[mythtv-users] Guide Idea - Would You Trade Viewing Statistics (Privacy) for Guide Data?

Dean Collins Dean at cognation.net
Fri Jul 6 17:54:27 UTC 2007


No but it is a good business model - however MythTV just doesn't have
the penetration required.

I know we like to think Myth is important but go talk to people like
Shelly Palmer and people like that and they have never even heard about
it.

 

Regards,

Dean Collins
Cognation Pty Ltd
dean at cognation.net
+1-212-203-4357 Ph
+1-917-207-3420 Mb
+61-2-9016-5642 (Sydney in-dial).

 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: mythtv-users-bounces at mythtv.org [mailto:mythtv-users-
> bounces at mythtv.org] On Behalf Of Brian Wood
> Sent: Friday, 6 July 2007 1:27 PM
> To: Discussion about mythtv
> Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] Guide Idea - Would You Trade Viewing
Statistics
> (Privacy) for Guide Data?
> 
> David Brodbeck wrote:
> > On Jun 30, 2007, at 5:09 AM, Jake Vickers wrote:
> >> Me personally? I don't care of they know I watch Mythbusters,
> >> House, and
> >> How It's Made, and that my wife records Britcoms and the Starter
> >> Wife.... As long as I can still record them.
> >
> > I agree.  Actually, in a way I'd see it as a good thing.  If TV
> > networks know what shows I like, maybe they'll be more likely to
keep
> > them around instead of scheduling more stuff I hate. ;)
> 
> TV is a strange business, as those why pay the bills are not the
> consumers of the product.
> 
> What counts is not "what you like", but rather what the sponsor
> perceives  will give him the most "bang for the buck".
> 
> Unfortunately, the average MythTV user is above average in
intelligence,
> and generally has far better taste than the "average" viewer. To put
it
> another way, there are far more stupid idiots in the world than smart
> people, and sponsors need to cater to the majority, and the lowest
> common denominator.
> 
> I suspect that even if each and every MythTV user reported precise
> preferences on content, and every programming executive was totally
> aware of that information, it would make not one whit of difference in
> what's on TV.
> 
> It's also the case that garbage programming is far cheaper than decent
> stuff, often not only costing a station nothing but actually being
given
> to them for free, in exchange for running the "self-integrated"
> commercials. In the case of network programming the station is
actually
> paid to run the programming, and "programs" are simply to fill up the
> space between commercials, and maintain a certain program/ad ratio.
> 
> It's like a newspaper, where the size of each day's edition is
> determined by how much advertising has been sold, and "news" is added
> only to keep the news/ad ratio high enough to maintain the second
class
> mailing permit.
> 
> Both TV and other media are advertising machines, not news or
> entertainment vehicles, the ultimate goal being simply to make money.
> Desirable programming is aired only to increase ratings, and thus
> advertising rates.
> 
> Once you understand that, a lot of what seems odd makes perfect sense.
> 
> It sucks, but it's true.
> 
> BEWW
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list