Some time ago we mentioned somewhere the amount of advertising shown on UK TV. I recall that Richard, who was unaware of the sneaky and little publicised change to the guidelines, thought it was about six minutes per hour. It was at the time actually about twelve minutes per hour. Recently I thought I'd noticed an increase so I timed a few segments. It seems that Channel 5 (the only one I've timed) is now broadcasting sixteen minutes per hour at peak times - four blocks of four minutes each. I wonder how high it can go before people actually rebel against it, and if we want to rebel what can we actually do?

Do what I (and a lot of others) do -- tape the show and watch it at your convenience, forwarding through the commercials.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
Do what I (and a lot of others) do -- tape the show and watch it at your convenience, forwarding through the commercials.

Or watch the BBC

quote:

Or watch the BBC

And have them peeking in my windows to make sure I had a license? No way!

Actually, we can get BBC America televised newscasts now.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:

quote:

Or watch the BBC

And have them peeking in my windows to make sure I had a license? No way!

Actually, we can get BBC America televised newscasts now.

Is that "peeking in the windows" story a myth that is currently being aired in the USA? I remember reading it somewhere else recently. It's nonsense, of course.

It's good to learn that it's now possible to get decent televised news in the USA now; I have previously suffered severe "news withdrawal symptoms" whenever I visit the USA.

To answer your original question, Bob, I think 16 minutes is over the top, but now you've piqued my interest. I am going to start timing to see where we stand on that.

Oh, and our public television (WTTW) doesn't have ads here.

quote:

Oh, and our public television (WTTW) doesn't have ads here.

How is that funded?

I was interested to discover over Christmas, when I stayed with my brother and his family, that the UK children's channel, The Disney Channel, doesn't show ads, although it's obvious that the programmes are made for a channel with ads. They last 25 minutes, and have breaks about 10 minutes in when they show a trailer for another show. I assume the US version does show commercials? I wonder why the UK version doesn't? They have another channel, Disney XD, that does show ads, as does its rival, Nickelodeon.

Out of curiosity, what is the total running time, including ads, for an episode of MASH in the US? (Assuming that it's still running on some channel in syndication.)

I recently bought the boxed set and discovered that the running time without ads is a mere 22 minutes per episode.

BBC America is a commercial cable station with ads (in the USA).

WTTW is a PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) member station. PBS is a non-profit corporation that receives part of its funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is a non-profit corporation that receives its funding from the US Federal government. PBS member stations also rely on viewers ("like you") to voluntarily donate money and increasingly corporate donations. These latter, in recent years, have expanded from a mention of the name of the corporate funders to what look suspiciously like ads run in between shows.

quote:

BBC America is a commercial cable station with ads (in the USA).

To be frank, it's not the advertisements per se that I find the problem with US news programmes. In the UK, ITV and other commercial stations carry advertising and still provide good news coverage. I prefer the BBC but am happy to watch ITV if the timings suit better. Of course, at present the advertising on UK commercial channels is minimal (ITV's main evening News at 2200 is a full half hour programme with no advertising - I suspect that most US commercial channels have far more.

I might have been unlucky over the years in my various hotels' channel choice, but I never found a US news programme - with or without advertisements - that had good international news coverage. Some hotels have BBC World, which is pretty good - although it spends to much time on interviews and analysis for my liking. BBC America I haven't yet seen; I must try to watch it the next time I'm over - not until next autumn, I suspect.

BBC America does show BBC World News and BBC World News America (link). I'm not sure what the differences are, because I do not watch news programming on TV. (I do listen to news on the radio, during my commute, mostly on PBS, NPR (National Public Radio), or PRI (Public Radio International), non-commercial stations. There I have access to BBC World News. I am not 100% sure, but I think that the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) regulates the minutes per hour of ads on broadcast TV.

So far as I can see from the link, BBC World News America is part of BBC World News - presumably that part which is deemed to be of interest to US viewers. The full BBC World news is not available in the USA as a separate channel.

I see that BBC America has a rather eclectic list of programmes. I do hope that American who watch "Friday Night with Jonathan Ross" do not imagine that his programme is regarded with anything like favour with the "thinking classes". Overpaid, over-opinionated and over-exposed would fairly describe "Jonafon Woss". Sadly many of our best programmes do not seem to be aired - and many of our rubbish ones are.

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:
at present the advertising on UK commercial channels is minimal

I may be misunderstanding the word minimal here. Channel 5 is a commercial channel and 16 minutes per hour is almost 27%, not my idea of the word at all.

I shall today conduct the experiment of timing the other two major commercial channels.

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:
I do hope that American who watch "Friday Night with Jonathan Ross" do not imagine that his programme is regarded with anything like favour with the "thinking classes". Overpaid, over-opinionated and over-exposed would fairly describe "Jonafon Woss".

Or to put it another way, one of Britain's most popular presenters with the largest viewing figures of any chat show host in the country, extremely knowledgeable regarding popular modern culture (especially film), and a generally genial - though sometimes too juvenile - television personality.

One man's meat is another man's poison.

I did read your posting, Bob, and was awaiting your results. If what you say is correct, then C5 is in breach of the OFCOM regulations, which state:

"...//4. Subject to paragraphs 5 to 8 below, time devoted to television advertising and teleshopping spots on any channel in any one hour must not exceed 12 minutes..." and a) on public service channels time devoted to television advertising and teleshopping spots must not exceed:
i) an average of 7 minutes per hour for every hour of transmission time across the broadcasting day; and
ii) subject to (i) above, an average of 8 minutes an hour between 6pm and 11pm;
b) on other channels time devoted to television advertising and teleshopping spots must not exceed an average of 12 minutes of television advertising and teleshopping spots for every hour of transmission across the broadcasting day, of which no more than 9 minutes may be television advertising.

"...//5. During programmes broadcast by the national Channel 3 licensee, the amount of time permitted for television advertising and teleshopping spots between 6am to 9.25am may be averaged across the week..." and

"...//8. Teleshopping windows must be at least 15 minutes long: a) on public service channels, teleshopping windows may be scheduled only between midnight and 6am; and b) on other channels, there are no limits on the number or scheduling of teleshopping windows...."

So far as I can see, none of the exemptions cited would apply. You can read the whole regulation here - http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/ifi...dv/tacode_072009.pdf

So 12 minutes is the maximum (including shopping spots) and, during normal programming, only 7 minutes. I reckon that 7 minutes is close to minimal. Was your C5 experiment during a shopping slot?

quote:

Or to put it another way, one of Britain's most popular presenters with the largest viewing figures of any chat show host in the country, extremely knowledgeable regarding popular modern culture (especially film), and a generally genial - though sometimes too juvenile - television personality.

Juvenile is surely the word for his antics. If what you say about his popularity is correct, it is a sad reflection on the values of those who support him.

Sadly much of the BBC's output these days seems to be aimed at juveniles; I can no longer watch "Top Gear" since the schoolboy behaviour of Jeremy Clarkson and his gang irritates me so much that I can't see past the childish pranks to the useful motoring information. No doubt you will be able to tell me that he is also hugely popular.

It was between 17:35 and 18:35 on Tuesday. There were three slots of four minutes and ten seconds each. Each contained a short station advert (for forthcoming programs) and three minutes fifty seconds of product advertising). The fourth slot was four minutes and was half and half station advertising and product advertising. That makes it 13:30 of product advertising.

I will check the other channels later.

Not every program on television has to be suitable for every viewer. Personally I like Ross's movie reviews and generally don't care for his interviews. Clarkson doesn't interest me because motoring doesn't interest me. On the other hand the recent, extremely juvenile (infantile, even), program by his partner-in-crime James May, did appeal. In it he built a full size house from Lego, ran a child's model railway for ten miles and entered a garden made entirely of plasticine flowers at the Chelsea Flower Show.

The point is that, in the case of Ross for example, many more people disagree with you than agree with you. This of course does not make you wrong but it does put you in the minority. I don't know what programs you like to watch but I expect many people would criticise them for the exact opposite reasons that you criticise the programs they like. While being popular does not necessarily make things good, nor does it make them bad. Similarly being perceived as "high-brow" by the "intelligentsia" also does not make things better.

You can't seem to bring yourself to acknowledge that things you don't like have any worth.

My point remains that one man's meat is another man's poison.

And by the way, Top Gear is one of the most popular programs on TV even without my watching it.

quote:

Out of curiosity, what is the total running time, including ads, for an episode of MASH in the US? (Assuming that it's still running on some channel in syndication.)

I recently bought the boxed set and discovered that the running time without ads is a mere 22 minutes per episode.

That's the regular running time for such an episode AT THE TIME IT WAS MADE. I am not certain but since then the number of comercials and time spent showing them has increased. The FCC imposed a limit on commercials on some programming but with a big technicality. You can run 2.5 minutes of commercials but then have to return to the program. But there is no set period you have to show the returning show and in some cases the return is only long enough for someone to make a 15-second announcement of some kind, then the next round of commericals start.
By the way, you have to be careful buying DVDs made from cable shows on US TV. Deadwood, which was a western based on actual events in the town, ran over the hour-long format by several minutes in its first episode. As a result, the climactic gunfight which occurred at the end is totally missing from the DVD. The first hour ends abruptly, then the second episode begins with the characters discussing the event. I'm happy that I only rented it.

quote:

Originally posted by Proofreader:
You can run 2.5 minutes of commercials but then have to return to the program. But there is no set period you have to show the returning show and in some cases the return is only long enough for someone to make a 15-second announcement of some kind, then the next round of commericals start.

I remember being very surprised the first time I saw TV in the US by adverts being shown both before AND after the closing credits of a show.

Also, the networks can squeeze extra ad time out of a show, by minimizing the show's end credits to half the screen (the lower half) and running ads in the upper half.

Every one of those breaks, I've noticed, also has approximately fifteen seconds of "program sponsor" advertising (in this case for one of those companies that buy your "unwanted" gold) top and tailing the break so that's another thirty seconds that probably slide by the regulations. When you take that out and also the short bits of station advertising they may well be just bang on the twelve minute limit. Of course they are adverts just as much as any others and the fact that they are paying to sponsor the programs shouldn't exclude them from counting but I'll bet it does.
There are so many ways round the regulations they might as well not exist at all.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BobHale,

quote:

Originally posted by zmježd:
Also, the networks can squeeze extra ad time out of a show, by minimizing the show's end credits to half the screen (the lower half) and running ads in the upper half.

Ours don't do that, but they often minimise the credits and run trailers for other shows in the main part. Presumably that means that they can get straight into the ads in the minimum time.

but they often minimise the credits and run trailers for other shows in the main part

Ours mostly run what's coming up, too, but I swear I've seen ads in those places, too. Maybe not.

quote:

While being popular does not necessarily make things good, nor does it make them bad.

Quite so. Popularity does not necessarily equal quality. Bud Light is the best-selling beer in the world; in the UK Carling, Foster’s, Stella Artois and Carlsberg occupy the first four slots. All rubbish in the opinion of many knowledgeable beer drinkers.

Sadly you can't make your product popular simply by making it well.

That Jonathan Ross's programme is crap in many people's opinion will not affect its popularity with many others.

quote:

Bud Light is the best-selling beer in the world; in the UK Carling, Foster’s, Stella Artois and Carlsberg occupy the first four slots. All rubbish in the opinion of many knowledgeable beer drinkers.

Knowledgable beer drinkers or those whose taste buds have atrophied?

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:

quote:

While being popular does not necessarily make things good, nor does it make them bad.

Quite so. Popularity does not necessarily equal quality. Bud Light is the best-selling beer in the world; in the UK Carling, Foster’s, Stella Artois and Carlsberg occupy the first four slots. All rubbish in the opinion of many knowledgeable beer drinkers.

Sadly you can't make your product popular simply by making it well.

That Jonathan Ross's programme is crap in many people's opinion will not affect its popularity with many others.

I never cease to be amazed at your ability to take the exact opposite point to the one intended from just about anything that is said.

quote:

Knowledgable beer drinkers or those whose taste buds have atrophied?

Knowledgeable beer drinkers. Those with atrophied taste buds might just as well drink Bud Light since they wouldn't be able to taste anything and wouldn't realise that Bud Light is similar in taste to making love in a punt. Of course, they would still get the dyspepsia and headaches associated with drinking chemical fizz - but some people are just masochists.

quote:

I never cease to be amazed at your ability to take the exact opposite point to the one intended from just about anything that is said.

If you didn't mean that popularity does not necessarily make things good, why did you make that suggestion?

It is a fact that the popularity of anything usually has little to do with its quality. In marketing terms all products and services become more or less popular by a combination of four aspects: the product itself; the price of the product; the availability of the product; the promotion of the product. Of those four factors, promotion is frequently the most important. The power of promotion is immense - although most people are unaware of just how much they are influenced by it. Bottled water costs more than petrol and is the same product as the water that comes out of our taps. But billions of gallons of it are sold every year - simply though the power of promotion.

The popularity of Jonathan Ross is a result of his immense promotion; anything that gets sufficient exposure is likely to become well-known. That he should have been sacked for his (repetitive) disgraceful behaviour on air is the opinion of many; that he wasn't is a sad reflection on the BBC and its falling standards. It's interesting to contrast Ross's treatment with that of the avuncular and popular Frank Bough who, in 2002, was sacked for consorting with a prostitute - regardless of the fact that he broke no laws and involved no others - and certainly didn't boast of his sexual exploits on live TV. In just a few years the BBC's standards have slipped to such a degree that Ross's (far worse) shenanigans did not receive the same penalty. Of course, this fall in standards might be why Frank Bough, although not forgiven and awarded a multi-million pound salary as is the case with Ross, has at least been allowed to appear briefly this year on BBC 4.)

It is to the credit of the broadcast regulator that the BBC was fined £150,000 pounds for one of Ross's obscene transmissions; it is to the BBC's discredit that it paid the fine out of its licence fee income and not from Ross's pocket.

People's standards vary; my standards are that I do not approve of highly paid public figures (the more so when I contribute to their salaries) making obscene remarks about others in the media. Others have different standards, as it their right; I do not have to agree with them.

I meant that neither popularity nor one man's opinion necessarily make things BAD.

quote:

I meant that neither popularity nor one man's opinion necessarily make things BAD.

Nor good. We agree.

It would be a grand thing if the majority opinion were always the right opinion; sadly, as history frequently proves, this is often not the case.