TV Programmers Seek the Elusive Dog Market 199
HonorPoncaCityDotCom writes "Stanley Coren reports that a number of new television stations are providing programming specifically designed for dogs and while many people report that their dogs completely ignore what is visible on television, with modern resolution and quicker imaging, more dogs have become potential television viewers. The increase in dog viewership is primarily attributed to the way the dog's eye works. The image on a standard television screen is updated 60 times per second and since a human's flicker fusion frequency is only 55 Hz, the image appears continuous and the gradually changing images give us the illusion of movement. However dogs can discern flickers at up to 80 Hz so with the increased availability of high-resolution digital screens that are refreshed at a much higher rate, the images are less likely to appear to be flickering to the canine eye. Presentation factors are also an issue. Dogs are most likely to respond to images that have been captured at the eye level of a dog with a low camera angle where there are moving things like animals or birds. But even if that requirement is fulfilled, most dogs do not watch television because the TV is normally placed at a comfortable eye level for human beings and dogs do tend not to scan upward, and therefore do not notice the TV images. All of which brings us to DogTV, the first cable network to deliver 24-hour programming for dogs that lets you flip on the channel while you go out for the day as your pet is stimulated, entertained and relaxed. 'If the dog wasn't enjoying it, he would find something else to do, like nibble on the end of a sofa,' says veterinarian Ann E. Hohenhaus."
wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm fairly certain that all US broadcast TV is around 27 FPS and non-HD cable is the same and there's no way satellite wastes bandwidth on high FPS. I think only HD is 60FPS. Just because an LCD is refreshing at 60 or 120Hz doesn't mean that's what the tower or cable company is sending.
Also, dog TV is a stupid idea. The last thing I want is my dog ramming and clawing to death my expensive television.
Fill disclosure: I don't actually have a dog or a TV. I'm allergic and live in an apartment and I use a tuner card on my PC.
Re:why ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Presumably advertisements on the show would be seen by the pet-owners who would then be more likely to purchase the advertised product. I assume that the type of people who would buy this for their pets - the "hard-core" dog-owners, as it were - are also the sort to buy "premium" dog food for $15.00 per can, or diamond-studded dog collars or whatever, so there is probably money to be made in that market.
It's unfortunate, however, that nowadays everything has to be justified by an explanation on how it can be monetized. Admittedly, it costs money to run a cable station but it would be nice to sometimes see somebody go "Fuck it, I just love dogs so what the hell; let's give them cable!"
Re:wealth brings stupidity (Score:2, Insightful)
yes, I have love and compassion for human life over anything else. but apparently you don't think the risk of stressed animal in fear of its life in cockpit of helicopter to human life is any issue, because some animals are so cute and cuddly. How about my neighbor's six foot python and rattlesnake, can he bring them in rescue chopper?
Not a joke? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know what to say about dog TV.
Re:wealth brings stupidity (Score:4, Insightful)
Like I said, give it up. Helicopter pilots have winched off many a 'wild, stressed animal'. You put it in a cage, you put a muzzle on it, you strap it down somewhere.
Exactly what you would do with the stressed, out of control human that you've just winched off the tree.
And no, if you want to take your snakes, you're on your own. We're in it for the cutes.
Humans can be rational at times, but it certainly isn't their default condition.
Remember "Scrooged"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Talk about life imitating art.
"If only I could fire that poor son of a bitch" -- Frank Cross (Bill Murray), in response to exec Robert Mitchum's "suggestion" to create programs appealing to dogs and cats.
Re:why ? (Score:4, Insightful)
That and Dogs are not really visual animals like Humans are.
Sure the dog can see what is on TV but he really doesn't care that much, unless it makes a noise that he finds interesting. My Dog responds to the barking of Real Dogs (Not Synthesized ones) and to the sound of the Door Bell. However other than that he has no interests. If the TV gave off smells, the dog may be more interested. However I wouldn't like a TV that gives off smells my Dog likes.
fluorescent lighting (Score:5, Insightful)
Being able to discern flickers at 80hz probably makes fluorescent lighting annoying as fuck.
What the F&$k? (Score:2, Insightful)
What? If you really like your dog you won't be plopping them in front of the goddam TV like you do your kids! You will give them attention, take them for walks, and spend time with them. There is absolutely no "good" reason to do this, let alone trying to figure out how to monetize it. Worried about your dog being alone? Spend time with them! Worried about your dog's fashion sense? Dogs hate clothes you dumbass, so don't put them on the dog! Worried about their toy collection? Buy the dog a bone and they will be happy for days! Worried about their diet? Stop feeding them McDonald's!
The only reason something like this should happen is that people have become so lazy and socially retarded that they now feel the need to treat their dogs just like their children, or maybe they didn't have any kids to screw up so feel left out.