Archive for category TV Turnoff
DOOH suffers from cognitive bias
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on December 4th, 2009
There is an entire field of study on cognitive biases in the way we see things, as individuals and as groups. “Bias blind spot,” “choice-supportive bias,” and “the base rate fallacy” are among the ways we reinforce what we believe and disregard what we don’t believe.
I believe the digital out-of-home media industry—the people who put TVs on trains, buses, subways, taxis, gas station pumps, elevators, office lobbies, and so on— is suffering from a big case of cognitive bias.
At conferences and in research reports, executives and consultants in the DOOH industry (as it’s called in some cases) claim that consumers like captive-audience media—that is, they like audio-video media they haven’t asked for in places where they can’t escape it.
As one executive at a recent conference says (as quoted in an industry report), “Studies consistently show that people do not mind—in fact, ‘invite’ media in out-of-home environments that stimulate them emotionally and intellectually.”
But I believe DOOH executives and consultants have spent too much time reading their own press releases. I have yet to talk to a single person who says they like TV in grocery stores, on gas pumps, in cabs, or in doctor’s offices. At most, they put up with the TV out of the belief that that kind of media is just part of the landscape now. What’s more, whenever consumers are quoted in newspapers and magazines on TVs in restaurants and other out-of-home settings, many of the quotes are typically about how irritating the TVs are. And those are just the polite comments printed in the story. When you read people’s online comments about captive-audience media, the quotes tend to have more exclamation points.
That said, I don’t doubt for a second that the studies being pointed to by DOOH industry people do in fact support their contention that we love being made captive to audio-video media. For a company or an industry to produce studies supporting what they want them to support is a time-honored tradition and something anyone who’s completed Statistics 101 can do. I recall two “studies” that came out within the last three months that show people liking TV in two different types of out-of-home settings (one a retail setting, the other a medical one). I put “studies” in quotes because they came from an independent firm that measures audience traffic but the studies were commissioned by the out-of-home media companies. Um, that means the media companies paid this independent company to “study” whether people like their product. Neither of the press releases that came out mentioned the fact that the studies were paid for. When I called the media contact on one of the press releases to confirm that the study was paid for, the contact threw back questions at me about whether I was media or not rather than just answer my question.
As it is, I have my own study on captive-audience media and after only one day the results show overwhelmingly that people dislike TV in public places.
The study isn’t objective, you say? Well, let’s look at this. The way I spread word about the survey was completely random. I simply tagged the blog page on StumbleUpon, Digg, Delicious, and Reddit. So I have no idea who will find the survey from those sites. I also tweeted about it, but I only have 40 followers, and some of them are just fronts for sites that sell Viagra, I think. There might even be a few DOOH people following me. I know the tweet was re-tweeted once, to a group that seems to have nothing to do with media of any kind. So, that seems pretty random.
Here are results of my survey so far:
* 75% say TV in public places is always or often an unwanted distraction
* 100% say the information on the TV neither helps nor enriches their life
* 100% say they would prefer to get information on specials at a grocery store on printed signs rather than in-house TV
* 75% say TV in public places makes it hard for them to read or think
* 100% say they’d rather read or think in a doctor’s waiting room than watch TV
* 100% say piped-in commercial radio on a publicly subsidized train is a violation of liberty and privacy rights
Those are the factual results from my survey one day after inviting people to voice their views. These results don’t match up with DOOH industry studies. If the different studies are equally factual, what can account for this divergence?
In the DOOH report referenced earlier, called Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) of Digital Signage the author of the report, an industry consultant, listed threats and weaknesses to the DOOH industry. The report does not list people’s dislike of captive-audience media as a threat. My own view is that, as captive-audience media spreads further, people will take notice and at some point many people will say that captive-audience media is going too far.
Do I suffer from cognitive bias? Listen, I’ve got the study to prove my contention.
Survey: is out-of-home TV good, bad, or both?
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on December 3rd, 2009
Many people like having TV in public places. The TVs are a way to pass the time while you’re waiting to catch a flight or eating at a restaurant. Now that out-of-home TV is migrating to many other places—the backseat of taxis, for instance, and to elevators, buses, subways, trains, street corners, office and hotel lobbies, and doctor’s waiting rooms, among others—it’s appropriate to ask whether this is too much.
Some people find out-of-home TV distracting and irritating, at least some of the time. Others find the TVs an invasion of their personal space. After all, the audio and video of TV in a public place washes over everyone indiscriminately. For some people, that’s just not right.
What do you think? Take this 10-question survey and help us get some insight into the good and the bad of out-of-home TV. It only takes two minutes to participate, and it doesn’t ask you to provide any contact or other information.
—R. Freedman
47 Anti-TV Books
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on November 24th, 2009
I’ve been seeing interest in our occasional posts updating various book collections we maintain, so I’m posting this update to our anti-TV book collection, now 47 titles strong. If you question why so much of our world is organized around screen media in general and TV in particular, you might find this collection of interest. I’ve done Internet searches on the topic and as far as I can tell this is the most complete list of anti-TV books available. If I’m missing a title, please let me know!
47 anti-TV books:
Noise Wars: Compulsory Media and Our Loss of Autonomy (Algora Publishing: 2009), Robert Freedman
The Age of American Unreason (Vintage) (Vintage: 2009), Susan Jacoby
Living Without the Screen (Lea’s Communication) (Routledge: 2008), Marina Krcmar
The Assault on Reason (Penguin: 2008), Al Gore
Media Unlimited, Revised Edition: How the Torrent of Images and Sounds Overwhelms Our Lives (Holt: 2007), Todd Gitlin
Television (Dalkey Archive Press: 2007), Jean-Philippe Toussaint and Jordan Stump: FICTION
Noise: How Our Media-saturated Culture Dominates Lives and Dismantles Families (Ascension Press: 2007), Teresa Tomeo
Living Outside the Box: TV-Free Families Share Their Secrets (Eastern Washington University Press: 2007), Barbara Brock
Remote Controlled: How TV Affects You and Your Family (Ebury Press: 2007), Aric Sigman
The Big Turnoff: Confessions of a TV-Addicted Mom Trying to Raise a TV-Free Kid (Algonquon Books: 2007), Ellen Currey-Wilson
Mediated: How the Media Shapes Our World and the Way We Live in It (Bloomsbury USA: 2006), Thomas de Zengotita
Noise (Viking: 2006), Bart Kosko
Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing (New Riders Publishing: 2006), Adam Greenfield
iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind (Collins Living: 2008), Gary Small and Gigi Vorgan
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (Penguin: 2005), Neil Postman
The Business of Media: Corporate Media and the Public Interest (Pine Forge Press: 2005), David Croteau and William Hoynes
The Medium is the Massage (Ginko Press: 2005) Marshall McLuhan and Quentin Fiore
We Know What You Want: How They Change Your Mind
(The Disinformation Company: 2004), Martin Howard and Douglas Rushkoff
The New Media Monopoly (Beacon Press 2004), Ben Bagdikian
Television after TV: Essays on a Medium in Transition (Console-ing Passions) (Duke Univ. Press: 2004), Lynn Spigel and Jan Olsson
Feed (Candlewick: 2004), M.T. Anderson: FICTION
The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-First Century (Monthly Review Press :2004), Robert McChesney
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (Pantheon: 2002), Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky
The Plug-In Drug: Television, Computers, and Family Life (Penguin: 2002), Marie Winn
T.V.: The Great Escape! : Life-Changing Stories from Those Who Dared to Take Control (Crossway Books: 2001), Bob DeMoss
Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community (Simon & Schuster, 2001), Robert Putnam
Ambient Television: Visual Culture and Public Space (Console-ing Passions) (Duke University Press: 2001), Anna McCarthy
Coercion: Why We Listen to What They Say (Riverhead Trade: 2000), Douglas Rushkoff
Glued to the Tube: The Threat of Television Addiction to Today’s Family (Sourcebooks: 2000), Cheryl Pawlowski
Endangered Minds: Why Children Don’t Think And What We Can Do About It (Simon & Schuster: 1999), Jane Healy
Culture Jam: How to Reverse America’s Suicidal Consumer Binge–And Why We Must (William Morrow: 1999), Kalle Lasn
Spy TV (Slab O Concrete Publications: 1999), David Burke
Get a Life! (Bloomsbury Publishing: 1998), David Burke and Jean Lotus
Seducing America: How Television Charms the Modern Voter (Sage Publications: 1998), Roderick Hart
The Commercialization of American Culture: New Advertising, Control and Democracy (Sage Publications: 1995), Matt McAllister
…And There Was Television (Routledge: 1994), Ellis Cashmore
Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (The MIT Press: 1994), Marshall McLuhan, with an introduction by Lewis Lapham
The Disappearance of Childhood (Vintage: 1994), Neil Postman
The Unreality Industry: The Deliberate Manufacturing of Falsehood and What It Is Doing to Our Lives (Oxford Univ. Press: 1993), Ian Mitroff and Warren Bennis
Conscientious Objections: Stirring Up Trouble About Language, Technology and Education (Vintage: 1992), Neil Postman
The Age of Missing Information (Plume: 1993), Bill McKibben
Television and the Quality of Life: How Viewing Shapes Everyday Experience (Communication Series) (Lawrence Eribaum: 1990), Robert William Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
Fahrenheit 451 (Ballantine Books: 1987), Ray Bradbury: FICTION
No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior (Oxford Univ. Press: 1985), Joshua Meyrowitz
What to Do After You Turn Off the TV (Ballantine Books: 1985), Frances Moore Lappe
Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television (Harper Perennial: 1978), Jerry Mander
The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man (Univ. of Toronto Press: 1962), Marshall McLuhan
Take our survey
Is TV in public places good or bad? Let us know your thoughts in this Media by Choice survey on the good and the bad of TV in public places such as elevators, taxi cabs, subways, trains, buses, airport gates, doctor’s offices, office and hotel lobbies, and so on. Click here to take survey.
The American cultural aesthetic: Mid-modern CNN
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on November 13th, 2009
I’m thinking about the decorative style of downtown San Diego, which is a kind of mid-modern CNN. If you’re wondering what mid-modern CNN looks like, think airport sports bar. That about sums up the San Diego urban aesthetic. Oh, yeah, there’s an ocean there, too.
Come to think of it, mid-modern CNN sums up most of the urban, suburban, and even rural aesthetic of much of the United States, as if our country is a private company run by the entertainment committee of a frat house. How did it come to this?
Almost everyone I have a beer with in a restaurant says they find the introduction of TV to even high-end restaurants a step backwards. Not because they don’t like TV. They’re dedicated TV consumers, like any good American. But they find it somewhat offensive that it’s become so hard to just find a quiet restaurant in which to enjoy the company of one’s dining companions. I always wonder on what basis managers make their decision to turn their restaurant, whatever its aesthetic had been, into mid-modern CNN. It’s like they take their aesthetic cues from the elevator of a Marriott Hotel.
Speaking for myself, I’m looking forward to the day the when the baby boomers retire and the techno-fused millennial generation takes over. You read about this generation being wedded to their instant messaging and social media, not to mention their virtual words, but moving from a mid-modern CNN aesthetic to a high Facbook aesthetic stries me as progress.
If you’re going to push giant screens out to me whether I like it or not, then I’d rather have the interactive, participatory wit and irreverence of a Facebook wall with conversation, commentary, and even YouTube videos than the sportsentertainmentmusic that passes for high culture at an American business hotel.
The only negative I can see from the baby boomers passing into retirement is that they’ll bring their mid-modern CNN aesthetic to the nursing home. Since I’m a baby boomer myself, that means I’ll be spending my golden years in front of a bank of TVs in the dining hall watching the same basketballfootball game that I seem to have been watching since 1978, except that the basketball uniforms have gotten looser and the football uniforms have gotten tighter.
I expect the last thing I see before I die is yet another beer commercial. That’s a great way to go out of this world—the same way we went out of the frat house.
53 Digital Detox Books
Posted by R. Freedman in Media noise, TV Turnoff on November 11th, 2009
Digital Detox Week is in April but any time is a good time to step back and put in perspective our dependence on things with screens. In that spirit, I offer up this collection of 53 books that remind us our dependence on TVs and other digital audio and video media is not a natural condition:
One Square Inch of Silence: One Man’s Search for Natural Silence in a Noisy World (Free Press: 2009), Gordon Hempton
Listening Below the Noise: A Meditation on the Practice of Silence (Harper: 2009), Anne Leclaire
Noise Wars: Compulsory Media and Our Loss of Autonomy (Algora Publishing: 2009), Robert Freedman
The Age of American Unreason (Vintage)(Vintage: 2009), Susan Jacoby
Living Without the Screen (Lea’s Communication)(Routledge: 2008), Marina Krcmar
Mechanical Sound: Technology, Culture, and Public Problems of Noise in the Twentieth Century (Inside Technology) (The MIT Press 2008), Karin Bijsterveld
The Assault on Reason(Penguin: 2008), Al Gore
iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind(Collins Living: 2008), Gary Small and Gigi Vorgan
Media Unlimited, Revised Edition: How the Torrent of Images and Sounds Overwhelms Our Lives(Holt: 2007), Todd Gitlin
Television(Dalkey Archive Press: 2007), Jean-Philippe Toussaint and Jordan Stump: FICTION
Noise: How Our Media-saturated Culture Dominates Lives and Dismantles Families(Ascension Press: 2007), Teresa Tomeo
Manifesto for Silence: Confronting the Politics and Culture of Noise (Edinburgh University Press: 2007), Stuat Sim
Living Outside the Box: TV-Free Families Share Their Secrets(Eastern Washington University Press: 2007), Barbara Brock
Remote Controlled: How TV Affects You and Your Family(Ebury Press: 2007), Aric Sigman
The Big Turnoff: Confessions of a TV-Addicted Mom Trying to Raise a TV-Free Kid(Algonquon Books: 2007), Ellen Currey-Wilson
Mediated: How the Media Shapes Our World and the Way We Live in It(Bloomsbury USA: 2006), Thomas de Zengotita
Noise(Viking: 2006), Bart Kosko
Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing(New Riders Publishing: 2006), Adam Greenfield
Spaces Speak, Are You Listening?: Experiencing Aural Architecture (The MIT Press: 2006), Barry Blesser
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business(Penguin: 2005), Neil Postman
The Business of Media: Corporate Media and the Public Interest(Pine Forge Press: 2005), David Croteau and William Hoynes
The Medium is the Massage(Ginko Press: 2005) Marshall McLuhan and Quentin Fiore
Television after TV: Essays on a Medium in Transition (Console-ing Passions)(Duke Univ. Press: 2004), Lynn Spigel and Jan Olsson
Feed(Candlewick: 2004), M.T. Anderson: FICTION
Too Loud, Too Bright, Too Fast, Too Tight: What to Do If You Are Sensory Defensive in an Overstimulating World (Harper: 2003), Sharon Heller
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media(Pantheon: 2002), Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky
The Plug-In Drug: Television, Computers, and Family Life(Penguin: 2002), Marie Winn
T.V.: The Great Escape! : Life-Changing Stories from Those Who Dared to Take Control(Crossway Books: 2001), Bob DeMoss
Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community(Simon & Schuster, 2001), Robert Putnam
Ambient Television: Visual Culture and Public Space (Console-ing Passions)(Duke University Press: 2001), Anna McCarthy
Coercion: Why We Listen to What They Say(Riverhead Trade: 2000), Douglas Rushkoff
Endangered Minds: Why Children Don’t Think And What We Can Do About It(Simon & Schuster: 1999), Jane Healy
Culture Jam: How to Reverse America’s Suicidal Consumer Binge–And Why We Must(William Morrow: 1999), Kalle Lasn
Get a Life!(Bloomsbury Publishing: 1998), David Burke and Jean Lotus
Seducing America: How Television Charms the Modern Voter(Sage Publications: 1998), Roderick Hart
The Commercialization of American Culture: New Advertising, Control and Democracy(Sage Publications: 1995), Matt McAllister
…And There Was Television(Routledge: 1994), Ellis Cashmore
Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man(The MIT Press: 1994), Marshall McLuhan, with an introduction by Lewis Lapham
The Disappearance of Childhood(Vintage: 1994), Neil Postman
The Unreality Industry: The Deliberate Manufacturing of Falsehood and What It Is Doing to Our Lives(Oxford Univ. Press: 1993), Ian Mitroff and Warren Bennis
The Soundscape (Destiny: 1993), R. Murray Schafer
Conscientious Objections: Stirring Up Trouble About Language, Technology and Education (Vintage: 1992), Neil Postman
The Age of Missing Information(Plume: 1993), Bill McKibben
Television and the Quality of Life: How Viewing Shapes Everyday Experience (Communication Series)
(Lawrence Eribaum: 1990), Robert William Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
Fahrenheit 451(Ballantine Books: 1987), Ray Bradbury: FICTION
No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior(Oxford Univ. Press: 1985), Joshua Meyrowitz
What to Do After You Turn Off the TV(Ballantine Books: 1985), Frances Moore Lappe
Noise Pollution. A Scientific and Psychological Look at a New Hazard (Franklin Watts: 1984), Shan Finney
Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television(Harper Perennial: 1978), Jerry Mander
The dangers of noise (Crowell: 1978), Lucy Kravalar
The Tyranny of Noise (Harper Colophon: 1971), Robert Baron
Noise Pollution, the Unquiet Crisis (University of Pennsylvania: 1971), Clifford Bragdon
The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man(Univ. of Toronto Press: 1962), Marshall McLuhan
Victory for media choice: BusRadio closing down
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, TV Turnoff on October 3rd, 2009
In a body blow to captive-audience media and a victory for those who oppose having out-of-home digital media content forced on them, BusRadio has pulled the plug on its compulsory commercial radio programming on school buses and is expected to make an official announcement next week.
BusRadio makes its money by providing targeted advertising to a captive audience of children on public school buses and has been the subject of intense push-back from parents and others who’ve taken their concern to Congress, the FCC, and to state and local governments.
“BusRadio severely underestimated parents’ determination to keep advertisers off of school buses,” the Center for Commercial-Free Childhood says in a statement. “And now, thanks to all of our efforts, parents no longer have to worry about their children being bombarded by student-targeted advertising on school buses.”
Commercial Alert has also been involved in efforts against the company.
Still on parents’ radar screen is Channel One, which provides free audio-video equipment to cash-strapped schools in return for providing 12 minutes of daily in-classroom TV programming. The programming includes two minutes of targeted advertising.
Parents have long charged Channel One with exploiting mandatory school attendance laws for commercial gain. The company almost went under a few years ago after critics launched a campaign asking companies not to advertise on its programs, but it survived and today has a new owner.
The BusRadio victory shows that the steady drive by out-of-home media companies to fill our common areas with intrusive audio-video content that we haven’t asked for isn’t proceeding without constraint. BusRadio and Channel One are clearly the most egregious and indefensible examples of captive-audence excess, because they involve our chidren. But as captive-audience media expands throughout our common areas and eat away at our ability to lead lives without having unsought content always in front of us, media companies can expect more push-back.
Not everybody wants the distraction of audio and video in front of them wherever they go; having TV screens on elevators and on gas pumps and in restrooms and on buses, trains, and subways, in taxis, and in office and hotel lobbies, and in medical offices, among other places, is creating its own antithesis. As it should. No one owns our viewscapes and soundscapes. No one should be forced to to consume distracting and invasive audio-video content they haven’t asked for.
—Robert Freedman, author, Noise Wars: Compulsory Media and Our Loss of Autonomy
Take our survey
Is TV in public places good or bad? Let us know your thoughts in this Media by Choice survey on the good and the bad of TV in public places such as elevators, taxi cabs, subways, trains, buses, airport gates, doctor’s offices, office and hotel lobbies, and so on. Click here to take survey.
Captive-audience media attracts 9,701 critics
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on August 14th, 2009
Since launching this blog about four months ago, on April 19, there have been 9,701 visitors, or an average of 80 visits a day. We would call that a success, and we’re interpreting that to mean there’s considerable interest in the topic of captive-audience media.
The most visited post by far is On noise, a judge who gets it, from July 12, that looks at the justice meted out by a judge who threw the book at rude renters who did more than thumb their noses at neighbors who asked them repeatedly to turn down the music; they tried to vandalize their house, with some success. That post attracted almost 2,650 views and generated comment on far-flung sites, some of which I reproduce in another post.
The most clicked-on link so far in any of the posts goes to a database of malicious ads from car stereo manufacturers that’s maintained by Noise Free America. That this link is the most clicked-on is not surprising, because those stereo ads are, to put it mildly, unbelievable. Their common theme is that upsetting people with the loud noise of boom cars is a laugh, and the more upset people get, the bigger the laugh it is. The ads are the definition of incivility and Noise Free America deserves credit for assembling them in one place.
In our book, boom cars and rude neighbors who refuse to turn down the volume of their media, whether music from a stereo or chatter from a TV, are forms of captive-audience media because boomers and rude neighbors force their media onto others. Although they don’t try to monetize their captive audience the way commercial media companies do (ads on bus TV, for example), they commandeer common space for a private aim.
Here’s a rundown of the top 10 posts and the top five clicked links on this blog since its mid-April launch:
1. On noise, a judge who gets it, 2,646 views
2. Boom cars: the constitutionality of nose thumbing, 1,593 views
3. Boom cars and ATVs: cut from the same cloth, 157 views
4. Congress: make leisure time quiet time again, 141 views
5. “Ad loop” and “excitement” equal incongruence, 122 views
6. No-escape TV in 5 of 6 airports, 102 views
7. Knight Foundation errs on captive-audience news, 90 views
8. Outdoor video: what’s wrong with this picture?, 68 views
9. Serenos = serene: a definition mayors should know, 59 views
10. Captive-audience media: Charles Black was on the case, 50 views
Top five clicked links:
1. Malicious stereo ads
2. Kovacs v. Cooper (Supreme Court case involving audio truck)
3.Public Utilities Comm. v. Pollak (Supreme Court case involving captive-audience radio)
4. Algora Publishing (the publisher of our Noise Wars book)
5. Washington Post piece on checkout TV
Thank you to all the visitors who are helping to boost awareness of growing concerns over captive-audience media.
Captive-audience media: Charles Black was on the case
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, Media noise, TV Turnoff on July 16th, 2009
If there is one person I wouldn’t want to go up against in a court of law it’s Charles L. Black, Jr., the famed professor of constitutional law at Yale and Columbia University. In his heyday, during the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, his was one of the most prominent voices on desegregation (Brown vs. Board of Education) and presidential impeachment, and was widely regarded by his peers as one of the top constitutional authorities of his generation. Sadly, he was never appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court because, had he been, it’s very possible that captive-audience media, a cause de celebre in the view of this blog, would have been deemed a generation ago an unconstitutional abridgment of individual liberty, and we never would have had to launch this blog. Thus, all the time we devote to this blog could have been spent on much more bright and positive pursuits, such as talking about the good ways to offer information to people (there are such ways)—that is, ways that treat people with the respect and dignity they’re owed.
As it is, a divided Supreme Court in 1952 overturned a unanimous lower court and gave an okay to captive-audience media on a commuter rail in Washington, D.C. The end result of that decision is what we’re faced with today: TV on buses, trains, subways, taxis, elevators, street corners, bus stops, ad infinitum. Any place where people gather is now fair game for someone to impose TV or other intrusive media on whoever happens to be captive in that environment at that time. And make no mistake: the executives who operated the captive-audience media on that 1952 commuter rail totally understood what they were doing. One of the company executives described the service as “delivering a guaranteed audience . . . . If they can hear, they can hear your commercial.”
Of course, even the Supreme Court had some mixed feelings about audience captivity. Just a few years prior to that case it said it was okay for a city to ban the use of audio trucks for commercial purposes (trucks that drive around for the purpose of blaring out commercial messages to pedestrians. Such bans don’t represent an unconstitutional violation of free speech because it’s not the speech that’s being banned but the delivery mechanism. As the court clearly saw, allowing anybody with speakers on a truck to drive around pushing out whatever message they want turns people into captives because they have no opportunity to say no.
Why was audience captivity not okay in that case but okay in the commuter rail case? The difference turned on the idea of tacit permission. Since the train riders voluntarily took the rail service, they gave their tacit permission to be made captives to the commercial media.
To the judges who dissented in the case, that’s a pretty thin reed on which to draw a distinction. For some commuters, taking the rail is hardly a choice; it’s the only practical way for them to get in and out of town every day. Thus, as Justice William O. Douglas said, “Compulsion which comes from circumstances can be just as real as compulsion which comes from necessity.”
In any case, we are where we are in terms of captive-audience media. But as Charles Black made clear in what’s widely regarded as a classic essay on liberty, He Cannot Choose But Hear: The Plight of the Captive Auditor, which he wrote after the commuter-rail decision, the Supreme Court decision doesn’t mean we have to allow audience captivity. There are plenty of ways to fight it. Nothing in that decision affects our rights to appeal for curbs at the legislative, council, and commission levels of government, not to mention in the court of public opinion.
It’s in this spirit of appealing to the court of public opinion that Algora Publishing, a literary house in New York City, has just released our book Noise Wars: Compulsory Media and Our Loss of Autonomy.
The book looks at the growth of captive-audience media, the different forms it takes, why its poised to grow so much in the near future, and what the ranks of unhappy captives are doing about it. It ends with a look at ways to create environments in which both willing and unwilling audiences of captive-audience media can happily co-exist.
Ultimately it’s a positive book because it shows that many people are not sitting by idly while media companies blanket our common spaces with media that people can’t get away from. If you are a critic of captive-audience media, I hope you’ll support Algora Publishing and the effort to put captive-audience media in its place by buying the book. As the author, I would appreciate it too.
Take our survey
Is TV in public places good or bad? Let us know your thoughts in this Media by Choice survey on the good and the bad of TV in public places such as elevators, taxi cabs, subways, trains, buses, airport gates, doctor’s offices, office and hotel lobbies, and so on. Click here to take survey.
Good news on digital switchover: many miss it
Posted by R. Freedman in Audience captivity, TV Turnoff on June 21st, 2009
In case it escaped your attention, June 12 was the big digital TV switchover day. Congress had spent more time debating, throwing money at, and wringing its hands over this big day than it has over some arguably much higher priority issues, like, um, the collapse of print journalism. Congress, it seems, is just as addicted to TV as the rest of us and, like a true enabler, wanted to be sure we could all keep getting our fix when TV broadcasters made the final switch away from analog TV on the big June 12 day. For that reason it had found millions of dollars in the federal budget, despite the deficit, and despite the fact that things like, um, education are so sorely under-funded, to make sure all of us can keep watching TV after June 12.
So the big day came and went and apparently 2.2 percent of TV-watching households, which adds up to millions of people, never made the switch and, what’s more, never complained when their TVs went dark on June 13. And that 2.2 percent wasn’t just regular households but households who participate in Nielsen surveys, so we know these are true TV watching households and their ranks don’t include any odd-ball TV-free households.
According to a news write-up in Media Post, the National Association of Broadcasters had braced itself for a deluge of panicked calls from households to find out why their TVs no longer work but instead of a deluge they received only a trickle, and the calls weren’t even about the blackout,. Rather, they were from people who had already made the switch and were just trying to find out how to make their converter box work correctly.
It would be nice to believe that the millions of people who let their TV go dark had decided they were watching too much TV anyway and taking a break from it wouldn’t be a bad thing, but that’s probably too optimistic. The more likely explanation is that people had bought a digital set as a second TV and had just allowed their non-digital TV go dark, or that they’re just watching TV in other ways, including over the Internet.
Even so, it’s nice to see Media Post cover the issue with this headline: “Millions of TV viewers go dark, few complain.”
With such a headline we can at least pretend that peopled aren’t as addicted to TV as we thought. But we know the reality is closer to this June 18 headline in the Onion: “Report: 90 percent of waking hours spent staring at glowing rectangles.”
Leave it to the Onion to return us to reality.



