dsgrue3 said:
Lol, you're so focused on the legality of it. There is literally no difference between me NOT watching a commerical because I chose to access the show online versus me NOT watching the commercial because I went to take a piss. And that's the fundamental issue I have with your complaint. Tell me, who is losing out here? |
That is precisely my problem. The precise theory of how TV companies work out whether or not to cancel a show is viewship figures (beyond premium cable) as then they can work out how much to charge from adverts. These are worked out by people having boxes in their house measuring what they watch and then this is extrapolated. Now this is clearly a very flawed system, but it is the system.
So in theory, you not watching makes no difference, unless you happen to have a Nielsen box in your house. In the long term, the companies advertising will realise that nobody is watching TV and thus their ad money is wasted, but that is more complicated. So in this precise case, what you are doing makes no difference
The problem is more broad than this. The problem is that people fundamentally don't think they need to pay for TV whether or not it is just them "skipping the adverts." In some cases is doesn't make any difference, in some cases it does. It is not up to you to decide whether or not you watching tv illegally effects the makers of the programme.







