You know how commercials are played at louder volumes than the programming segments between which they are played. I can’t help but think this is done on purpose as a means for trying to make the commercials more affective advertisements. This is just one of the six major reasons I think internet-deployment of programming content will the business model of the future. Frankly, why most all the players in the TV commercial industry are not sprinting towards an internet-deployment model, is beyond me.
Reason 1: Relevant advertisements are ignored less
TV commercials that run between programming segments that I watch on Hulu.com are more relevant to me and potentially to ever other observer of the content, because we can tell Hulu.com which advertisements are relevant. Hulu.com records our feedback and tries to play advertisements that are relevant to me. For example, advertisements about children diapers are not relevant to me because I don’t have kids, even though many of other males my age who enjoy the same programming as I do, do have kids. Therefore, Hulu.com is better able to make commercials more effective advertisements because I watch and listen to them instead of leaving the room or muting the television during commercial breaks.
Reason 2: The automatic raising of TV commercial volume levels is annoying and leads to less exposure to TV watchers
This brings me back to the original thought that inspired this entry: how TV commercials are played at an annoyingly louder volume than the volume level I have set on my TV. What really angers me is that this annoyance is not only unnecessary but purposefully used by corporate TV executives and advertisers, who think this is a good strategy for making TV commercials more effective advertisements. The problem I have with the strategy is that it based on the belief that annoying the TV watcher is the best way to get them to do that which you want them to do (i.e. watch and listen to the commercial). I have never seen this kind of piss-off-the-customer-so-they-will-do-what-we-want-them-to strategy used so obnoxiously anywhere else in business.
Thus, if TV commercial advertising dollars are needed to finance television programming, then the annoying volume change and lack of relevance of commercials are two reasons for why TV is on the way out; because if advertisements are not effective–and they won’t be if nobody watches and listens to them–then traditional TV broadcasting businesses will be unable to make money from their creating and airing of programming. But there are three more reasons for why traditional TV commercials are not effective, and thus, for why I think the TV broadcast business model of old will be replaced by an internet-based content-deployment model.
Reason 3: Ability to satisfy a spontaneous desire to investigate one’s curiosity spurred by the advertisement
The third reason is the TV watcher’s ability to interact with the commercials in a way that benefits the advertiser while also benefiting the TV watcher, because he is able to click on the advertisement, investigate it, and then seamlessly return to the exact point in the programming after doing so.
Reason 4: Fans never miss programming, and re-watch programming more
The fourth major reason internet-deployment model is better than the antiquated broadcast network model is because the internet-deployment model will eventually allow lead to larger numbers of people watching commercial advertisements. This is simply because fans of a given show can watch programming from that show at times that fit their schedule. Not only will fans never miss any of their favorite show’s programming, but they will be able to re-watch programming whenever they want, thus increasing the number of advertisement impressions that the TV watcher is exposed to.
Reason 5: Sharing content with people is easy
Sharing content with more people should mean more impressions per advertisement. Therefore, the ease with which one can share online content with other people is another fundamental advantage over the “old TV”. To share online content with another person or a larger group of people, I have to–at most–email each person a link to the content or post the link one time to any of my social network profiles that people I know follow. Compare the amount of effort it takes to share a URL with multiple people to how hard I would have to work to achieve the same level of quality sharing under the existing TV-deployment model (i.e. First, I would have to know that before I watched the content that I wanted to share it with other people, so that I recorded the programming; and then, I would have to create and send out tangible media with the programming on it.) and it is almost incomparably more arduous.
Reason 6: Advertisers can track more effectively the effectiveness of their advertising dollars
This is because it is much easier to track how many, and which, TV watchers: 1) clicked on a commercial advertisement, 2) watched the advertisement in its entirety, 3) did or didn’t further investigate the advertised product, and even 4) purchased online the product. The only way for TV advertisers to gain this kind of information today is rely on TV watchers to use promotional codes that secretly tell the advertiser what advertisement and where the TV watcher saw it. This is simply is not nearly reliable a method for measuring the effectiveness of an advertisement, relative to using basic website and computer technology to track content viewers actions.