WHITBY FREE PRESS, WÈDNESDAY, JUNE 24,1987, PAGE 7 PAGE SEVEN Television is an expensive medium and as a resuit programming is closely tied to its ability to attract commercial sponsors. The success or failure of a program depends entirely on the audience it attracts which translates directly into the number of bucks in ad- vertising that can be sold. Monitoring agencies such as Neilson tel the advertisers how many people are watching. The ratings will make or break a show. (Unfortunately this results in prime time programming all aimed at the same "average joe" segment of the population - all the networks have sitcoms and cop shows on weekday evenings and all have sports on Saturday afternoon. If it wasn't for TV Ontario and PBS there would be precious little for the "not-so-average joes" to watch. But that's not what this column is about.) However, advertisers have known for a long time that ratings leave a lot to be desired. In the past Neilson has monitorec| television habits by providing an appropriate number of scien- tifically selected households with a log book in which to mark down ail the programs they have watched. What they couldn't measure is how many commercials were being watched. And everybody uses commercials as intermissions - a chance to raid the fridge or check the listings to see what else is on. Modern electronic wizardry allows us to scan al Uthe other channels without leaving the armchair and return to our program just as the com- mercials are finishing. Not surprisingly, advertisers prefer not to spend money on commercials that are not being watched and so they are demanding changes in the way programming is monitored. The Neilson answer is to mount a box on the TV which will automatically record whether the TV is on and what channel is being watched. The members of our scientifically selected household will merely punch in and out when they enter or leave the room. Coupled .with a computerized analysis of the household's buying habits, this is designed to stimulate some of the uncertain- ties. This is just the beginning of what could be a broadcasting revolution. Television is already an electronic medium, and it lends itself to a level of monitoring that is impossible in other advertising media. I would predict, for instance, that in a very short time pun- ching in and out would be replaced by infrared detectors to sense bodyheat (the same sensors that are used in a wide assortment of inexpensive burglar alarm systens) - the amount of bodyheat would indicate the number of people...and pets (Purina would finally know how many dogs watch their commercials). Finally advertisers will know what really happens when their commercial comes on and the results could be devastating. What will happen when Bayer discovers that 90 per cent of its potential audience leaves the room when their commercial comes on? Will ESSO want to sponsor the hockey games when it finds that 75 per cent of the fans switch channels instead of listening to how good their gas is? Wil Purina be upset when all the dogs and cats leave the room? Instead of delivering potential audiences, advertisers will'expect television to deliver sales. Program. content per se will become irrelevant as long as people watch the commercials. On the other hand, commercials will probably get better - those particularly nauseous ads will disappear when the agencies find out that NOBODY watches them (maybe those ad agencies will disappear too for lack of business). Commercials will have more subtle and seductive openings to hold you in your chair for just 30 seconds longer. There will be pressure to break up commercial segments so that instead of having four, 30 second commercials every eight minutes, we will get 30 seconds every two minutes - so much for raiding the fridge. And there will be pressure to insert commercial messages right into the program itself - J.R. will be seen using Schweppes tonic water with an appropriate line or two while Tom Selleck fills up with Sunoco Gold. Television will never be the same again. indeed, commercial television as we know it today may disappear. If TV cannot deliver to the audience it now claims, advertisers may find it too expensive for most products. Pay TV may finally get off the ground as people tune out from the crass commercialism of "free" TV. Publie television will finally get the audience it deserves as refugees from the commercial wars find comfort in the solid news, information and drama programs produced for the value of their content rather than their saleability. VCRs (or whatever replaces them) will flourish and people may buy (or even subscribe to - perhaps on the black market) expurgated versions of their favorite programs from which the commercials have been removed. And what about other advertising media - how will they respond to the changes in television land? Television advertising has an immediacy and a vibrancy that no other medium can touch but because it is so costly, it has to aim at the great masses. When ad- vertisers discover they can't deliver to that great mass audience, advertisers wiI have to look to different more selective (and cheaper) markets. Print media - magazines and newspapers - and radio have always been a more selective medium than television. Radio and newspapers aim at local markets while most magazines target a particular segment of the population (c.g. Chatelaine targets women, Road and Track targets car buffs, etc). As advertisers look for bigger and bigger bangs for fewer and fewer bucks, targeting will get tighter and tighter and Uic medium which can deliver Uic market (and Uic sales that go with it) with the greatest consistency will be Uic biggest winner. By SCOTT FENNELL MP Ontario Riding This Governiment promised Canadians a thorough review of our defence policy, and a few weeks ago we delivered on that promise when the white paper on defence was tabled in the House of Com- mons by Minister of Defence Perrin Beatty. This was a very notable occasion, considering that the last white paper on defence was tabled 16 years ago and so many changes have taken place in the world which have had a significant impact on Canadian security. The following is a brief overview of the white paper. Paper. The white paper is a 15-year plan which lays out the future course of defence policy. Canadian security will continue to be based on three pillars: maintenance of an adequate defence, pursuit of equitable and verifiable arms con- trol and disarmament measures, and a continuation of our peace- keeping efforts by Canada will keep us an active member of NATO and NORAD. We will modify the force struc- ture of the Canadian Forces, and part of this modification will occur with the consolidation of our forces in Europe, by stationing land and air commitments in the central region of West Germany, thereby ensuring a more efficient use of our resources. The white paper also indicated the introduction a balanced maritime force by combining sur- face vessels with helicopters, sub- marines, and maritime patrol air- craft. We will, throughout the planning period of the white paper, increase the strength of the reserves to about 90,000. The quality and quan- tity of training and equipment will be improved, as well as obtaining more effective university officer training programs. In addition, an- nouncements were made to im- prove the pay and benefits of reser- ve personnel. This is a made-in-Canada defence policy which will provide con- To the editor: Never mind that Canada has NATO commitnents. Right at the moment Canada couldn't stop a troop of American boy scouts fron mounting a successful attack on Southern Ontario! Manpower is down - drastically; the air force operates with fleet of antiques; the navy is straddled with way too much to adequately patrol, and at that, its current fleet is rusting out; and the army, well, there are police forces that arn their members with better weaponry and training. (This last, I'll venture further, and suggest that police forces have more mem- bers than both the regular and militia forces combined.) Naturally, I can't back up that statement with facts, but never mind - I look at our army ranks and think. "What sharp-lookiing new police officers these guys are.!" I'm basically a "Hawk" in nature. I'm disappointed in Canada's apparent lack of ability to provide adequate military protection. I don't agree with Canada having the American spatrol our coastal shores, or providing three-quarters of the manpower/equipment for our northern defense. We need those nuke subs - badly. We need to become full partners in the SDI project. We don't need to offer "protection" to Norway, when our commitments are greater at home! This country could stand to tinuing security for Canadians, and ensure that the Canadian Forces are equipped with the capabilities they need to become and rermain ef- fective into the 21st century. sain, in terms of employment, with a more complete military. Will memories be d---ed; we're living now, in a nuclear age! R.T. Pollock Whitby Update our military To the editor: In my opinion, Canada should start to pull its load by directing some of its resources towards up- dated military equipment and per- sonnel. The issue is not directed towards our U.S. neighbors only butto our obligations to the U.N. to which we claim to be a part but since the Trudeau regime, we lost face with, as Canadian military presence was rapidaly decreased. We rely too heavily towards the United States in the event of hostile invasion, with little retaliatory ability. The Canadian forces were recognized during WW2 as an elite and able first strike force. Let's get back on track. Albert Wells, Whitby --~---'ArA Policy ensures security We need those nuke subs-badly