SKIPPING COMMERCIALS IS STEALING ACCORDING TO TURNER CEO

It was inevitable. The broadcast industry is now describing people who skip over commercials as thieves! And with new technology like HDTV and insane laws such as the DMCA, they may very well make it stick in the future.

Jamie Kellner is the chairman and CEO of Turner Broadcasting, which encompasses everything from CNN to TNT and is a part of AOL Time Warner. On Monday, an interview with Kellner appeared in CableWorld.

In response to a question on why personal video recorders (PVR's) were bad for the industry, Kellner responded: "Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

More : Link

Heh,

First of all, not a single one of us signed any contract that say's we HAVE to whatch commercial's. Second, I pay for my cable tv access, so if I wanted to use a PVR then I have every right to skip commercial's. I paid to whatch the show's, not the ad's.

So piss on turner.

Am I a thief because I turn the channel as soon as what I'm watching goes to a commercial break? Or because I immediately close a pop-up ad on the internet, or flip the page of an ad in a magazine? You can try to advertise to people but you cant shove ads down peoples throats.

This guy must be close friends with Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf. Theyre both crazy.

[Edited on 8-4-2003 by Tetsuo-51]

ROFLMAO !!!! Now that's funny !!

Ahh, brought to you by the same mindset that brought about the NET act, and the RIAA anti-download swat team. People too afraid of technology to learn and understand it. People whose favorite wet dream is to turn the play button into the "pay" button.

Well his girlfriend was Hanoi Jane....

Seriously, I pay for my cable access too, and quite heavily, I might add... So my commercial skip is always "on"

Since William is working for an ad's company, may be he could tell us his opinion.

William ? WILLIAM ? WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLIIIIIAAAAAAAAAAAM ????????????????

Oh man I hate commerials. I'm very lucky that I dont live in the US, you guys have a commerial break every 5 minutes Here in holland we usually have every 15 minutes a commerial break. I hate them, I shift to another channel as soon as I notice the break comes in.
The most irritating thing about commercials on TV is that the commercials are louder in volume than the programs. TV commercials are like uhh......pop-ups or something like that.
And I think pop-ups are EVEN MORE irritating than crack-addicts on Amsterdam Central Station.

To hell with Turner.

Ah... a topic close to my hear.

Ted's can be controversial. But essentially, in this context, he is not completely incorrect. For the past 80 years, passive media (print, radio, and TV) have had what amounts to a "contract" or "general agreement" with users/viewers. That agreement is the simple concept that we will tolerate advertising as the means for generating revenue that pays for content development.

Since hundreds of books have been written on the effectiveness of advertising, the quality of superior ads, and it's effect on society, we won't get into the merits of advertising here. But the basic concept that content providers will give you content, in exchange for you accepting their commercials is a sound and effective business model.

So... yes, at least in principal, skipping television ads is akin to stealing the content. People have always been doing this to some degree... pop to the kitchen during commercials, use the remote to surf channels, fast forward if you're watching a video tape, and so on. But now it's becoming easy, even potentially automatic to skip commercials during live broadcast television. Scary stuff for advertisers, of course they'll react with fear.

The problem is that we, as a culture, are evolving away from passive media toward interactive media. Ted certainly doesn't understand this change, and he's not ready to consider alternatives.

Change is coming. For those not ready, like Ted, it will be painful.

In response to a question on why personal video recorders (PVR's) were bad for the industry, Kellner responded: "Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

This Guy can kiss my Puerto Rican A$$!!!!

Originally posted by Ocelot

This Guy can kiss my Puerto Rican A$$!!!!

And my Belgian a$$ too.

Originally posted by William

For the past 80 years, passive media (print, radio, and TV) have had what amounts to a "contract" or "general agreement" with users/viewers. That agreement is the simple concept that we will tolerate advertising as the means for generating revenue that pays for content development.

WOAW WOAW WOAW...STOP !

I didn't sign any " general agreements " or " contract " with anybody. I pay for the TV cable,ok. But I pay for looking movies and shows, NOT for looking ad's.

Also, I don't know if you know the VPC system. It's a signal, sent by the TV channel(s). Your PVR detect the signal and start the recording. When their is a commercial break, the signal stop, and of course, the recording stop too. Ween the commercial break is over, the signal is sent again, and the PVR start to recording again. NO MORE AD'S !

It's very usefull. Also, if you did a programation ( i.e : 10:00 am to 12:00 am ), the PVR will not record if he don't receive the signal. So, if your tv channel send the signal at 10:25 am ( they can be late.Eerm, no, I mean they are ALLWAYS late ), you don't mind, the PVR do all the job for you.

Personally, I don't see how it can be stealing when people with cable have to pay for their content ... Wasn't cable started, and at one point actually had NO ad's? It's complete BS. If they want to make this a punishable offense, then I'll just drop cable altogether. Screw them!

I'm not paying 30+ dollar's a month for friggan ad's ... Me no not thinnky soooo ....

I have to agree with the general sentiment here... I am already paying $130 a month for cable (granted that include high speed internet, but even without, we're talking $90 a month for 3 cable boxes).

Why am I paying for TV shows... with commercials??? I can see like with the premium channels, you have a movie 1 hour 45 minutes. You want to keep your schedule even, so you have to fill in the extra 15 minutes with ads, promos, behind the scenes, ect. No big deal. But why am I paying to see standard shows, with commercials on them????

And now I am accused of theft if I DONT want to watch the ads? Please, Ted can kiss my @ss.

first of all any of yall who got a commercial skipper, are just too damned lazy to skip to another channel, or better yet, since you've been spending the last half hour watching donna does dallas, you should get up and stretch, do a few laps around the coffee table. go get some cheese, or refill your cup of booze. this has gotten to the point where even the antis are stupid for arguing against it. both sides here are wrong,
CHNAGE THE DAMNED CHANNEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

err sorry, i got carried away.

[Edited on 03/17/2003 by phoenix_cross]

Changing the channel is still evading the commercial's, which in turn still make's you a thief ... So what's the point?

Originally posted by ultra_phoenix
I didn't sign any " general agreements " or " contract " with anybody. I pay for the TV cable,ok. But I pay for looking movies and shows, NOT for looking ad's.

In spirit, you did. You watched the advertising supported network programming... and continued to do so.

And everyone needs to get something clear, when you pay for cable TV, you're not paying for content, you're paying for a delivery system.

Sooo ... I'm paying $30 dollar's just so they can zip some data into my TV? Kinda expensive ... I'm still wondering ... wasn't this whole cable thing started under the pretense of being AD FREE? What happened to that???

Yes it was, for premium channels... that's what you're paying for... in addition to the "luxury" of not having to have some ugly antenna on your roof.

in addition to the "luxury" of not having to have some ugly antenna on your roof Posted by William

Guess you havent seen the mini sat dishes?

J/K

But seriously, advertisers cannot be missing enough revenue due to these devices to start screaming about going out of business (well, if they adopt the same thinking as the RIAA, I guess they will).

So if they push this true with the PVRs, what next? Are they going to make it impossible to change the channel when ads come on?