PVRs will diminish TV programming?

The Chicago Tribune has a piece on the impact of DVR/PVR technology and how the business model for TV (advertising) is circumvented by these new technologies.

Television has always been the entertainment medium most immediately sensitive to popular taste. Ratings are provided almost instantly, and the very business model is not to sell the entertainment, but to use the entertainment to gather an audience. The audience is what is sold, to the advertisers.

And, as leaders from all aspects of television have warned, when you diminish advertising's effectiveness you mandate that TV has to find a different way to pay for itself.

That means three likely results: the end, or shrinking, of over-the-air free TV to be replaced by much more pay-per-view; more stealth ads sneaked into the content of a show itself, like today's product placement only more so; and, in all likelihood, probably more repeats and a greater ratio of reality schlock to carefully produced scripted fare, because the latter is so expensive to make.

I personally think that the article is a re-hash of all the "industry fears" surrounding new technologies but is nonetheless worthwhile to read for that perspective. In light of all the efforts by the satellite and cable companies rushing to bring these new boxes to market, it is clear that DVR/PVR technology is here to stay.

With growing amounts of programming (cable, satellite, etc.) and the lure of video games, Internet games, and the Internet itself, we all are watching less TV. So advertisers must be much more precise with their advertising in order to target the customers who will appreciate/react to their messages. Blaming new technologies for changes in market behavior? Cue the tiny violins, please.

Why more choices may mean fewer [chicagotribune.com]