Network Greed Rant

[rabid1st]

Okay, I'm a cooperative citizen of the consumer culture. I don't mind paying for things. I think television shows are products and I want to support my favorite brands. Show me an ad for a Buick Regal. Heck, show me two.

I turn up as requested at 8/9 central to support shows I enjoy. And I consider their ads, so that they can pay their actors and writers and stay on the air. But, I've spoken to you before (ranted to you?) about the obtrusive network logos all over the products I am trying to enjoy. It's like buying cornflakes and having some guy constantly interrupt you as you eat them with a pitch about raisin bran. Just let me eat my frakkin' cornflakes, dude. I've made a decision to support the cornflake manufacture. I will get to other brands. Certainly, tell me they exist if you must. But stop annoying me during the cornflake consumption. And tomorrow I might well decide to also buy raisin bran...but not if it means I must endure this constant interrupting. OKAY?

SIGH!

Anyway, so...more and more I elect to watch shows online just to avoid the heavy handed network advertising that has made viewing such a chore. Now, some of the networks are becoming savvy to the online market of Hulu and are forcing me to go to their website to watch.

Still..I'm easy...I go with that. I am then assuming that I will be bombarded with info on shows I don't really want to watch. All around my screen stars will be dancing and Dano will be drawing his weapon before a monster wave hits him and turns him into a wet t-shirt model. I accept that I will be force fed a product advert for a product I have no intention of ever buying. That's a price I am willing to pay. And I will watch an ad or two with a happy smile on my face, because even though I am a captive audience, I think it is only fair to pay for the viewing convenience.

But...just now...I went to the CW to catch up on America's Next Top Model and they made me watch 4 ads in a row. That's 4 before I gave up and wrote an angry feedback memo...and came here to rant. Lord knows how many they were hoping to make me watch.

Let me be clear about this...America's Next Top Model...isn't a show I particularly prize. I don't really care if I don't watch it. I've missed the first three episodes this season without a qualm.But, it's a slow Sunday night. So, I thought I might catch up on it and maybe if I enjoy what I see, I might watch the rest of it this season.

Follow me here. I am a viewer that MIGHT watch their show on network, where they can sell loads more advertising. All they have to do is get me caught up on the show so far and they have a new viewer. A good deal for them. But was before I was hit with this extreme greed on their part. Now, ANTM and its parent network can go straight to hell for all I care. They have seriously overestimated how much patience I can spare America's Next Top Model.

And, OMG, network profits are down, ratings are down? Why is that? Could it be because television is practically unwatchable? I truly believe the main reason our economy is tanking is that nobody making a product in this country has any respect for their customers. Television viewers are there not to buy mouthwash but to watch a television show. Networks exploit us for profit. And we are, more and more, simply deciding we can do without the crap they are trying to sell to us.

Le Pant! Le Gasp!

Sorry! But I really feel very strongly that what we need in this country is a decent product for the people. Hire enough employees, pay them a decent wage, charge what the product is ACTUALLY worth and stop being such complete assholes to your customers.

Rae

Comments

[thisficklemob.livejournal.com]

I think the economy tanked because too many corporations didn't have any respect for their workers. They were like, hey, we can outsource it! With the threat of job loss, we can make one person do the work of two or three, and they won't leave because there's nothing else out there!

What they forgot was, if 15 million people don't have jobs, they also aren't going to have much money to buy anything. Certainly not anything not a necessity.

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

Exactly. This is such a no brainer. But all of the Wall Street blokes seem to think that economics is magical and is tied to THEIR profits. It is simply that people need money and confidence to spend money. But corporate America has gotten away with giving us crap products and treating employees like crap for three decades now.

They just didn't understand that there is an eventual tipping point on how few people you can employee to make really inferior products...and still make loads of profit every year. They still think if only we cut a few more corners and jobs...we will boost the profit margins and make more for our stock...then we will save America.

Of course, we did play along...allowing them to automate response calls and cut tellers at banks and waitress at resturants and workers at assorted plants just so we can pay a bit less. But it is all tied to wages, really. Workers need money to spend money.

[thisficklemob.livejournal.com]

It's actually a classic Prisoner's Dilemma -- if one company outsources, and others don't, the outsourcing company gets all the monetary benefits. But if enough companies outsource that Americans can't buy their products because they don't have jobs -- or suddenly realize they should save up because they might not have jobs next month -- then unless the companies don't need Americans to buy their products, they all suffer.

Unless, of course, they're running themselves mainly for stocks and to pad the pockets of their CEOs... in which case, woohoo?

This is why I like buying local... or even not local, but small business. If I'm going to buy from a big company, I'm going to be looking for a big discount.

[maniacalshen.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly this. The corporations don't have any consideration for anyone at all. Not the customers, and not the workers. I'm no longer trapped in grocery store hell, and holy crap am I glad about that. They used to be okay to work for, but then, the market started going down... the job market was flooded with workers... their surrounding competitors went out of business, pushing our profits way up... and we workers were that much more eager to keep our jobs.

What happened? Well, by now, you practically have to be George, the patron saint of anal retentive policy-keeping, to get a raise anymore. Scheduling is less flexible than ever; they have fewer people working any given shift than ever. Getting fired is easier. So now all the workers are either new or too exasperated and harassed to give good service and keep the shelves full, which in turn makes shopping less pleasant and runs off customers. All the best employees are gone or going, and the customers miss them. Aaaand, profits are tanking. Gee, who could have seen that coming, after alienating the source of revenue?!

I'm sure our experience is just one example of a problem that replicated itself across the entire country.

Greed only gets companies so far. A happy workforce turns out better products, and happy customers buy more of it.

[ladyoneill.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I read a couple weeks ago that the networks online were thinking about adding more ads to their online shows. Apparently the CW has already done it. *sigh* I can't watch at the network sites easily because the ads freeze my computer half the time. With more ads, more likelihood I won't be able to watch. :P

[thisficklemob.livejournal.com]

BBC News used to have clips online where I could watch the ad beforehand -- and then the actual news story wouldn't play. That used to annoy me. Now, something they've added to their website crashes my browser whenever I click on a story with a video clip, whether I click it or not. I've taken to turning off plug-ins whenever I go to BBC News now.

(Yeah, I should probably update my browser. But they should probably not need people to have the latest software to not have their browsers crash.)

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

Yes! The ads were very delaying to my computer as well. I was thinking I wouldn't be able to watch because of them, but then I got through 2 and I was thinking, "Okay, I can watch. It will just be a trial." But then I had ad #3 and ad #4 started and I thought..."Screw this."

They just can't respect the viewer. It's insane. I mean, I know programs cost money, but surely they are rolling in dough and I think they should give some consideration to producing a better product, too.

Rae

[keswindhover.livejournal.com]

Those little channel logos at the corner of the screen seem to have disappeared from my satellite shows now - I hadn't noticed 'til you mentioned it.

My tolerance for ads at the front of video clips is one. Any time it tips into two I stop watching. Strange, because I suffer through far more in the cinema.

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

I don't really mind watching one or two and it was better when they were at the front of the clip. But now, they are putting these ads in the middle at the same cuts that they use for TV ads. Worse, they are repeating the ads many times. I had watched about 10 minutes of the show and they did the ad from the beginning again...which is fine, but I do start muting the sound and doing something else when I've seen the same ad four times already. So, this time it was that ad over and then two more.

The cinema is a little different. For one thing, I can come late and miss the ads. For another thing, I usually am a little interested in what they are advertising. Here it is only other movies for the most part...except we do have a few regular ads in the pre-trailer portion of the show, but everyone just chats and ignores those.

Rae
who is really over the logo situation here...the CW one is like a little periscope of annoyance that cuts across the main portion of the screen. Luckily, only for a moment rather than continually like the Animal Planet one that set me off a few weeks ago.

[keswindhover.livejournal.com]

I checked. The logos are still there, I've just stopped seeing them. They are semi-transparent and tucked away top left, so not too unbearable.

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

I am very much against the upper left logo because it blocks the action. I like my logos on the bottom of the screen...because there is less action there. On the other hand, I suppose they do play havoc with reading any captions on inaudible or foreign dialogue.

I do like the transparent logos a bit more than the solid neon ones that Animal Planet was using. Though theirs was offensively large even when it was transparent, which it sometimes was.

The CW did this very interesting logo, promo thing, that was offensive but less so than some...because of its brevity. It basically did this periscope animation. First the CW would arrive like an iris opening in the bottom then a series of icon shapes would surround it...and one of the icons would bloom up across the action on my screen...like a periscope rising. A flag with some announcement would then ripple out across the screen. It was in my way, very distracting and blocked the action on the show...all negatives. However, it wasn't on the screen more than a few seconds. So there was less overall annoyance. However, I can see that getting VERY annoying as they make more and more of them, which they will, because they are greedy asshats. :grin:

Rae

[asahifirsa.livejournal.com]

It's interesting because in the U.S. you have a lot more add breaks but they're shorter than here. When I watch U.S. shows I can actually see where a break was supposed to be. On the other side of the coins, add breaks are 5-10 minutes over here. Usually toward the lower end, but if it's a new blockbuster or a new show it can be up to 10. I rarely watch anything life on TV anymore. Instead I just tape it on my HD recorder and jump 5 minutes forward then 1 then 1 until I get to the end of the commercials. Otherwise I'd go crazy.

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

If you have a single long break, people know that they can get up and go to the kitchen, or skip ahead as you do. The smaller breaks are supposed to keep us glued to our TV sets. But they have gotten out of control because there are so many of them now.

Though I will say that the long break was what I was objecting to above, because I was at my computer. I didn't feel the same sense of freedom I have with a television to get up and go. On the other hand, I did feel I should have more control over the experience with my computer. And I am relatively old...I think young people if they don't get desensitized to it...would simply flip to something more interesting.

[princessblue791.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, broadcast diarea. TV that shouldn't matter but does. As someone who's been in the industry for 5 years I can tell you from that the reason you're seeing nothing but crap is because people aren't really watching tv anymore. Why should they? They can either download it, netflix it, or DVR it. So to catch up with the new internet sub-culture, that thrives on the most horrible things you can imagine (via the internet) networks put out reality tv and the worst shows you've seen since Spinger. As we say in news which is my part of the industry, if it bleeds, screws, or explodes, it sells. This is why I work with the biggest bunch of sociopaths you can imagine. I love my job, I just hate alot of these people.

[rabid1st.livejournal.com]

Yes! I mean, the problem is all of us on some levels. We give in to the chocolate cookies of broadcasting and then we are surprised when we have nothing else to eat. Eventually, we need to behave responsibly ourselves...as viewers and consumers. This is why when I turn off a network, I send them an email explaining exactly why I am no longer watching. Sure, they probably ignore my email, but it's not like they can say they didn't have ANY idea what I wanted.

And, while I do sympathize with the plight of corporations. Sometimes I think what they should do is just take all their profits and divide them evenly between all workers. CEO's would make the same as stock clerks and everyone would start doing their absolute best for the company. And if CEOs quit...well...good luck to them, just promote from within the ranks until you have a solid group of workers on deck and committed to the company doing well. Bet you would see more work out of everyone eventually. And more solid ideas if the lowest workers had a say in how the company did business. Many low level workers have the best ideas anyway.

Rae