posted
I'm curious to hear some thoughts on this. Television has slowly become more and more "viewer friendly" so to speak. With the advent of dvr and Tivo and On Demand programming the viewing experience is more in the hands of the audience. And the nature of how we watch television is changing. We are no longer slaves to the viewing schedule. And to a level much further along than just being able to tape something on the vcr. You can now automatically set to record a whole season of a show with one push of the button. You'll never forget to set the vcr again. You can record one thing and watch another. you can pause, rewind, or fast forward(as long as it's not live) anything you want. With On Demand, as long as it's available you can watch whatever movie or tv show you want any time you want, and it's completely under your control.
I see things only progressing more in this direction with time, and have always thought things would eventually be this way, probably as soon as mp3s came out.
The only impedent I see to this revolution in video entertainment is what I referred to as the water cooler effect. The beauty of the prime time shows is that the next day at work or school everyone loves to talk about them. Or post about them online. I hated missing 24 this year and not being to read the thread or talk with some of my friends about it. Though I loved watching the whole season in one week at the end. So how strong is this effect?
And even more, what is the future of prime time television in general? With more and more niche channels coming out, television is becoming more specialized. Prime time tv is being taken over by reality shows anyway, so in that sense, prime time television has already changed significantly. But how much longer do the big budget shows shows have? And if people are getting their tv shows on dvd, or On Demand where they can skip commercials where is the money for the big shows going to come from?
What's tv going to be like in 20 or even 50 years?
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
We will have tv instantly transmitted into our brains. Unfortunately, The ads will secretly control us.
Posts: 1287 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't forget American Idol Clone--Where contestants have thier naughty clones perform classical music in there boxing shorts, or risk getting kicked off the show as they race across the world gathering ingredients for the great cook-off.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think TV's headed in exactly the direction you describe, and that the "water cooler" effect might die off in real time, but that there will be new virtual water coolers around which tv show fans will congregate...i already see this happening -- take Firefly and its fan-base for an example.
i like the advent of personalized television viewing -- the ability to download an episode of a favorite show or a whole season and not have to worry about scheduling around it. This way, i can come home from my job at 10-11 o'clock at night, and i can watch the Arrested Development DVDs i just bought, or watch downloaded bittorrents, instead of the crappy late-night tv that cable offers these days.
I actually hate watching TV now. I used to love it and watch it all the time. But now i'm spoiled -- i don't want commercials, in fact, commercials will actually make me stop watching something because they jar me so thoroughly out of the experience of watching my show.
Luckily, one of the most positive things that i think will come out of this is that quirky, off-beat shows like Firefly and Arrested Development i think will find their audiences a lot easier, and be able to retain funding. Although i don't know what road funding will take in the future...without commercials (which i think will die out, or at least be replaced by another form of advertising, like banners on the sides of the websites, etc) it will be interesting to see whose money keeps shows afloat in the future.
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didja hear about the new Tivo-proof ads that just have a still for 30 seconds, so even if you fast forward you still see the frame? I'm not making it up, but no linky goodness.
I can't see it catching on, though. Too expensive to waste video ad-time for a still.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
hah, television billboards. Neat idea. Aren't there certain services though that automatically cut out the commercials from the recorded show? So it's not actual "tivo-proof" in the general sense of digital television recording.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do those really work? I've never used Tivo so I dunno.
If only there were services that replaced products with generics like "Soda" ala Repo Man. That would even stifle the evil product placement cabal. Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those new "Lymon" commercials for Sprite (I think) actually read at the bottom of the screen that they are tivo proof. I don't have a tivo though so I don't know if it actually works.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've already pretty much stopped watching tv, definitely new shows. I still record 24, Lost, and Smallville on my VCR to watch with a buddy of mine. Otherwise I either download through bittorrent or wait for the dvds to come out on Netflix.
As for water cooler talk, it is a bit of a problem some times. My wife has had certain parts of Sex and the City ruined for her, which she just started watching.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, product placement would be the next logical step, but it just couldn't be as cloying and obvious as it was in the Truman Show...i think television is becoming more and more...real. Or less and less cheesy. At least, most shows are making some attempt at not seeming staged (although i'm usually painfully aware of "staged" scenes in reality shows)
Maybe funding wouldn't come from private companies anymore? Or if it did, they'd be listed in the credits of the show as a sponsor? I think the traditional living-room television set with the family gathered around will become less and less the norm in the future. So, since people won't be sitting down, i think television show watching will become less of an "event"...less of an activity, more of a distraction. I'm not explaining this right, but i think tv will be more of a "oh, i have some free time, i'll download the newest Lost to my portable TV/ipod/mp3 player thingy" and less of a "oh, it's six o'clock, better stop what i'm doing and go downstairs so i can catch all of American Idol!"
So given that mindset, the mindset of "I just want to watch the show during this free time i have" where could products get mentioned?
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, I've thought about this greatly (as a side note, I do work for Comcast and sell DVR's, own one, and use On Demand on a fairly regular basis).
The honest truth is that DVR's are going to push the cost of television higher, or push it to a la carte cable at extremely ridiculous rates.
We will see a lot of product placement, take for example HP shelling out a lot of dough to put their symbol in a Jessica Simpson music video, and it was barely seen. Also, I have tinkered around with the idea that perhaps things will get so out of hand as to increase the cost of DVR's over time, and introduce cheaper alternative that will just allow you a rewind button and a pause button, and get rid of the fast forward altogether.
On Demand is already introducing ad's (sure, you can fast foward them, but they are the very first thing saying "this program is brought to you by XXXXX, here is their commercial"). I've even seen Advertisments On Demand. Comcast has even been playing around with selling ad space in their digital preview guide, and has recieved a lot of flak from customers about it.
The next thing to consider is that DVD of TV shows have a bigger industry than ever before. Tons of money comes in from Seasons of DVD's, and networks make money off of that as well. Just as much, you can watch free episodes of stuff online just with advertising in them. Don't forget about the growing demand for purchasing episodes from MP3 sources.
The big thing to consider is that one way or another funding from ads are going to be significantly decreased, and networks and companies are going to try to make money from other sources, and sell advertising space elsewhere.
Morbo, the Tivo Proof commercial that I have read about was for a show called Brotherhood, which was run on fox. 30 second commercial that has the same thing shown, with audio from the show played in the background.
Posts: 116 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I enjoy watching TV in real time. I think this is a function of the shows I watch - and the life I don't have.
I don't watch much TV. In fact, the only "canned" show I watch is Galactica. Darn near everything else I watch is live: football, primarily; and then the guilty pleasure I derive from "Dancing With the Stars." (Shut up!) I watch the live shows just so that I can talk about them the next day - or even the same evening. Especially in the case of football, which I'm seriously considering adopting as a religion.
And I watch Galactica because I have no Friday night life... but I also clear out my Friday nights to watch the show, which creates a fairly nasty feedback loop - which sucks during the hiatus. Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The next thing to consider is that DVD of TV shows have a bigger industry than ever before. Tons of money comes in from Seasons of DVD's, and networks make money off of that as well.
I was in Best Buy the other day looking for DVDs. The first thing you see as you come in is the new releases. The very next thing after that is rows of TV shows. Then after the tv shows are the movies split up by genres. Amazing the kind of placement tv gets now. It used to be in the back with all the special interest programing type stuff, now it's the main attraction.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I recently got DVR through the cable company and I adore it. I've found I actually watch less tv now because I can't stand to watch commercials. Instead, I only watch the shows I record. Theoretically I could watch them whenever I wanted, but I find I usually watch them within a few days of when they aired. The biggest reason for this is the water cooler effect. I know people who watch the same shows I do and I like having the ability to talk about the shows. I also can't stand spoilers and if I wait too long, the odds increase that somebody will spoil something.
One thought I have is that I have almost no interest to get into new shows. I watched the first episode of Heroes and that was the only new show I've watched this season. I keep finding myself thinking that if I hear good things about a show I'll check it out on DVD later. The shows I make an effort to watch (well as much as effort as setting my DVR to record a season of a show), are all ones that I already know and love. Does anybody else do this as well?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amanecer: One thought I have is that I have almost no interest to get into new shows. I watched the first episode of Heroes and that was the only new show I've watched this season. I keep finding myself thinking that if I hear good things about a show I'll check it out on DVD later. The shows I make an effort to watch (well as much as effort as setting my DVR to record a season of a show), are all ones that I already know and love. Does anybody else do this as well?
Thats me. I now wait for a lot of shows to come out on dvd since I have Netflix. I don't even have cable anymore. I just watch Smallville, Lost, and 24 on tv. I download the Stargates from bittorrent.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Everyone in my office has DVR/PVR, or watches TV via Netflix, or some combo of that. We still have the "water-cooler" effect, but it is more about what we saw and are recommending others see, then we talk about them again after a few others have seen them.
In short, I'm very skeptical of the idea that "the water-cooler effect" drives anything. I think it will always be there just as strong, but will always be about whatever the common cultural things are. If that's not live TV, it will be the news, current movies, celebrity scandals, or whateverelse we all heard about.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
When television first got started, the sponsors would pick the shows and then pay the network for the airtime. They'd pick any show that fit the demographic they were looking for.
Then somebody came along who most television folks who were around at the time agree screwed up TV--Newton N. Minow (Sherwood Schwartz named the boat on Gilligan's Island after this guy). He was the head of the FCC in his day, and is the guy who first called television the "vast wasteland." He decided that instead of leaving programming in the hands of sponsors, networks should take more responsibility for helping their networks serve the "public" rather than corporations.
This spawned television as we know it now--TV is all about ratings, and airtime is sold to sponsors based on viewership. Quality became second to ratings, and only showed up if there was a chance it might generate ratings. As opposed to the sponsors, who produced quality shows so people would associate their product with quality.
In other words, his "fix" made TV even more of a vast wasteland.
So what's going to happen now? A switch back. The sponsors are going to start generating the programing themselves. As the internet and television slowly merge, the bandwith for programming will be paid for by the sponsors. It will be "Butterfinger Presents . . . The Simpsons" or "Apple Computers Presents . . . Firefly."
You'll still get the Water Cooler Effect, because the new episodes will still go live at a certain date and time.
But you'll also get video on demand, because the whole series will be available on their site for free.
We won't see people pay for TV--we've been getting it for free for too long. And advertisers, anxious to get back the viewers they've lost to Tivo, will gladly pay for the programming themselves since their advertising budgets already are greater than the costs of many series.
And we won't see a move to "interactive" TV or anything like that--if people wanted interactivity as their primary entertainment, Nintendo would be a fortune 500 company. It has it's place, but it won't replace television. The "interactivity" will be limited to stuff like what we currently get on DVDs.
So the next question is, who fills the job of the networks? Who helps us find the gems in the sea of programming? With all these shows out there, who helps us find which ones to watch, and gets some money in the process?
The answer is search portals. Sites like Google and Yahoo! will have their TV sections where people go to look for programming. Since Butterfinger and Apple will pay them money to get their shows listed, people will find Butterfinger and Apple's shows. As shows don't bring in viewers, they'll be cancelled by the sponsors rather than the networks.
Also, pirating will be much, much less of an issue. Since having people download their show or share it off their server saves them the cost of bandwith, viewers will be all but encouraged to steal the video, complete with the quick celebrity-endorsements for their product at the start, middle and end.
As bandwith gets cheaper and the quality of internet video gets better and Digital TV and internet merge, this is where we'll end up.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
