Unwanted ads

Posted on November 19, 2010


Imagine having a commercial-free service.  Forget bothering with DVR’s and waiting a whole day.  Too bad we don’t live in the U.K. because BBC cited views of 79 million last October, doubling its popularity with the iPlayer.  Now it’s ready to launch it globally.  So, is it proper for me to say the British are coming?

It will launch in several countries in 2011, unknown which they are according to Beet TV.

Would this mean that a news channel is not dependent on advertisers?

Although increasing the news viewership is not so easy to resolve, we now know that most people would tune it if there are no commercials.  In fact that’s true for nearly all channels, once a commercial comes on you are more likely to change the channel than wait in front of the TV 4 or 5 minutes for the show to return.

Have you also ever thought about who pays for those commercials? Us.  Just because you move away from the TV during the commercial doesn’t mean we are not paying for it.  It will still count.

News and advertising should not interfere with each other, but apparently it does.  Since the Internet revelation, advertisers are moving online, leaving TV in the dust.  And because TV had become so dependent on ads, it never really thought about replacing it.

According to TVB, the gap between cable and broadcast new networks is closing in.  Broadcast is still pretty high in drawing revenue compared to cable, but since 2006 a decline is readily emerging.

Now that the we see commercial interference as a possible reason why viewers are more likely to not watch, are there other solutions to keep the news programs from depending too much on advertisers to drive their values and instead focus on content and providing viewers the necessary information?