Bob Kennedy is a senior partner in Flashcut Editing, Toronto, and chair of the PVR subcommittee for CPAT.

The quote that Ian Maclean refers to was supplied to me by the Television Bureau of Canada as part of a package of articles concerning the PVR. The particular article in question was from Marketing magazine, May 7, 2001, entitled ‘The Next Digital Revolution’ by Carey Toane.

Ian called me after he read my piece in Playback and told me that he has been unsuccessful in contacting Toane about her reference to the New York Times article and that he had been unable to find any trace of it himself, hence his description of the reference as an ‘urban myth.’ As yet, I have been unable to find any other references quantifying how much PVR users skip TV commercials. If anyone reading this has seen anything, I would appreciate it if they would forward the information to me (bobk@flashcut.com).

I did come across an interesting report from last July’s American Demographics Magazine on a small sample survey commissioned by Statistical Research Inc. It stated that respondents with a PVR reported a better quality viewing experience. They claimed it was so easy to use that time shifting became a daily experience. ‘They can really find what they want and watch it at their convenience.’

Many users stopped watching scheduled television altogether, making such concepts as primetime and the advantage of lead-in programming obsolete. Families tended to watch programs as a group more often since they could schedule their time together more easily.

People used the fast-forward mechanism to select the commercials they most wanted to watch. But they did choose to watch some ads. In other words, well-produced commercials, or more to the point, commercials that were relevant to the viewer’s psychographic profile and interests, retained an audience, and probably a more receptive one at that. (Unfortunately, there were no numbers given in the article as to the quantity of ads viewed versus bypassed.)

Many PVR users like the feature that allows them to download ads they find interesting. However, customized (targeted) ads that were pushed to viewers based on their demographics were not well received.

One could take from this that commercials do have a place in the PVR world. The question that needs to be answered is how big a place? Does everyone watch the few BMW ads but bypass the many soap ads? Also, while Ian notes that a time-shifted program would have otherwise been missed by the viewer, the SRI survey suggests that it is seen at the expense of scheduled programming (and their commercials).

Anecdotally, users of PVRs that I have met tell me that they regularly bypass ads. PVR suppliers market the ability to skip commercials as a significant ‘benefit.’ They are also on record as having developed technology to automatically bypass advertising.

I agree with Ian that it is important that any conclusions be supported by accurate facts and we need more facts. However, I also believe it is prudent to recognize the potential of a new risk to our industry while waiting for more information.

My point in writing the article was to caution against complacency and to start thinking preemptively. Since the PVR is already entering viewers’ homes and since advertising involves many players, there may not be enough time to react by the time we know all the facts.

Despite our differences, I think that Ian would agree with me that the best response to the PVR is not to dwell on the degree of the disruption, but to look for and exploit the new opportunities that the technology enables. *