Posted on 11/19/2006 8:53:37 PM PST by Snickering Hound
NEW YORK — Americans born between 1946 and 1964 are accustomed to being catered to, but that's not the case with much of television today. Now there's some new evidence that they're finding this mighty irritating.
A study conducted by Harris Interactive suggests that the television industry's obsession with youth is backfiring.
Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they believe that most TV programming and advertising is targeted toward people under 40, the survey said. More than 80 percent of adults over 40 say they have a hard time finding TV shows that reflect their lives.
A significant number of baby boomers — 37 percent — say they aren't happy with what's on television, according to the study.
"The amount of people dissatisfied with television overall was a pretty big eye-opening thing for us," said Larry Jones, president of the TV Land cable network, which commissioned the study.
To a certain extent, the generation that decades ago warned against trusting people over 30 can blame itself for the predicament. The TV industry's slavish devotion to ratings within the 18-to-49-year-old demographic started when most baby boomers fit into that group.
The theory among advertisers is that it's important to reach young people as their preferences are forming — get them hooked on a certain toothpaste or soda early and they'll be hooked for life. Advertisers will pay a premium for young viewers: $335 for every thousand people in the 18-to-24 age range that a network delivers, for example. Viewers aged 55-to-64 are worth only $119 for every thousand, according to Nielsen Media Research.
That's why ABC and NBC conduct all of their business with advertisers in the 18-to-49 demo. From a financial standpoint, if you're 50 or over, you mean nothing to those networks' executives. For Fox, the CW, MTV, BET and countless other networks, even 40 is too old.
The peak year for births within the baby boom, Jones noted, was 1957 — meaning all those people are turning 49 this year.
Much of the television industry isn't aging with them.
"They've just never changed or haven't realized that the population has moved on," said Randy Berkowitz, vice president of research for Combe Inc., which makes health products and beauty aids.
Berkowitz believes that "people are just not in tune with TV because they can't relate to it anymore."
Jones, who's 46, said he wants to come home at night and see an entertainment program that appeals to his sensibilities. Some people may find Paris Hilton funny on "The Simple Life," for example — not him.
To a surprising extent, advertising is also alienating. The Harris Interactive study found that half of baby boomers say they tune out commercials that are clearly aimed at young people. An additional one-third said they'd go out of their way NOT to buy such a product.
"I'm not saying that every show, every network should reshape, but that's an awfully high level of dissatisfaction among the largest generation group of all time," said Ken Dychtwald, a psychologist who worked with Harris Interactive on the study. (Harris conducted an online survey of 4,220 adults between April 28-May 15 this year, with a sampling error of plus or minus 1.5 percent).
Some advertisers have responded to the aging population. Financial services firms, for example, see many potential customers advancing toward retirement. Two decades ago drug companies didn't advertise on TV; now you could fill a medicine cabinet with all the products hawked on the evening news.
But these were cases where the companies making these products saw the opportunity, not necessarily the TV industry, Berkowitz said.
TV Land's Jones is already using the survey in his business. The results have convinced him that, more than ever, his network of mostly classic TV shows should be boomer-centric, he said. He also comes armed with the survey when he meets with the Madison Avenue types who buy advertising time.
One statistic he's sure to cite: The survey found 51 percent of the postwar generation describe themselves as "open to new ideas." Meanwhile, only 12 percent of young adults think the older folks feel that way.
Why does that matter? Jones said the average media buyer or planner is under 30. Many are undoubtedly hired for their know-how in appealing to a specific generation, and it isn't the baby boomers.
"There is this huge perception versus reality situation in the marketplace," he said.
Jones is pushing the idea of a "middlescence," about 40-to-59-year-olds who don't feel young anymore but don't feel old, and have plenty of discretionary income.
With the continued carving of the television audience into smaller slices because of all the networks on the air, the chance for advertisers to reach particular niches increases, said Evan Shapiro, who had his own marketing firm and is now head of the Independent Film Channel. Shapiro, 37, doesn't buy the idea that there's nothing on TV for older viewers.
"If you are a 50-year-old male or female, there is an enormous amount of television for you," he said. "It's just not on all the places that it used to be."
Still, Shapiro said he senses that marketers are slowly waking up to the potential in older TV viewers.
But by the time it happens, the children of the baby boomers will be the focus, making their parents even more irrelevant in television's eyes, he said.
"143 posts, and nobody has mentioned The Unit."
I was also counting the posts and feeling very dissappointed in my fellow FReepers. I'd like to also add NCIS to the list of "must see TeeeVeee."
Not only do boomers have more money - they have more influence with the younger generation. What Grampa has to say has more sway than what Mom says... Same with Grandma.
And original series Trek every night. Watched a bunch of the marathon this weekend while working on my modeling stuff, and it was great. I had forgtooen how well-written those shows are...cheesy effects and overdone acting aren't nearly enough to overcome it.
Every time I see one of those Cialis ads with the couples in bathtbs, i can't help thinking, "If they do it in one of theose bathtubs, somebody's gonna break a hip!
It actually wasn’t the SciFi channel that resurrected it….per se.
It was a producer from one of the worst shows ever: Star Trek Deep Space Nine. I watched an interview with him where he said once he was done with DS9, he was done with Science Fiction for good.
But someone gave him a set of the original BSG series and as he was watching it he thought to himself “Wow, this is stupid and campy, but the story has incredible potential.”
Where upon, he approached the Sci Fi channel with the outline for the mini-series.
I think the thing that’s most amazing about the series is not that Sci Fi agreed to re-hash it but, that they didn’t insist on changing it and making it campy like the original…….that’s something they seem to do with everything they produce.
The writer stuck to his guns, determined not to let the new BSG turn into a insipid, childish series like DS9.
I kinda liked the allergy drug commercial with the guy and his girlfriend's cat.
I'm 20-something and I'm with what I'm seeing here. History Channel, Discovery Channel, HGTV, FoodTv, TLC (still learning to cook :) That's the vast majority of my viewing. I rarely watch the network stuff anymore. I do occasionally watch Reba, which is on whatever the WB used to be. That's a good clean reasonably decent show. Not earthshattering, but not bad and infinitely better than reality TV. I'm also a Golden Girls/Cosby Show/Designing Women addict. Yes, Designing Women had the flaming liberal, but at least she had good morals and the show was clever. Plus, it was the first show to show realistic southerners.
History/Discovery/A&E and sports. Television is not so bad if you stay away from the network crap and that PBS abomination.
I was replying to someone bashing Boomers. The spirit of my post mirrored his ... Gen Xer!
Good post, House is a good show.
Boo freakin' hoo .. of course, TV, in general, is very low quality entertainment within the realm of mainstream media broadcasting.
It was a producer from one of the worst shows ever: Star Trek Deep Space Nine. I watched an interview with him where he said once he was done with DS9, he was done with Science Fiction for good.
...
The writer stuck to his guns, determined not to let the new BSG turn into a insipid, childish series like DS9.
That makes BSG even more amazing. DS9 was weak, among the Star Trek series, but to my mind, the weakest had to have been Voyager; the totally PC Star Trek. At least DS9 had the Ferengi, the original party animals. Making money, gambling, naked females; those guys know how to live.
I've never seen House and didn't list it.
Wow. Most Star Trek fans--at least online--regard DS9 as the best of the Trek spinoffs. Never seen it called "weak" or "insipid." It was the only human Star Trek since the original. None of this Roddenberry, liberal, "we're so perfect we don't even argue" crap. The Ferengi were always capitalist whipping boys on the other shows, but DS9 tried to make them a little more than that. And, capitalism got a positive spin on a few episodes of DS9, such as the one where Jake learned about capitalism while trying to get a baseball card for his dad. And, religion--even if it wasn't our own--got the only positive view in the spinoffs on DS9.
I didn't appreciate the underlying storyline of the CO sleeping with one of his men's wife--and sending him on missions just so he can get a little sack time! I stopped watching because of that. Maybe they toned that down.
The family dynamic on that show is great. They really sell that they are brothers. There were a couple of moments I didn't like, like when the crazy right-wing preacher's wife was using the reaper to kill abortionists or whatever, but that was just one episode, and the rest is good. I think the ratings are improving, so hopefully it'll be around a while.
1964 myself...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.