OCTOBER 1, 2009

I have four kids at home. My life schedule after work is a blur of activities, logistics, dishes, homework and mediation of disputes that last all the way until the last kid is stymied once again after he thought he figured a way to stay up past his bedtime. On a weekly basis, it is a schedule truly worthy of a NASA super computer to figure out. So watch TV in prime time… are you kidding? No chance.

Yet, I’m from the TV Generation… we grew up with sitcoms, dramas and now reality shows. I was bred to watch TV and spent much of my adult life working in 24-hour TV news at CNN. I’m in the 24-54 demographic for Pete’s sake… I am TV’s best friend! But life has changed and so have our schedules and so has technology. I don’t know what is taking so long and why others don’t see this all coming together like I do. So, let me put it this way, I know what I want went it comes to watching television and it suddenly dawned on me the other day that soon I will get it.

It’s really quite simple: I want to watch what I want to watch, when I want to watch it on whatever device that I choose. I want that device to be two-way, wireless, handy, with a killer screen, with charged and long lasting batteries where applicable and constantly capable of connecting to the news sites, entertainment sites, social networks, app stores, ebay and I’ll throw in Google Earth because, well, it’s cool. Is that too much to ask?

Yet I don’t have that today. Or don’t I? I already pay iTunes/NBC $1.99 for every episode of Law & Order, which I watch at my convenience on my iPod touch and rarely in prime time. I can also go to NBC.com and watch a missed episode there. I have the Verizon FIOS service at home, which brings a host of services into my house on one thin strand of glass. And that’s my point. It’s already one pipe to the service providers such as Verizon. It’s me and my way of looking at the world that divides that pipe into TV, phone and internet service.

You have heard of IED’s in Iraq… well how about IAD’s at home? Internet Assimilation Device - is there any question that in perhaps less than 5 years a TV will be little more than another outlet to display a connection to the internet and all the world it opens up? Honestly, it will be easier to find the programs I want to watch that way. Will anyone ever need a TV Guide again?

The truth is that very shortly there is likely to be little difference between the capabilities of the 3-inch iPhone screen, 6-inch Kindle screen, 10-inch Netbook screen and 75-inch home theatre screen. They will all draw content from the same locations and give me the same choices of information, entertainment and two-way interaction.

Anyone see it differently?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

JULY 15, 2009

We’ve posted several times here on Undercurrents about Verizon FiOS - and we’ve talked even more times about using social media and other media channels (TV, newspaper, etc.) in tandem. Verizon recently announced a new feature for its FiOS home media DVR that conveniently brings the two together in one set-top box. Adam Ostrow at Mashable explains some of the new capabilities:

Verizon FiOS TV is adding Facebook and Twitter integration, as well as several other social media options, to its service. Similar to the integrations we’ve seen on the Web, this allows you to update your status on either network when watching a given show or event and also see what your friends or the larger social media community is saying about it.

In addition to this functionality, Verizon FiOS customers will be able to access what are essentially big screen, simplified versions of Twitter and Facebook. For example, with Twitter, you can search and view currently hot topics, and with Facebook, you can view friend’s photos.

I applaud Verizon for taking steps to transform the consumer’s TV-watching experience, but as Adam also alludes to in his post, aren’t we already doing this? I’m already using Twitter and Facebook while I watch TV, albeit via either my laptop or Blackberry. Verizon is obviously targeting the technologically savvy here (I’m assuming that this won’t recruit a new wave of Twitter or Facebook users) - and I think most of the people in that group are already participating in social media as they watch. I initially thought these new features were intriguing, but the more I think about it, beside making Twitter’s trending topics look a whole lot bigger on my TV, this doesn’t seem to add anything to my experience.

What do you think? Will this feature prove to be useful - or will it join the FiOS weather, sports score, and horoscope widgets as another fancy add-on I never use?

For more on the service, check out Verizon’s demo video:

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

JULY 14, 2009

This past weekend I attended a wicked out of town wedding in New Hampshire (Congrats Chandra!) and was almost completely offline for three whole days.  I came back to a Google Reader full of blog posts to read, Facebook statuses to catch up on, and Twitter conversations to browse. Nothing unusual except for one minor detail, season six of “Entourage” premiered Sunday night and our hotel didn’t have HBO! I was okay missing the premiere and watching it a day late. The real problem was being online Monday dodging all the landmines in the form of spoilers the blogosphere, my friends on Facebook, and the people I follow on Twitter had left for me. It doesn’t help that I’m a fan of “Entourage” on Facebook too. The wall was inundated with comments after the show aired. Everyone was talking about what the guys of “Entourage” were up to and what they thought of the first episode. “Entourage” fans have been patiently waiting since last November for the new season and had plenty to say when they found out Vince was getting his driver’s license, E might move out, and Loyd was threatening to leave Ari.

It’s nearly impossible not to stumble upon a spoiler when it’s commonplace to share your experiences - sometimes immediately - through social media. People are watching TV, attending concerts, going to movies, all while connected to social media. Laptops are accessible from the couch and handy Facebook and Twitter applications are available on cell phones. It’s an addiction! Don’t get me wrong, sometimes it’s nice being in the loop, but when it ruins the anticipation months of waiting brings, social media becomes a spoiler!

[Comments(2) »] [TrackBack »]

MAY 12, 2009

Sometimes when I’m catching up on my DVR’d programs, I catch a commercial or a scene from a show and think, “that’s New Persuasion.”  An example: after taking in a lot of my favorite new shows this season, I realized that they all shared a common theme - perhaps another sign of the rapidly changing landscape of business affairs, consumer behavior, and the activities of our everyday lives.

All four of my favorites, including, FOX’s “Lie to Me,” ABC’s “Castle,” CBS’s “The Mentalist,” and FOX’s “Fringe,” employ outside consultants or professionals of an unrelated industry to help solve problems.  For example, on “Lie to Me” a slew of clients, including government agencies like the FBI and CIA, hire “The Lightman Group,” a group of quirky deception experts (masters at reading body language), to get the truth out of people to get answers and solve crimes.  “Castle” depicts a mystery novelist who tags along with a New York City police detective, calling up the characters and plot twists of his stories to anticipate criminal behavior and crack cases.  In “Fringe,” an FBI special agent partners with a “mad” scientist and his son to solve and usually help victims of strange and supernatural occurrences.  And “The Mentalist” enlists the help of an independent consultant with a knack for observation to help the California Bureau of Investigation find out “who done it.” 

You won’t find any capes, or the ability to fly, or special weapons among this cast of characters, but don’t be fooled - these are society’s new superheroes:  average, everyday people. The presence of multiple primetime shows with similar plot structures reveals to me that audiences want to see unlikely-but-skilled individuals save the day.  Perhaps this is yet another example of society moving towards more of a “back to the basics”mentality.  We don’t want to be dazzled by superhuman, otherworldly heroes. In fact, they’re kind of scary. We prefer people who look like us, using their brains and skills to help solve problems.  It’s a return to ingenuity, elbow grease, and creativity, instead of fantasy-world saviors who don’t really exist.

Given our current challenges - the international war on terror, global warming, and an economic recession - people seem to be looking for practical, real-life solutions.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

MARCH 11, 2009

Television is always more interesting when there’s a feud going on, don’t you think? Not a fictional feud, but real life drama, like the current battle between CNBC and The Daily Show.

If you happened to have missed the rant by Rick Santelli (on-air editor for CNBC and host of “The Rick Revolution/Chicago Tea Party“) on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade last month, you missed quite a show. From my view, the rant appeared to be completely staged, a well-planned gimmick designed to bring some attention to Santelli and CNBC. I’m not the only one to suspect that, although Santelli has denied the accusations. Regardless of the real motive, the clip did indeed become the buzz of the day, eventually reaching The White House and garnering Santelli an invitation to appear on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

But that’s when things got interesting. After accepting the initial invite, Santelli canceled his appearance on the March 4th episode of The Daily Show. Stewart used the cancellation to rip on the entire CNBC Network during his opening monologue. Stewart left no stone unturned, taking shots at everyone from David Faber to Jim Cramer. Not to be outdone, Cramer, the Mad Money maven, responded to Stewart’s attacks several times, including during an appearance on the NBC family of networks yesterday. And that was only the beginning. (For full details, as well as links to all the battle footage, check out this post from Nicholas Graham at The Huffington Post.)

The news, in theory, is supposed to be objective and non-biased, but as this situation clearly indicates, the line between news and entertainment is becoming more and more blurred. As a result, we often get more”views” than news. Why? One word: ratings. People tune in to see drama, but what about plain, old-fashioned, unbiased reporting? Nope. We complain that the news has become biased, yet it appears that if it isn’t - if there isn’t something added to make it interesting like drama and arguments - we won’t watch.

If viewers want the news networks to report unbiased news, then they must be the ones to hold them accountable. We live in a consumer-controlled society - we, the consumers, get what we want.  If we truly want news, then we must turn the “entertainment” off!

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]

FEBRUARY 20, 2009

The Snuggie - also known as “the blanket with sleeves” - has gotten major exposure in mainstream media over the last few months and has developed its own cult-like following. And so, like it or not, talk of the Snuggie has been circulating through our office. We’ve been wondering, why has this seemingly unnecessary invention made such a connection with consumers?  Is it the actual practicality of the blanket? Or was the advertising - the cheesy infomercial which made way for a hilarious parody version  - responsible for its success? Check out the infomercial:

I recently heard about the Snuggie Pub Crawl in Chicago, and I admit that at that moment I was so tempted to get one of my own (don’t tell anyone)! Also, I’m secretly hoping that they introduce Snuggies with pockets so that you can store snacks or your remote control in it, or better yet - double Snuggies, with room for two people! But all kidding aside, over 4 million Snuggies have been sold to date, there have been over 250 pro and con Facebook group pages created, and nearly 300 parody videos posted on YouTube.  With all the advertising - the messages, the products - that consumers are bombarded with, the Snuggie was somehow able to break through the saturation and actually hit a chord with Americans all across the nation. It’s baffling!

The popularity of the product has even surprised the president and CEO, Scott Boilen, of Allstar Products Group (creators of the Snuggie), but he attributes its success to “finally marketing the product,” even though blankets with sleeves have been on the market for 40 years.  Candidly, I disagree. While using the direct-response marketing technique may have been the right approach, I think the actual advertising was extremely out of touch, and that it was the sheer ridiculousness of the infomercial that grabbed consumers’ attention.  In my opinion, this is an example of the power of word-of-mouth, consumer-controlled marketing.  Consumers are responsible for this success, not Snuggie’s marketing efforts. In short, Snuggie’s got lucky by making a horrible television spot that consumers enjoyed making fun of.

What Mr. Boilen and I do agree on is that the Snuggie provides “a simple solution to a basic problem” and that is always something that resonates with consumers.  So “kudos” to Allstar Products Group for that, if nothing else.  Most likely, the Snuggie will be a short-lived fad fueled by humor and novelty, but this blanket will, no doubt, be remembered as that quirky blanket everyone was talking about in 2009.

[Comments(2) »] [TrackBack »]

FEBRUARY 9, 2009

Dating. The word alone conjures up some of the best of times and, perhaps, even some of the worst of times. As a whole, dating tends to get a bad rap - whether it’s first date awkwardness, unreturned phone calls, over-analysis, mixed signals, or unreciprocated affection, most people either laugh or let out a long sigh when pondering their own experiences with the dating game.  But, nonetheless, “the game” is fascinating, which is most likely why the newly released movie, “He’s Just Not That Into You“ exceeded box office projections this weekend.  The movie, adapted from the New York Times bestseller of the same title (which sold over 2 million copies in 2004), provides audiences with a tough-love approach to the rules of dating.

Yes, I said “the rules.”  You can deny it all you want, but there are rules – some spoken, some unspoken - and just like everything else these days, the rules are changing faster and faster.  With over 30 million active users on online dating sites like eHarmony, Match.com, and Plentyoffish.com, it’s safe to say that the dating game has forever been transformed in recent years.  Email has become an acceptable means of asking someone out on a date, “hook ups” are becoming more popular than dating, breaking up through a text messaging is happening more often, and women are playing more of the “pursuer” role. So whether it’s technology or a shift in values, there’s no denying that many of the rules are drastically different than they were 20 years ago. 

Tamara Duricka is a NYC-based writer who turned 31 years old last month, and happens to be single. In a quest to “do something different” this year – she began a project she calls “31 dates in 31 days,” in which she dates 30 different men in 30 days, blogs about each one of them, and then chooses one of them to go out with her for her 31st date.  I like to think of it as ”The Bachelorette” meets “How to Lose a Guy in 10 days” meets “Sex in the City.

“Sex and the City” romanticized the single life in NYC - a place where every young woman is over-sexed and unattainably glamorous, spends thousands on designer shoes, and drinks cosmos every night of the week. Tamara’s site, on the other hand, does not reflect any sort of “big city” propaganda.  If anything, it presents a more traditional and simple approach, while still remaining fairly open-minded, particularly about whom she will date - friends, strangers, set-ups… all the types of encounters acceptable in the modern-day dating arena.  One of the most fascinating aspects of her project, though, is the balance of the new with the old. It is a very technological, transparent approach to dating, in that all privacy is stripped away and the audience is encouraged to participate in her adventures, yet her expectations and rules seem to revert back to a more chivalrous approach. Love. It.

Being single myself, I admit that the dating game isn’t always fun, but in a society that has created the term: “starter marriage,” where over 50% of marriages end in divorce, and one in five adults in monogamous relationships admit to cheating, I’m quite content with playing the game for a little while longer.  Perhaps I’ll even give Tamara’s approach a go; after all, I’ll be turning 31 in less than 6 months!

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]

JANUARY 7, 2009

Do you know what’s going to be the demise of my New Year’s resolutions?

It’s not Madden 09, YouTube, or Facebook .

The answer is FiOS TV.

This past Sunday I had great ambitions of catching up on some blogging, paying some bills, and maybe even taking over the world; however, none of it got done.

Instead I sat and watched D3: The Mighty Ducks- and loved every minute of it. The trilogy about those lovable, misfit hockey players is my all-time favorite movie franchise.

When I moved into my new place, I decided to try Verizon FiOS for TV and Internet rather than Comcast Cable, which I was using at my old place. While I was impressed with the speed of my internet, I was floored by the TV channels.

With cable I only had 75 or so channels and now there are 10 times that amount. I now have so many TV channels I don’t know what to do with them.

Need to know the weather? I have 5 channels for that. Have the urge to shop? I have QVC and three other channels to watch. I have 5 channels of ESPN, 5 of MTV, and 13 of local programming… from two counties.

I sat down that Sunday just to briefly check out some news, but I soon got lost in the channels, wondering who watches the CHILLER network or WealthTV (my best guess: people who can afford all the premium channels I haven’t even talked about, like 14 channels of HBO in HD).

Back in 2007, Josie looked at the average number of TV channels available to the average home and the number that are actually watched. It makes sense that with so many channels now available, many of them specialized, niche networks, a consumer can feel overwhelmed with the saturation of media. I know that’s how I felt that night.

So with 700 channels what did I ultimately choose? While I had my pick of quality programming such as Parental Control or How to Look Good Naked, I ultimately settled on something familiar. With so many new choices I couldn’t make a quick decision and just stopped at the first familiar face I saw- that of the lovable Emilio Estevez. I wonder if that’s the thought process many others go through when trying to cope with all those channels.

I’ve had FiOS since November but I only really watch ESPN, CNN, MSNBC, and the broadcast networks. The only new channel I now watch from the deluge of new TV is the NFL Network.

Have you also narrowed down your viewing habits to a select few?

[Comments(4) »] [TrackBack »]

SEPTEMBER 25, 2008

Television is not the medium it was even a mere year ago, and we are not the audience we were, either.  We are all evolving, television and us together.  But good Lord, into what?

That’s how Tom Shales opened his column in The Washington Post last Sunday.

One day later, Lana Sweeten-Shults with the Times Record (TX) added her own earnest evaluation of modern television.  Her focus, however, was on programming, as she wrote, “You have good TV.  You have bad TV.  And then you have a whole other genre called guilty TV, which is probably a subgenre of bad TV except that you cannot seem to look away, which makes it good TV, right?”

To me, justifying watching bad TV simply because it’s “addictive” is about the same as justifying smoking a cigarette because it, too, is “addictive.”  Viewing public, can we really not help ourselves?!

No, we can’t.  On September 11, the copycats at FOX aired yet another Americanized version of a popular Japanese game show: Hole in the Wall.  And, just as Sweeten-Shults described, despite the show’s cheesy, debasing awfulness - and the fact that it premiered on the anniversary of the most tragic day in America’s history - I could not help but watch.

If you missed the premiere (you are better off for it), the object of this bizarre cabaret is to twist your body into unusual shapes in order to squeeze through uneven holes in a fast-approaching Styrofoam wall.  If the contestants fail to fit through the cut-outs, they run smack into the wall and fall helplessly backwards into a deep, aquatic abyss – usually accompanied by a broken Styrofoam souvenir.  (Don’t worry – standing by are two shirtless, chuckling lifeguards who readily jump in after the fallen).

In the one-hour series premiere, 400-pound wrestlers challenged 100-pound equestrians in “Sumo Wrestlers vs. Jockeys.”  Afterward, an Italian family from the North took on a family from the South in “Spicy New York Meatballs vs. Sweet Georgia Peaches.”  The Sweet Georgia Peaches were all women, and all overweight.  (The show’s producers obviously think the chubbier, the funnier, right?)

I’m no xenophobe, but American re-makes of Japanese game shows, as guilty as I am for watching them, disturb me nonetheless.  For one, they make me feel like we’re all locked away in a zoo on Tralfamadore or some other alien planet, watching each other commit self-deprecating acts for the sake of E.T.’s perverted pleasure.  And, as long as it’s not us out there, it is okay for us to laugh.

So, why are shows like this so popular?  Hollywood Reporter explains:

“There’s the flashing lights, the dramatic music, the preening announcers, the competitors in loud colors serving up mounds of inane trash talk.  All of the ingredients are in place to drive home the point that the broadcast world continues to implode before our eyes.”

To my surprise (or maybe not), the show is actually a hit in several countries other than Japan and the United States.  Also tuning in are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Sweden and Britain.

I believe John Doyle from the Globe and Mail best summarizes the reality of modern television programming:

How things change – on the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, there is little evidence of the anniversary being marked on prime-time TV.  Instead, what’s in evidence is what the post-9/11 period has become – a time of escapism, frivolity and the glorification of singing and dancing competitions.

Flexibility, adaptability, metal acuity and physical dexterity in a fast-paced, ever-changing environment - ”Hole in the Wall” contains so many evolutionary undertones it might as well be called “Survival of the Fittest.”  Who knew, after all, that Social Darwinism could be so darn entertaining!

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

SEPTEMBER 4, 2008

It must be hard owning a brand these days. Everywhere you turn, you hear about how consumers are taking over, how control has shifted away from the owners of products and brands and into the hands of the people who use those products and brands, regardless of whether they love or hate them.

From a consumer standpoint, however, these are exciting times. Last week, I read on a few blogs(subscription needed) about some Twitterers who had shown up using the names of characters on AMC’s sophomore drama “Mad Men.” For those of us who follow this addictive, intense drama, this was exciting news! Don Draper on Twitter? Never mind that for a show with an obsessive eye to detail and factual accuracy, this made no sense - Don Draper is an advertising executive in the 60s, when the delivery of a new copy machine was met with complete and utter befuddlement. It didn’t matter - the “Mad Men” characters on Twitter were simply a very cool extension of the “Mad Men” franchise into a new medium, one that would only encourage fan intensity for this show.

Well, as it turns out, Don Draper on Twitter wasn’t in fact created by AMC, or the writers of “Mad Men”, or anyone else connected with the show. And AMC’s first reaction was to have the accounts taken down. Luckily, they (thanks to their digital agency) changed their mind a few days later and allowed the accounts to be reinstated. As the Silicon Alley Insider said:

What happened? Deep Focus, the Web marketing group that works for AMC, tells us that they gently nudged their client into rescinding the DMCA takedown notice they’d sent to Twitter. See, in Web marketing parlance, the Twitterers assuming the names of Mad Men characters are actually “brand ambassadors” meant to be cultivated, not thwarted.”Better to embrace the community than negate their efforts,” says a Deep Focus spokesman. We agree!

I can understand AMC’s reticence. They’ve spent millions of dollars creating these complex characters, imagining their wardrobes, their anxieties, their ambitions. Why would they be comfortable with these unknown Twitterers hijacking these finely honed identities and tweeting all over the blogosphere?

On the other hand, though, in an age where mass media is rapidly fading and traditional advertising simply doesn’t work, what could be better than having bunch of people love your programming so much that they want to assume the identities of your characters and spread the word about them over the Internet?

Take a deep breath, AMC. It will be OK. Just roll with it. If this doesn’t get you new viewers, I’d be very surprised.

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]