Approaches

BT_Insight

Medium on the “Fringe”

October 02, 2008

Posted by: Michael Deichmiller in Consumer

In yet another attempt by the major networks to combat ad skipping, Fox recently debuted a new format of commercial breaks.  This test impacts the new drama Fringe and involves a 40% increase in spot cost in exchange for inclusion in breaks that are 50% shorter.  You might be asking yourself, “Why would Fox do this?.” We asked ourselves that exact question.

Their rationale behind the decision is simple, to attract more relevant advertisers and offer less ad clutter for viewers.  Kudos to Fox for attempting both, however, can they really expect marketers to pay 40% more for a brand new show with an unproven audience simply because the breaks are shorter?  We don’t think the risk is worth the reward. 

Fox has also decided to announce the length of each break, prior to the commercials, in an effort to ease viewer concerns about when the program will continue and to keep them glued to the TV.  That tactic could easily backfire by allowing viewers to “schedule” their activities (snack, flip the channel, etc…) during the commercial break.  In any case, justifying a 40% increase in spot cost is simply impossible.

In order to remain an effective part of the media mix, television must (and is) changing the way it approaches advertising.  It is easy to understand that on paper Fox’s latest adaption may have been a worthwhile attempt to keep viewers in their seats or away from the remote, but in reality we will see it is as merely another failed attempt to halt the inevitability of ad-skipping.