Slashdot Mirror


How Television Is Fighting Off the Internet

HughPickens.com writes: Michael Wolff writes in the NY Times that online-media revolutionaries once figured they could eat TV's lunch by stealing TV's business model with free content supported by advertising. But online media is now drowning in free, and internet traffic has glutted the ad market, forcing down rates. Digital publishers, from The Guardian to BuzzFeed, can stay ahead only by chasing more traffic — not loyal readers, but millions of passing eyeballs, so fleeting that advertisers naturally pay less and less for them. Meanwhile, the television industry has been steadily weaning itself off advertising — like an addict in recovery, starting a new life built on fees from cable providers and all those monthly credit-card debits from consumers. Today, half of broadcast and cable's income is non-advertising based. And since adult household members pay the cable bills, TV content has to be grown-up content: "The Sopranos," "Mad Men," "Breaking Bad," "The Wire," "The Good Wife."

So how did this tired, postwar technology seize back the crown? Television, not digital media, is mastering the model of the future: Make 'em pay. And the corollary: Make a product that they'll pay for. BuzzFeed has only its traffic to sell — and can only sell it once. Television shows can be sold again and again, with streaming now a third leg to broadcast and cable, offering a vast new market for licensing and syndication. Television is colonizing the Internet and people still spend more time watching television than they do on the Internet and more time on the Internet watching television. "The fundamental recipe for media success, in other words, is the same as it used to be," concludes Wolff, "a premium product that people pay attention to and pay money for. Credit cards, not eyeballs."

12 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. I'll tell you how- they're turning the internet by mark_reh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    into television. I cut the cord years ago because I couldn't stand all the commercials. Now my hulu+ is getting loaded with commercials- it's almost as bad as watching broadcast TV.

    I think I'll go back to getting discs from Netflix..

    1. Re:I'll tell you how- they're turning the internet by fropenn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hulu + isn't free, and neither is cable or satellite television. I don't mind paying for content I want, but I don't want to pay and be forced to sit through tons of commercials. Providers, make your pick. If I'm paying, layoff the adverts. If it's free, then feel free to load it up with advertising, but I'm much more likely to turn it off or install an ad-blocker.

    2. Re:I'll tell you how- they're turning the internet by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes. Sounds like a bargain to me.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:I'll tell you how- they're turning the internet by amxcoder · · Score: 4, Informative

      The problem with this, is the shows themselves are now shorter to accommodate all the ads that get put in. In the shows I watch, the watchable content for a 30min program is about 21-22 mins tops. This statistic by itself hasn't changed much in 20 years or so, but it is getting close to lower point of program running length for that kind of time slot. So when you watch a show on Netflix or Hulu, the content is only as long as it was made if it did have ads. Meaning, you are loosing the ads by watching on Netflix, but you're getting less and less content in each episode, meaning the episodes are shorter and shorter when you strip out the commercials.

      Another big problem is now more shows (especially reality shows, but even news and infotainment type shows) seem to want to show you 15-30s of what is coming up after each commercial, and then when they return from commercial they want to repeat the last 30-60s of what you already saw as if you had no attention span. This becomes very apparent when you have a DVR and skip the commercials, you end up seeing the same segment around the commercial 2-3 times total. Not only is this annoying, but it drastically cuts into the actual running length of the show. So while technically, the show might be 22mins of content, if you removed the repeated content out of the show (that is due to the commercial breaks), then you really only end up with 15-18 mins of actual content for a 30min show/slot.

  2. no ones really winning. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Online media has, like a meth junkie at a desert party, overdosed itself. The average slate or buzzfeed is a rats nest of unrelated yet increasingly predatory advertising that saps bandwidth and kills the user experience waiting for everyhting from monolithic flash ads to autoplay html5 elements to load. even your local newspaper is taking advantage of this to hose you for cash payments you wont make to read their clickbait articles that are written at the 4th grade level.

    And what is this television thats slowly weaning itself off advertising? Watching Van Helsing in my hotel room I was treated to a 3 hour movie padded with advertising for everything from pain pills to fried chicken and cars. some ads even came back-to-back for the same damn product. television is rehabing from ads like a crack addict rehabs at the family reunion with a rail of white lightning in the bathroom. And dont think this excuses you, blu-ray and DVD titles are just as much television as the average CW network after school highly sensored puritanical life lesson sitcom. I have 12 to 20 minutes of un-skippable content in each of these disks where 10 years ago i was promised this wasnt ever going to happen. Im forced to watch advertisements and previews for products i dont give a shit about, just so i can get to the movie that includes (surprise) more product placement. Does anyone remember Oreo-bot from the transformers?

    The only change in televisions model has been taking credit cards for things other than the ronco electric food dehydrator or the jack lalane power juicer. the guide feature in most provider services at the 1080p level still includes a myriad of floating chyron ads for weight loss and dick pills. buying anything pay-per-view will immediately forward your personal information to nearly two dozen affiliate advertisers and merchants. its a horrendous pain in the ass. And if you dont like it? two words: Its Comcastic.

    cable and television service providers not only insult your intelligence and dignity but take it as a personal act of blasphemy if you try to cancel. simply calling up, youll be asked a phonebook of personal and insulting questions about your service and your personal likes and dislikes. its not the callcenters fault, some seersucker clad golfbag toting used car salesman marketing drone decided it was going to be a great idea to force the callcenter to carpet bomb customers in whats known as 'customer retention.' tactics.

    the only thing this article isnt mentioning is that adblock is still a very real and useful thing, and that everything on television inevitably shows up on torrent.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  3. Or just get rid of it by future+assassin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ever since cutting the cord two years ago its amazing how much extra time I have per day and now more alive you feel not watching tv. Now I haven't gotten rid of it all yet, still have Netflix and we watch a few Star Trek episodes at night but the medium no longer controls out lives. Now internet had eaten up quite a bit of my life but that is one more thing I'm slowly removing also.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  4. The meat of the issue by blueshift_1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's always comes down to the same thing. If you want people to get your product, make a damn good product. Some things will naturally be a fad, but will fade away. Lasting revenue is based on making something people actually want/need. For so long, many networks have been shoveling our crap content - now that there are ways to view exactly what you want, they have the incentive to make something you really want.

  5. You know, it's funny... by Unknown74 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...many years ago, we were told, "in the future, you will pay for TV". And we said "WHAT!? We get it for free, off our antenna now!" And they said, "but since you will pay for TV, there won't be any need for advertising." Many years later, I am paying for TV, PLUS, getting ads that run across the screen all the time. It it any wonder I am feeling ripped off? Oh yes... I think these were the same people who said, "we will put catalytic converters on cars. it will cost more, but they will convert the noxious fumes into harmless water and carbon dioxide." So years later, we are, indeed paying more, PLUS being clobbered by the "carbon crisis"

    1. Re:You know, it's funny... by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oh yes... I think these were the same people who said, "we will put catalytic converters on cars. it will cost more, but they will convert the noxious fumes into harmless water and carbon dioxide."

      Yes. They add a couple of hundred dollars to the price of the average car and they make the world a better place; unburned hydrocarbons are the most foul emission which automobiles make. You might also be interested in knowing that we averted the ozone depletion crisis by banning CFCs. Meanwhile, the O2 sensor that came along with those catalysts actually lets you make more power while burning less fuel.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  6. Re:TV seized back the crown? Not likely. by RKThoadan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's not really using his terms very well. He seems to be defining Netflix and Hulu as primarily television companies as opposed to internet companies. He says so at this point:

    Netflix bills itself as a disrupter of television - except that it is television, paying Hollywood and the TV industry almost $2 billion a year in licensing and programming fees.

    You can certainly make an argument for that. They are certainly a blend of the two. His argument is really much more about subscription services versus ad-supported services.

  7. Re:Get rid of the fucking adverts completely by edawstwin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Like you were supposed to when you started charging for cable. Who knows, you could make more money by offering a better product.

    I don't think that they could make more money by dropping ads because many many people just aren't bothered by ads, and that drives me almost as crazy as having to sit through ads. And everything in the U.S. has more ads now. As an example, I've been watching football (the real football, not American hand-egg) for about five years, in particular English football. For about three seasons, I paid a subscription fee of $150/year so that I could watch every Premier League game online commercial-free for up to one week after the game aired. This also included many FA Cup matches and some matches from other leagues and even sports like rugby. I would have gladly paid double for this kind of service. So when the EPL was rebid and NBC won the American rights, I was devastated because I knew what was coming, and I wasn't wrong. Now I can watch all matches online (for free if I have NBCSN on cable), but online there is a banner that sits above the viewing area for the game that is constant. And whether or not I watch online, there are ads every 4-5 minutes in the form of a video that plays in the upper left where the score is, and then the static logo of that advertiser displays until the next ad runs. And of course there are always things like "The Ben and Jerry's Stoppage Time." In addition, NBC only has the rights to the Premier League, so I can't watch any other competition on that channel. International football is now spread across at least five networks (NBC, Fox, ESPN, GolTV, BeIn), three of which are not included in basic cable, and all of them maximize ads (but not up to the standards of MLS on Fox, who actually shrinks the game area by about 40% every few minutes to show an ad along the entire right-side and lower-section of the screen - so I just never watch an MLS game on that network). I truly don't get why people pay for this crap. (I don't pay for cable.) I actually have a couple of modified pieces of black felt that I use to cover the top score/ad area and the bottom ticker, both of which are equally annoying. I would gladly pay around $100/month or probably even more if I could watch most matches around the world commercial free online, but I don't see that happening, ever. It seems like we're going towards more ads in the U.S., not fewer.

    --
    I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
  8. Re:Get rid of the fucking adverts completely by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 4, Funny

    Like you were supposed to when you started charging for cable. Who knows, you could make more money by offering a better product.

    Yea, I miss the good old days. MTV actually played music (and no advertising). USA actually had programming all night (and it was weird stuff). TBS had black-and-white movies.

    Now, get off my lawn

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia