>
I don't recall saying it was a 1:1 ratio.Right, but that's implied when someone says commercials are 50% of the programming: 1:1 ads to non-ads.
I did mistype that originally, though. I wrote "50% and 33% (aka a 2:1 ratio and a 1:1 ratio)". It should have been "50% and 33% (aka a 1:1 ratio and a 2:1 ratio)".
> As I recall, jrockway specified 20 minutes content, 10 minutes ads. It's plausible to call ten fifty percent of twenty, leading to his unfortunate grammar vs math, but that wasn't his point.
That's plausible if the context makes it clear, but it was extremely unclear in this context.
> Btw, per Wikipedia, "a typical 30-minute block of time now includes 22 minutes of programming and eight minutes of advertisements", making it quite clear as I also used the terms, that "programming" is not "ads".
Uh, how does a quote from Wikipedia make it clear what you were saying? Were we discussing a random Wikipedia page and I missed that?
> Using the wiki terminology, that's a 30 minute block of time, 22 minutes of programming, 8 minutes of ads. So, contrary to your assertion a couple comments up, programming and ads and time were the correct words, and my application of the word "time" was appropriate and accurate.
No, your application was not appropriate or accurate. Your statement's structure still implies that ads are a portion of the programming. "X is Y% of Z" implies that Z is a superset of X.
Your comment("Yet 10 mins of ads to every 20 mins of programming makes ad time exactly 50% of the program time.") says that ad time is 50% of the program time.
> saying that +/- 2 mins of ads undermines jrockway's double dipping claim
Right, but I didn't say that. I said that it was an exaggeration compounded with the misleading "50%" claim. That you're now trotting out other statistics to try to support the misstatement is irrelevant, because jrockway himself said it was 10 mins ads and 20 mins programming. He clearly wasn't talking about product placement.
I also find it strange that you're still pushing 20 to 10 as a "reasonable average" when your own reference (Wikipedia) says it's 22 to 8. Your 17-18 to 12-13 seems to be original research.
> It says late night talk shows may have advertising "49% of total content time", while commercials are "36% of an average prime-time hour".
No. That's a selective reading (and a little bit of bias pushed by the article). It says that "commercial messages" are 36% of an average prime-time hour. They included "in-show brand appearances", aka product placements, in this. As in "I can see a brand on-screen". They actually said there were about 14 minutes of "network commercial messages", or 23%; not 50%, and not even 33%. For late night, it was 26% "network commercial messages".