Fear the Mighty DVR: page 2
News with PIP ad blocks
Hard hitting News programs are mostly talking heads, and footage of events, how much screen real estate does one of these shows need? We stare at the person reading the teleprompter because TV is a VISUAL medium, and some of us like to see eye candy on news shows. What is so horrible about displaying sponsor logos at the bottom center of the screen?
Nobody wants to see a Gerber Baby formula bottle at the same time the news Anchor is talking about seven poisoned children in Florida. But nobody thinks anything of it when the station cuts to that same baby formula commercial right after the News Anchor finishes their "very sad, tut tut" routine.
The fact is that we're very good at separating shows from advertising. It's not just because there's a split second of black screen between the news and the ads, but because we don't let what we see on the news dramatically affect our lives. If we didn't have these filters, we wouldn't be able to sit through a newscast without completely breaking down, or giving madly to charity organizations.
How many times have you seen some horrible refugee situation and actually sent money to help? Compare that to the number of times you said "Gee, that's horrible, I wonder who's on Letterman, or Leno tonight?"
My point, considering our ability to compartmentalize, and disassociate, is that having an ad panel at the bottom of the screen during news programming is quite viable.
There are already ads at the bottom of our screens during shows. They're for upcoming shows, or special features available online, etc. I believe these will become far less frequent, since there are 15 minutes of each hour block that can be allocated for more show time, and these informative, though annoying wastes of screen space will instead become short announcements of other programming available on a given network, which can be televised in the time between shows.
Oh, and just in case you think they WOULD run a Gerber baby formula ad at the same time they ran a story about poisoned children, rest assured that even if it DID happen once, someone would get fired, and then it would never happen again. Networks are paid by advertisers, but ads are worthless if you gross out your audience.
Entertainment -- Product Placement
Given the opportunity, entertainment programming will either smoothly incorporate advertising, or the audience will go away based on the producer's ineptitude. A smart producer will enrich the reality of a show by having real things show up in real places in appropriate ways.
Of course, this is more difficult to place products in futuristic space fantasies like Battle Star Galactica, but the opportunities still exist. For example, Logos like Sony are completely out of place in this kind of setting, but a short statement at the end of the episode with product visuals would do well to sell them. Perhaps somehting like "Video screens shown on this episode are the latest in DLP technology, provided by Sony Corporation" with a display of the monitor as used in the show. I'm sure there are more than a few people who would like to know where to buy some of the Civillian fashions worn on the show . For example, who makes Six's dresses?
Cooking shows spend a lot of time and money hiding the labels of products they use. Why is that? Why shouldn't they show the labels of sponsors? If the product is crap, they should refuse the sponsorship for fear that the credibility of their product will be lessened. It's the ultimate truth in advertising. If Emeril Lagasse hawks sub standard anchovies, then his reputation becomes sub standard anchovies.
The same goes for everything from house makeovers to wilderness survival shows. What tools are best to use, who makes that cool pocket knife, Why blur out all those logos on the shirts and the signage in the background, when you could just as easily get paid for it, or better yet, use a computer to to change the billboard in the background to advertise a suitable product?
I guess it's just a comfort thing on the part of networks. They want to make tiny little changes that mess with our lives and get us all upset rather than think of the big picture and come up with ways to keep both the Audience and Advertiser's happy.
The inability to deal with new technology is indicative of an industry that needs a major shakeup. Networks need to stop thinking of the DVR as a problem, and start thinking of how to use it to their advantage. If people are clicking past commercials, it means they don't like them, sort of like door to door salesmen. Instead of bemoaning a technology change, they should be looking to figure out how to take advantage of the next generation of DVR's.
As the astute technology fan knows, everything you own is out of date within 6 months of buying it. There's another generation of DVR's in the planning stages that will blow away what's in your entertainment cabinet. We just don't know in which way we'll be impressed. Network and Advertising companies should be looking to add features that allow them to interactively market products and services.
For example, why can't there be a "Products" button on the next DVR remote? Think about it. Lets say you saw this cool pair of sunglasses in a show, and you want them. Rewind to the scene, click on the products button, and get a display of everything from the maker of the actor's suit to the paint color on the wall.
How could you do this? You ask. It goes back to my original statement. My DVR is a precision piece of computerized equipment. The key word is computer. Data is sent to this computer. Some of it is audio, some of it is video, all of it is digital information that gets stored on a hard drive. There are currently interactive programs that can be downloaded onto my DVR at my request. Why can't one of those tell me where I can get that cool set of shades?
