In summary, we find little value in advertising in general, and find it invasive and
harmful in most instances. To interrupt private leisure time and at the public\u2019s personal expense
requires either a literal boycott or a \u201cvote with their spending dollars\u201d type voice from the
consumer public. The researcher predicts this will be one of the causes of the decline in the
attendance of movie viewers. Lawsuits brought against the movie industry such as Fisch vs.
Loews Cineplex Entertainment Group got the attention of movie advertising executives and
Loews actually complied with the request to list actual start times of movies as a first step
towards appeasing the complaints of movie patrons. A 2004 online survey of 500 adult
moviegoers by Insightexpress, an online market research service, reported that 53% of those
surveyed said theaters should stop showing commercials, 52% said the ads are intrusive, and
27% say the showing of commercials will cause them to go to movies less frequently. This
survey also found: 71% believe they should pay less for a movie if ads are shown; 18% enter the
movies later to avoid the commercials; Moviegoers younger than 35 are more receptive to movie
ads; and moviegoers would be more receptive to ads if they were funny, or of higher quality than
conventional advertising. (Peel, 1995).
The conclusions of this study and the section referring the comparison of advertising on
TV versus other media point to tolerance factors that are easily explained due to the voluntary
nature of consuming advertising as opposed to being subjected to it. Other than arriving to the
movie theatre late, which is difficult since theatres are reluctant to publish actual movie start
times, there will be some parallels between TV viewers and movie goers and the similar feelings
of being interrupted during an entertainment experience.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?