Too Darned Loud

Amid all the bluster in Washington over big issues like the stimulus package, healthcare and the basic fate of our teetering economy, sometimes Congress decides to tackle something a bit, uh… smaller. Something that has annoyed us all for years but just seemed like an inevitable price to pay for living in modern society—kind of like lines at the DMV, jury duty and Twitter updates from Paris Hilton. What is this horrible albatross hanging around society’s collective neck? Loud commercials. That’s right. Loud friggin’ commercials.

 

As CableFAX reported last week, Rep Anna Eshoo (D-CA) has introduced a bill to regulate the volume of commercial interruptions (Believe it or not, there are already some regs on this… but the smarty pants on Madison Avenue have figured out ways around them over the years). The Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act, surely named by a twenty-something Hill staffer who would rather be writing screenplays, threatens to lower the hammer on those ear-splitting ads. And it’s hard to imagine any real opposition from the public. Is anyone actually for loud TV ads? Well, anyone under the age of 80?

 

There’s no doubt that loud commercials are annoying. Very annoying. In fact, they have gotten so obnoxious that it seems plausible they’re at least partly to blame for domestic squabbles. (“Did you take out the trash?”… “What? I can’t hear you!”… “The trash!”… “What!?”… “I want a divorce.”) Furthermore, no one wants to be assaulted by an uber-hip commercial while watching a horrible reality show. We’re already watching a horrible reality show. We know we need help. If you must remind us how much cooler we’d be if we bought your product, at least do it softly.

 

But it’s funny. While Congress can’t seem to decide what to do about healthcare or the deficit, Eshoo’s bill sailed out of the subcommittee on a voice vote. For those in the cable industry, this may seem familiar. Let’s not forget that the 1992 Cable Act that hobbled the industry for several years was the ONLY bill that President George Bush Sr. vetoed during his entire term. People really, really, really, really care about television. That’s especially true during a recession that, while perhaps coming to an end, will likely still pack a world of hurt as unemployment hovers around 10 percent for the foreseeable future. All of those out-of-work folks are spending more time than usual in front of their televisions. The last thing they need are obnoxiously loud commercials that remind them they have no money to buy stuff! If advertisers must entice us to spend money in such an environment, it’s only polite to turn down the volume.

 

In the end, Eshoo’s bill tells us that populism knows no real limits. Next up: A bill to outlaw paper cuts. It also reminds us that even “everyone’s for it” bills like this one usually create hardships for someone somewhere—in this case, small cable operators who are already trying to cope with myriad regulations, not mention retrans, massive competition from much bigger players and… the list goes on. Now they might need to monitor commercial volumes on local ads they insert. ACA is already asking for an exemption. Like the 1992 Cable Act, sometimes the smallest players end up taking the biggest hit when populist rage takes root over cable rates or, in this case, loud friggin’ commercials. And while we’re at it, can we add an amendment to turn down the volume on TV news punditry as well? Sorry… flying too close to the sun.