Tuesday, May 9, 2006
Shifting the Commerical-Based Revenue Paradigm
Posted by Damion Chaplin in "NEWS" @ 11:00 AM
"They will take my remote control away only when they pry it from my cold, dead hands. This thought followed my first reading of a patent application for a new kind of television set and digital video recorder recently filed by a unit of Royal Philips Electronics at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The design appears to threaten the inalienable right to channel-surf during commercials or fast-forward through ads in programs you've taped. A second, calmer reading of the patent application revealed that the proposed design would uphold the right to avoid commercials, but only for those who paid a fee. Those disinclined to pay would be prevented from changing channels during commercials. If the viewer tried to circumvent the system by recording the program and skipping the ads during playback, the new, improved recorder would detect when a commercial segment was being displayed and disable the fast-forward button for the duration."
I had pretty much the same reaction when we reported on this new patent a few weeks back. When I told my wife about it, she totally flipped out! My wife cannot stand to watch commercials, and always goes surfing when one comes on. After reading this article, I've come to understand that the issue is deeper and more fundamental than our freedom to surf or fast-forward. At stake here is the very income of the television industry: sponsors. For example: How is the Sci-Fi Channel supposed to sell advertising time for Battlestar Galactica when it can be shown that fully half of their watchers own DVRs and that 70% of them are skipping the commercials entirely. Thus Sci-Fi gets no money to support quality shows like BSG and are stuck with reruns of Xena. Shows like BSG may even stop being made because the revenue just isn't there. Obviously, the old paradigm of feeding us 3 minutes of ads for even 7 minutes of content can't be supported in the long run. The TV industry needs to find some other way making money. Personally, I think I would rather pay a yearly subscription to the shows I actually watch than a monthly subscription to my cable provider. What about you? How would you like to see the industry make money and still provide us quality programming (and our DVRs)?
I had pretty much the same reaction when we reported on this new patent a few weeks back. When I told my wife about it, she totally flipped out! My wife cannot stand to watch commercials, and always goes surfing when one comes on. After reading this article, I've come to understand that the issue is deeper and more fundamental than our freedom to surf or fast-forward. At stake here is the very income of the television industry: sponsors. For example: How is the Sci-Fi Channel supposed to sell advertising time for Battlestar Galactica when it can be shown that fully half of their watchers own DVRs and that 70% of them are skipping the commercials entirely. Thus Sci-Fi gets no money to support quality shows like BSG and are stuck with reruns of Xena. Shows like BSG may even stop being made because the revenue just isn't there. Obviously, the old paradigm of feeding us 3 minutes of ads for even 7 minutes of content can't be supported in the long run. The TV industry needs to find some other way making money. Personally, I think I would rather pay a yearly subscription to the shows I actually watch than a monthly subscription to my cable provider. What about you? How would you like to see the industry make money and still provide us quality programming (and our DVRs)?
