In almost all cases, television programs rather than commercials are what attract viewers.  Any advertiser knows that viewers often go to great lengths to avoid having to sit through the commercials.

Of course the Super Bowl is a bit different.  Since I work in the business, I might be a bad example, but I’ll openly admit that I found myself wandering off for snacks during this year’s game and then rushing back to the TV for the ads. But according to Nielsen, I’m not alone.  More viewers now say they tune in to the Super Bowl for the commercials rather than the game (51%).  Given the lengths to which advertisers go to produce entertaining (and hopefully effective) spots, it’s not surprising.

So, if the ads are actually drawing in viewers, aren’t advertisers essentially programming suppliers to the NFL?  And as important suppliers, I wonder if its fair that they should pay the highest price tag in all of television (plus production costs)?  I’m not thinking those placements should be free, but given what Super Bowl advertising has come to mean to the telecast; don’t you think it’s time the balance of power shifts a bit toward advertisers?

Tags: Nielsen ratings, Super Bowl Advertising, Super Bowl Viewership