Television shows are becoming increasingly popular with the growing availability of cable television and on-demand streaming sites like Netflix and Hulu. If this is the case, why is it so difficult to promote new shows then? In the New York Times article “Networks Go to Extremes to Promote New Shows for the Fall Season,” Bill Carter points out that advertising new shows is becoming a lot more difficult due to the large amount of television shows. Therefore, marketers are developing many new and unique promotional ideas.
For example, Carter mentions the headless horsemen in Madison Square Park that were used to promote Fox’s new series “Sleepy Hollow.” Many of us might’ve noticed them or have even taken a picture with them on our way to and from Baruch last week. Fox went beyond this and sent actors in headless costumes to city and state fairs and had local weather forecasters deliver their report in headless costumes. Isn’t that awesome?
Headless Horseman promoting “Sleepy Hollow” in New York City
However, even with all these great ideas and large sums of money spent on advertisement; marketers are still finding it difficult to gain audience. It is so difficult because broadcast networks are “introducing dozens of new series at the same time” in early September. As Mr. Earley stated in the article, network marketing executives are running out of new promotional ideas all because there are too much television shows.
While I sympathize with the struggles of marketing executive, I think this sort of competition is good because it forces networks to create content that are more original. TV shows have been infamous for showing the same content over and over again with a different name and different characters. With an increased level of competition, they would need to be more distinct from other TV shows and they will need to be some new ideas introduced to gain viewers.
On the other hand, I believe people show be careful of how much time they spend watching television. With such a vast amount of TV shows and the availability of digital video recorders (DVR), it is very easy to spend all your time at home watching television and indeed, many people are wasting hours every day watching television rather than doing something more productive. Entertainment is necessary for people to relieve stress but there should be a limit because too much entertainment can turn into an undesirable waste of time.
Work Cited:
Carter, Bill. “Networks Go to Extremes to Promote New Shows for the Fall Season.” New York Times 22 Sept. 2013. Web. 27 Sept. 2013.
To view the article, click here.
I thought this was a really interesting article. How many times have we seen commercials for new tv shows, both the ones that caught our attention and the ones forgotten as soon as we saw them? This article made me notice just how many advertisements I see on a daily basis (especially recently with the beginning of a new television season). From posters slapped on the sides of buses, billboards, commercials, and online advertising, we are being bombarded by ads. I think its difficult for new shows to gain a substantial following when viewers may already have “their shows” that they watch religiously. Also, competition between networks during primetime thins out viewers. I also wonder if the online (illegal) streaming websites have an impact on the success of television shows? Is there a way to monitor or get a better idea of just how many people watch a particular show, or has television been too broadly changed by the internet?
Advertisements for TV shows and movies are everywhere, especially in New York City. I think you make a great point in saying that it is important for the network or show to differentiate itself from the other advertisements in their challenge to capture society’s attention. Without the competition from other networks, we wouldn’t have creative, new series to pass the time. However, I agree with you when I say I believe that streaming sites and on demand options are enablers. People watch SO much television. Now that Netflix allows people to watch shows for hours on end, it only further contributes to the lazy nature of our generation and the good and bad of this technological era.
What I wonder is how effective commercials are. I see many commercials on television, but I’m never compelled to watch many of those advertised television shows. I guess this does brings to question the originality of the advertisements; although those real life advertisements are certainly very enthusiastic. I feel that word of mouth is the real influence, whereas commercials are initiators.
I never really noticed all the advertisements we see for new television shows until now, despite the fact that advertisements for “Revenge” and “Pretty Little Liars” on buses and trains influenced me to watch the shows. I agree with you that marketing competition is good because it leads to the creation of new, unique series. However, it is also true that we waste a considerable amount of time watching these shows rather than doing schoolwork or chores. I’ve found myself rushing to go home from school many times in order to complete my homework before the viewing of new episodes of my favorite shows. Television has really affected my priorities, which is definitely not good. Although I enjoy the new shows that result from advertisement competition, I am wary of their addictive qualities.
I think this is a really intriguing point because it does bring into perspective how many channels and shows there really are. It’s definitely understandable why it’s hard to reign in people to watch a certain show, it may not even be that one show is not good, simply the time slot when it’s playing is inconvenient to some. There are so many other things on TV and so many other things available to do in our world, that it’s hard to garner as much attention to one show. It’s definitely very hard to get attention to one show when there are so many others out there. It kind of reminds me of some of the old sitcoms which many are familiar with, and which I love, namely Full House, Blossom and Saved by the Bell. These are shows that many people knew about, but today when someone talks about certain sitcoms, I rarely watch any consistently because there are so many things to watch that each time you turn on the tv, you get pulled into a different show. Thus, I definitely understand Carter’s point because if one wants a large, consistent, universal viewing audience today they have to get a lot of attention and have an amazing show. This is a lot of pressure.
Well I can certainly relate to how much efforts TV show producers put into advertisement. I’m sure all of you must have noticed, on your ways to school, the giant posters on the walls of every subway station and on almost every route of buses. What I also notice these days is that the competitive advertisement market (not limited to TV Show Ads) not only create good advertisement there are also some byproducts. To better the advertisement effect, which means making consumers remember the products, some resorted to the usage of negative languages and scenes to deepen one’s memory of the advertisement. Competition produces results but sometimes it also causes the implication of negative actions. (If you look at students that would be things like cheating)
As someone who loves watching television, I completely understand Carter’s point. Due to the abundance of networks and programs, it’s often difficult to decide what to watch. With so many options, viewers mostly depend on advertisements to make their decisions.
You can’t be in New York City and not see an advertisement of some sort. Everyday, we see them on billboards, subway platforms, on the side of buses, and more. In order to differentiate their show, marketing executives need to be more creative. They need to create memorable and unique advertisements so people will remember the show; therefore, be more inclined to watch it.
I believe this intense competition for viewers is good for the entertainment industry. Competition drives networks to create new and interesting shows. They can’t rely on the same-old storylines and characters to gain viewers. It forces writers, directors, etc. to reinvent the wheel. Advertisements only attracts viewers temporarily; it’s the content that keeps them watching and makes them fans of the show.
I found Bill Carter’s article and your analysis very interesting. Advertising has become a major issue in today’s world, primarily because of the range of media and the variety of products. Entrepreneurs, advertisers, and marketers need to ‘push the envelope further’ and apply their ingenuity to attract more viewers to their respective television shows.
I find it noteworthy that despite our advancements in technology, we seem to be taking a quite regressive approach to promote new shows. For instance, as you mentioned, Fox used a person dressed as the “Headless Horseman” to grab people’s attention. Using people to promote a show almost seems like a new idea in our tech-savvy world. Fox’s approach was unique because it is intriguing. Carter’s article, in fact, is a testament to Fox’s distinctive and successful approach.
In addition, we come across thousands of advertisements in trains and on billboards on a regular basis, but very few of them register in our minds. Why is that? What do some advertisers do that others don’t? Personally, I find the field of marketing and advertising very challenging because it requires businessmen to reach new zeniths every day. At the same time, however, I think if advertisers survey the people and try to understand what catches their attention, they can successfully endorse their products.
The reason television networks are going to extremes to promote their upcoming shows is because they know viewers are more than likely not going to tune in to seven different shows at once. Although the creation of DVR has made this feat possible, there are simply not enough hours in the day to go back and play each show. Therefore, networks are scrambling to ensure their shows are among the lucky ones chosen by audiences to DVR- because lets face it, the age of live-watching is coming to an end.
I love your proposed solution for the network’s problems- make shows that are original and interesting. But, creating a show that is original is easier said then done. It is as if every love story, every Grimm’s fairy tale, and every take on vampires has been exhausted, so what’s left to create? Perhaps it’s not who can create an original story line now, but instead who can obtain the biggest stars. People tune in when they recognize and like who they are watching.
I love the Headless Horsemen promotion idea and whatever unconventional ways products and shows are being advertised nowadays. As society and technology changes, advertisers have to keep up with trends and find innovative ways to get customers and audiences interested. It’s interesting how, after society has gotten used to mainly seeing advertisements on television and on the internet, that marketers are looking towards advertisements in a physical context to be more innovative. We’ve gotten so used to watching commercials that they have become commonplace and trite to the point that we are bored with them. I know I always gloss over advertisements and go do other tasks when commercials are on. I applaud companies who are taking the steps towards more provocative ways of marketing; they certainly catch more interest when they do so.
It is so true that there are too many television shows already, therefore hindering the production of new ones that may prove to be popular and innovating once they are aired. However, it is definitely more difficult to come up with totally different ideas from the earlier ones as so many have already been presented, and this holds true not only for tv shows, but also for other creative works such as novels, movies, and music. I also think that perhaps the standards for passing new shows should be made more lenient to promote creativity. I like how you chose to write about this topic, as some countries other than the U.S. are facing the similar problems in a more serious degree when it comes to the arts often because of their short budgets.