Here at news from me, one of our recurring complaints about network television is when they lie about start and stop times. If you TiVoed Deal or No Deal last night, you lost the last three or four minutes of the show. It was supposed to run from 8:00 to 8:59 but it actually ended around 9:03. This was not a huge loss since they were in the middle of a game. But if they'd been at the end, it might have been like sitting through an entire murder mystery and then getting robbed of the scene that tells you whodunnit.
I'm still a little fuzzy on why they think this helps their ratings. Let's say you're watching Deal or No Deal on NBC. It's followed by The Apprentice but you'd planned to switch over to Fox after Deal or No Deal and watch 24. When you do, because of the overage, you find you've missed the first few minutes of 24. Is the idea here that you'll go, "Shucks. Well, I don't want to watch this now so I might as well switch back to NBC and watch The Apprentice"? Do people actually think that way and switch back? Especially since in the process, they've probably also missed the first minute or so of The Apprentice"?
Or are they presuming you won't even switch at all; that you'll get to the end of Deal or No Deal, look at your watch and realize 24 has already started so you might as well stay put? I don't recall ever watching TV with an eye on the clock. I figure that when one show ends, the next ones are just beginning. Is the idea here to eventually disabuse America of that presumption? If so, to what end?
Is there evidence that this fudging of start and end times works? I'm trying to think what kind of testing or surveys a network could conduct to determine if this helps or hurts them. It seems pretty obvious it can only piss off folks who TiVo or tape a show for later viewing. How might it help the ratings enough with those who watch live to more than make up for that?
I asked one network person a few months ago and got back a shrug and an "I dunno." It may be that it's all anecdotal; that there's no proof it helps but it's been tried and some ratings are good, so someone sees a connection. Television programming is the most inexact of sciences, and there have been plenty of seemingly-successful strategies that turned out to be silly superstitions. This one may rank up there with rubbing a rabbit's foot, kissing a horseshoe or even hiring Tom Arnold to star in a new sitcom.