TV commercial blocking devices are bad, because they block politician's ads.

[Anti Federalist]

Now That Mandates Are Effectively Legal, Here is The Next One

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2012/06/now-that-mandates-are-effectively-legal-here-is-the-next-one.html

June 28, 2012, 1:54 pm You have to watch politicians’ commercials

The Dish Network, in its continuing effort to attract new viewers, introduced a new DVR called the Hopper earlier this year. The Hopper’s main appeal is that it allows you to skip past commercials entirely, and unsurprisingly, TV networks aren’t very happy about this. But guess who else is unhappy?


At a Wednesday hearing on video distribution held by the Communications and Technology Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, [Rep. John Dingell, D–Clueless] complained that the service will allow potential voters to skip past important commercial messages.

“I’ve got an election coming up, like all my colleagues,” Dingell said, during his questioning of Dish Network Chairman Charlie Ergen. “We all put political ads on the local stations to reach our constituents. The Hopper potentially limits the ability of every member of this subcommittee to reach constituents to help them make up their minds on Election Day.

“Do you understand and appreciate the concerns that the politicians up here on the dais and other politicians everywhere will feel about that, yes or no?” Dingell asked.

[TheGrinch]

I actually wrote a paper sometime ago about what I predicted would be the "Tivoization of America". The hypothesis was that this would only serve to destroy the integrity of the programs it seeked to preserve by eliminating commericals. Since shows and netowrks derive their income from ad revenue, this would only stand to increase product placement within the shows to make up for less eyes on the commercials.

So far it actually hasn't been as bad as I predicted in most cases, other than mostly subtle product placements and even industry placements (there was a time on FOX where all of their cartoons frequently pushed both the idea of everyone having a cellphone and a flat-screen TV... I think this was definitely an industry wide placement deal). However, it hasn't been that much of a marked rise since they really started doing this in the movie ET with Reese's Pieces (not that it wasn't still used some before that, but this was when it became seen as a popular marketing strategy).

Of course one of the negative effects is precisely this, that it takes away the ability of local businesses and politicians to be able to advertise, as the nationally-televised programs get national sponsors (i.e., big corporations that can afford it). Not that I'm anti-corporate as long as they're not in the bed with government, but I am pro-little guy... That doesn't mean I think any legislation in favor of the little guy is needed here (that would be stooping to the same thing we're against), but it is indeed concerning, when there aren't nearly as many other means for the little guys to get their message out there like the big boys can.

[tod evans]

First you pay for access to media..........Then you pay again to avoid interruptions in said media.

While those paying media providers to interrupt programming complain that providers are offering the consumer the option of paying more to opt out.

"Just Say No" to syndicated media..

[Kluge]

Bring back VCR's!

[Acala]

The off switch is your friend.

[TheGrinch]

First you pay for access to media..........Then you pay again to avoid interruptions in said media.

While those paying media providers to interrupt programming complain that providers are offering the consumer the option of paying more to opt out.

"Just Say No" to syndicated media..
I agree with the cesspool that media has become, but there is nothing underhanded about the way it's set up.

How it started and still is today is that networks like ABC and such were available completely for free to anyone with a TV. The relationship has always been TV/cable provider > customer, and show/network > advertiser. The only difference today is that the relationship is becoming increasingly uneasy between those 2 different relationships with different priorities.

[moostraks]

So a business operates with an eye towards what the customer wants-an option to not have to watch the commercials-and those with a bully pulpit will now force the business to do the contrary for their own petty interests. Fire that clown! If these politicians want to have their commercials heard maybe they need to accept they will have to find another way to go about it rather than forcing something else down our throats. I don't feel one ounce of pity that politicians will not be able to pander to those who watch the dish. It ain't like they don't have other options that aren't offering an opt out service.(triple negative...figure that one out!lol...)

[CaptainAmerica]

haha. Ill take one of those!