FiveUS dog

In article , says...

"Bob Adams" wrote in message
...
In message , leon
writes
This is the response from five re the size of the dog on 5us:

Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding the DOG on Five US.

There are no current plans to stop using or reduce the size of the DOG
on Five US.

What email address did you use? I'd like to make them aware of my view!

Bob



And
--

Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
/* 1115 DVDs, 337 games, 264 CDs, 108 cinema films, 34 concerts, videos & news
/* shinobido, revolver, gary moore, devendra banhart, reincarnation, cerys

New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml
DVDfever Youtube Channel - http://youtube.com/user/DVDfever

Ian wrote:

In message , Paul Heslop
writes
Pyriform wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote:
It seems with this stuff there isn't an easy answer. The sky answer to
complaints was almost identical, only they actually claimed to have
proof that people like having onscreen garbage.

I think the proof is entirely in the heads of deluded, dimwitted TV execs.
I've yet to meet or communicate with anyone who thought DOGs were either
necessary or a good idea. People differ only in how irritating they find
them - from those who barely notice them to those who find them utterly
intolerable. Considering that people often become irate at discovering a
single dead or stuck pixel on their shiny new LCD TVs, it seems odd to
imagine that they would find a permanent, large, picture marring blob in the
corner of the screen in any way acceptable.

I'll put my complaint in to C5 (for all the good it will do), and I'll ask
them for references to peer reviewed research demonstrating that people like
DOGs. I won't be holding my breath.

Let us know if you get the same reply :O)

I contacted them on the day they started broadcasting the previews.

I'm still waiting for a reply.
--
Ian

Maybe they weren't set up properly then?
--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

Edster wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote in message

Edster wrote:

"Agamemnon" wrote in message


"Paul Heslop" wrote in message
...
Dom Robinson wrote:

Please pass that back to all relevant Five personnel."


Nicely put, but i think, like my rebuttal to sk's crap about that
damned red button on the movie channels I think your reply to them
will be ignored. Heh, they probably don't have a stock reply for more
than one statement or question re the DOG

My advice is DON'T WATCH IT, tell your friends and family not to watch it
and ask them to tell their friends and their friends friends and their
friends friends not to watch it and pass the message on and lets see how
long Channel 5 continues to insult the intelligence of their audience, when
they no longer have one.

They would just look at the lack of complaints and think everyone was
happy with it and think up some new ways to stop people from watching.

It seems with this stuff there isn't an easy answer. The sky answer to
complaints was almost identical, only they actually claimed to have
proof that people like having onscreen garbage.

The Scifi channel also claimed to have proof that people like all the
crap they have, but were unable to provide any further details. I
notice Sky 1 have stopped having pictures of Homer Simpson popping up
during every programme, but they are still advertising their HD system
mid-programme.

You would think that the best way to compete with channels that have
stuff all over the screen designed to stop you from watching the
programmes would be not to have all that stuff. Instant influx of
viewers who want to watch the programmes instead of just reading
various advertising messages.

It seems obvious they intend to make it impossible for folks to make a
nice clean recording without giving lots of free advertising for their
programs etc. Do you have the feeling we'll eventually be offered a
button to remove this stuff but at a price?
--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

In message , Paul Heslop
writes
Ian wrote:

In message , Paul Heslop
writes
Pyriform wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote:
It seems with this stuff there isn't an easy answer. The sky answer to
complaints was almost identical, only they actually claimed to have
proof that people like having onscreen garbage.

I think the proof is entirely in the heads of deluded, dimwitted TV execs.
I've yet to meet or communicate with anyone who thought DOGs were either
necessary or a good idea. People differ only in how irritating they find
them - from those who barely notice them to those who find them utterly
intolerable. Considering that people often become irate at discovering a
single dead or stuck pixel on their shiny new LCD TVs, it seems odd to
imagine that they would find a permanent, large, picture marring
blob in the
corner of the screen in any way acceptable.

I'll put my complaint in to C5 (for all the good it will do), and I'll ask
them for references to peer reviewed research demonstrating that
people like
DOGs. I won't be holding my breath.

Let us know if you get the same reply :O)

I contacted them on the day they started broadcasting the previews.

I'm still waiting for a reply.
--
Ian

Maybe they weren't set up properly then?

I sent it to ".
--
Ian

Ian wrote:

In message , Paul Heslop
writes
Ian wrote:

In message , Paul Heslop
writes
Pyriform wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote:
It seems with this stuff there isn't an easy answer. The sky answer to
complaints was almost identical, only they actually claimed to have
proof that people like having onscreen garbage.

I think the proof is entirely in the heads of deluded, dimwitted TV execs.
I've yet to meet or communicate with anyone who thought DOGs were either
necessary or a good idea. People differ only in how irritating they find
them - from those who barely notice them to those who find them utterly
intolerable. Considering that people often become irate at discovering a
single dead or stuck pixel on their shiny new LCD TVs, it seems odd to
imagine that they would find a permanent, large, picture marring
blob in the
corner of the screen in any way acceptable.

I'll put my complaint in to C5 (for all the good it will do), and I'll ask
them for references to peer reviewed research demonstrating that
people like
DOGs. I won't be holding my breath.

Let us know if you get the same reply :O)

I contacted them on the day they started broadcasting the previews.

I'm still waiting for a reply.
--
Ian

Maybe they weren't set up properly then?

I sent it to ".
--
Ian

Maybe they gave in eventually under the deluge of complaints, or were
still formulating their stock reply? :O)
--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:57:04 GMT, "leon" wrote:

This is the response from five re the size of the dog on 5us:

Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding the DOG on Five US.

There are no current plans to stop using or reduce the size of the DOG on
Five US. Station identity is increasingly important in the age of
competitive multi-channel television; as is promotion of certain programme
strands. We have purposely ensured that the current DOGs are very faint and
unobtrusive.

Nonetheless, we have logged your comments for the attention of all relevant
Five personnel. Also, your complaint will be noted in the quarterly report
to our regulator. Commercial television is regulated in the UK by Ofcom
(the Office of Communica tions).

If there is anything further we can help you with, please do not hesitate to
contact us.

Thank you for your interest in Five.


What is the issue with DOGs ? I've seen people moaning about them in
this group for ages and kept quiet up to now, I'm struggling to see
how something so innocuous causes so much angst.

Dominic Shields wrote:

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:57:04 GMT, "leon" wrote:

This is the response from five re the size of the dog on 5us:

Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding the DOG on Five US.

There are no current plans to stop using or reduce the size of the DOG on
Five US. Station identity is increasingly important in the age of
competitive multi-channel television; as is promotion of certain programme
strands. We have purposely ensured that the current DOGs are very faint and
unobtrusive.

Nonetheless, we have logged your comments for the attention of all relevant
Five personnel. Also, your complaint will be noted in the quarterly report
to our regulator. Commercial television is regulated in the UK by Ofcom
(the Office of Communica tions).

If there is anything further we can help you with, please do not hesitate to
contact us.

Thank you for your interest in Five.


What is the issue with DOGs ? I've seen people moaning about them in
this group for ages and kept quiet up to now, I'm struggling to see
how something so innocuous causes so much angst.

It may seem innocuous but think of it like noise pollution or light
pollution. It's the kind of stuff people keep quiet about until,
whoops there's so much of it you can't concentrate. We're not stupid,
and I doubt even the stupid need a badge in the corner of the picture
to tell them what channel they're on. So, why is it there but to spoil
recordings? Then you can take it to the extremes and have the ones
where a small icon in the corner suddenly unrolls and a banner for
some crap, which you probably already knew was on from the hundreds of
times this has happened previously, unfurls across the top of your
screen.

Keep schtum if you wish, but I'm sure even someone who thinks they're
innocuous would rather have a nice clean clutterless screen.

--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

Dominic Shields wrote:
What is the issue with DOGs ? I've seen people moaning about them in
this group for ages and kept quiet up to now, I'm struggling to see
how something so innocuous causes so much angst.

Let me ask you two questions:

1) Do you find DOGs useful (rather than merely inoffensive)?

2) If you bought a new TV, would you complain to the retailer if a corner of
the picture was marred by dead or stuck pixels?

In message , Dom Robinson
writes
In article , says...

"Bob Adams" wrote in message
...
In message , leon
writes
This is the response from five re the size of the dog on 5us:

Thank you for your recent enquiry regarding the DOG on Five US.

There are no current plans to stop using or reduce the size of the DOG
on Five US.

What email address did you use? I'd like to make them aware of my view!

Bob



And

Thanks. Complaint emailed to them both today.

"Dominic Shields" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:57:04 GMT, "leon" wrote:


....snip some generic claptrap from 5...

What is the issue with DOGs ? I've seen people moaning about them in
this group for ages and kept quiet up to now, I'm struggling to see
how something so innocuous causes so much angst.

I must admit that I didn't generally notice these graphics, but I'm still at
a loss to understand why the broadcasters seem to think they need them. I
certainly don't watch channels; I watch programmes. I'd be surprised if
there was even 1 percent who said otherwise. In any case all (or nearly all)
digital receivers will be able to show info about the programme and channel
at the press of a button.

However whilst watching Torchwood last night the BBC logo appeared right in
the middle of Capt Jack's forehead spoiling the scene and distracting me
from the contents of the show. I suspect after a few such occurrences one's
ability to tolerate these unnecessary additions will quickly reduce to
zero - hence the angst you see from so many people on here.

--
Paul Schofield