Adverts destroying the quality of TV?

[Omaeka]

It always bugged me that great shows such as Firefly get cancelled so prematurely, and with Spartacus coming to an end soon I started thinking eek. Is it because of the audiences that watch them?

Let me explain, the kind of people who watch shows like The Only Way is Essex, Jersey Shore, Keeping up with the Kardashians etc. are, lets face it; of very low intelligence and are easily goaded into buying anything advertised to them. So the big companies pay big money to get their adverts wrapped around them. Whereas the audience to a show like Firefly aren't going to be interested in products from the kinds of companies who have the wealth to pay to advertise to millions, as it's mostly useless bull****. So the big corporations aren't interested in paying the network to advertise in the shows time and thus the network refuses to carry on airing it, forcing the creators to cancel the show. So for moneys sake, they have to try their hardest to cater to the lowest common denominator (the idiot) with the shows they put on air?

This isn't just happening with television either, it's happening to cinema, music, gaming and pretty much every single form of media. Hell it's even happening with clothing, food outlets (who the hell wants to go to McDonalds for their elaborate range of coffee? That's what Starbucks, Costa etc. are for) and lets just be honest, society itself.

What do you think?

 

[d_brennen]

McDonalds coffee is quite nice. I fancy a quarter pounder with cheese and medium fries now. Damn you Omeaka

 

[rotters]

It's not the dumbing down per se it's corporate greed and market research driven advertising. In essence your right, but its more of a greed thing in my opinion.

 

[THMRK]

Reality shows are far, far cheaper to make and have much broader appeal than other programmes on television. The same goes for (most) documentaries. High impact + low cost = bigger audience share and more money in the pockets of networks.

It's nothing to do with the intelligence of the audience. Demographics have been key to the success of every kind of television programme since the 1970s. The biggest demographic in terms of how profitable it is, is the 16-34 demographic. You can see a break down of the various demographics here, with a little explanation about reach and audience penetration.

Marketing also has a large part to play. It's much easier to market any kind of reality TV, be that something like The Only Way Is Essex right up to game shows and the like, than drama. Obviously it'd be silly to compare the two: most current reality TV reaches that transient 16-34 demographic, those who are much more likely to have the TV on the background than tune right in.

The current trend for reality television will reach saturation point, much like the sitcom did in the 90s, and will ultimately be replaced with something else. When that'll happen, or what'll replace it is anyone's guess though.

Also, creators don't cancel shows, networks do. Ratings are, of course, the biggest reason for this and shows like Firefly are classic examples of non cable networks not knowing how to market a particular kind of show. For reference also see NBC's Thursday comedy night, where Parks and Rec, Community and 30 Rock have trailed behind the likes of CBS' How I Met Your Mother, Two and a Half Men and The Big Bang Theory in audience share, which works out on average as something like 3million for NBC's against 20 million + for CBS. Largely this has happened because NBC have been unsure how to market those shows against their competition. Also, all three of those NBC shows are much more expensive to produce/buy (Community, for example, is owned by Sony, not NBC) than the more traditional sitcom fair like The Big Bang Theory.

Advertising around television shows is targeted but it's not a case of corporations not wanting their products advertised with certain shows. Yes, you wouldn't see make up or celebrity magazines advertised during something like Firefly (because it's a sci fi show aimed at men, so it's more likely to be something more like beer or cars or whatever) but that's always been the case. Much in the same way that life insurance and stuff like Wonga are advertised during daytime television because it's mainly unemployed and old people who watch it.

tl;dr - the type of audience has nothing to do with why shows are moved or cancelled. It's the size of audience, and reality TV simply has more viewers because it has better marketing. There's more reality TV because it's cheaper and easier to produce, can be spun off into other shows and has more commercial crossover. Adverts aren't destroying the quality of television. If anything, the quality of television is, on the whole, increasing because of pay for TV networks and every other network's drive to emulate their success.

 

[One]

No personal insults.We live in a part of the world with a free-market and democracy. If you don't like how a private company does something then either stop using their products/service or make your own company that does what you want.

Advertising is awful, Tivo realised this and capitalised on this, I no longer watch live television unless it's on the BBC or a sport. As far as advertising and the money interfering with the production of shows, well I think it's nonsense. Yes the big networks (fox, cbs, nbc, etc) still operate like this but it's not the only model out there. You get the premium channels that rely on subscriptions and have no ads such as HBO. Then you have the online streaming where advert blocking is very easy or places like Netflix where again you pay a subscription to remove advertising.

Networks such as Fox have a profit margin in mind. If they're not getting that profit then the show is no longer financially feasible and it gets binned, it's not unheard of for other networks to decide they think the show is profitable for them and pick it up.

p.s. Firefly is over 10 years old dude, I don't think it's going to get picked up by a different network.

 

[Omaeka]

McDonalds coffee is quite nice. I fancy a quarter pounder with cheese and medium fries now. Damn you Omeaka

I know, but who wants to go with a friend to get a coffee and have a chat at McDonalds? McDonalds is good when it's late at night and you're so hungry that you'll tolerate eating a burger that tastes like decomposing plastic... but trying to be a café now? I know it's all in the pursuit of profits but as you just said, you fancy a burger and fries right now, so why don't they find a way to do deliveries? That'd make more sense and probably more money then trying to become the next Starbucks.

It's not the dumbing down per se it's corporate greed and market research driven advertising. In essence your right, but its more of a greed thing in my opinion.

Well that has the same outcome in the end, surely there are some companies who could benefit from advertising to more than just brainless droolbags?

Dexter might not make it past season 8, why?

 

[ethan]

It's not the dumbing down per se it's corporate greed and market research driven advertising. In essence your right, but its more of a greed thing in my opinion.

This and the fact that your marketing decisions are constantly being spied on. I can't even go a day without Amazon sending me mails on the stuff I have previously looked at.

 

[One]

I know it's all in the pursuit of profits but as you just said, you fancy a burger and fries right now, so why don't they find a way to do deliveries? That'd make more sense and probably more money then trying to become the next Starbucks.

lolomaeka

If you invested all your money in McDonalds in 2007 not only would you completely avoid any ill effects from the financial crisis of the past 4 years but you'd actually more than double your money. I think they have their business under control.

 

[Omaeka]

tl;dr - the type of audience has nothing to do with why shows are moved or cancelled. It's the size of audience, and reality TV simply has more viewers because it has better marketing. There's more reality TV because it's cheaper and easier to produce, can be spun off into other shows and has more commercial crossover. Adverts aren't destroying the quality of television. If anything, the quality of television is, on the whole, increasing because of pay for TV networks and every other network's drive to emulate their success.

Why is Spartacus doomed and Dexter on the verge though if that's the case? They have millions of viewers and decent ratings and popularity across the board. Something must be going wrong somewhere for them to get canceled and it certainly isn't popularity. The only thing I personally can think of that would cause it, is companies not seeing an increase in profits comparable to their marketing pay out.

Stop moaning you idiot.

Pardon? Were you trying to completely render your entire post pointless by being an ass before you even got started?

We live in a part of the world with a free-market and democracy. If you don't like how a private company does something then either stop using their products/service or make your own company that does what you want.

The entire 'if you don't like it do something better' argument doesn't quite apply so well to things of this scale mate.

Advertising is awful, Tivo realised this and capitalised on this, I no longer watch live television unless it's on the BBC or a sport. As far as advertising and the money interfering with the production of shows, well I think it's nonsense. Yes the big networks (fox, cbs, nbc, etc) still operate like this but it's not the only model out there. You get the premium channels that rely on subscriptions and have no ads such as HBO. Then you have the online streaming where advert blocking is very easy or places like Netflix where again you pay a subscription to remove advertising.

Does Netflix actually offer shows now and not just movies? In the UK, do you get screwed and have to wait 6 months for American shows to air or do you get them when the Americans get them? As for networks, it's hard to know which ones have the actual decent shows. Starz have Spartacus, AMC has The Walking Dead, Showtime has Dexter and so on, I have no idea which British networks have any of those because I gave up trying to watch actual television years ago. I just pirate the shows as they release (least that way we get them at the same time!) and buy the boxsets when they eventually emerge to support the actual creators.

Networks such as Fox have a profit margin in mind. If they're not getting that profit then the show is no longer financially feasible and it gets binned, it's not unheard of for other networks to decide they think the show is profitable for them and pick it up.

p.s. Firefly is over 10 years old dude, I don't think it's going to get picked up by a different network.

I don't see why not though, the show has enough viral standing even to this day to make a more than viable show.

lolomaeka

If you invested all your money in McDonalds in 2007 not only would you completely avoid any ill effects from the financial crisis of the past 4 years but you'd actually more than double your money. I think they have their business under control.

Not seeing your point on this one, I'm well aware McDonalds are doing well but people have wanted deliveries for years, that'd make more sense then trying to emulate a cafe, who wants to go to a place like Maccies with screaming brats everywhere to enjoy a latte with a mate? No one.

p.s the cocky internet rudeboy act is pretty boring mate. If you can't act like an adult without petty (and comically ineffective) cheap insults, you should remove yourself from the thread. You wouldn't act like this on the streets to a complete stranger so drop the act.

 

[THMRK]

Why is Spartacus doomed and Dexter on the verge though if that's the case? They have millions of viewers and decent ratings and popularity across the board. Something must be going wrong somewhere for them to get canceled and it certainly isn't popularity. The only thing I personally can think of that would cause it, is companies not seeing an increase in profits comparable to their marketing pay out.

Dexter is finishing, it's not being cancelled. Also, it's on Showtime, a pay for TV network. Advertising has very little baring on the decisions around whether a show is cancelled on subscription TV channels. Pay for TV networks rely less on advertising and more on subscriptions.

Spartacus is also on a pay for TV network called Starz. Like Dexter, it's being brought to an end, not cancelled. Spartacus has been phenomenally successful for Starz, so it's definitely not a money thing.

EDIT: Incidentally, without pay for TV networks like HBO, AMC, Starz and Showtime, who are a lot less bound by public service remits in America, we wouldn't have had shows which are violent/explicit as stuff like Dexter and Spartacus.

 

[Omaeka]

Dexter is finishing, it's not being cancelled. Also, it's on Showtime, a pay for TV network. Advertising has very little baring on the decisions around whether a show is cancelled on subscription TV channels. Pay for TV networks rely less on advertising and more on subscriptions.

Spartacus is also on a pay for TV network called Starz. Like Dexter, it's being brought to an end, not cancelled. Spartacus has been phenomenally successful for Starz, so it's definitely not a money thing.

EDIT: Incidentally, without pay for TV networks like HBO, AMC, Starz and Showtime, who are a lot less bound by public service remits in America, we wouldn't have had shows which are violent/explicit as stuff like Dexter and Spartacus.

Well that throws the whole advert theory or whatever out of the window.

Whats the situation like for us? No idea how them shows are aired in the UK, don't think we have any of those networks?

 

[nicktay2605]

It's a bit of a generalisation to suggest that people of lower IQ watch the shows you mentioned in the first post. I don't think it would be unfair to suggest that they have a predominantly female audience, but that doesn't mean they are morons for viewing it. Maybe they are in your opinion, but I know a couple of extremely bright girls who watch things like Take Me Out, Big Brother, stuff I would consider complete **** and quite similar to the shows in your OP.

I wouldn't like to try to argue that Spartacus viewers are of a higher IQ either, it's not exactly the most challenging thing to follow ever, lets be honest. What would be fair to say is that Spartacus has a predominantly male audience, so adverts during that show are, if the advertisers are doing their job properly, designed to hit that male audience.

Further, the affect of advertising is extremely subtle and only influences people subconsciously. Very few people will watch an advert and get influenced by it then and there, but when they come to make their next purchase, that might be subconsciously affected by seeing that advert. A person's IQ may have a slight impact on how much adverts influence that decision, but I doubt IQ makes that much difference. I don't think shows being cancelled has anything to do with advertising to be honest, it's the quality or the concept of the program that matters most. If it appears to be doing well and hitting a large enough target audience, larger companies will want to advertise during the breaks.

 

[Omaeka]

It's a bit of a generalisation to suggest that people of lower IQ watch the shows you mentioned in the first post. I don't think it would be unfair to suggest that they have a predominantly female audience, but that doesn't mean they are morons for viewing it. Maybe they are in your opinion, but I know a couple of extremely bright girls who watch things like Take Me Out, Big Brother, stuff I would consider complete **** and quite similar to the shows in your OP.

I wouldn't like to try to argue that Spartacus viewers are of a higher IQ either, it's not exactly the most challenging thing to follow ever, lets be honest. What would be fair to say is that Spartacus has a predominantly male audience, so adverts during that show are, if the advertisers are doing their job properly, designed to hit that male audience.

Further, the affect of advertising is extremely subtle and only influences people subconsciously. Very few people will watch an advert and get influenced by it then and there, but when they come to make their next purchase, that might be subconsciously affected by seeing that advert. A person's IQ may have a slight impact on how much adverts influence that decision, but I doubt IQ makes that much difference. I don't think shows being cancelled has anything to do with advertising to be honest, it's the quality or the concept of the program that matters most. If it appears to be doing well and hitting a large enough target audience, larger companies will want to advertise during the breaks.

I know, what I said was an over exaggeration to push the point across but you're right. I have a friend who's obsessed with towie and I wouldn't actually consider her a droolbag but my point does still stand. As for Spartacus, yes, it is pretty easy to follow and has a lot of gore/action but the real charm is in the (somewhat inaccurate) historical lore and the way it portrays us as humans and the flaws of Roman society. Whereas the shows in question do nothing but highlight what is wrong with our actual society and they do it over, and over, and over, and over, and over. I have to tolerate enough complete morons in everyday life without having to see them on our T.V channels whenever I can be bothered to actually watch any.

I've actually resorted to watching Eastenders/Coronation Street, not that there is anything wrong with them but when the most stereotypical soaps humanly possible end up being the best things on, you know things are in trouble. Much prefer American T.V., although that's hardly a surprise as with most things, America is superior as usual.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

What do you think?

I think you are a TV racist who thinks what you watch is so much better than what other people watch.
I'm watching the latest Spartacus right now and it is also low intelligent mindless drivel but I love it.
What makes you think the Essex programme is for low intelligent people? Both my daughters watch it and one has a first in Sports Science and the other a 2:1 in Business studies so by your argument what they watch is more intelligent than what I watch because I haven't even got A levels.
I really hate people who think they are soooo much advanced because of the type of TV programmes they watch.

 

[wazza300]

shaaa aaappp

 

[Omaeka]

Education = intelligence? What a piece of paper says someone can do is more important than what they can actually do? Get off it.

 

[Nexus]

Well that throws the whole advert theory or whatever out of the window.

Whats the situation like for us? No idea how them shows are aired in the UK, don't think we have any of those networks?

The Networks sell their shows to as many foreign territories as they possibly can.
That's why you might have watched Friends on Channel 4, or a myriad of thousands of other examples.

There will also be various parent company agreements in place, for example with Fox shows on BSkyB.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Education = intelligence? What a piece of paper says someone can do is more important than what they can actually do? Get off it.

You are the one who is trying to make out that you are more intelligent for watching Spartacus than someone who watches the Essex programme.
You get off it.
All TV is mindless drivel and I watch loads of it (mainly documentaries).

 

[Omaeka]

The Networks sell their shows to as many foreign territories as they possibly can.
That's why you might have watched Friends on Channel 4, or a myriad of thousands of other examples.

There will also be various parent company agreements in place, for example with Fox shows on BSkyB.

Who has all the good american shows in the UK though?

You are the one who is trying to make out that you are more intelligent for watching Spartacus than someone who watches the Essex programme.
You get off it.
All TV is mindless drivel and I watch loads of it (mainly documentaries).

No I'm not at all though, I know I'm not particularly intelligent but I also know what **** T.V. is and what good T.V. is. I just thought it was bizzare that you'd think your daughters are more intelligent than you because they are studying something. I worked in a hospital for quite a while and some of the doctors and surgeons I dealt with, who may I add were capable of procedures like triple heart bypasses and brain surgery, came across like they didn't even know how to tie their own shoelaces. The biggest idiots are the educated idiots.

Btw I'm in no way shape or form calling your daughters idiots, but you shouldn't base someones intelligence off of whatever education they've had.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

No I'm not at all though, I know I'm not particularly intelligent but I also know what **** T.V. is and what good T.V. is.

What is it then?
David Attenborough or Big Brother?

I just thought it was bizzare that you'd think your daughters are more intelligent than you because they are studying something. I worked in a hospital for quite a while and some of the doctors and surgeons I dealt with, who may I add were capable of procedures like triple heart bypasses and brain surgery, came across like they didn't even know how to tie their own shoelaces. The biggest idiots are the educated idiots.

Btw I'm in no way shape or form calling your daughters idiots, but you shouldn't base someones intelligence off of whatever education they've had.

I absolutely 100% know education has got nothing to do with intelligence (it helps) but you are the one who thinks you are way better than them because you watch Spartacus and they watch a reality show. I find that very bizarre.

I work with Clinicians every day so know exactly where you're coming from on that point. I had one on Friday ringing me up saying that xrays I had sent to him had broke his computer.