Once Again: DVRs Not Killing TV, But Helping It

from the think-this-through-a-bit dept

Mon, Nov 2nd 2009 11:55am — Mike Masnick

It's becoming almost comical how often this happens: a new technology comes along for consuming/watching/listening/distributing some sort of entertainment content, and the industry freaks out. The technology is going to destroy the industry, and laws must be put in place, royalties must be paid, technology must be crippled, etc. And yet... the impending doomsday scenario never shows up. The player piano did not kill the sheet music market. The gramophone did not kill live concerts. The VCR did not kill the movie industry. And, here we are, with TV folks finally realizing that the DVR is not killing TV, but actually helping it. Basically, lots of people still watch ads, even if they're watching a time-delayed program. What's funny is that throughout the article you have execs insisting that this was a shock to everyone and no one could have predicted it. Except, of course, we wrote about the same basic thing three and a half years ago. But no one listens to us.

The article doesn't even mention the biggest benefit to DVRs -- even beyond the fact that people watching them still watch commercials: that it allows people to become more connected to certain shows, since they're less likely to ever miss an episode. That makes them more likely to watch those shows regularly (with or without the commercials). If someone can't keep up otherwise, they'll just let the show go entirely.

The other amusing finding in the article is that NBC's attempt to "DVR-proof" itself by moving Jay Leno to 10pm (on the theory that more people would watch it live when they couldn't fast forward through the ads) has totally backfired. That's because it also means that if people miss the show, they don't go back and watch it days later (who wants to watch stale jokes?) -- so fewer ads get watched in the long run (compared to a show that would be recorded and watched later). Oops. In the meantime, can we go back to those TV execs who were threatening to sue TiVo just a few years ago, and ask for an apology for wasting everyone's time?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: commercials, dvr, tv

33 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:00pm

I watch more TV since getting a DVR, just on my own schedule. Completely agree with this article. My wife and I skip most of the commercials but we do watch some. I would watch almost zero TV if it was not for the DVR. Given everyone's busy schedules time shifting TV shows is the only way to find the time to watch what I want to watch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ima Fish (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:09pm

"can we go back to those TV execs who were threatening to sue TiVo just a few years ago, and ask for an apology"

Considering the MPAA has not acknowledged that its members have greatly benefited from the VCR, I think you're in for a long wait.

The first rule of the copyright maximalist is to never concede any point. No matter how much evidence there is to the contrary.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
senshikaze (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:17pm

funnily enough, I don't use a DVR and I promise you advertisers make near $0 off me, much less than most people who do use a DVR. Buying something just because it is on tv and has an actor/actress or what not doesn't make any sense to me. As much as I enjoy the geico commercials, I don't use them. Probably never will.
Put that in a TV exec's spreadsheet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
zcat (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:26pm

I don't have a DVR, and I watch almost no TV at all.

I'd almost certainly watch more if I had a DVR, since there's a lot of stuff I'd actually like to watch and for various reasons it's just not convenient to watch it at the time it's broadcast. And TVNZ's on-demand site is basically horrible, can't download so the quality is limited to what can stream, and they force you to watch ads (I'm sure more fewquently than the broadcast ones) plus I pay for bandwidth so it's not 'free' for me at all. Basically it sucks on every level.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:32pm

Re:
But the fact that you know who Geico is, and what they sell, pretty much shows that advertising works. A lot of ads are just to get your name out there. So when you eventually do go out looking for a product, you think "Hey, Company X sells the widgets I need. Saw it on a commercial", or if your bud asks "Know anyone that sells widgets?" you're more likely to have Company X on the mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean Dougherty, 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:40pm

DVRs Saving TV
I blogged this one as well this morning, with the same conclusion. Waiting for the story about how the Pirate Bay saved television...

http://seanreadsthenews.typepad.com/seanreadsthenews/2009/11/dvrs-help-ratings-nyt- finds.html

Sean Dougherty
[ link to this | view in thread ]
R. Miles (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:44pm

Re: Re:
But the fact that you know who Geico is, and what they sell, pretty much shows that advertising works.
Define "works". To me, these GEICO commercials remind me of those brats who scream at the checkout line for a candy bar. Sure, it "works" because volume is impossible to ignore.

Plop, plop. Fizz, fizz. See? I'm sure many will know what this refers to, but those who weren't bombarded with these "one showing per every 10 minutes" ads will have no clue.

The DVR's greatest asset is the fast forward button, when watching an entertaining ad once or twice is now boring and we'll quickly skip it for the next shiny one, if at all.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me that last Kia ad was the best ever made. *yawn* And how many car commercials do we get per night? Couldn't tell you. I skip them. And *lots* of them.

Maybe it's about time these businesses focus in spending their money on something the majority of us aren't going to skip.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re: Re:
"Plop, plop. Fizz, fizz. See? I'm sure many will know what this refers to..."

Well, yes I know what it refers to, but I don't think it's what YOU'RE talking about...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:10pm

Re: Re:
In my case, I'm more likely to think 'Gee, Geico can afford a crazy amount of advertising... they must charge their customers more to pay for that and since they advertise constantly everywhere they are clearly after the folks who are willing change insurance companies on a whim, thier whole business is built on attrition.' No good reason to choose Geico for insurance. So while Geico might come to mind as an insurance company their constant advertising will keep me away. Counterintuitive but true.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
senshikaze (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:11pm

Re: Re:
just goes to show what assuming does to people.
If you asked me personally what insurance I would recommend, it would be the one I use. The local one that doesn't bombard me with a thousand advertisements per day. Funny how that works.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:22pm

Does anyone know .....
Did the TV industry ever have a problem with the mute button on TV remotes .... seems along the same lines .... "the mute button will kill our advertising! people wont listen to the commercials, you have to give us the option to disable a TV's ability to use Mute!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
W4RM4N (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:24pm

Tactics
I noticed a tactic some networks are using. They end their show 1 minute later (for example House on Fox). How does this affect anything? Lets say you record house at 9pm then want to record two shows at 10pm. Well now you have THREE shows at 10pm (since house records till 10:01) and the DVR will not record one of the 10pm shows. Slick - huh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:24pm

Re: Does anyone know .....
and crank the volume to painful levels
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shawn (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:35pm

Re: Tactics
And the payoff is?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
iamtheky (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 1:51pm

I would rather know how many times the rewind button is pressed in the 2-3 minutes following a commercial. I am guessing people still instinctively get up and do something else during the commercials, like an expected intermission. If they then rewind too far and catch the ass-end of the ad does it count. Exactly how much of an ad has to be consumed for Nielsen to count it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:03pm

46% watch the ads... and 54% done. Now, out of that 46%, how many of them get up and go for a pee, look for something to munch, etc?

First thing I did when I got a PVR was learn how to jump commercials. Heck, even now, if I want to watch an hour long show "live", I start it records and then show up 15 minutes later to start watching. So then I only have to spend 45 minutes to watch an hour, commercial free.

Depending on learned behavior is pretty much a losing battle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook, 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:07pm

Re:
You've got it bass-ackwards. You pause live TV when the commercials start, go take your pee break, get a fresh drink, whatever, then FF through the ads when you get back. It always feels better to FF through than to RW back to the restart of your show, and you don't spoil the results of the next person kicked off the biggest loser.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Duncan Yoyo (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Mama, Mia that's a spicy meat ball.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:32pm

"...a new technology comes along for consuming/watching/listening/distributing some sort of entertainment content, and the industry freaks out..."

yup, we all know how much the computer destroyed calculator sales.

And the TV destroyed theater sales

And the Radio destroyed CD sales

and of course the internet destroyed ALL SALES

These companies are just paranoid and un-inventive when it comes to business models
[ link to this | view in thread ]
rollinginsanity, 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:36pm

DVR's are great. I don't have to stay up late to watch shows. I wouldn't watch them anyway, and I do leave the ads running, because I'm lazy (which is why so many other people just watch the ads, I bet ya!). Also, they're a good time to get up and do something else or let your mind drift, which is what happened when they were on non-recorded TV anyway. I think the MPAA and other organisations are only there to serve to maximize profits for the movie/music industry. I think they're more of a hindrance then a success in this role. Everyone would be happier without them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 2:50pm

I always thought it would be smart for them to make a commercial in a very slow framerate so that way when people fast forwarded passed it it would play at normal speed. They could make it like a silent movie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 2 Nov 2009 @ 3:06pm

Network TV has gotten to the point where I refuse to watch any new shows. What's the point, they're all going to get cancelled on a cliffhanger that will never be resolved.

Flashforward has an interesting premise and looks like a show I'd like. I haven't watched a single episode of it. Why? Because I know they'll end the season on a big cliffhanger, then the network will keep fans hanging for 2-3 months until they finally announce that it's been cancelled.

Why bother?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nick, 2 Nov 2009 @ 3:24pm

Re: Cliffhangers
That's better than the droll 'reality tv' crap that's permeated so many networks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rdog, 2 Nov 2009 @ 3:38pm

Re:
Ads dont work on you eh...but you know who geico is :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2009 @ 3:54pm

Re: Does anyone know .....
Did the TV industry ever have a problem with the mute button on TV remotes .... seems along the same lines ...

Only if it was used during commercials, then they called it "stealing".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mikecancook, 2 Nov 2009 @ 5:54pm

Commercials as Content
What's that thing that Mike always says, advertising is content? Or content is advertising? However it goes...

The nice thing about watching a recorded program on your DVR is that you can skip past the ANNOYING commercials. I think its recognition that most commercials are crap and network execs know this when they complain that no one will watch commercials.

When there are good commercials, advertisements for something I'm interested in or anything of value, I do watch those commercials. Even to the point that I'll rewind them to watch them again.

Who wants to watch crappy commercials? Or the same commercials every commercial break? Am I going to skip over these? Of course! This is a no brainer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike, 2 Nov 2009 @ 5:56pm

Along the lines of W4RM4N's point about the 31- or 61-minute show:

Some channels flat-out lie about show timing. Comedy Central started broadcasting Futurama delayed by about 4 minutes, so that it might start at 4:04 and end at 4:34. But the published time is 4:00-4:30, so my Tivo records all but the ending of the show. I've tried to think of a benign reason why they do this, but it doesn't really matter, because the result in my case is that I no longer watch Futurama on Comedy Central.

At least in the 31- or 61-minute case, the extra minute is typically a silly scene that's not essential to the plot. But when the syndicating network ham-handedly chops off a good chunk of the show, you're better off not watching any of it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
senshikaze (profile), 2 Nov 2009 @ 6:14pm

Re: Re:
sure do. also know they make no money off that. Amazing how me knowing their name doesn't help them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Migzy, 2 Nov 2009 @ 11:03pm

Re: Tactics
And a number of DVRs have a feature called clipping to get around this very issue. If a show runs a few mins past the start time of another show, it will clip the new show rather than not recording the new show. My motorola box was just updated with said feature. Although that said my old box recently lost a tuner so this feature is of little use to me at the moment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
T. Vough, 3 Nov 2009 @ 6:51am

Tivo is now clever enough to clip one pgm or another that runs over the hour (as long as the guide says it does). Another benefit of DVR is to skip over the boring parts of the SHOWs, not just the ads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 3 Nov 2009 @ 10:23am

Re:
"""
I've tried to think of a benign reason why they do this, but it doesn't really matter, because the result in my case is that I no longer watch Futurama on Comedy Central.
"""

Unless you've found a different channel to watch Futurama on, I'd say this is kinda drastic. Tivo has options to allow for both pre- and post- recording of up to 5 minutes or so of the actual scheduled time. No biggie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 4 Nov 2009 @ 12:09pm

Fighting DVRs
I agree that the motives behind "Big E" fighting DVRs (and almost anything else that would help them) are likely not altruistic; but decaying away in front of a TV, etc., is causing the US to get fat, and costing us dearly - we used to be among the tallest, fittest, most capable people on earth - that is all going away; several nations are now taller, fitter, and generally more capable (though for now we have inertia on our side; but we are losing that). At least, by deemphasizing enterformercial stuff, they are tending to make us a little less slothful (unintentional, granted)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Nov 2009 @ 8:28pm

Re: Re: Cliffhangers
That's better than the droll 'reality tv' crap that's permeated so many networks.

I don't watch that crap either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]