kq4ym 11/14/2016 | 11:55:55 AM
Re: Why? Yes, it does seem when we watch a show we want to actually watch the show. When we don't want to watch (during the commercial break?) we don't watch. Adding more distraction to a screen like the Twitter feed just doesn't make sense other than for a novelty for a few minutes. I suppose there may be a small percentage of folks who actually might prefer the distraction, but not enought to make it pay off I'd guess.
danielcawrey 11/6/2016 | 4:43:48 PM
Re: We have interactive television Twitter and its relationship to television is in such a weird place. So many people spend their time during television ads looking at Twitter. Problem is, Twitter hasn't been able to figure out online ads the way Google and Facebook have been able to. I would expect ultimately a content provider will end up buying Twitter to try to figure out exactly what to do with it. 
Mitch Wagner 11/3/2016 | 3:21:39 PM
Re: Why? I am often interested in what people have to say about a particular TV show but I like to hear about it AFTER I've watched the show. When I watch the show, I'm watching the show.
Carol Wilson 11/2/2016 | 6:57:56 PM
Re: Why? Watching TV with Twitter is like being forced to watch your favorite team play a critical game in a bus station lobby. There is a lot of noise, but none of it adds to the experience, and some of it is downright bothersome. 
Mitch Wagner 11/2/2016 | 4:00:46 PM
Why? I understand why broadcasters like this idea. TV joined with Twitter gets people watching TV -- and being exposed to ads -- in realtime. 

But there's no value to consumers in this. 

People interested in watching TV with Twitter already do it, on their phones, tablets, and laptops. 

People without phones, tablets, and laptops aren't interested in Twitter. 

So this is a service with nobody interested in it. 
Kelsey Ziser 11/2/2016 | 3:25:43 PM
Re: Kids these days. I might be the only one who loved Pop Up Video...I learned so much useless knowledge about The Cure and Dead or Alive that's stuck in my brain to this day. 

Pop Up Video is like Mystery Science Theater, you watch it for the running commentary, but that doesn't hold water on a regular TV show. I agree with Dave's point about it "lacking intimacy." If I want to know what people are saying on Twitter...I'll go on Twitter.
macemoneta 11/2/2016 | 2:54:33 PM
If only If only there were some sort of smart phone or tablet-like handheld device that could be used to interact with any social media, while watching unobscured and uninterrupted broadcast TV programs.

I swear, the executives at these companies still have their secretaries print out their emails, so they can dictate a response. Their use of technology must be almost nonexistant. It's the only way to explain the crazy stuff they come up with. 
inkstainedwretch 11/2/2016 | 1:36:27 PM
Kids these days. Anyone remember MTV back when it showed music videos? It eventually set up a running crawl of comments from viewers. It got boring pretty quickly.

This is more of the same and the rationale for doing it seems even more shaky today. In order for real-time commentary to be interesting and to stay interesting, it has to be done in real time, yet more and more viewing is done on a time-shifted basis. 

There's value in novelty, so might as well try it, I suppose. But as demonstrated by pet rocks, Tamagotchi, and the Boston Red Sox, novelties get real old real fast.

-- Brian Santo
brooks7 11/2/2016 | 1:02:17 PM
We have interactive television  



They are called video games....



Sign In