Google’s game here is obvious: By analysing this anonymised sea of TiVo viewer data, they can help customers target their ads more accurately. Ad buyers also win, because they have a better sense of exactly how many people are actually seeing their ads. Guess who doesn’t like this plan!:

Now, with TiVo’s data, collected from millions of digital video recorders across the country, Google can tell exactly which of those commercials are being bypassed. If all the commercials are being skipped, the channel gets no money. It’s easy to see why TV executives get heartburn over this.

With my pay TV DVR and my computer, I rarely watch live TV. And when I do, I usually end up flipping around during commercials. I know I’m not alone, and I know this is causing problems for networks that are pushing more and more of its advertising into shows instead of between them.

Google, which already licenses similar data from Dish Network, is giving us a preview of how this kind of thing will work for everyone in the future – soon, data detailing what people are and aren’t watching will be too present, too obvious to ignore, and networks will have to acknowledge that hey, nobody is watching ads anymore. In the long term this will make advertising more effective and efficient, but it could also kneecap TV ad sales as a whole. Or not! According to Google, via the LA Times:

Our system makes it easy for people to buy TV ads. We’re lowering the barriers to entry, which has the effect of growing the market.

Somehow I imagine “lowering the barriers for entry” isn’t on the top of NBC’s to-do list right now. Google will kill all. [LAT]

It’s not even Thanksgiving yet, but already Best Buy seems to have won the “most annoying holiday ad of the season” award. Seriously, try to sit through one of these without squirming around uncomfortably and wanting to punch the screen.

You think Apple is going to take its fancy phone being relegated to the Island of Misfit Toys in a Verizon ad laying down? Nope. These two new iPhone ads seem to gun right at the big V.

[Engadget]

Sure, the Wii might actually have a shot at keeping awkward conversation to a minimum, but it faces the same problem that the Commodore 64 had when it reigned supreme: You’ll still probably be booted from the TV when the football starts.

Technologizer has collected 10 of the most disturbingly perky tech ads from the 1980s, and it’s a fun look at how far we’ve (sorta) come. [Technologizer]

When I think escalating mega mobile phone carrier ad war, I think actor Luke Wilson. Oh wait, no I don’t, and yet here he is, again, striking back on behalf of AT&T against Verizon Wireless.

Now, good on AT&T for fighting back with more ads and not more silly lawsuits and all, but the Verizon holiday ad lineup is pretty strong, and I don’t see many Verizon customers losing sleep over Luke Wilson covering a giant coverage map with post cards.

As tipster Eric notes, AT&T selectively does not mention Edge, 3G or voice/data distinctions in this commercial, opting instead for vague blanket statements like “AT&T covers 97 per cent of all Americans – that’s over 300 million people.”

Just as AT&T’s injunction for the Verizon “There’s a map for that” ads to be taken off-air was denied, the company’s own pugnacious messages started playing. I somehow doubt that these “Side by Side” commercials are gonna make Verizon cry.

US District Court Judge Timothy Batten Sr remarked that people might “misunderstand” the commercials, “but that doesn’t mean they’re misleading”. He continued to add that “most people who are watching TV are semi-catatonic” to begin with. Let’s hope his train of thought remains during the follow-up hearing on December 16, because the case is starting to lose any entertainment value. [AJC via Engadget]

[jenntotten via Geekologie]

When your lawsuits sound like press releases, it’s because they probably are (not that we care, the whole case is pretty entertaining). Check out this opening statement from Verizon:

AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts.

YA BURNT, AT&T! Verizon goes on to accuse AT&T of failing to adequately expand its 3G coverage to match demand for its smartphones, which is sort of a hard point for AT&T to argue. Verizon claims that its advertisements are “literally true” (instead of philosophically true? Metaphorically true? True in the sense in which it is used in animal husbandry, as in purebred? What?) and not misleading, and that AT&T has failed to provide customers with an accurate map of its coverage. It’s pretty great, really — if you’ve ever wished the American legal system was more like it is on Law and Order, this whole statement is a gift. [Engadget]

Keep it tasteless 1984. I’ve got no idea what fine publication this appeared in, but it looks like the sales came out of Mission, Kansas. And no, the 1800 number no longer works.

How much would this ultimate conversation piece have set you back? Just $US75, including shipping which takes 3-6 weeks. That’s an insane $US150 bucks today. I wonder how many they sold… [Paco Camino and LiveJournal via CopyRanter]