Customer Discussions > television discussion forum

You only get 40 minutes of tv for every hour, that is why I hate ads and why the BBC is so much better!


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 92 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 16 Apr 2011 15:11:07 BDT
Thomas88 says:
BluRay ADS
I find Bluray disabling my control and forcing me to watch a Malteser AD.
On a disc I've paid for.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Apr 2011 15:36:35 BDT
TJ Smith says:
But see Matthew Weiner's recent contract negotiations with AMC for "Mad Men". They wanted to cut the show to 40.5 mins, he refused as he felt the stories needed the original run time to tell their stories.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Apr 2011 22:42:07 BDT
Ecclesiastes Ch V 9 - "There is nothing new under the sun" By that I mean nothing in essence really changes.

Sycophantic fan [ atics ] crowded the gladiator arenas of Rome to laud their heroes of the moment - today it's State of Origin. I have no doubt that in centuries to come some archaeologist will find the statue of Wally Lewis in the stadium ruins and surmise it was one of the local gods. He'll be quite right.

Anyway, I digress - back to the point. Do you recall the VHS tapes you'd hire and how you'd be forced to watch 'trailers' [ which by interpretation should be behind the feature movie not preceding it ] for soon to be forgotten utter c...p films you'd never be interested in in a month of Sundays.

If you hired movie A it was movie A you wanted to watch.

Then you got that silly bl...y intelligence insulting thing with the family in the wrong shirts telling you what the letters meant on film ratings.

Those who manufacture [ manus, the hand, fecit, to make happen ] have us by the throat. I own a beautiful open reel tape recorder - technology phased the tapes out to make us buy cassettes. I have 78 speed vinyl records in my collection - try and find a new turntable that offers that speed today.

In earlier times we purchased Beta video tape players only to find they were phased out by VHS. What do you do with your collection of Beta movies when you can't get a machine to play them any more?

Then there was the 8 track players in our cars - again phased out, forcing us into compliance.

The Dollar is the recognised god of this world, masking Lucifer, the real god of this world.

Posted on 17 Apr 2011 19:00:07 BDT
breaks dont bother me that much freally, they give you a chance to get a cup of tea etc. without the worry your missing something

Posted on 17 Apr 2011 21:45:36 BDT
Neal Vincent says:
Anyone who's watched the various incarnations of Star Trek on DVD will have seen the steady erosion of your supposed "hour" of telly by advertising. The original late-1960's series weighs in at 52 minutes per episode; that drops to about 45 minutes per episode (80's-90's) with TNG/DS9/Voyager; and by the time of Enterprise (00's) it's down to just 42 minutes per episode - which is the standard for most US TV at the moment.

That's 10 minutes of every episode lost to the encroachment of advertising, which adds up to around 4 hours of "missing" material - material that you *would* have seen if it wasn't for all that advertising - per season. Or, to put it another way, that's 5 (nearly 6) whole episode's worth of material per season lost to the advertisers.

More interruptions and shorter shows. It's not a move in the right direction for the viewer, but you can see how it works out nicely for the show's producers: more advertising revenue, plus 4 hours per season that they don't have to make.

And anyone who thinks BBC shows are exempt from this is kidding themselves. The BBC has overseas sales in mind, as well as us license-payers. It's no coincidence that on Season 5 (the first Matt Smith season) of Doctor Who each episode weighed in at just 42 minutes (down from 45 to occasionally as much as 50) on the previous seasons. Our shows are conforming to American run-times for ease of overseas sales.

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Apr 2011 10:48:32 BDT
man says:
really enjoyed your answer Neal...well done

Posted on 18 Apr 2011 12:47:43 BDT
H. A. Lynch says:
I really got annoyed at the little ikons that appear at the climax of a tv show telling me what is on next, or what new series is on the following night. They are so desperate to prevent us turning over to another channel. Anyhow, this is all academic as my partner and I recently surrendered our TV license and only use the set for watching DVDs. We checked it out, it's all above board. I have Empire magazine to advise me on which series to purchase on DVD - as well as the reviews on Amazon,etc - so I am quite happy.

Also; has it occurred to anyone that 24 should really be called 18?

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Apr 2011 12:52:40 BDT
I was gonna mention that about 24. It's actually 17.5. There's an episode of American Dad (the first episode, I think), where they have 24 hours left to live and decide to watch the first season of 24 on DVD. I felt like I should complain!!

I think another reason we get popups during/after TV episodes is to sully the image in an attempt to drive DVD sales. I've wondered in the past if channels watermarking their programmes was at the request of studios, too, to promote DVD sales. There isn't really a good reason for it besides that.

I only watch TV for live sport anyway, so I don't care. I went all-DVD back in 2004, but mainly because I like to marathon stuff. Though adverts were a factor.

In reply to an earlier post on 18 Apr 2011 13:25:09 BDT
I get annoyed at the b....... infuriating habit the channels have of 'minimising' the end credits of a programme to put some other information in front of us. I may want to see which actor played a particular role in the programme I have just watched, maybe just in interest or to perhaps confirm that he or she is someone I have seen from programmes in earlier years and to confirm that it's the same person.

There may be other information you want from the credits that you can't get because they have been shrunk down to miniature size.

Posted on 18 Apr 2011 16:00:39 BDT
pb752 says:
The minimising of the end credits really annoys me too as I also like to check the names of some of the actors etc. Sometimes they don't even show the credits at all and just cut the programme off, or they whizz through them so fast that you can't read them properly.

Posted on 18 Apr 2011 21:04:20 BDT
Ok, so shall we have proper 60 minute quality shows? Runtime will be 60mins but showtime will be 125? And of course that extra 20 mins ain't free so more advertisers money required.

Posted on 19 Apr 2011 00:24:17 BDT
stuart lief says:
As we've seen in the past decade Multichannel TV has been a complete disaster because we've seen advertising time increase from 10% as of the early 1960s to 20% of the broasdcast time which was common during the mid 50s to early 60s. In the USA product placement has become quite common though historically American broadcasters in the 1940s did product placement & as such when commercial Television was being debated in this country during the early 1950s those who were using the american experience of commercial television drew up the Television Act of 1954 which not only forbade product placement but also stopped British Commercial Broadcasters such as Associated-Rediffusion from broadcasting the ads & programmes in such a manner that the viewer couldn't tell which was the programme from the ads ie a child watching the flintstones in the USA would suddenly end up watching an advert for cigrettes since one segued into the other & now in this country product placement is now allowed and yet back in the 1980s a presenter for TV-am was hauled over the coals for product placement so it looks like adverts are now creeping into the programmes.

Posted on 19 Apr 2011 11:24:42 BDT
Diana Benson says:
There are some really interesting points emerging through this discussion. Living between France and England has allowed me a different perspective on broadcast cultures. The common point between the two countries is that each imposes a licence fee that is obligatory if you own a device capable of receiving broadcast programmes. I understand that even should you elect not to watch broadcast transmissions you are obliged to hold a licence if you own any form of television/receiver (eg even a computer fitted with a TV card that you don't know how to use). In France the licence fee is collected alongside the local tax and it is for the householder to 'opt out' if they don't own a TV. Years ago when we were students we had only a small black and white TV and therefore we bought a licence at the lower rate (still available) for black and white viewing. As video players became less costly we hired one; we were then informed that while we could only view in black and white, the video recorder was capable of receiving colour and therefore we were told we should now buy the more expensive colour licence.

In Britain, having paid the licence fee, we can view all the BBC TV channels and enjoy all BBC radio - world, national and local. There are no commercial ads although as others have mentioned this does not prevent the BBC from showing lengthy trailers for other shows or for informing viewers on linked products (eg BBC publications). I have yet to see any BBC programme that breaks for such information part way through a transmission so while there are some lengthy advertising sections between the programmes in general the emissions themselves are broadcast intact. Other broadcasters such as Channel 4 receive some subsidy through the licence fee in addition to their other sources of revenue, such funds bring with them an element of responsibility for public service broadcast.

In France the licence fee pays towards 'France Televisions', the BBC equivalent. France 2 is kind of like BBC1, France 3 is a bit BBC2 but with a local element. France 4 is perhaps nearest to Channel 4 in the UK. France 5 is arts, documentary, debate - perhaps a bit of BBC2 and BBC4 and Channel 4 as it was before Big Brother etc came along. There is also France O which is for French viewers largely overseas. Radio France provides a wide range of stations catering for numerous audiences with no advertising. Advertising on France Televisions was prolific (generating funds in addition to the licence fee) until recently. Gradually legislation had required a reduction in advertising with an aim of purging it from the public channels within a fairly short time frame.

The fundamental difference between broadcasting in these two neighbouring countries appeared to me as the manner in which the adverts were transmitted. In Britain, as others have said, there appears to be an increasing number of breaks during the programmes and for many this ruins the continuity of the story. There are of course ways around the problem through use of time delay functions on Freeview or on Sky but certainly it is not every household that can afford a Sky subscription. If you haven't remembered to build up a buffer with your Freeview box before your programme begins then you are stuck with breaks every ten minutes or so. Many of the newer channels (eg ITV3, Yesterday) rely on retransmission of older programmes perhaps first broadcast for a BBC audience. Little thought seems to be given on identifying appropriate places for ad breaks and this impacts even further on the continuity. Other shows, in particular those made by Granada during the period when it made excellent drama, are recut to introduce additional breaks; again it seems that in their preparation for broadcast today the breaks will be inserted at the most annoying moment possible, often cutting a key character mid-sentence and then restarting at a completely different scene. Watch an episode of the excellent Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes and you will quickly see what I mean.

In France the more commercial channels will show a limited number of adverts during certain programmes but in general such breaks are reserved only for the period between two programmes (which can be long - you could make your cup of tea, drink it, use the bathroom, telephone your mum and then get back in front of the TV during one such break. I recall taking a recording of a Grand Designs from Britain to show some friends in France who had renovated a similar property. My French friends found it incredible that the programme would stop so often in order to run adverts, for them, even though we could zap past the ads, the programme was incoherent and they couldn't understand why anyone would tolerate so many breaks.

The issue of volume change when adverts are shown is also live in both countries. It is certainly very annoying in England, the worst culprit I've found to date being Viva where programmes are broadcast with so quiet a sound-track that we raise the volume considerably above where it might normally be. When the adverts begin we are all but blasted out of our seats by the change in broadcast sound volume.

The French are guilty of similar practices, the difference being that the equivalent to Radio Times monitors such sound differences and I understand that should the variation between programme and advert sound be above a certain margin of tolerance the broadcast company will be fined. Does anyone know if similar rules apply in England/Wales (or Scotland with its own legal system)? It would seem that if there are rules they are generally ignored; I've never seen a table comparing volume during programmes and during ad breaks published in Britain.

From a personal viewpoint there is one issue in all of this that really annoys me and I'm sure I'm not alone in my frustration. I pay for a TV licence in Britain and for another in France. While in France I can usually pick up Radio 4 on long-wave (a service that I believe will disappear before too long) and of course with a smart-phone I can access the internet and podcasts that are available through that medium. Similarly, when I'm in England, I can access the France Televisions internet site and listen to French radio via my iPhone.

In both cases I am prevented from watching 'video on demand' or the BBC iPlayer when not in the country from where the programme originates. On attempting to watch a programme the internet will inform me that the content of the page is not available as I am not currently located in the country of origin and it is assumed therefore that I don't have a relevant licence. A friend's horse won a race at Ascot last year, the clip was available on the BBC website but when I tried to access it to show her in France I was informed that the content could not be viewed outside the UK.

In this day and age where we are encouraged to be mobile in order to obtain work, where many British people own property across Europe and where many of the retired spend long periods abroad to enjoy better weather and a different pace of life isn't it about time that the European bureaucracy came up with some form of universal licence or even an additional 'visitors' charge? There is much moaning in the press at overseas visitors who don't appreciate our culture; would it not be positive for them to be able to access British programmes? Thinking beyond Europe I can see that certain heads of state might disagree but I'm thinking of a European universal licence rather than an inter-continental variant!

To get around the problem many of the older English people living in France have secured assistance from small businesses (also run buy the English in general) able to arrange a Sky box and dish on the basis of false addresses and doctored subscription cards. There is clearly a market there and the money going to those who can arrange these rather dubious Sky installations would surely be better spent on a transferable licence with the funds going towards the creation of better programmes all round. It is easy to find reasons to criticise Europe and its regulations, this would be a relatively simple exercise to sort out, perhaps resulting in a small surcharge to the licence for those of us who opt in so that we could watch our favourite programmes from any participating European country from whichever other European country we happen to be passing through or living in.

I would be intrigued to know how many other European countries have licences, how they manage their advertising and whether similar issues apply in respect of overseas access to their content.

Posted on 22 Apr 2011 17:12:59 BDT
I have had sky since before it went mainstream and was over the moon when
the first sky + boxes were introduced as I record 90% of everthing I watch
for one simple reason you can wind tru the adverts =)
Sky rang me once as I was one of the first million to have the new HD+ service
and asked what was the best thing about it
there was an shocked silence when I said it was to wind tru the adverts =)

In reply to an earlier post on 22 Apr 2011 18:48:56 BDT
pb752 says:
As I mentioned earlier in this discussion, I do exactly the same thing as you. I record the programmes that I'd like to watch onto my Virgin V+ box (I'm unable to have Sky) and when I play them back, I fast forward all the adverts. I only watch a small amount of actual live tv these days (a few sports programmes).

Posted on 22 Apr 2011 22:03:14 BDT
Joyeuse says:
The clever ads I can tolerate - but have you noticed that if the ad is worth watching one tends not to notice what the product was. It's the bloody awful ones you remember - and then you can boycott the product. There are several firms I have made of note never to patronise just because they inflict such drivel on us.

Posted on 23 Apr 2011 16:05:42 BDT
M. Bull says:
Personally I'm happy with adverts if it means we get decent programs quickly from America.

BBC = Funded by Taxpayer
Everyone else = Independant
Being Independant = Costs Money
Money + Adverts = Good shows

See it works :3

Posted on 23 Apr 2011 16:20:07 BDT
Mrs Pisaroni says:
Advert breaks are intrusive and so irritating. What really infuriates me is when you are at the denoument in a crime drama, with around 5 minutes to go and you get a break just so they can cram a 4th break into the programme. GOLD is even worse-the advert breaks can last 6 or 7 minutes. I once timed adverts on a Discovery Channel documentary and the hour long programme actually lasted 40 minutes when adverts were taken into account. I would much prefer say a 10 minute advert break between programmes and then for the programme to run in full but I doubt that would happen. We just mute adverts anyway-as I expect many people do so they serve no useful purpose.

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Apr 2011 18:38:58 BDT
M. Bull says:
I understand that, but it's the only way for channels to make money and thus provide quality programming. If channels had shorter ad breaks, we'd see less new programs and more old ones. Think of channels like *The horror channel* or the *CBS* ones, yes they have adbreaks but they essentially show old stuff that other channels no longer want lol

Speaking of the Discovery channel, cant understand why they even have ad breaks at times, have the stuff is just them advertising their own programs as they obviously couldnt sell the ad slots..

Posted on 25 Apr 2011 01:30:33 BDT
Basically TV is now a 24 hour shop. From adverts every 8-10 minutes here in NZ- to all night advertorials & home shopping-it is pure garbage. I love the BBC & its quality shows, and watch very little else with the help of nifty software- Coro being the exception (Yes I admit it I'm hooked on it!!) There is so much to annoy you now with shrunken credits-to whats on next flashing on the screen-to promos at either end of every damned ad break-and endless cooking programmes. I'd rather stick pins in me eyes!! Thank god for books CD's & DVD's!!

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Apr 2011 20:12:11 BDT
Yeah, re. Doctor Who, the BBC have pitched its length at overseas sales BUT don't have a problem with that because we're still not seeing it made up to an hour with the insertion of ads. Good point re. Star Trek TOS.

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Apr 2011 20:24:14 BDT
Last edited by the author on 25 Apr 2011 20:26:33 BDT
A logical, well thought-out reply, Felders, parts of which occur to me on a regular basis. Its basically different ends of the spectrum, but I'm mature enough to realise that whatever I feel in my gut won't change a thing, therefore I can only refer you, in the continued interests of cyclical debate, to my opening statement...

Posted on 25 Apr 2011 20:31:02 BDT
Ian Langford says:
I got around the TV & Adverts problem years ago by unplugging my receiver. This way, I'm saving a fortune by evading the need for a TV license and if there's anything I want to watch; I can probably find it on DVD somewhere. Besides; all those channels that have breaks in them use their funding on shows like the next Big Brother, I'm a Celebrity, or whatever the new #fad# show is these days!

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Apr 2011 21:28:05 BDT
Can we actually get away with doing that? If I unplug my channel receiver, I still have it in the house plus the tv has it's own receiver too. Won't they just use that as evidence you have the ability to receive tv?
And of course, I'll bet they count a computer as receiving equipment thesedays...

In reply to an earlier post on 10 May 2011 19:10:29 BDT
John Gammon says:
Since Top Gear's on 14 times a day on various channels I'd say that's quite a good deal. I'd love to put people who claim to only watch one show on a lie detector. You mean to say you never pop the news on, see what's happening or what the football score is? And don't you use the BBC website at all? Sorry, can't believe you. You'd have got rid of your telly years ago if this were true. In my view, the BBC license is worth 200 for the news and the pips alone.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the television discussion forum (622 discussions)

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Participants:  48
Total posts:  92
Initial post:  7 Apr 2011
Latest post:  29 May 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers

Search Customer Discussions