Non. As the OFCOM rules show there is no rule that every ad break must be taken.
When it's a sponsored programme, the sponsor bumpers have to run a certain number of times, so you can't drop breaks in sponsored programmes.
What about a boxing match which may be scheduled for 12 rounds with a 30 second ad between every other round but the fight lasts only 4 rounds what happens to those ads paid for and scheduled to feature in the main bout?
No doubt company bosses will be on the phone demanding the producers make the boxers carry on for the full 12 rounds or they'll sue them for lost advertising. ;-):D
You'll notice if you ever watch boxing that the breaks are front-loaded for that very reason.
On ITV on Saturday night for example, there were breaks after each of the first six rounds, and then no more breaks until well after it had finished.
If that fight had ended in the fourth, they would have taken a break at the end of the fight and dropped two more breaks into the post-fight chat. They wouldn't have dropped any of them.
Programme makers don't have the power to drop breaks. That would be blurring the boundaries between editorial and commercial, which is not something anyone wants. Well maybe some advertisers...
Non. As the OFCOM rules show there is no rule that every ad break must be taken.
What about a boxing match which may be scheduled for 12 rounds with a 30 second ad between every other round but the fight lasts only 4 rounds what happens to those ads paid for and scheduled to feature in the main bout?
No doubt company bosses will be on the phone demanding the producers make the boxers carry on for the full 12 rounds or they'll sue them for lost advertising. ;-):D
I can't believe you are still going on about this.
You are obviously far to young to remember the wrestling on World of Sport in the 70's. They had many 30 second ad breaks between rounds to give the impression it was live. It made more sense than a 2-3 minute break every 20 minutes.
Sky do the same with cricket, sneaking in an ad between overs.
But your boxing analogy is pointless. They would KNOW in advance they were screening boxing, and advertisers would know what was, or wasn't going to be available in advance (as in would it be one 30 second ad every round, or every other round). AND-if it was a title fight they would have paid handsomely for the privilege, and would expect the ad to be shown at the agreed time (eg between rounds 2 and 3- or-If he's knocked out before that- immediately before the post fight interviews.
Have another go.
Edit to add- Out of interest, how do you think ITV4 or whoever it was could afford to show these men riding bikes in the first place? They don't have a license fee- so the ADVERTISERS are the ones who are making it possible in the first place. And, at some point (I don't know how many hours on end these men ride their bikes) you HAVE to take a break, and hope nothing significant happens in the 3 minutes you are away
If something significant does happen, they can always show a replay (does it really matter it will be 3 minutes after the incident?
When it's a sponsored programme, the sponsor bumpers have to run a certain number of times, so you can't drop breaks in sponsored programmes.
There isn't any actual _regulation_ saying that, though, is there? From Ofcom's point of view if a programme has 2 breaks in the hour rather than 3, that's not a problem and no cause for any concern whatsoever.
But obviously if the TV channel in question has chosen to have "all breaks at maximum, all the time" for maximum revenue, then it's a matter for that channel whether they insist that there are never any acceptable circumstances for not taking a break. Likewise, it would be surprising if any TV channel had sold spots or sponsorship on an absolutely guaranteed number of plays no matter what, because they'd be setting themselves up for a real problem whenever there were genuinely unforeseen circumstances. e.g. what happens if there's a technical issue (as affected ITV fairly recently) and transmission is lost for any particular amount of time? The world doesn't end if planned breaks and sponsorships don't air - there are make-good mechanisms built into the process to account for that, because even TV companies know that nothing is foolproof and you never have 100% reliability.
Programme makers don't have the power to drop breaks. That would be blurring the boundaries between editorial and commercial, which is not something anyone wants. Well maybe some advertisers...
The lines are blurred far more if people think that advertisers have an immutable, unstoppable right to interrupt any transmission in any circumstance, no matter what is happening. Advertisers take breaks as and when they are offered - they have no right to demand breaks which a broadcaster, for any reason, may be unable to run, or may elect not to. Programme makers may not have that power, but only because the TV channel prefers to take the advertisers' money in almost every circumstance. That's their choice - not a regulation.
Comments
When it's a sponsored programme, the sponsor bumpers have to run a certain number of times, so you can't drop breaks in sponsored programmes.
You'll notice if you ever watch boxing that the breaks are front-loaded for that very reason.
On ITV on Saturday night for example, there were breaks after each of the first six rounds, and then no more breaks until well after it had finished.
If that fight had ended in the fourth, they would have taken a break at the end of the fight and dropped two more breaks into the post-fight chat. They wouldn't have dropped any of them.
Programme makers don't have the power to drop breaks. That would be blurring the boundaries between editorial and commercial, which is not something anyone wants. Well maybe some advertisers...
I can't believe you are still going on about this.
You are obviously far to young to remember the wrestling on World of Sport in the 70's. They had many 30 second ad breaks between rounds to give the impression it was live. It made more sense than a 2-3 minute break every 20 minutes.
Sky do the same with cricket, sneaking in an ad between overs.
But your boxing analogy is pointless. They would KNOW in advance they were screening boxing, and advertisers would know what was, or wasn't going to be available in advance (as in would it be one 30 second ad every round, or every other round). AND-if it was a title fight they would have paid handsomely for the privilege, and would expect the ad to be shown at the agreed time (eg between rounds 2 and 3- or-If he's knocked out before that- immediately before the post fight interviews.
Have another go.
Edit to add- Out of interest, how do you think ITV4 or whoever it was could afford to show these men riding bikes in the first place? They don't have a license fee- so the ADVERTISERS are the ones who are making it possible in the first place. And, at some point (I don't know how many hours on end these men ride their bikes) you HAVE to take a break, and hope nothing significant happens in the 3 minutes you are away
If something significant does happen, they can always show a replay (does it really matter it will be 3 minutes after the incident?
But obviously if the TV channel in question has chosen to have "all breaks at maximum, all the time" for maximum revenue, then it's a matter for that channel whether they insist that there are never any acceptable circumstances for not taking a break. Likewise, it would be surprising if any TV channel had sold spots or sponsorship on an absolutely guaranteed number of plays no matter what, because they'd be setting themselves up for a real problem whenever there were genuinely unforeseen circumstances. e.g. what happens if there's a technical issue (as affected ITV fairly recently) and transmission is lost for any particular amount of time? The world doesn't end if planned breaks and sponsorships don't air - there are make-good mechanisms built into the process to account for that, because even TV companies know that nothing is foolproof and you never have 100% reliability.
The lines are blurred far more if people think that advertisers have an immutable, unstoppable right to interrupt any transmission in any circumstance, no matter what is happening. Advertisers take breaks as and when they are offered - they have no right to demand breaks which a broadcaster, for any reason, may be unable to run, or may elect not to. Programme makers may not have that power, but only because the TV channel prefers to take the advertisers' money in almost every circumstance. That's their choice - not a regulation.