zlacker

Apple is quietly pushing a TV ad product with media agencies

submitted by ksec+(OP) on 2022-10-12 13:56:59 | 306 points 440 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩◪
25. takoid+M9[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 14:37:46
>>_track+F7
> I don’t have to dig through some torrent sites, download it, then stream it to the tv.

This is not the reality of piracy in 2022.

https://radarr.video/

https://sonarr.tv/

https://www.plex.tv/

◧◩◪
26. airstr+1a[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 14:38:15
>>_track+F7
At this point, I actually pay for Netflix + Hulu(+ESPN+Disney) + Amazon Prime + I get HBO Max with my AT&T plan otherwise would also have to pay for that one. In the past I have also paid, for a limited amount of time, for Apple TV, Paramount+, Starz, Cinemax, The Criterion Channel, FuboTV, BritBox and Peacock. I'm probably forgetting a few.

I'm fairly certain Comcast's cable package they keep spamming me costs less than those combined

Media consumption is expensive again. All we've done is move from the cable bundle with terrible content to a different set of un-/re-bundled channels where the slightly better content lives.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/10/hbo-max-d...

◧◩◪◨
36. Msw242+Ib[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 14:47:16
>>fullsh+o8
What do you do when you find out that you make more per ad-tier user than you do for ad-free user[0]?

The incentives go in the wrong direction from a UX perspective

[0] https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/hulu-makes-about-15-in-reven...

51. winter+de[view] [source] 2022-10-12 14:57:30
>>ksec+(OP)
20+ years now of not watching a single video ad (since the TiVo). I will never ever go back to that insanity. I'm unlikely to hoist the jolly rodger again as my internet connection is tied to my income. Honestly, I know that the day will eventually come when these parasites will eliminate ad-free streaming and ad-blocking on the web. At which point I will raise my middle finger as a flag and tackle my neglected reading list.

Obligatory Bill Hicks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHEOGrkhDp0

◧◩
78. Y-bar+4h[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:08:49
>>theGnu+Qc
If News+ is any indication, your outlooks are bleak:

> Why are there ads in Apple News Plus news feed? Just subscribed to Apple News Plus. I am surprised to see ads in the Apple News Plus feed. Please remove these ads for paying subscribers. I realize that ads in articles that Apple can't control, but it is insulting to have them in the feed itself.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252017203

◧◩◪
89. scarfa+si[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:14:34
>>zikdur+ve
That time was never

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33177999

◧◩◪◨
96. thakop+tj[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:18:03
>>scarfa+zf
Thanks for mentioning this. I’ll admit I believed the meme.

From a 1981 NYT article

> Although cable television was never conceived of as television without commercial interruption, there has been a widespread impression - among the public, at least -that cable would be supported largely by viewers' monthly subscription fees.

https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-inv...

◧◩
139. lstamo+aq[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:42:41
>>belval+Qg
Actually you can get Rick and Morty legally in Canada via StackTV on Amazon channels for $12.99/month if you’re an Amazon Prime member.[1]

You can also watch episodes in the Global TV app, but you do have to have a subscription to Global TV to watch those, though it is often included in basic packages that start at $25/month ($15 for Alt TV) as CRTC mandated that channels be made available a la carte with a cheaper “Starter” package.[2]

That said the cheapest (legal) way to get Rick & Morty is to record it yourself over-the-air for free given that Global is a nationally broadcast TV channel, for now. Edit: Actually, I’m not sure this is still the case.[3]

1. https://www.adultswim.ca/where-to-watch/

2. https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/television/program/alacarte.htm

3. https://blog.fagstein.com/2018/11/13/corus-asks-crtc-to-shut...

◧◩◪
154. kipcha+Ht[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 15:56:41
>>lp0_on+Lj
I think the argument would be that prior to advertising as we know it today, people bought things because they needed them, and at a substantially lower level of consumption. For example you might need a pair of work boots, walking shoes, and dress shoes. Advertisements for 19th century shoes generally focused on their features, like quality, comfort, fit or value.

Born from WWI's propaganda was the idea of using communication to convince someone of something against their interest or for your policy objectives. For example, all x are monsters and you should risk your life to go fight them, using emotional responses and conceptual associations. “make the world safe for democracy.”[1] After the war it was realized these same techniques could be used to make people buy things they didn't need. Shoes are often now sold by convincing you they will make you more athletic, cool or similar self image. As a result there is now no limit on the number of shoes that a person "needs".

This consumer culture[3], and was somewhat a conscious decision in response to the challenge faced by business from the ability to produce outstripping people's demands or overproduction. Consumers were trained via advertising, in order to keep production and growth humming, at the unseen expense of overconsumption. From Paul M. Mazur's :American Prosperity: Its Causes and Consequences" in 1928,

"Advertising is an educational force. If effective, desires increase, standards of living are raised, purchases are made; purchases create production, production creates purchasing power, and the circle can be made complete if desire is at this point strong enough to convert that power into actual purchases.

Of course there exists theoretically that danger point when consumption has reached its limit. Such a breaking point is probably non-existent.[2]

[1]https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-woodrow-wilsons-p...

[2]https://quoteinvestigator.com/2021/01/21/desires/

[3]https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/a-brief-history-of-consum...

◧◩◪◨
160. lstamo+5v[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:02:14
>>black_+ws
Oh the hostility is definitely still present despite (perhaps because of) the CRTC’s regulations. For example, Bell successfully lobbied the CRTC to mandate that you can only buy TV from your ISP if watching on a home ISP cable package. This doesn’t apply to Crave/Netflix/OTT, but if you want to a-la-carte buy a Global TV channel you’ll have to buy it via your ISP, often Bell.

There is definitely a need for things to change yet even in the land of the free (USA), there are talks of trying to “bundle” together OTT streaming as the next wave of getting you to pay more to watch the same content.[1]

There is some good news though. Often when you subscribe to internet there are limited two-year promotions that offer streaming TV at no extra cost. Unfortunately, these plans often don’t include PVR function and also don’t include the ability to skip commercials when playing on demand, but luckily a number of on-demand streaming methods can still be tricked by adblock such as Pi Hole, in my experience. Not all of them, of course.

1. https://www.wsj.com/articles/streaming-service-bundle-cable-...

◧◩◪◨
172. tim--+nw[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:07:46
>>Samuel+mu
Disney has never had a history of really being any good at physical media releases, but at this point it's starting to become a bit of a joke.

Even their 'higher end' 4k UHD media releases are missing features that Disney+ has, like Dolby Vision. https://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=showfull&id...

◧◩
189. kirykl+5z[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:19:30
>>menset+zq
They already had an ad product before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAd
◧◩◪
191. skulk+Cz[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:21:49
>>artifi+ky
I don't know how Apple sells media, but if you "buy" content on Amazon, you're still subject to licensing terms that Amazon negotiated, which often means you don't have permanent access to said content. Someone sued Amazon for this: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6882808-Caudel-v-Ama...
◧◩◪
194. mbesto+JB[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 16:30:56
>>matai_+vm
https://showrss.info/ + https://put.io/ is easy as hell
◧◩◪◨⬒
242. ask_b1+GO[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 17:26:37
>>andsoi+yJ
https://steamdb.info/graph/ Top 5 currently and Top 4 all time peak.

And outside Steam others like Fortnite, Candy Crush, Roblox, Club Penguin...

Many at the top here have a free-to-play model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_game...

◧◩◪◨
274. squeak+gV[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 17:57:36
>>scarfa+zf
> Then the first cable channels came along like MTV, Lifetime, ESPN, USA.

MTV was actually a ripoff of QUBE channel C-1 program "Sight on Sound" which didn't air advertisements the way we think of them. Instead record labels could pay to have their music videos prioritized or to run giveaway contests.

QUBE also lead to the creation of Nickelodeon (Which itself was ad-free for several years). QUBE channel C-3 "Pinwheel" was the first cable channel made for only young children, and was spun off into Nickelodeon when QUBE went defunct.

The QUBE T channels were just cable links to conventional OTA broadcast television channels (T for television).

QUBE C channels (C for community) did not have ad breaks. Instead there would be sponsored giveaways or sponsored shows which eventually lead to the current practice of infomercials. Except with QUBE the segments were live and viewers could push one of 5 buttons on the remote to interact with the program. For example in a sponsored cosmetics segment viewers could vote on whether the next topic would be one of 5 options, lipstick, mascara, etc. Sight on Sound would ask some questions about current viewer demographics (are you male/female. Are you in age group ABCDE. How many people are watching right now), the dj would say it was to play music matching the current demographic, but it was mainly collected to give metrics to sponsored segments or to wait for an appropriate time to play a sponsored segment.

But what most urban people considered "cable" at the time would be the QUBE P-channels. P for Pay. Unlike other pay channels at the time like HBO, the P channels were a monthly subscription (each), not pay per view. Notably, QUBE got into the news several times because of channel P-10, which aired softcore porn.

Also ESPN did not initially air advertisements during programming, only in between programs. But they also only had sports no one really cared about for the first few years. No major sports, no college games. But they did have highlights and some international sports.

https://youtu.be/7Fz1bSViIZw

The main reason early cable-only channels didn't have advertising is mainly because the subscriber numbers were so small there wasn't much revenue to be made targeting 5-10k viewers. Once subscriber numbers went up, and higher budget programming was in-demand (sports licensing is ridiculously expensive) ad breaks similar to OTA channels were introduced. But many of cable's early adopters bought into it on word of mouth, and word at the time was "no ad breaks!" It wasn't a goal of cable TV, just a side effect of the development.

It was only a few years, but there were a few years when cable tv had no ad breaks for the majority of urban subscribers. It's sort of like someone saying Netflix used to have pretty much every show and movie, and then pulling up stats from 2014 and beyond saying no they didn't.

◧◩
289. helsin+101[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 18:19:45
>>belval+Qg
> so to watch a 20 minutes animated show I’d have to take a +40$ subscription.

You can buy season 6 on Apple TV and Google play for $19 according to this site: https://www.justwatch.com/ca/tv-show/rick-and-morty/season-6

◧◩◪◨
293. fancyf+Y01[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 18:23:31
>>themit+5H
It's well-accepted in psychology/sociology that moral development extends beyond simply following the law, i.e. using the law as a stand-in for moral principles. E.g. in Kohlberg's stages of moral development[1], there is a post-conventional stage where an individual develops a moral code independent of laws, and views laws as a social contract that can be disobeyed if it violates his/her morals. Laws are a good guideline, but are not an absolute moral framework.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_o...

◧◩◪
330. dimitr+Uh1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 19:41:36
>>nscalf+FE
> The government has shown they're unwilling to

Have they? Or perhaps trash media is the bottom of their list of priorities? Maybe they are overloaded with cases and need more support? There are many more possible explanations than "shown they are unwilling"

You can take a look at some recent current and pending antitrust cases on the DOJ's website:

https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-case-filings?search_ap...

In fact there was just recently action taken against Disney, which forced it to sell of major parts of 21st century before it was allowed to proceed with the merger.

https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-case-filings?search_ap...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
337. scarfa+ak1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 19:52:46
>>Apocry+Gf1
Honestly, piracy for video games became less relevant because most of the game revenue comes from locked down platforms - mobile and consoles. Also, much of the revenue of from games these days come from in app purchases.

As far as iPod sales, I won’t editorialize

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ipod_sales_per_quart...

◧◩◪
352. fsflov+jx1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 20:52:28
>>andsoi+LK
How about https://puri.sm/products/librem-5 or https://pine64.org/pinephone?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲◳
353. scarfa+zy1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 20:57:21
>>Apocry+Rl1
Gaming revenue breakdown

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-gaming-proves-to-be-a-g...

As far as “bought digital music” vs music not bought from iTunes right before the iPhone came out, SJ himself said that most music on iPods were not bought from iTunes:

This was originally posted on Apple’s front page when Jobs was trying to convince the record labels to allow everyone to sell DRM free music (it happened a couple of years later)

https://macdailynews.com/2007/02/06/apple_ceo_steve_jobs_pos...

> Today’s most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
365. samatm+NC1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 21:10:45
>>promet+9S
> The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind any body but themselves.

Lysander Spooner goes on to expand this theme greatly.

Foundational essay, well worth a read: https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/spooner-no-treason-no-vi-t...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲◳⚿
374. Apocry+oH1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-12 21:27:45
>>scarfa+zy1
Perhaps I've over-credited the iTunes Store's impact on music piracy, so I will concede that point. But for whatever reason, after the revolutions unleashed by the iPod, and the subsequent rise of Spotify and other paid legal music streaming services, music piracy is just not as significant as it was in the decade. So either these technologies were instrumental to stopping it, or consumers just moved on for whatever reason. Perhaps the same will happen to movies and television piracy, once consumers get over services/platforms fatigue.

https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-the-beginning-of-musi...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
416. senko+8h3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-10-13 11:32:01
>>badpun+tV2
Apart from being inconsequential (copyright makes no distinction between products for entertainment or otherwise), this is also incorrect.

Here are just a few examples off the top of my head, to whet your appetite:

- The OG superhero story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Gilgamesh

- A fairly popular adventure story you might have heard about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey

- This one even has "comedy" in its name, if you needed convincing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Comedy

[go to top]