Is Television Passé?

For several years, we received cable on our television free of charge, despite our best efforts to regularly complain to the local cable provider. They would promise to look into it, weeks would go by, and we would still have a full 70 channels. 

Last fall, I put my foot down with the cable company and harassed them until they FINALLY pulled the plug. Unfortunately, it happened exactly one week before the 2008 U.S. election, and we had invited a number of friends  to come over to watch the election with us. We had to do something fast or it would be a quiet evening.

As it turned out, November 4 was a night of joy. We had invited our friends over, ostensibly to watch "the end of the Bush era," but what we were really hoping for was the chance to celebrate the victory of Barack Obama. The gathering was a cross-section of generations, nationalities, men, women, friends and family come together to watch an historical event. But aside from the politically significant aspects of the evening, there was also a more subtle historical shift occurring that night.

Since we had no television, I had to rig up a media centre from which we could monitor the election results. I brought my MacBook downstairs from my home office. Relying on our wireless modem, and using a second monitor I lugged upstairs from my husband's home office in the basement, we were able to watch two different Web sites - cnn.com's live action news, and CNN's interactive Web site showing electoral returns from across the various states. 

While the evening was all about Obama, upon reflection over the next few days, I realized that it was the first election night in my entire life (and I have been watching elections for as long as I can remember because in my family, every election is important) that I had not turned on the television or the radio. It is not so much a coincidence as a given that my first Internet-only election was won by a very Internet-savvy politician. This was probably the first election where the Internet, as a medium, had more influence over the outcome than any other medium. Building on Howard Dean's use of the Internet in the 2004 election, Obama's team parlayed the Web into a grassroots fund-raising machine and a key communication channel. The Obama administration continues to use the Internet as a critical component of their communications strategy, recognizing that many people, especially young people, get their information from the Internet.

Given the decline in both television and newsprint news, it certainly appears that the Internet is fast becoming most people's number one news medium, whether through conventional news organizations such as CNN or The New York Times (two news organizations that have made very successful leaps to Internet-based news), or through the "mash up" sites that gather news from a variety of sources and present it, or through more politically focused Web sites, such as the Huffington Post. 

But what of entertainment? Clearly, television is still the favoured device for watching entertainment. But how long will it be before televisions and computers converge? Indeed, they already are, with digital services delivered via cable's bandwidth and PSPs, iPods, and other handheld devices allowing users to watch movies in miniature. And once televisions and computers converge, will there be any further requirement for television shows to be delivered via commercial television stations?

The fact is, commercial television is passé. It is too rigid in its structure, too out-of-date with today's attention deficit-afflicted society. For many people, watching television now involves mindlessly flipping through dozens, if not hundreds, of channels, over and over again, avoiding commercials and rarely stopping to watch a show in its entirety. This probably has a lot to do with the amount of garbage being broadcast, but it also reflects a change in our viewing habits - we have learned to bounce around the Web and our attention span has decreased. Television is linear, and if you stop too long at any given station, you are confronted with a barrage of commercials, prompting you to flip again. Television is an old technology, in terms of how we interact with it. It is only a matter of time before commercial television disappears completely. 

It is now over six months since our cable was finally cut off, and I can honestly say that I have not missed television for even a minute during those months. Of course, I still rent movies on DVD, and I often borrow friends' DVDs of television programs. But I am no longer controlled by commercial television, which forced me to schedule my life around its programs, and drew me in to watching more garbage than I care to admit.

Follow up: Planet of Sound and Internet Forums

It's been an interesting week with respect to my previous post. 

After I did not receive a reply to the letter I sent the owner of Planet of Sound, I decided to warn other customers about Planet of Sound's unfortunate return policy. Canuck Audio Mart is an online shopping mart for audiophiles, which has a very healthy forum of postings on audio topics, primarily focused on technology issues and other concerns of interest to the audiophile community.

Last Sunday night, I posted a brief warning about Planet of Sound's return policy on the general audio forum. Within minutes, a couple of other forum users had responded to my post, asking questions and making comments.

Over the next 24 hours, the responses continued, and escalated. Some people were clearly in agreement with my feeling that the store's return policy was unfair, and some people were very negative toward my post. In fact, some people got quite personal about it, referring to me as a "man-hater," "loser", and even worse epitaphs. It is astonishing the number of freaks, weirdos and psychos who populate these forums. People who had never met me made personal and awful statements about me, simply because I had posted my opinion about a particular audio retailer.

On the positive side, there were many intelligent posts, and many people who did agree with me that the policy was unreasonable. There were also intelligent posts by people who did not agree with me. And one person even posted a supportive note on my blog!

After twenty-four hours, there was such a flurry of activity, that the owner of Planet of Sound himself had to respond, and he responded several times over the following 24 hours, exaggerating many facts about the return transaction and suggesting I had been confrontational (When I returned to the store, the first thing he said to me was "no returns after 30 days." It was day 28. He then proceeded to tell me that there was nothing wrong with the unit and implied that my father and I were idiots. He then handed me off to a junior sales clerk. So yeah, I may have been a little emotional by that point, but I left the store apologizing for the return - that's how little he and his staff made me feel - with the exception of the nice young lady who sold us the unit in the first place - she was a pleasant exception.)

But as his forum posts continued, he was clearly on the defensive and had to stoop to criticizing me, rather than addressing the real issue - his return policy. A lot of people called him on his policy, and he was clearly unable to defend it successfully.

Over three days, there were 14 pages of posts, and the moderator finally closed off the posting.

Interestingly, within a few hours, the entire post had been deleted. I can only believe that Canuck Audio Mart's loyalty to one of their own (Planet of Sound probably pays some kind of fee as an audio dealer to participate on the site) made them decide to remove the post. 

That's okay. I have no doubt that Planet of Sound has lost at least the equivalent of the $400 I spent at the store in the form of future lost sales. And a recent Google search of "Planet of Sound Ottawa" put my forum post in the Top 10 results! That won't last long, but the point has been made, and that was what I set out to do.

Consumers should not accept poor service and should not allow retailers, whether they are online or bricks and mortar, to get away with these types of draconian return policies. The Internet provides many communities of opportunity to state your opinion - if you have the stomach to deal with the psychos, weirdos, and freaks who lurk on Internet forums. My husband refers to Internet forums as "refuges for the damaged." Methinks he exaggerates somewhat, but it was a telling experience.

Caveat emptor!

But also, 

Voluptas ultionis melius longo degustatur intervallo, which, roughly translated, means "the pleasure of revenge can be enjoyed for a long time."

Consumer Rights - Exercise Your Power!

Women make many of the major decisions with respect to household purchases. In the world today, it is very difficult to wield much influence; however, as consumers, we actually have a fair amount of power and influence. Have you ever written a letter to a corporation, complaining about a defective product? Generally, the response is swift and positive - most companies understand that if one consumer writes a letter, there are probably hundreds, if not thousands of other consumers out there who have the same complaint. And all those consumers have one thing in common - they talk to other consumers about their shopping habits. A small issue can quickly mushroom into a bad reputation for a company. Most companies want to nip these issues in the bud as quickly as possible, which is why they are happy to hear from consumers. Otherwise, word hits the street and their reputation can be damaged before they have the opportunity to make things right. Word of mouth is probably the most common form of advertising for most retailers.

I recently had a very unfortunate incident with a local retail store. I purchased a piece of audio equipment for my 80 year-old father, which did not work well. Upon returning it, I was treated like a pariah. My only recourse was to write the retailer after the fact and ask him to make things right. He did not. Below is the letter I sent him. This is an example of a small retailer who does not understand the power of the consumer. I have now posted my complaint on several audio web sites and linked them to this blog. I hope the owner will think twice the next time he receives a similar complaint.

As consumers, we do have some power. Speak up! Write a letter! Post a bad review on a Web site. Don't let the retailer get away with poor service! Exercise your considerable consumer rights!

March 31, 2009

 

Gunnar Van Vliet
Planet of Sound
1194 Bank Street
Ottawa, ON

Dear Mr. Van Vliet:

I am following up on a transaction that occurred at your store on March 28. As a consumer and customer of your store, I think it is important that you understand my concerns with that transaction.

On February 28, I purchased a Squeezebox Boom, with my father. I set it up for my father, who is 80 and has trouble with technical gadgets. I had no problems with the setup and it worked fine for a few days. However, my father relocated the unit to his bedroom, and from that moment forward, he had problems with it. Most of the stations buffered almost constantly.

I attempted to troubleshoot the problem, but I could find nothing wrong with the unit’s set-up. As a person familiar with technology, I put it down to a poor underlying technology: Internet radio (which, even at the best of times, is not entirely reliable) and the wireless modem’s signal. Since Saturday, I have done some investigation, and it appears that my assumption is probably correct. A number of reviews and sites on the Internet point to the problem. Here is one example: http://the-gadgeteer.com/2009/01/30/logitech-squeezebox-boom-review/.

My father, however, continued to try and get the unit to work properly. He read the entire technical manual, which he downloaded (and which was very poorly written), he called the Logitech help line, and he spoke to you once, at length, about the issues he was having. I think it is fair to say that my father tried everything he could to get the product to work. Notwithstanding his lack of technical prowess, the unit clearly was not functioning optimally and despite his best efforts (and yours, mine, and Logitech’s) to get to the bottom of the issue, he was unable to.

After weeks of frustration, my father asked me to return the unit for him (it was purchased on my credit card).

I returned the unit on my father’s behalf. Here’s a summary of what then occurred:

• I returned the product, in its original packaging, and was told that the product was fine, and therefore, it was the consumer who was the problem.
• You charged a 25% restocking fee, for a unit that had originally been a display unit (and no discount was ever provided for that), and that was returned in its original packaging, and in working condition.
• You would not provide a refund on the remaining 75%, but instead provided a store credit.

 So, here’s the bottom line:

 We purchased a product that, despite our best efforts, did not live up to our expectations.

• My father is very frustrated by the product he purchased, he is out $100, and we are forced to return to your store to spend $300.
• You have received the unit back with full packaging, and you can therefore sell the unit again for its full price. You have also secured the $400 of the original purchase, including a $100 “repackaging” charge.

 From my perspective, you, the retailer, have come out of this transaction very nicely, and my father has come out of it frustrated and $100 poorer. However, it could have been different, under the following scenarios:

•  We returned the product. You accepted that it did not live up to our expectations and did not imply that we were somehow at fault. (This would be in keeping with the claim on your Web site: “We want to sell products that will make you happy and perform for a lifetime.”)
  
• You explained the 25% repackaging fee, and then credited back the other 75% to my credit card, OR
• You explained the 25% repackaging fee, but indicated that if we were willing to take a store credit, you could credit us back 100%.

 The outcome would have been a win-win: my father would have been mollified about an unsatisfactory product and I would have been reasonably refunded. You would still have the $400 product to resell, a $100 restock fee OR a completed $400 transaction.

 You, however, chose to make this a win for you and a loss for me and my father.

 My mother owned a small bookshop for many years, and I am a big supporter of the independent retailer. I admire those who find a small niche and go up against “the big boys” in the retail industry. You are competing for that most fickle of all souls – the retail consumer. What better way to secure their future custom than to treat them well and make their retail experience the best it can be? You cannot compete with the big stores on price, but you can compete with them on service, and that is the secret to most small retailers’ success. Were I to have returned the Squeezebox to Future Shop or Best Buy, they would have taken it back, no questions asked, with a full refund. Your return policy, however, puts you in a competitive deficit with respect to this aspect of customer service.

 Word of mouth is probably your biggest advertising medium. I would therefore like to give you the opportunity to change my mind about your store. If you are willing to either (a) give us the full ~$400 credit at your store, or (b) refund the ~$300 to my credit card, then I think you will win back our business and a positive view of your store. I hope you will consider this option in the name of good customer service and public relations.

 Sincerely,

Catherine