http://inquisitr.disqus.com/enWed, 24 Dec 2008 16:02:14 -0000http://www.inquisitr.com/2207/are-content-restrictions-helping-kill-broadcast-television/#comment-4614266The endless, endless, always longer commercial breaks -- and not just that, but featuring obnoxious people and stupid themes -- make me turn the channel at ads here in the US, too. Plus (and this might tie in with the declining revenue which you reference), network TV-made shows just have this cheesey, overdone, overproduced look, feel, and background music about them. Just plain annoying. Even freaking made-for-TV movies and television sitcom reruns from the 1970s almost seem moodier and movie theater-quality, compared to current network American TV programming, sometimes.ItaloWed, 24 Dec 2008 16:02:14 -0000http://www.inquisitr.com/2207/are-content-restrictions-helping-kill-broadcast-television/#comment-1119401Duncan,<br><br>Interesting post. The facts are the most viewed video program is American Idol, a commercial network TV property. As it happens, that program continues to enjoy the position of earning the second highest priced spot rate after the Super Bowl. Your suggestion that linear or so-called appointment viewing is heading into life support there are a growing number of solutions that will assist the viewer in time shifting their favorites (e.g., TiVo, cable DVR, et al). In sum the play's the thing no matter the original platform. Perhaps that is the biggest shift of all. Place of origin matters not when distribution is enabled granting viewer control of the content. That is to say, commercial and non-commercial networks need to get out of the import business and into the business of export. The decades old best practices of getting viewers to tune in at a specific time are replaced by the new best practices of making the video available on viewer terms. What really matters is that they view the show not how, not when ( the sponsor issues including the practical end of time sensitive price and item selling, e.g., "Tomorrow only at Sears", yet to be worked out).<br><br>US commercial broadcast, collectively, has not yet pushed the regulatory grant of "safe harbor" (exceptions included SNL and the weekday late night talk shows). My sense is a commercial network could legally run any of the cable offerings you cited in the hours of safe harbor and do so with a strong and reasonable legal defense for affiliates to employ. However, commercial networks are not the deciders, they don't have an FCC license to protect, the system is structured in such a manner that the local affiliates, each individual station, is made to account for 100% of the responsibility for all programming broadcast. Keep in mind the FCC is, by charter, a complaint driven agency. In practice this means that unless and until they get a complaint the FCC does nothing about broadcast content.<br><br>Let me also put the non-broadcast and broadcast programming into another perspective.<br><br>The big viewing on non-broadcast is sports. The consistently highest rated of all offerings? Wrestling.<br><br>The biggest investment in programming is made year after year by commercial networks. There is no argument here, when you are watching commercial television you are watching the best television that money can buy.<br><br>HBO is as good as it gets on paid TV. At last count after decades of great marketing and as I would argue brilliant original programming they enjoy a small niche audience of 28 million subs.<br><br>Commercial broadcast TV is not doubt at another crossroads but my suggestion is don't count them out, not yet. <br><br>Duncan, you do a fine job. Keep up the good work. Best,dmartinThu, 07 Aug 2008 00:05:29 -0000