Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

exstreamist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 462 posts

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#141

Post by chris_va »

scrollaway wrote: post #24
sigzero wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ALL shows have product placement. Some more blatant than others. You can't get around that.

Product placement in series and movies really break my heart, because it plain and simply taints the piece forever. When it's released, sure, okay, so you do your product placement and get some extra cash to finance the series. Fine. But now, your series which hopefully is good enough to still be watched 20 years, 30 years from now has characters randomly bringing up how they drive an Audi and did you see that builti…

Heh, it gets better:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jun/22/new-technology...

... for some definition of better.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#142

Post by zhengyi13 »

pfranz wrote: post #108
megaman22 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of an inversion of who's leading things, but kids television and the toy industry have always gone hand in hand. Ninja Turtles and Power Rangers and HeMan were cartoons before they were toys (I think...) but it was all about the merchandising.

He-Man was an action figure made by Mattel. TMNT started as a comic book, but from what I understand was a parody of popular things; Teenagers, Mutants, Ninjas...not sure why turtles were thrown in there. TMNT didn't get gain popularity until they started making action figures.

I hadn't ever thought of TMNT as being a parody, at least not in original Eastman and Laird form - I missed most of it, but parts of it were pretty dark, particularly Raphael's character IIRC.

I got introduced to it by way of Palladium's adoption of the world/setting as an RPG, who expanded the world with a whole bunch of amazing sourcebooks that never went anywhere near the silliness of the later incarnations involving "COWABUNGA DUDE!".

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#143

Post by scott_karana »

niftich wrote: post #138
pesfandiar wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why Netflix doesn't add a "random content" button. That's one of the appeals of TV versus Netflix that could be replicated very easily. Something more akin to changing channels like "random cartoon" or "random comedy" would remove one last obstacle in the way of converting cable subscribers.

The 'random' button would interfere with their aggregate viewership tracking and recommendation algorithms. When the viewer appears to select a particular show to watch, you can have reasonable faith in the viewership numbers. If the platform were to offer a random choice, the fact that the resulting view was not organic would need to be tracked separately. Conversely, you'd want a better way of figuring out whether…

I'm sure they have Referrer metrics, and could add a "from Random" flag.

The UI could even continue doing separate random programs, but allow the watcher to say "Keep Watching this", locking in their choice and making it a "discovered" show.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#144

Post by JohnTHaller »

scarface74 wrote: post #129

Cue the "I don't even own a TV crowd".... 97% of American Households own a television. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/business/media/03televisi... Then right behind them the "I don't subscribe to cable crowd and I don't understand why people do" 75% of households still have cable or satellite. http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/24/a-stunning-number-of-ameri... And I'm one of the 25% that don't subscribe to cable but…

I own a television but it's never used as a 'television'. It's a screen with an Xbox connected on which I have Netflix, YouTube, Hulu, and games.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#145

Post by dexterdog »

jjeaff wrote: post #117
nostrademons wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect regular programming isn't getting dumber, the alternatives are just getting smarter. When I look at the crap I watched as a kid in the 80s (which included a good amount of 70s reruns), basically all broadcast TV today is far superior. But the competition for broadcast TV isn't "no competition" now, it's the Internet, and computer games, and Netflix. The entertainment industry has been blown wide open by the…

One thing that is certain is that there are more commercials now. If you watch an episode of The Big Bang Theory sans commercials, you will notice that it is only 17 minutes long! And that includes the 60 second intro. So 13 minutes of commercials for 16 minutes of actual content. No chance I'll be going back to regular TV.

If you're watching it in syndication it's probably either cut or sped up (or both) to squeeze in even more commercials. The intro and credits combined are about a minute on that show as most 30 minute shows are.

I don't complain about the speeding too much as I watch most shows are 1.5x and cut out the commercials so a show with 18 minutes of content takes 12 minutes.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#146

Post by blacksmith_tb »

pesfandiar wrote: post #126
DubiousPusher wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think TV remains popular with certain people largely out of ease of use. You can just turn it on and you don't have to make a decision about what to watch. It's always there. Also, changing would require learning something new. People genuinely find learning to have a level of discomfort so they avoid it. https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/03/learning-hurts-your-...

I wonder why Netflix doesn't add a "random content" button. That's one of the appeals of TV versus Netflix that could be replicated very easily. Something more akin to changing channels like "random cartoon" or "random comedy" would remove one last obstacle in the way of converting cable subscribers.

Seems like a problem that could be solved with an addon for Chrome and FF, at least...

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#147

Post by eat_veggies »

chris_wot wrote: post #53
kleiba wrote: post #35

I live in a 'Netflix free' home -- I watch as many commercials a year as a any kid in a 'Netflix only' home. It's not clear to me why the article assumes that not having Netflix means you're consuming commercials.

That makes no sense. Kids who watch Netflix get zero ads. Kids who watch commercial television are bombarded with ads.

PBS makes great content with zero ads, aside from a five second blurb about "our sponsors and viewers like you" between shows. They also broadcast over antenna, so you don't even need a cable subscription to watch it (and conveniently, if you only have antenna, you're spared from all the garbage and only get PBS + local news).

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#148

Post by labster »

jjeaff wrote: post #117
nostrademons wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect regular programming isn't getting dumber, the alternatives are just getting smarter. When I look at the crap I watched as a kid in the 80s (which included a good amount of 70s reruns), basically all broadcast TV today is far superior. But the competition for broadcast TV isn't "no competition" now, it's the Internet, and computer games, and Netflix. The entertainment industry has been blown wide open by the…

One thing that is certain is that there are more commercials now. If you watch an episode of The Big Bang Theory sans commercials, you will notice that it is only 17 minutes long! And that includes the 60 second intro. So 13 minutes of commercials for 16 minutes of actual content. No chance I'll be going back to regular TV.

To be fair, the commercials are the best part of watching The Big Bang Theory. Much better to spend a few minutes imagining how cool I would be if I just owned Product X rather than see a nerd minstrel show with an annoying laugh track.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#149

Post by andrewprock »

neals wrote: post #5

I accidentally watched some TV the other day. Having not seen any regular programming for at least a year, I was amazed at how much ... dumber it has become. Also, why did we sit through so many commercials for so long? It feel a little like a twilight zone episode, where we sit there watching a box telling us what to buy.

It's important to remember that the percentage of time devoted to commercials has been increasing over time.

1950s: 13% Pre-cable: 18% Pre-web: 22% Pre-Youtube: 24% Now: 30%

As alternative forms of media have become available, the value per viewer hour has decreased, so the total amount of time devoted to commercials has increased.

Re: Kids in ‘Netflix Only’ Homes Saved from 230 Hours of Commercials a Year

#150

Post by aviv »

l33tbro wrote: post #133
aviv wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like watching someone come down from a high. Technically they are doing just that. They get pretty intense, very demanding, can't handle the calmness and relatively (to the stupid show they just watched) quiet environment. And they know it too. Both my kids express that finishing watching shows on the iPad doesn't make them feel good. They're very aware of it. Now that it's nice out they would rather skip it alt…

How do they go with reading? Seems like a balance between stimulation and calm.

They love reading. Going to the library to return and find new books to read is one of their favorite activities.
Post reply on HN