6 ms·

If advertising ever intrudes on streaming the way it did on cable, I'll just transition out of watching TV altogether. I don't care near as much about keeping

If advertising ever intrudes on streaming the way it did on cable, I'll just transition out of watching TV altogether. I don't care near as much about keeping up with the zeitgeist as I used to. Maybe I'm just getting old.

etrautmann 7y ago
Yep, exactly. I refuse. I’m not sitting through any ads.
- pmiller2 7y ago
  More importantly, I’m not paying to sit through ads.
BurningFrog 7y ago
The TV zeitgeist is gone. People used to all watch the same shows at the same time.That made it the thing everyone had in common. Now TV is more like reading books. Everyone does it n their own time. It's still a big things, but it doesn't create a nationwide community. On top of this, you're also getting old :)
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  If you heard about Game of Thrones or Westworld or Stranger Things, or most recently, Tiger King, you'd realize this is very much still a thing for a large population. Weekly shows of certain types have massive speculation and plot discussion crowds with podcasts and analysis channels. Then there's a second viewership wave created by all the memes. Netflix's just drop the whole season model has cost them a lot in public discussion and hence hype, some of their shows are now released in a weekly format to better capture the hype cycle.
  - ygjb 7y ago
    I that because of the hype cycle, or is that because they have distribution and creative partnerships with other distributors?
  - bovermyer 7y ago
    Yeah, but I no longer care. Twenty years ago, or ten years ago even, I would be adamant about keeping up with the latest series. Now, though? I don't care about "tha memes." I don't care if I'm current in my analogies. I want to take care of the people I care about, and experience things that enrich my life. Other people can care about memes and such, and I don't think any less of them for it. Not that they need my validation. But my own world revolves around different suns now.
    - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
      You don't care, but "the TV zeitgeist is gone" wouldn't really be a true statement, in a general sense. The hype of popular TV shows in our culture is very much active today, and it's actively influencing the ways TV shows are distributed and released.
  - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
    > If you heard about Game of Thrones or Westworld or Stranger Things, or most recently, Tiger King, you'd realize this is very much still a thing for a large population. This isn't the same thing. In the 1990s, everybody watched The Simpsons. Even the people who hated it still watched it so they could complain about it. It was on broadcast TV so everybody had access to it. And Friends, and Cheers, and so on. Game of Thrones is on HBO. If you have Netflix and not HBO, it's not there. Stranger Things is on Netflix. If you have HBO and not Netflix, it's not there. A lot more people watched Friends than Game of Thrones, because Game of Thrones was less available and had much more competition. You can find a website full of fandom about Game of Thrones, but you can find a website full of fandom about Battlestar Galactica. Passion and popularity are not the same. Popularity is what matters to the zeitgeist. It's not a matter of being able to find a place where all the Game of Thrones fans hang out and whinge about the last season, it's about being able to go into a room full of normies and make a reference to last night's episode and expect nearly everybody to get it. Which isn't really a thing anymore.
    - jarjoura 7y ago
      People had watch parties the moment episodes dropped for GoT. Bars would even air episodes in later years. Most of the world watched it together, both legally and illegally. It was definitely the same thing.
      - kortilla 7y ago
        GoT was in 10-20 million in final season worldwide. Seinfeld finale was 70-80 million in US alone. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-may-16-ca-50143-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-may-16-ca-50143... The numbers don’t even compare. With Seinfeld that’s literally 1 in 5 people in the US. GoT is what, maybe 1 in 100?
        silveroriole 7y ago
        And Friends, Simpsons, Seinfeld etc were things whole families watched together (depending on the kids’ ages of course). Families are not watching GoT and Westworld together en masse. TV shows filled with violence and boobs just aren’t going to be ‘everyone’s seen it’ shows like tamer ones, even if it feels to 20-year-olds like ‘everyone’ has seen them.
  - finnthehuman 7y ago
    >this is very much still a thing for a large population No, it's so radically different that while there is still zeitgeist related to TV, it's not wrong to say the "tv zeitgeist" is dead. Following a TV show used to be even more in the moment than following sports are today. Either someone saw last night's game, or they didn't and you can't have a meaningful conversation with them. They might catch up watching the highlight reel but conversations will be shallower, and talking about one game becomes near-irrelevant by the time the next game airs. These days TV shows have the zeitgeist pattern of a recent video game release. Everyone works through the release at different paces, conversations are bounded by seeing how caught-up everyone is before getting into details, and the material has long enough shelf life that conversations can happen with months - or years - between different conversation participants seeing it.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - msla 7y ago
      After a certain point, the more well-off could own a VCR and record off TV; that is, time shifting, which is something Universal made a Federal case out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting Incidentally, the practice of time shifting is a reason VHS caught on and other home video formats didn't: LaserDisc didn't offer time shifting at all, so it wasn't even in the running here; as a result, its pitch wasn't as compelling. Betamax did, but its tapes only held one hour to begin with, which isn't enough for a sports game or a TV movie. It was only arguably of higher quality on the TVs of the era, and the fact its time shifting capability was half of what VHS could offer in the same time period made it a less attractive option. (Both Betamax and VHS increased recording times as the format war wore on. However, after a certain point, merely being the entrenched winner has an impact on how the competition goes.)
  - jarjoura 7y ago
    Arguably Game of Thrones could be the last series to ever capture the attention of the entire world at the same time. Everyone I know watched it, all ages, and all different genre fans. Bars used to play the episodes to a packed crowd. It was truly epic. I don’t think these other series you listed are anywhere close to the level GoT captured. They win awards and have big budgets and fans spread the word, but still nowhere near.
    - slfnflctd 7y ago
      > all ages A lot of parents I know would not be at all comfortable allowing children under the age of 14 to watch this show (and for older kids only on a case-by-case basis) due to its incredibly violent & sexual content, horrific rapes depicted in detail, and extremely graphic sadism across the board. Many adults wouldn't begin to consider watching it for these reasons. Sometimes I wish I hadn't.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      If anything, I think GoT turned people away from getting invested into TV shows especially over long seasons due to its nonsensical ending.
  - BurningFrog 7y ago
    TV is still important, and the shows you mention are big. But it's very far from how things were, say 20 years ago. An interesting question is what the zeitgeist is now? I have two potential answers: 1. Nothing. The worlds has diversified on the net, and most people focus on their own smaller interests. 2. In terms of what everyone is talking and thinking about, my best answer is, unfortunately, Donald J Trump.
dylan604 7y ago
In the worst cases of cable/broadcast advertising, at least the content creators could dictate when the ads should be played. Sites like YouTube, just decided by algorithms when to place an ad based on time so you get ads in the middle of sentences. The streaming apps for cable channels also include ads just like watching it live. In these formats, they make it where you cannot skip ahead past the ad breaks, so it's even worse on streaming
- caf 7y ago
  Yeah that "ad in the middle of a sentence" thing annoys me, particularly because surely Google of all places has the ML chops to figure out how to place an ad at a natural break point based on the sound track!
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  I think it was less dictating, and more of being aware beforehand. The shows of TV era all have a pretty distinctive way they're cut, to have breaking points for ads. It gets especially noticeable today, when you're most likely to be re-watching them on an ad-break-free streaming service. On the other hand, apparently there is a way for the YouTube creators to dictate where ad breaks will happen. I've seen at least two videos in which the person speaking said "and then YouTube will show you an ad right about... NOW"; lo and behold, an ad shows perfectly timed to when the speaker announces it.
titzer 7y ago
Old? I feel like a dinosaur because I still watch shock DVDs. Still no ads. No DRM. No funky software needed, though, TBH, the bits are encrypted. Not sure how long optical media lasts, but I am hoping these things last a few more decades.
- scarface74 7y ago
  DVDs don’t have DRM????
  - flo123456 7y ago
    They do. But it’s been broken for 20 years or so.
- rollingbarreler 7y ago
  I believe CDs and DVDs used organic compounds for their data layer, which begins physically rotting and destroying the data later Later disks like M-disc type DVDs and Blu-ray don't use living components and don't really age
  - titzer 7y ago
    Printed CDs and DVDs have nothing but plastic and aluminum. If you are referring to CD-R(W) and DVD-R(W), these use phase change materials, the exact composition of which I am not sure. https://volga.eng.yale.edu/teaching-resources/cds-and-dvds/methods-and-materials https://volga.eng.yale.edu/teaching-resources/cds-and-dvds/m... Also remember organic != living. Organic is basically hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen and carbon chains in molecules. They vary greatly in their durability and may or may not be useful to carbon-based life.
- swilliamsio 7y ago
  Your DVDs don't have unskippable anti-piracy ads and ads for movies that released decades ago?

etrautmann 7y ago

Yep, exactly. I refuse. I’m not sitting through any ads.

pmiller2 7y ago
More importantly, I’m not paying to sit through ads.

BurningFrog 7y ago

The TV zeitgeist is gone. People used to all watch the same shows at the same time.That made it the thing everyone had in common. Now TV is more like reading books. Everyone does it n their own time. It's still a big things, but it doesn't create a nationwide community. On top of this, you're also getting old :)

ocdtrekkie 7y ago
If you heard about Game of Thrones or Westworld or Stranger Things, or most recently, Tiger King, you'd realize this is very much still a thing for a large population. Weekly shows of certain types have massive speculation and plot discussion crowds with podcasts and analysis channels. Then there's a second viewership wave created by all the memes. Netflix's just drop the whole season model has cost them a lot in public discussion and hence hype, some of their shows are now released in a weekly format to better capture the hype cycle.
- ygjb 7y ago
  I that because of the hype cycle, or is that because they have distribution and creative partnerships with other distributors?
- bovermyer 7y ago
  Yeah, but I no longer care. Twenty years ago, or ten years ago even, I would be adamant about keeping up with the latest series. Now, though? I don't care about "tha memes." I don't care if I'm current in my analogies. I want to take care of the people I care about, and experience things that enrich my life. Other people can care about memes and such, and I don't think any less of them for it. Not that they need my validation. But my own world revolves around different suns now.
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    You don't care, but "the TV zeitgeist is gone" wouldn't really be a true statement, in a general sense. The hype of popular TV shows in our culture is very much active today, and it's actively influencing the ways TV shows are distributed and released.
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago
  > If you heard about Game of Thrones or Westworld or Stranger Things, or most recently, Tiger King, you'd realize this is very much still a thing for a large population. This isn't the same thing. In the 1990s, everybody watched The Simpsons. Even the people who hated it still watched it so they could complain about it. It was on broadcast TV so everybody had access to it. And Friends, and Cheers, and so on. Game of Thrones is on HBO. If you have Netflix and not HBO, it's not there. Stranger Things is on Netflix. If you have HBO and not Netflix, it's not there. A lot more people watched Friends than Game of Thrones, because Game of Thrones was less available and had much more competition. You can find a website full of fandom about Game of Thrones, but you can find a website full of fandom about Battlestar Galactica. Passion and popularity are not the same. Popularity is what matters to the zeitgeist. It's not a matter of being able to find a place where all the Game of Thrones fans hang out and whinge about the last season, it's about being able to go into a room full of normies and make a reference to last night's episode and expect nearly everybody to get it. Which isn't really a thing anymore.
  - jarjoura 7y ago
    People had watch parties the moment episodes dropped for GoT. Bars would even air episodes in later years. Most of the world watched it together, both legally and illegally. It was definitely the same thing.
    - kortilla 7y ago
      GoT was in 10-20 million in final season worldwide. Seinfeld finale was 70-80 million in US alone. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-may-16-ca-50143-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-may-16-ca-50143... The numbers don’t even compare. With Seinfeld that’s literally 1 in 5 people in the US. GoT is what, maybe 1 in 100?
      - silveroriole 7y ago
        And Friends, Simpsons, Seinfeld etc were things whole families watched together (depending on the kids’ ages of course). Families are not watching GoT and Westworld together en masse. TV shows filled with violence and boobs just aren’t going to be ‘everyone’s seen it’ shows like tamer ones, even if it feels to 20-year-olds like ‘everyone’ has seen them.
- finnthehuman 7y ago
  >this is very much still a thing for a large population No, it's so radically different that while there is still zeitgeist related to TV, it's not wrong to say the "tv zeitgeist" is dead. Following a TV show used to be even more in the moment than following sports are today. Either someone saw last night's game, or they didn't and you can't have a meaningful conversation with them. They might catch up watching the highlight reel but conversations will be shallower, and talking about one game becomes near-irrelevant by the time the next game airs. These days TV shows have the zeitgeist pattern of a recent video game release. Everyone works through the release at different paces, conversations are bounded by seeing how caught-up everyone is before getting into details, and the material has long enough shelf life that conversations can happen with months - or years - between different conversation participants seeing it.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - msla 7y ago
    After a certain point, the more well-off could own a VCR and record off TV; that is, time shifting, which is something Universal made a Federal case out of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting Incidentally, the practice of time shifting is a reason VHS caught on and other home video formats didn't: LaserDisc didn't offer time shifting at all, so it wasn't even in the running here; as a result, its pitch wasn't as compelling. Betamax did, but its tapes only held one hour to begin with, which isn't enough for a sports game or a TV movie. It was only arguably of higher quality on the TVs of the era, and the fact its time shifting capability was half of what VHS could offer in the same time period made it a less attractive option. (Both Betamax and VHS increased recording times as the format war wore on. However, after a certain point, merely being the entrenched winner has an impact on how the competition goes.)
- jarjoura 7y ago
  Arguably Game of Thrones could be the last series to ever capture the attention of the entire world at the same time. Everyone I know watched it, all ages, and all different genre fans. Bars used to play the episodes to a packed crowd. It was truly epic. I don’t think these other series you listed are anywhere close to the level GoT captured. They win awards and have big budgets and fans spread the word, but still nowhere near.
  - slfnflctd 7y ago
    > all ages A lot of parents I know would not be at all comfortable allowing children under the age of 14 to watch this show (and for older kids only on a case-by-case basis) due to its incredibly violent & sexual content, horrific rapes depicted in detail, and extremely graphic sadism across the board. Many adults wouldn't begin to consider watching it for these reasons. Sometimes I wish I hadn't.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    If anything, I think GoT turned people away from getting invested into TV shows especially over long seasons due to its nonsensical ending.
- BurningFrog 7y ago
  TV is still important, and the shows you mention are big. But it's very far from how things were, say 20 years ago. An interesting question is what the zeitgeist is now? I have two potential answers: 1. Nothing. The worlds has diversified on the net, and most people focus on their own smaller interests. 2. In terms of what everyone is talking and thinking about, my best answer is, unfortunately, Donald J Trump.

dylan604 7y ago

In the worst cases of cable/broadcast advertising, at least the content creators could dictate when the ads should be played. Sites like YouTube, just decided by algorithms when to place an ad based on time so you get ads in the middle of sentences. The streaming apps for cable channels also include ads just like watching it live. In these formats, they make it where you cannot skip ahead past the ad breaks, so it's even worse on streaming

caf 7y ago
Yeah that "ad in the middle of a sentence" thing annoys me, particularly because surely Google of all places has the ML chops to figure out how to place an ad at a natural break point based on the sound track!
TeMPOraL 7y ago
I think it was less dictating, and more of being aware beforehand. The shows of TV era all have a pretty distinctive way they're cut, to have breaking points for ads. It gets especially noticeable today, when you're most likely to be re-watching them on an ad-break-free streaming service. On the other hand, apparently there is a way for the YouTube creators to dictate where ad breaks will happen. I've seen at least two videos in which the person speaking said "and then YouTube will show you an ad right about... NOW"; lo and behold, an ad shows perfectly timed to when the speaker announces it.

titzer 7y ago

Old? I feel like a dinosaur because I still watch shock DVDs. Still no ads. No DRM. No funky software needed, though, TBH, the bits are encrypted. Not sure how long optical media lasts, but I am hoping these things last a few more decades.

scarface74 7y ago
DVDs don’t have DRM????
- flo123456 7y ago
  They do. But it’s been broken for 20 years or so.
rollingbarreler 7y ago
I believe CDs and DVDs used organic compounds for their data layer, which begins physically rotting and destroying the data later Later disks like M-disc type DVDs and Blu-ray don't use living components and don't really age
- titzer 7y ago
  Printed CDs and DVDs have nothing but plastic and aluminum. If you are referring to CD-R(W) and DVD-R(W), these use phase change materials, the exact composition of which I am not sure. https://volga.eng.yale.edu/teaching-resources/cds-and-dvds/methods-and-materials https://volga.eng.yale.edu/teaching-resources/cds-and-dvds/m... Also remember organic != living. Organic is basically hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen and carbon chains in molecules. They vary greatly in their durability and may or may not be useful to carbon-based life.
swilliamsio 7y ago
Your DVDs don't have unskippable anti-piracy ads and ads for movies that released decades ago?