Skipping Commercials Is Stealing According To Turner Ceo


Recommended Posts

Posted 1 May 2002 11:05:57 UTC on 2600.com

It was inevitable. The broadcast industry is now describing people who skip over commercials as thieves! And with new technology like HDTV and insane laws such as the DMCA, they may very well make it stick in the future.

Jamie Kellner is the chairman and CEO of Turner Broadcasting, which encompasses everything from CNN to TNT and is a part of AOL Time Warner. On Monday, an interview with Kellner appeared in CableWorld.

In response to a question on why personal video recorders (PVR's) were bad for the industry, Kellner responded: "Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

While most programming on American TV is so insultingly bad that nobody would ever need to steal it in the first place, there is great danger in permitting this line of reasoning to become accepted. If this is seen as a "problem," expect legislation forbidding any device that allows consumers to skip the sacred commercial. Kellner, however, is not completely unreasonable. When asked if he considers people who go to the bathroom during a commercial to be thieves, he responded: "I guess there's a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you've got that only for one reason, unless you go to the bathroom for 30 seconds. They've done that just to make it easy for someone to skip a commercial." Heaven forbid.

The text of the entire interview can be found at

http://www.inside.com/product/product.asp?entity=CableWorld&pf_ID=7A2ACA71-FAAD-41FC-A100-0B8A11C30373. ://http://www.inside.com/product/produ...-0B8A11C30373. ://http://www.inside.com/product/produ...-0B8A11C30373.

Yeah right... It really does seem like we can't do anything nowadays without being accused of stealing.

/me wipes my backside after a good long hard dump on the head of Jamie Kellner (chairman and CEO of Turner Broadcasting).

Does this mean i'll be accused of stealing his air?

heh

Why can't it be made LEGAL to shoot people like this?

Sigh... where in the TV licence agreement state that you have to watch the comercials.

DCMA and other **** like this needs to be voted out and new laws that PROTECT US FROM STUFF LIKE THE DCMA from being made should be put in its place.

The DCMA and its newest encarnation only hurt consumers and developers.. Large companys abuse it to crush even small little developers that just want to find out how something works.. Why can't people in high places see that?

Jesus christ. I am learning Japanese and moving to Japan.. that seams to be a MUCH better place to live then America.

That's got to be the silliest thing I've ever heard.

"Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

You have to watch the spots eh? What if I want to get off my ass during a break and get some nachos or go take a pee? It's the same reasoning cos either way you aren't watching the advert.

They are getting paid the same amount whether you choose to watch the advert or not so they should quit their bitching.

I think he/she/it is just looking for a scapegoat for lost revenue and doesn't want to blame AOL

"Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

You gotta be sh*tting me. I am paying for that station(s) as it is through my cable bill, now I am forced to watch the crap commercials they air? How can skipping ads be stealing? I didn't purchase a license to watch the program so what am I actually stealing? Like what Wickedkitten said, they get paid regardless if we watch the ads or not. They are such lame retarts, they need a good beating. I betcha this person gets to watch all the shows he want with the ads removed.

(looking through my cable bill for and EULA)

I think he's missing the point that if you (the viewer) are paying for your TV (through a license or Pay TV) then you can watch what you want, as you are still paying for it even when you're not watching. Perhaps we should try to claim back money for when we're not watching? That's about 20 hours unwatched a day for me, rebate should be in the post Mr. Kellner?

Skip ads? what this sounds like the holygrail of TV

Im in Australia, you know how behind in technology we are, so whats this about skipping ads, please explain?

You mean we have the technology to skip ads, Ive heard of it but never thought it would ever come in.

I'm not stealing a damn thing. All of my television is digitally broadcast, and I pay a hefty bit of my hard earned (lol) payroll each month to Time Warner for it.

Just because I have no desire to see whats been added to Cheer detergent (now thats a cool product...doesnt it seem like they add some new chemical to it ever month? I bet it eats chrome off of bumpers) or how I'll be a better person for buying from Sears, that doesn't give anyone the right to call me a theif.

If they don't like the way their networks operate, maybe it's time for them to stop broadcasting over the free airwaves and look at another business model instead of placing blame on their customer base.

it's funny... it really is... I never once signed any contract or anything requiring me to watch ads.... acording to what's said, something as simple as flipping through channels are going to the bathroom during a commercial break is "stealing"

How about .... dont watch TV. Seriously. Everything you would want to watch is on the web. Any information you need, you can find better, more reliable sources on the net. TV is just for stupid people anyway. ;) [ouch -- I can see the bricks flying already]

Originally posted by primortal

I am paying for that station(s) as it is through my cable bill

Well you don't actually pay for the channels; you pay for the privilege to have them in your home. If you paid for every station they wouldn't have the ads at all, just like HBO. I wouldn't want to pay a few extra dollars per channel per month with 120+ stations.

What about websites? Are you stealing if you quickly scroll down, or look away, before the banner ad loads? If you close the popup before looking at it? If you tear out those annoying letter ad things in magazines? I think this guy should think things through before making an idiot of himself :ermm:

so is he saying if we turn on the TV during a comercial wer are required to watch that particular set of comericals even though we didnt watch the show? is that still stealing? Big companies are really starting to **** me off, they think only about profits and not about there customers. If we had a law against everything big companies thought was stealing we'ed all be in jail...

just my 2 cents

Greenmuncher

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Just the price of doing business. The scamble to pull as much from the web as possible is happening, and it's happening before a case like this changes how or what is legal do to with AI in terms of data harvesting. But even then as we've seen with the likes of Google who ignore cookie requests and just accept the fact they'll get fined, it's built into their business price model now. AI is here, its not going away. Their reward if any from the court case would be best suited to trying to incorprate AI or licence their end points as authentic human verified content. The problem is, as we've seen these same news papers are using AI themselves.
    • Which finger's fingernail are we talking about? I can see how not having this info can lead to massive differences in interpretation.
    • This Chinese company is reportedly developing a feature Apple and Samsung can only dream of by Hamid Ganji While companies like Apple and Samsung have been relatively conservative with their devices’ battery capacities in recent years, Chinese manufacturers have taken the competition to the next level by introducing significantly larger batteries. However, the latest report from China suggests that a local company may already be developing a smartphone with a whopping 14,000mAh battery. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claimed on Weibo that a smartphone maker is developing a device with a 14,000mAh battery. If true, it would be the largest battery ever used in a smartphone and could, in theory, provide up to a week of battery life on a single charge. The leaker did not reveal the name of the company behind the device, but there are some clues. This week, HONOR unveiled the X80 Pro Max in China with an 11,000mAh battery and 90W wired charging support. The company also launched the Honor Win in January, which packs a 10,000mAh battery. HONOR, a former subsidiary of Huawei, has a proven track record of developing smartphones with unusually large batteries. However, other Chinese brands, including Xiaomi, have also launched devices such as the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max with 7,500mAh batteries. Though Chinese users on Weibo also believe the company behind the new battery is HONOR. Interestingly, Digital Chat Station said the device with the 14,000mAh battery weighs around 220 grams, making it lighter than the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max (233 grams) and slightly heavier than the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra (214 grams). The iPhone 17 Pro Max currently packs a 5,088mAh battery in eSIM-only versions, while the Galaxy S26 Ultra features a 5,000mAh battery. Neither device is expected to see a dramatic increase in battery capacity in its next-generation successor. So when it comes to battery comparison, Chinese brands are unbeaten. HONOR smartphones are currently available in the EU, but the Chinese brand has no official presence in the United States due to restrictions imposed by the U.S. government.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      137
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!