h a l f b a k e r yIt might be better to just get another gerbil.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
A tv network should use a bar on the side of the screen for contiuous ads. It should be without sound so people can ignore it if they wish and simply enjoy the programming. This would benefit the station by encouraging viewers. It would be good for the advertisers because, some of the time some of the
people will choose to look at the ads. If the station is responsible and limits the ads to being factual and informative, they and their sponsors might even find that people want informantion to buy what they need and want and if they get good information about good products, they will buy them. Everyone benefits. [Every 15 minutes change the side of the screen the ad is on to prevent the view from putting cardboard over the ads.
[link]
|
| |
How would this benefit the stations? Ad revenue from some small, passive, peripheral and silent space on the side of the screen isn't going to sell for much no matter how many viewers. |
|
| |
No thanx. Some shows on the music channels are already like this. Maybe not strictly advertising, but one or more "panels" with scrolling text info and other distracting stuff, leaving just a little frame for the actual music video shown. |
|
| |
I imagine the Bergman classic "The Seventh Seal" with split screen advertising for black capes, chess computers, health insurance.... |
|
| |
In answer to Bristolz. Advertising makes money by connection buyers with information about stuff they want to buy. The idea is to respect people and treat them considerately, giving them the info they need in a way that does abuse them. If a station advertised considerately with useful info, good programming [with no commercial interuptions that cause people to change the channel] they would have a large audience of people who trusted their ads and looked at them when it was useful to them and used the info because they trusted it. It is different that banners because you try to do it in a considerate way. |
|
| |
I think that that is ignoring the advertisers who spend a great deal of time and effort creating advertising that is enjoyable and for whom a :30 or :60 second slot is an opportunity to produce inspired and lovingly crafted works. It is these folks who advertise considerately, working hard to hook the viewer, rather than the stations who merely provide a broadcast commodity and ad-flight framework. |
|
| |
Thoughtless, uncreative shovelware advertisements are the real inconsiderate culprit no matter the medium or presentation. |
|
| |
Also, as for me, I would rather suffer a periodic interruption in programming than a continuous distraction. |
|
| |
Finally, I really doubt that side screen banner advertising space sales, despite the continuous nature, will match the revenue of the current model. I have nothing to back up the assertion other than an instinctive sense and the assumption that the interruptive nature constitutes a sizable portion of the value of advertising time. To be more distinct, it is the interruption of a proven audience demographic that generates some of the value. An easily ignored flutter at the edge of the screen seems far less valuable to me. |
|
| |
Now, combining the two models together, à la Oxygen, might do it but at the risk of annoying viewers. |
|
| |
Kind of like banner ads? They are not renowned for their success. |
|
| |
<*my* rant>I shelled out the extra bucks for a bigger screen t.v.; and then the advertisers push the picture back down to the smaller size. I think it's theft.</rant> |
|
| |