More Crappy legislation regarding skipping commercials

That's a matter of opiniuon, and I happen to disagree. Nova is often
very good, and the children's programing is excellent. I like Mark Russel,
and the arts based programming is sometimes great.

"Keeper of the Purple Twilight" wrote in message
...
In article , Kenny
wrote:

"Leslie A Rhorer" wrote in message
...

Don't try to tell me it can't be done, because HBO, Showtime,
Cinemax,
PBS, and others all do very well, thank you,

I wouldn't put PBS in the same catagory. They do list all of the
programs
sponsors prior to the begining of every program. 30+ years ago they
showed
a list of sponsors and read the company names. Then they started showing
company logos as their name was being voiced as a sponsor and over the
years
they have evolved to the point that one could argue that some of these
are
commercials.

Besides, the only things that PBS shows that are really worth watching
anyway are Red Green, Dr. Who and Red Dwarf.

--
"No urban night is like the night [in NYC]...here is our poetry, for we
have
pulled down the stars to our will."
- Ezra Pound, poet and critic, 9/18/1912, reflecting on New York City

"Tim Witort" wrote in message
5.201...
curmudgeon seemed to utter in
:

NEWS FLASH!!

Free TV has never been free!! Commercials pay for the content. No
commercials, no "free" tv. Too bad so sad, but stations and networks
gotta make a buck too. Or do you work for free?!

An honest question for the group...

If this hypothetical "pay one fee for TV and all advertising

I'm not suggesting one fee for TV. Quite the opposite. I am suggesting
all sports channels be removed from all cable and off air packages unless
one pays for them. 'Ditto network television. The same for hobby channels,
etc.

is removed from broadcasts" system came into be. Do you think
the quality of TV content would improve or degrade? On one

It would be very hard pressed to degrade, IMO. Much of the more popular
programming is not only disgusting, it is offensive and even destructive.
It panders to the lowest, basest, most despicable, and unacceptable of human
emotions and instincts, and it glamorizes those things against which we
should be fighting the hardest. There is nothing real or redeeming about
"reality" series. Donald Trump, Ozzy Osborne, and Paris Hilton are not
entertaining or even interesting, and they should be ignored with extreme
prejudice. Sex is a beautiful expression of our evolutionary heritage and a
fascinating topic of discussion, not a spectator sport and not an
appropriate weapon. It is also highly personal, not an appropriate means of
selling automobiles. Voyeurism is illegal for very good reasons. We
shouldn't encourage it 24 hours a day on the television.

hand I think, "If there are no advertisers paying more to
put their ads on the popular shows, what incentive do show
producers have to make high quality shows?" but on the other

The same incentive any artist has: the desire to produce art. What's
more, no one is suggesting the producers work for free. Movie production
companies certainly do not. They rely upon the sales of their products to
the public at large, not to an advertiser who cares nothing for the content.

hand I think, "If producers did not have to worry about winning
advertising dollars, they might make quality shows rather
than the prurient, 'popular' junk they make today."

I certainly would hope so, although I suspect the impact on the quality
of programming will not be vast. Some of the more expensive junk will fall
by the wayside, and some of the more expensive quality content will have a
little easier time - since the money originally wasted on the expensive junk
will now be available, but for the most part I think the impact on the
quality of the content will be moderate at best. The real benefit is *I*
won't have to pay for the junk, and the morons who do want to watch it will
have to pay for it.

The ONLY reason I have TIVO is to skip the commercials.


On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:45:02 GMT, SINNER wrote:

http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65704,00.html

Some Quotes:

...The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip
objectionable content -- like a gory or sexually explicit scene -- in
films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the
proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements
would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the
Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file
civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

..."This legislation enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support in
Congress. Many pieces of it already have unanimously passed one house
of Congress," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy wrote in an e-mail. "The
intellectual property industries are one of our leading national
exports, and it's approprate for the federal government to have a
role in protecting those sectors from rampant piracy."

End Some Quotes

Seems to be more towards DVD and Movie's but can TV be far off?

You watch ALL programming when it airs and never watch it later?

Before getting a DirecTV DVR, I watched TV programming recorded
on video tape and fast forwarded over the commercials. I haven't
watched live TV for more than 20 years.

Joe wrote in message ...
The ONLY reason I have TIVO is to skip the commercials.


On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:45:02 GMT, SINNER wrote:

http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65704,00.html

Some Quotes:

...The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip
objectionable content -- like a gory or sexually explicit scene -- in
films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the
proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements
would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the
Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file
civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

..."This legislation enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support in
Congress. Many pieces of it already have unanimously passed one house
of Congress," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy wrote in an e-mail. "The
intellectual property industries are one of our leading national
exports, and it's approprate for the federal government to have a
role in protecting those sectors from rampant piracy."

End Some Quotes

Seems to be more towards DVD and Movie's but can TV be far off?

Jack Ak said in a posting:
----"You watch ALL programming when it airs and never watch it later?

Before getting a DirecTV DVR,I watched TV programming recorded on video
tape and fast forwarded over the commercials.I haven't watched live TV
for more than 20 years."----


Reply:
That's all well and good for MOST (not all) TV fare.But speaking for
myself,I prefer to watch live sports AS IT HAPPENS.I do not like
recorded sports contests,due to the fact that somewhere along the line
some idiot is going to tell me the score or what happened rendering the
recording pointless.So,I watch ALL SPORTS LIVE.It irritates me
otherwise.

Next they will come up with a way to make us prove that we read an ad in a
magazine before we can turn the page.
--
Steven BerkHolz
Send to Domain TESCOGroup dot com, username SB

Note: you may also want to know that you should never send mail to:







"SINNER" wrote in message
. 130...
http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65704,00.html

Some Quotes:

...The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip
objectionable content -- like a gory or sexually explicit scene -- in
films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the
proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements
would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the
Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file
civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

..."This legislation enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support in
Congress. Many pieces of it already have unanimously passed one house
of Congress," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy wrote in an e-mail. "The
intellectual property industries are one of our leading national
exports, and it's approprate for the federal government to have a
role in protecting those sectors from rampant piracy."

End Some Quotes

Seems to be more towards DVD and Movie's but can TV be far off?

--
David

And what is this nonsense about Britain and license fees? Those fees
support public broadcasting over there; they have nothing to do with
commercials or lack of same on other outlets. Further, such license

As Robert Heinlein said, "A government supported artist is an
incompetent whore."

fees in the U.S. would be unconstitutional, as has been stated on the
several occasions that CPB/PBS advocates have tried to have such fees
enacted. The issue of license fees in the U.S. is a straw man.

Too true, but ad based programming is a defacto tax, albeit levied by
private enterprise rather than government. In this instance the distinction
is largely moot, if you ask me. We're all forced to pay the tax and no one
ever voted on it. Of course, the constitution regulates the government, not
private enterprise, but I can think of few things more in opposition to the
spirit of the US Constitution than ad based network programming.


Yes, I would rather pay a reasonable amount for ad-free TV than have to
sit through endless mounds of crap ads that don't address anything in

Amen.

which I'm interested. I don't care at all if the free-TV model
disappears. It matters nothing to me. Something better and more
useful to me will replace it.

Even if not, you've lost nothing, but gained the advertising dollars
spent without your consent. Personally, I can't find a down side.

IOt hasn't been 20 years, but it's been more than 5, for me. I almost
never watch live TV, whether it has commercials or not.

"Jack Ak" wrote in message
om...
You watch ALL programming when it airs and never watch it later?

Before getting a DirecTV DVR, I watched TV programming recorded
on video tape and fast forwarded over the commercials. I haven't
watched live TV for more than 20 years.

Joe wrote in message ...
The ONLY reason I have TIVO is to skip the commercials.


On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:45:02 GMT, SINNER wrote:

http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,65704,00.html

Some Quotes:

...The bill would also permit people to use technology to skip
objectionable content -- like a gory or sexually explicit scene -- in
films, a right that consumers already have. However, under the
proposed law, skipping any commercials or promotional announcements
would be prohibited. The proposed law also includes language from the
Pirate Act (S2237), which would permit the Justice Department to file
civil lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

..."This legislation enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support in
Congress. Many pieces of it already have unanimously passed one house
of Congress," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy wrote in an e-mail. "The
intellectual property industries are one of our leading national
exports, and it's approprate for the federal government to have a
role in protecting those sectors from rampant piracy."

End Some Quotes

Seems to be more towards DVD and Movie's but can TV be far off?