A Clean and Boring Sweep (Via Calpundit I/II)

Might seem like a minor issue, but why on earth do The Oscars ceremony take so freakin' long every damn year? Calpundit is obviously irked by this issue. The show is scheduled for 3 hours, allegedly. The LA Times slips in a reference to a planned 3.5 hours scheduling. What bugs Cal, and perhaps bugs me slightly less so, is that when watching the show, where exactly does one see moments that were unnecessarily long? And considering that the show has gone over its allotted time for the full run of its televised history, should anyone be shocked?

But heres where this bugs me. Cal says the following last year:

It's pretty obvious that the show lasts exactly as long as the producers want it to. Consider: (a) it runs long every year, (b) every other award show ends within a few nanoseconds of the scheduled time, (c) the networks sell advertising time based on the length of the show, and (d) these guys are pros and know exactly how to time a show like this.

Whoa there ... advertising sales. That's key. If you knew a show was going on for 4 hours and would be on well past a lot of bedtimes on the east coast, how much do you think that ad slot is worth late in the show? A lot? Not really. Even if you factor in the suspense due to the big awards being saved for last, I suspect there's still a decrease in viewership ... maybe small, maybe large ... but eventually people tire. But you've also got to go by ratings that are comparable, and there's nothing to really suggest that midnight on Sunday is a good time to sell ad space.

So why bother telling everyone that its a 3-hour show? Because you've got to sell spots at the end with something of a straight face to let Proctor & Gamble know that their ad will be seen by X people for Y dollars.

Then again, why would advertisers be fooled by such a ruse?

In any event, its a minor diversion, I suppose. One commenter on Cal's site bothered to keep stats on the show's runtime over the last 6 showings:

1999 - 3:51
2000 - 4:15
2001 - 3:28
2002 - 4:21
2003 - 3:34
2004 - 3:45

Another commenter suggests that part of the reason may be another bit with ad sales ... those bought on condition that the show runs over. The ads might not run, so there's a variable factor at stake here ... but if you are running the show and you know you've got X number of extra ads that make it worthwhile to run a 4 hour show versus a 3:45 show, would you not take the 15 minutes and the cash?

Then again ... yet another commenter sums it up thusly: "Who cares?" Well, who cares which actor wins Best Actor? Who cares which documentary wins Best Documentary? Its all an idle diversion, I suppose. May as well jump in and enjoy the moment.