I have noticed an increasing tendency for cable broadcasters to
include a short (few frame), still ad between the series of normal
advertisements and the continuation of programming.  To make this a
little more concrete, let me describe the phenomenon:

A cable program is running and breaks for commercials.  The channel
runs the traditional sequence of 15- to 30-second ads (or whatever the
duration).  Then, right before the programming starts again, an ad
flashes up on the screen for a fraction of a second.

When I first noticed this, I though it was a truncation issue between
the network and the local cable provider.  My thinking was that the
local cable company might be contractually able to replace one or more
of the network-fed ads with local spots.  In doing so, they might have
time-shifted the network ads, and then, because of a slight
synchronization problem, the viewer would see the truncated beginning
of a network ad that was eliminated.

This theory was blown to pieces when I studied the phenomenon in slow
motion.  I?m clearly seeing ads.  Furthermore, they?re specifically
designed to be shown as described.  Sometimes they?re simply a
company?s logo.  In addition a brief tag line, phone number, and/or
URL may be added.

The duration involved in this technique is very interesting.  As
mentioned, the ads flash up only for a few frames (literally a
fraction of a second).  As they are consciously perceived, I would
argue that they are clearly not subliminal.  However, they flash up so
quickly, that anything beyond a familiar logo does not appear to be
mentally assimilated (i.e., a viewer cannot possibly linguistically
decode the tag line).

There appears to be advertiser-commonality between these ?flash-ads?
and the full duration ads that the channel runs.  That is, if the
channel runs a 30-second spot for XYZ Corp, then they will (at a
different time) run a ?flash-ad? for XYZ Corp.  I?m guessing,
therefore, that the idea is to slip these into the ?blank gap? between
programming and commercials, so as to reinforce the message of the
normal-duration ads.

This all seems a bit insidious to me, but I can?t find any mention of
it on the Web.  This is probably because I don?t know what the
technique is called.  Not knowing what it?s called, I?ve used the
search terms ?television/TV? and ?advertising/ad? with modifiers such
as ?few/two/three frames,? ?gap,? ?blank,? etc.  All of this with no
luck.

Here are my questions in descending order of importance (if you?ll
answer the first, I can probably research the latter two, but an
answer to all three would be nice):

1. What is technique called, and where can find more information about it?

2. It is being used to compensate for the ad-avoidance possible
through digital recording devices?  I seem to remember that for such
devices to work automatically, they must be able to ?see? the blank
gap between ads and programming.  If these ?flash ads? fall within
that gap, perhaps they can?t be avoided, or perhaps they even throw
the whole process.

3. I seem to recall there is a technical name for the blank gap
between ads and programming.  I also seem to recall that the FCC was
very specific about the duration of the gap (otherwise ads would
nebulously bleed into the programming).  What is the technical name of
the gap?  Aren?t these ads violating the whole concept?

---

Clarification of Question by czilla-ga on 09 Feb 2004 03:14 PST

These ads last even less than a second.  I would say they are up and
then off the screen in a 10th of a second (literally two frame clicks
on my VCR).  I would mention on what channels I've seen them, but as a
newbie to Google Answers, I'm not sure that's allowable.

Hi, 

These are called, rather appropriately, one-second commercials. They
started in 1998 here in the United States, with very little fan fair,
and have been used since that time. I?ve found references to a United
Kingdom newspaper story on several blog sites, but since the article
itself is so old, it is off that newspaper?s main site.

The first company to run these ads was apparently Master Lock, June
1998. Since then several companies, Coca Cola, Pepsi and others have
used these one-second spots. There is very little commentary about
these ads in the main-stream media, though for a while ?subliminal
message? sites were posting commentary on them.

They are not illegal, and various reasons are given for using these
fast spots, the most common is price. A company, such as Master Lock
or Pepsi, has a well recognized branding, and a single second is all
they need to get the concept across.

The biggest reason I can find for the lack of fanfare and questions
about these ads, is that most of the time, companies have found very
little return in investment from the one-second add. Master Lock for
instance has quit using them. Periodically companies will try them,
but not for very long. But, as I said earlier, they are not illegal,
or against FCC standards, so using them or selling them is not a legal
issue.

The biggest ?threat? for ad-avoidance right now is rated TV spots.
Commercials are not ?rated?, because rating them cost money, a great
deal of money. So filters right now, to get all commercials, are
simply blocking any ?non-rated? event that comes across the cable.
News broadcasts and other live shows are not generally rated either,
but you can turn the filtering off, with a few clicks of the remote
and watch those when you want to. There is quite a great deal of
pressure to get laws pass which dis-allow any filtering of commercial
content, but with the rating idea, an FCC law would have to be
repealed first, and then new laws installed.

The Black Spot you are referring to, has several technical names, and
as you have guessed it is all but a myth these days. Many stations
still use it, a frame brake of black area. But again, this is not your
culprit for the one-second ad, which are basic, time paid, time shown
one-second ads, no trickery needed at all.

To get the best information on these ad spots, simply call your local
cable company and ask if they have them available, what the costs are,
and if they have any literature, which might give you an idea of what
the benefits are for your company. Most ad sales people are happy to
burden you with a great deal of information on these subjects.

Links of Interest

http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2003/0929/076.html

Is the V-Chip A Stealth Weapon Against Commercials?
http://www.fair.org/media-beat/980806.html

Brandweek.com
http://www.brandweek.com/brandweek/search_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2071793

FCC 98-35 CS Docket N. 97-55 
://www.google.com.ni/search?sourceid=mozclient&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=FCC+98-35+CS+Docket+N.+97-55


Slash Dot Book: Review Hacking TiVo
http://books.slashdot.org/books/03/10/15/129224.shtml?tid=188

Google  Search on VCR ?Commercial Advance?
://www.google.com.ni/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=VCR+%22Commercial+Advance%22&btnG=Google+Search


Thanks, 

webadept-ga

---

Request for Answer Clarification by czilla-ga on 11 Feb 2004 17:59 PST

Webadept-ga,

I appreciate your work on this.  The information on video recording
technologies, ad-circumvention, etc. was most helpful.  However, I'm
not sure what I'm describing is a one-second commercial in the genre
of the Master Lock ad.  I recall that ad, and it had motion and
literally lasted a second or two (this is confirmed as it is described
in Brandweek ad you cited).

The ads I'm concerned about literally last a FRACTION of a second and
are completely still.  They appear to be included in the video stream
from the actual cable channel, and not added by the local cable
provider.  I've seen them very recently (i.e., last couple of weeks)
on CNN as well as Discovery and its sister channels.

---

Clarification of Answer by webadept-ga on 12 Feb 2004 04:10 PST

Exact same thing, I've seen them too. The Master Lock was the first of
it's kind. They believed then that some type of motion was needed...
some "value" to the picture. About 2 years ago Pepsi's was completely
still. I remember this, though I've not been able to find a reference
to it anywhere. At the time, I thought it was some type of feed error
and gave it no thought.

Fortunately I have a wife in the cable company business and ran all
this by her. She asked at the shop, and informed me that these are
basic "for sale" spots, normally to clients who purchase regular 30
second ads.

Anyway, what you are seeing is exactly the same. As long as you can
physically register that the add was there, it doesn't fall into the
subliminal area, and is therefore legal and sellable.

If I get some time tomorrow I'll give Cox a call and see if I can get
some more information on this for you, and get a name of someone you
can talk to if you like.

webadept-ga

---

Request for Answer Clarification by czilla-ga on 12 Feb 2004 04:13 PST

Fair enough.  That's good enough for me.

I appreciate your help.

-Czilla-ga

---

Clarification of Answer by webadept-ga on 12 Feb 2004 04:21 PST

Something else I learned as well, from the wife; I don't know if you
recall this or not, but about the same time as the Pepsi thing, I'd
say two years, maybe three, cable channels I was watching, like comedy
central and sci-fi, had what seemed to be a rash of commercials that
would start, and then cut out in a second or two. They were popular
commercials, and I knew what they were, but they didn't play more than
the first second or two, and then cut off, abruptly. I thought then,
that the cable company was switching things or some type of feed error
from the national network, or something.

Not so. Those happened exactly as paid for. Not a bad trick really.
Especially with the more entertaining of those ads, where the mind
would see the first blurt, and recall the rest of it? almost ?needing?
to see the rest of it, and a little sad at the ?tease?? imagine
putting the public in the position of ?needing to see your ad? :-)

webadept-ga

---

Request for Answer Clarification by czilla-ga on 13 Feb 2004 10:46 PST

Webadept-ga:

I do recall the ?cut-off? ads that you referred to as well.  Looked
like an ad was going to start up, and then it got cut by the
programming resuming.  I figured that was by design as well, and for
the reasons you stated.

As mentioned, this all seems a bit insidious, but I guess it?s the way
of the world.  I guess it?s all no sneakier than the ever-increasing
product placement in movies (and now television).  The wife and I have
a game going when we watch movies on cable or DVD ? we see who can
identify the most product placements.  It?s a lot trickier than it
sounds.  Some of the stuff is pretty subtle, and is easily overlooked
by someone actually trying to follow the story.

Appreciate all of your help on this.

-Czilla-ga

---

Clarification of Answer by webadept-ga on 13 Feb 2004 14:35 PST

No problem at all.. :-) I live to research. 

Along the product placement lines here's a little teaser for you:
http://www.marketingwonk.com/archives/2003/12/02/nielsen_announces_product_placement_tracking_service/

Thanks again, and have a great day. 

webadept-ga

czilla-ga:

Strange, it seems that this sort of information is not easy to find at
all. Here is an article, from 1998, that mentions the phenomenon:

http://www.fair.org/media-beat/980806.html

However, other than this, I have not come across any other mention of
these 'flick-of-an-eye' commercials, as the author of that article
calls them.

As for rules governing the placement and gaps between commercials and
programming, the only rules that the FCC seems to enforce are the ones
dealing with commercials appearing during children's television
programming, as introduced in the Children's Television Act.

The 'standard' two-second gap appears to be a carry-over from the
radio broadcast days, when it was voluntary set as a standard by the
national radio networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) to provide enough leeway for
the radio engineers at their affiliate stations to manually switch
back and forth from the national feed to include local programming and
local ads. In Canada, where I live, most of the networks use
two-second network station calls to fill in these traditional gaps,
since modern automated digital equipment makes the need for the gap
obsolete. So, it seems to be more a case of traditions dying hard,
than anything.

aht-ga
Google Answers Researcher

These are part of an extremely well-known phenomenon in the
advertising industry, called "subliminal perception" and are a very
effective technique.
A remarkable book was published many years ago called "Media
Sexploitation" which dealt with its application in its infancy,
specifically to graphic art.

Essentially, at the old film speed of 15 frames per second images or
text were flashed on the screen faster than the ..... "conscious
brain" would recognise them and they "slipped past the 'censor'
mechanism and were recorded directly in the sub-conscious mind as
"real" or "approved" data.

A very famous (underground) experiment was effected in Sth Africa in a
Drive-in Movie theatre which lost astounding numbers of speakers after
each show.
Several "implants" of unseen messages were flashed during the show and
the numbers dropped to almost zero.

A Disneyland(?) operation was caught out using the techniques in CD
Games it was distributing and forced to stop doing it.

Search on "subliminal perception conditioning" or similar.

i would be interested to know about the research that you have done
about this subject i researched what i could about subliminal
advertising a few years ago and found this out it was apartently
developed in 1957 where they set up a experiment which involved a
cinema screen and various flash ads anyway on an unsuspecting audience
they let them watch a film and recorded the sale of coca-cola at break
times ,then they played the subliminal messages and for a different
audience and noticed that the sale of coca -cola jumped from 30% to
65% aproximately i beleive that there was an article about it in the
scientists weekly newspaper in 1957 of which i found at the newspaper
archives in hendon APPARENTLY in the uk it is supposed to be banned by
the independant television corporation or the body which looks after
and governs advertising on television as the reasons being we are
supposed to be living in a free world and yes granted we are all
subject to some sort of advertising or cohersion of somesort in
everyday live but what they said was this because it could take over 
your own freewill and could coherse you into buying for agruments sake
a can of coca-cola then it takes away your own free will of purchasing
say orange juice not to say that it is as sinister as it sounds but
basically it can ,say auto suggest something that you wouldnt normally
do
             if you went into tesco,s and they were playing music in
the backround and underneath that music it was telling you to buy
baked beans you might be cohersed into buying these then you get home
and you have a cupboard full !!! so why did you buy them??? very scary
if you ask me when you think about the implications especially as we
are in a civilised society where we can be educated about these things
but what would you tell someone that you are hearing voices (scary)!!!
in an oxford dictionary cant remember what one but i managed to find
some very good bits of info aboutsubliminal messages and they
basically were this that is is below the normal level of consciousness
it but may be considering these comments im just mad please let me
know lol

    The American HeritageŽ Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth
Edition.  2000.
  
subliminal 
  
SYLLABICATION: subˇlimˇiˇnal 
PRONUNCIATION:   sb-lm-nl 
ADJECTIVE: Psychology 1. Below the threshold of conscious perception.
Used of stimuli. 2. Inadequate to produce conscious awareness but able
to evoke a response: subliminal propaganda.
ETYMOLOGY: sub? + Latin lmen, lmin-, threshold. 
OTHER FORMS: subˇlimiˇnalˇly ?ADVERB
    


 

subliminal
/sblimmin?l/ 

  ? adjective Psychology (of a stimulus or mental process) perceived
by or affecting someone?s mind without their being aware of it.

  ? DERIVATIVES subliminally adverb. 

  ? ORIGIN from SUB- + Latin limen ?threshold?.

 Where is a person's threshold of consciousness? It varies. I'm only
noticing the air conditioner in the room because I decided earlier to
use it as an example. But until the moment of starting this example I
was not conscious of hearing the air conditioner. Would I have noticed
if it stopped? I was now and then hearing snatches of music from the
table radio, mostly when I stopped typing. Where was my threshold of
consciousness in each of these moments? Awareness of the sub-liminal
is relative.


If you don't believe it, notice what happens when I remind you that
you are reading this. Now you are more aware of an act that you were
alrfrom eady doing. When I call your attention to it by mentioning it
from within the act itself, your level of consciousness jumps from one
level to another. To read 'correctly,' you have to be unaware of doing
it, at one level, while, at another level, being totally aware of it.


Then there's your butt. It's touching something. Before I mentioned
it, you probably weren't aware of it touching anything at all. But
it's never disconnected from your brain. Yet in some way it WAS
disconnected, gone--until I called your attention to it. Then, your
butt was there again. When I start talking about something else,
you'll stop noticing your butt again. I'll draw your attention
somewhere else. To your tongue. Feel it in there, taking up all that
space in your mouth? Now where'd that butt go?


You'll mostly stop noticing it, but not totally. It's connected to
your brain 24 hours a day. Normally, you shift your position when your
butt tells you to, even if you are 'totally' engrossed in something
going on outside your body, such as a sports event or a movie.That's
an example of unconscious awareness, if you needed one.


And then there's the title at the top of almost all these pages. It
says ADVERTISING, with the word s u b l i m i n a l behind it three
times.


 


Once you see the words 's u b l i m i n a l' you can't stop seeing them. 


But did you notice that you can't pay total attention to the big word
ADVERTISING and to the little words 'subliminal' at exactly the same
time? All the words are there on the page at exactly the same time.
But you can't consciously pay attention to all of them at the same
time.


You have to keep shifting your attention back and forth between the
two 'attention 'layers' that I've created by having BIG RED LETTERS
and the hollow black letters. Ads are carefully designed to manipulate
your attention (and memory) the same way.

These are because of new psychology studies that determine the average
person's attention span is NOT 30 seconds as previously thought, but
only 3-4 seconds.  This is why now movie trailers are the same way.
Seriously, you don't notice it- but sit in the movie theatre next
time, and watch the previews and count. You will see the frame, not
change, but FLASH & change every 3-4 seconds.

It's a shame that we have to stoop so low, isn't it? :)

-Rebekah