial breaks were too frequent and killed the momentum of the show. It's one thing when the sport has stopped and then the cut to advertisements. It would be another if they cut to commercials right when a guy delivered a pitch or the ball was snapped. "Stay tuned to see if the Patriots scored after these commercials".

    Unfortunately that is how most shows are. "Will this character die...? Find out after we assault your senses with a dozen commercials". Not to mention that most advertisements are BLASTED AT FULL VOLUME compared to the show that is on at the time. It ruins the flow of the show. This is why I almost only watch sports and HBO.

    HBO figured out decades ago that people would be willing to pay for premium content delivered to them commercial free. With no advertisers to answer to they could put on shows like The Wire, Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Band of Brothers, and Curb Your Enthusiasm. They don't have to worry about advertisers pulling out of shows. They don't have to censor anything because of the FCC either. And they can write dramas and comedy shows that are purely art and not meant to sell products or have commercial breaks written into them. Considering the extreme popularity of Game of Thrones right now it is quite evident that people want to pay a premium for high level programming that is free of advertising and doesn't have to answer to sponsors or the FCC. Also HBO has a policy where product placement is forbidden. When you see a real life product on Sopranos or Treme or whatever it is there for realism and not as an in show paid advertisement.

    Unfortunately most of these other companies haven't figured out that people will pay money to bypass advertisements. This is essentially what people do when they buy a show on DVD or Blu-Ray anyways. People will also pay extra when it improves the quality of programming. Major League Baseball's internet package that allows you to watch all out of market games online is commercial free. Lots of companies are putting their shows up on I-Tunes or the Playstation Network the day after commercial free and you pay for each episode individually.

  10. ReplayTV already tried this....... by JRock911 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Years ago ReplayTV tried the same thing with the same response from broadcasters. Instead of giving in, Replay took the battle to court and lost and that pretty much bankrupted the company. I dont see how Dish thinks its going to turn out any better for them.

  11. This tech isn't new by ANY means! by richardtallent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ReplayTV had a DVR many years ago with this exact feature, and they got their asses sued off by Hollywood for it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReplayTV). The suit was never decided. It even had a feature that did the reverse, playing *only* the commercials (aka "Superbowl Mode").

    But even *that* was based on earlier technology patented back in 1993 (http://www.google.com/patents/US5333091) and used in VHS machines dating about 10 years ago, maybe longer.

    As a DISH subscriber, I'm happy they are finally implementing this, but they ARE going to have a fight on their hands.

    Now, if only someone can invent technology to get rid of those awful graphic overlays advertising other shows/movies. And the ridiculous "OMG IT'S TOTALLY RAINING OR SOMEONE GOT ELECTED DOGCATCHER" crawls from the local news.