isn't the use of the ABC Kids logo also a form of advertising?

Adelaide:

Friday (28th Jan) night I spotted the ABC logo watermark during 'blood in the wire' - it was fairly unobtrusive and reasonably transparent - certainly didnt have me worried about screen-burn..  (on a side note, this programm was broadcast in 5.1 which was a pleasant surprise from the stereo 5.1 of the commerical networks).

You mean Wire In The Blood?
Are you sure there was one there, as I never noticed one in Sydney that night. If there was one in Adelaide, are you able to provide a screen capture?
ct

Adelaide:

Friday (28th Jan) night I spotted the ABC logo watermark during 'blood in the wire' - it was fairly unobtrusive and reasonably transparent - certainly didnt have me worried about screen-burn..  (on a side note, this programm was broadcast in 5.1 which was a pleasant surprise from the stereo 5.1 of the commerical networks).

Dissapointing its there at all.

Reading these posts, I am loathed to see ABC Kids once I get home from work tonight and see what the daily recording has for me.

Cheers,
Bitey

You must be seeing things. Wire In The Blood did not have a ABC watermark on it on Friday 28th Jan.

Also it was stereo only, not 5.1. It may have been a "surround" mix, but not 5.1, I would had known if it was.

I was guessing they might start watermarking tomorrow, but I now think they are "easing" it in, just so they will get less complaints about it.
e.g. start off with the news last week, now ABC Kids, next a few more shows, then all the time.

well no watermark on doctor who on abc nsw

Does anyone else think that the "ABC Kids" DOG looks like someone was sick in the top right hand corner of the screen????

C'mon those "few" ppl that don't mind watermarks, etc, just try and justify that one.

With your http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/ link, I would smash my own TV if I had a TV like that, regardless of the effects of it.   

It's just TV. The "idiot box". Who cares if it has a little mark on it? Don't you have more important things to harp on about, like world hunger? That's one possible response.

I would rate the 'ABC kids' watermark as being worse than WIN... and anyone that has WIN inflicted on them knows how bad WIN's is.

Child's play

In the cutthroat world of Australian television, Humpty Dumpty is no longer an untouchable.

Irate parents have been calling the ABC complaining about the inclusion of a corporate logo in the form of a "watermark" superimposed over the network's children's television programs, such as Play School.

One viewer contacted Spike and described the watermark as an "evil ABC Kids logo", adding that "surely our children don't need to have their minds polluted with such blatant commercialism and crassness in the form of a logo?". However, an ABC spokeswoman, Lesna Thomas, said "blatant commercialism" was the last thing on ABC management's minds when they launched the watermark.

"The reality is we're going to be using a watermark across the whole schedule. At the moment it's kids' programming because we've started broadcasting on Foxtel Digital. The ABC children's brand is really trusted. Parents know what they are getting with ABC's children's programming and we need to make sure parents know their children are watching programs which come from a trusted source ...

"It's a consumer advice and has nothing to do with making money. We see the watermark as a positive rather than a negative."

At the moment it's kids' programming because we've started broadcasting on Foxtel Digital.

I cant beleive this one "have their minds polluted with such blatant commercialism and crassness"

We see the watermark as a positive rather than a negative.

I cant beleive this one "have their minds polluted with such blatant commercialism and crassness"

Dear Aunty,

In this morning's Spike column in the Sydney Morning Herald, I read that the ABC intends "to be using a watermark across the whole schedule", having already placed one on ABC Kids programs. As a "refugee" viewer who made the switch to ABC TV from the commercial networks five years ago, I am appalled that the management at ABC TV has chosen to follow in their footsteps. The use of a full-time watermark is a display of contempt toward not only your audience, but the unique role of a public broadcaster to make television a quality medium.

Though little more than a minor distraction on certain types of shows, such as the news, watermarking is an insult to the masterfully-filmed scenes in others. Programs that could be considered works of art—and there have been many outstanding examples on the ABC over the years—are less likely to be made for a medium cheapened by its loss of visual integrity. By adding this visual noise to most or all programs, you are defiling TV as an artistic medium and reducing it to the level of every other manufactured and branded product. It is a low act to be using our children, who are already bombarded with corporate logos in this brand-obsessed culture, as guinea pigs for your watermarking experiment.

While it is doubtful ABC TV will lose its share of the audience over a watermark, what you will no doubt lose is the unique sense of affection we feel toward the ABC. Despite the comparatively large audience of commercial TV, few people I speak to these days have a positive thing to say about it. If ABC TV treats its viewers with the same disdain, it will contribute to the general TV turn-off as viewers tire of being treated contemptuously and seek alternative sources of information and entertainment. In my particular case, I intend to do less viewing and more listening—ABC TV's loss will be Radio National's gain. Furthermore, I won't be purchasing any more Bananas in Pyjamas products for my niece or other ABC TV products for myself.

In my relatively short time as regular ABC viewer, I had come to understand why your audience refers to you as "Aunty". This may be the last time I address your television department with such fondness, as the watermark will be a 24/7 reminder that it now sees me as just a "consumer" in the least flattering sense of the term.

Your loyal viewer,

Where did I see recently about children's 'nag factor' being a high factor in US marketing strategy?

Their approach means fewer complaints, and those they do receive will be spread out.

I'm really disappointed that the ABC has decided to pollute programming with a watermark, in this case one that is so large and distracting (worse than even WIN Television).

I am particularly concerned that one of the reasons provided by Lesna Thomas in the SMH yesterday (Spike column) is factually incorrect. She said that the watermark was added because "we've started broadcasting on Foxtel Digital". My understanding is that the ABC has been providing programming to Foxtel Digital cable since March last year (I believe satellite just commenced).

I am also unsure as to why the FTA broadcast (both digital and analog) requires a watermark when a separate signal can be provided to Foxtel Digital (indeed, THEY could watermark the programming on behalf of the ABC).

I would love to know what was on ABC management's minds when they launched the watermark. Why is it required, and why has it been introduced without consultation or an announcement to viewers?

I would also like to know how the ABC (to quote Lesna Thomas) considers "the watermark a positive, rather than a negative", especially when applied across the entire ABC schedule.

- Miles.

PS, Pizza the Hut, for radio you could try a local community station, if your in Adelaide, then Radio Adelaide 101.5 fm is a good option (and not just becuase I work there  :ph34r:

As a regular viewer of ABC television I am very concerned over the impending introduction of a watermark on all of its programming. I do not believe that the ABC should treat its viewers with the same contempt as the commercial networks.

Watermarks I believe were originally introduced in the USA due to a large number of cable channels in the analogue format as a means of station identification. This may have had some validity many years ago, but has no relevance to Australian television today. Firstly there is insufficient free to air (FTA) analogue channels to cause confusion as to which station you are watching, and secondly digital television makes such channel identification irrelevant. Anyone who has watched digital television be it FTA or pay will have noticed that every time a channel is changed an information bar pops up which tells you which channel you are watching and the current time. If the station is doing its job properly it will also tell you the name and duration of the current and next programme. So to claim that a large number of digital channels necessitates a watermark is complete nonsense and displays a complete lack of knowledge on how digital television operates. The ABC has had substantial gains in its viewing audience over the last few years, so strangely enough viewers are able to find and watch the ABC without a watermark!

The ABC claims that it will prevent piracy. This also is ridiculous, software already exists which allows you to remove a watermark. The only effective way to prevent piracy is through electronic means, and these do not impact on the image at all. So the viewers suffer, while it makes no difference to piracy at all. The massive growth in the sale of DVD’s by the ABC over the last few years would indicate to me that piracy is not a huge problem.

The only reason that I can see for the ABC to do this is for corporate branding purposes only. The ABC Kids logo for example goes well beyond mere station identification, and whether intentional or not, it is promoting an ABC brand name. It is a sad day when commercial interests be they the ABC’s own or others take precedence over the quality of the service provided to the viewing public.

This move apart from being an insult to our intelligence (especially when the name of the programme is also included for its duration), will in the longer-term just drive demand for alternatives. Already the watching of DVD’s has had a significant impact on the number of television viewers, which will only be compounded by the introduction of video on demand services over broadband. So it is hard to understand why the ABC is meeting this competition by degrading its service.

Has any one seen that the watermark is now in the bottom right hand corner not the top  i think it is better that way