Posted by voter, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Dec 13, 2012 at 6:33 pm
What happened to freedom of speech? First, she is trying to reduce the effectiveness of advertising. Next she'll to to restrict corporate political donations. Doesn't she understand that corporations are people, too?
Posted by iamhmmm@yahoo.com, a resident of East Palo Alto, on Dec 13, 2012 at 6:36 pm
Um, Anon, I watch "regular television." So do some of my neighbors. Guess what? Not everyone can afford cable - I know you know that - but moreover, not everyone WANTS cable. W/Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, etc., plus local channels, we're just fine w/out cable.
Posted by Loud-TV-Ads-Are-Not-A-Pressing-Problem, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Dec 13, 2012 at 6:37 pm
20+ years in Washington, and this is about the only thing that Eshoo has to show for her taking up space on Capitol Hill.
> I am a lot more irritated that there is no regulation
> of Internet advertising.
If advertising on the Internet offends you--don't use it. By the way, would you guess that there is more advertising in one of the local newspapers, or Youtube? The answer, of course, is that there is more advertising in print media. Ready to have the Federal government regulate the advertising in newspapers?
Posted by loud loud loud, a resident of Los Altos, on Dec 13, 2012 at 7:13 pm
"What happened to freedom of speech? First, she is trying to reduce the effectiveness of advertising."
Not effecting freedom of speech, silly, just the volume. It was bi-partisan.
"The other thing is ... who can do anything about it? Where do you report an ad being loud, how do you prove it. What is the penalty and who enforced it?"
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 13, 2012 at 9:34 pm
Hey iamhmmm@yahoo.com
I don't have cable ... but I do have Amazon Prime ... which is no substitute. I don't think there are many watchers of regular TV around anymore
I do watch regular TV, I think most people do not any more. I just get really crappy reception - worse than I ever used to get years ago when that was all there was to watch. I'm think they do it on purpose.
My point was relative to all the other assaults on citizens in terms of advertising, now regular TV advertising is almost moot.
One example are the commercial AM radio stations that routinely have louder commercials than programming, AND they do things like feature alarms, telephones, car horns, etc in them to annoy and get attention.
On the Internet, go to a public site like You-Tube or Huffington Post or others and notice how when they show videos they push more and more advertising at you, and then lower the volume of the actual content, sometimes it does not even play so you have to reload the page and sit through the commercials several times, then when the shorter and shorter segments of video are done we are treated to more and louder commericals that autoplay - often without any control to stop them or turn them off.
Posted by Anon., a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Dec 13, 2012 at 9:38 pm
> Loud-TV-Ads-Are-Not-A-Pressing-Problem
What offends me is your thoughtless knee-jerk reaction. If you don't like my posts, skip them, don't read them and by all means do not respond to them.
And by the way brainiac, print media does not have a volume or loud obnoxious commercials, yet. what is with people like you that you have to always toss those kind of snide comments into the conversation. Obviously obnoxious programming does not bother Fox News viewers.
Posted by MIdtown resident, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Dec 16, 2012 at 9:25 am
Thanks Anna, Next how about banning advertising that target kids? is outrageous that impressionable and immature kids are played upon to turn them into consumers so some fatcat executives can make a pile.
Ya, Ya, I know all about freedom of speech but this concept is being abused - just look at the "citizens united" decision. wake up!
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
