Personally, I feel there are WAY too many commercials on TV these days. They are now starting to interrupt regular programming and are starting to cut into TV shows. I wish advertisers could just cut out some of the commercials. We don't need soooo many of them!! They are on every 15 minutes and most of them are stupid ads anyways. Occasionally, a funny or sweet commercial will come on but for the most part they are mindless, silly ads with no purpose other then to annoy us.

There, I'm done my rant. Now post your own! ;D

You be careful what you wish for, young lady . . .  ;)

Over here we have to pay a TV licence (which I believe you folks don't). We pay

There are too many commercials I agree.  When you see promos for TV shows, the voice over guy is like "30 minutes of your favourite sitcom up next".  If you take away all of the commercials, each

[quote author=wһіѕ

I heard that they abridged The Simpsons a lot to fit into the television schedule.


They did yes.  I believe on the Simpsons Seasons DVD's, the full episodes with the cut footage are featured

The money has to come from somewhere. What the exact cost is of running a television or radio network is I don't know, thus it I cannot say whether or not there are too many commercials. I do find commercials obnoxious and destructive to the continuity of programming. I don't like them.
As Bobby points out, in the U.K. citizens pay a hefty license fee for television. I think most Americans if asked would say they'd rather watch commercials.
Our public broadcasting networks don't show commercials per se, but they do interrupt programming three or four times a year for days of obnoxious pledge drives. People in my family--especially my grandparents--were ardent supporters of NPR/PBS. However, a lot as changed since the 1970s.
Nixon put the nascent Corporation for Public Broadcasting on his enemies list in the late '60s. CPB has been under constant right-wing assault since it's foundation. If you have media free from the mandates of corporate America, you have media free to say what it likes about the government and the government's paymasters, the corporations. In the 1970s CPB did have a "liberal bias" (simply meaning they were skeptical of the PR from government and big business). Political pressures steadily eroded the government funding of CPB and forced it to rely more on corporate money. Listener support via pledge drives contributes a significant amount of funding for both PBS and NPR stations. However, listener support does not fill the bill. Never has.
In the 1970s, philanthropic foundations underwrote PBS programming (Ford, Carnegie, Macarthur, Pew, etc). In the '80s and '90s you saw a gradual shift to underwriting directly from corporations themselves (as opposed to philanthropies founded by corporate seed money), so you had not just an acknowledgement, such as "Sesame Street is made possible by a grant from the Ford Foundation," but corporate slogans and graphics from Archer Daniels Midland, General Electric, and so forth.  The ability of CBP networks to be critical of corporate America has been nearly extinguished in this decade.
If our government were interested in working for the people, not the fatcats, it would have no fear of critical media programming. They would be glad to fund their own watchdogs. We all know government is hand-in-hand with big business, and they know an ignorant populace is a compliant one.
My beef with commercials is less about the number of commercial spots broadcast, and more about the influence commercial interests have over media programming

Personally, I feel there are WAY too many commercials on TV these days. They are now starting to interrupt regular programming and are starting to cut into TV shows. I wish advertisers could just cut out some of the commercials. We don't need soooo many of them!! They are on every 15 minutes and most of them are stupid ads anyways. Occasionally, a funny or sweet commercial will come on but for the most part they are mindless, silly ads with no purpose other then to annoy us.

There, I'm done my rant. Now post your own! ;D

I agree

ABC is the biggest commercial skank as far as the major networks are concerned. It is likely I won't watch any of their programs again. >:(

Everytime I settle down to watch TV, a commercial break crops up after one minute of watching.

They did yes.  I believe on the Simpsons Seasons DVD's, the full episodes with the cut footage are featured


I think that's scandalous. Not only do you have to watch crappy commercials but you get less programme for your money, lol.

The money has to come from somewhere. What the exact cost is of running a television or radio network is I don't know, thus it I cannot say whether or not there are too many commercials. I do find commercials obnoxious and destructive to the continuity of programming. I don't like them.
As Bobby points out, in the U.K. citizens pay a hefty license fee for television. I think most Americans if asked would say they'd rather watch commercials.


I would choose commercials over a licence fee anyday and I know that if we had the choice to drop BBC1 and BBC2 from our television schedules, everybody in Britain would do it which is why the fee is compulsory. I may have to emphasise that it costs a household

Commercials are too frequent for our liking, but necessary.  (I would have copied quotes of others but I don't have time).  What with Cable, the Internet, DVD rentals being so cheap, Cable on Demand.....the tv stations that provide "free" programming have to pay for themselves with commercials.  The less people that watch them, the less an advertiser will pay to put their commercial on the programs, the more commercials they need to have to pay their bills.  It's that simple.  Economics 101.

As Maxwell said, PBS is a good choice for commercial free tv.  But pay up.  We have to support it if we want it.  I remember when government supported it and the hubbub that stopped that.  It was definitely partisan politics at play.  I, myself, think government should stay out.  We, the public, can pay for public television ourselves.  It would cost less than the license Bobby has to pay for but more than not contributing at all.  If you can afford to give $100 / year to public television, I say DO IT.  It provides educational programming for kids who need it and can't afford it...and great arts and history and such for the rest of us.  With, basically, no commercial interruptions. (This ends my appeal for the funding of the public broadcasting system  :))

Commercials are too frequent for our liking, but necessary.  (I would have copied quotes of others but I don't have time).  What with Cable, the Internet, DVD rentals being so cheap, Cable on Demand.....the tv stations that provide "free" programming have to pay for themselves with commercials.  The less people that watch them, the less an advertiser will pay to put their commercial on the programs, the more commercials they need to have to pay their bills.  It's that simple.  Economics 101.

As Maxwell said, PBS is a good choice for commercial free tv.  But pay up.  We have to support it if we want it.  I remember when government supported it and the hubbub that stopped that.  It was definitely partisan politics at play.  I, myself, think government should stay out.  We, the public, can pay for public television ourselves.  It would cost less than the license Bobby has to pay for but more than not contributing at all.  If you can afford to give $100 / year to public television, I say DO IT.  It provides educational programming for kids who need it and can't afford it...and great arts and history and such for the rest of us.  With, basically, no commercial interruptions. (This ends my appeal for the funding of the public broadcasting system  :))


Oh believe me, I know. I took an economics class in high school. I just hate commericals that's all, but I am not stupid. I know they are a neccessary part of TV and if we didn't have them, we wouldn't be able to afford the TV shows that we watch. And I do support PBS but I can't afford to give them money. I watch the Lawerence Welk show every week though. ;D

^ It would not be such a problem if our government was interested in democracy rather than corporatism. In a healthy democracy, the taxpayers would be happy to support the arts and media--especially media that acted as a watchdog for government and corporate power, that requires media free from for-profit corporate money, and free from the influence of politicians on the take from for-profit corporate money.
But...America has made its choice, and it has chosen Montgomery Burns!

http://inicia.es/de/estrellaee/srburns.jpg

Depends on the network.. some show very few, not even enough for me to get a snack or go to the bathroom.. others take forever.