Forum: What Do You Think Of Fewer Ads, Longer Stories On '60 Minutes'?


(CBS)

(CBS) For the first time in its 37-year history, 60 Minutes features an exclusive advertiser, Philips, which gave back half of the program's commercial time to allow the news magazine's stories to run longer.

Under the arrangement, Philips purchased all of the commercial time typically allotted to 60 Minutes, but is only using half the time for ads. The result is longer stories and only half the usual commercials, with the first two stories airing uninterrupted.

Viewers are encouraged to share their thoughts on the special broadcast in the forum below.


Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
Add a Comment See all 335 Comments
by bbaum117 November 1, 2005 11:48 PM EST
We were very pleased with the reduced time for ads on the 10/23 version of 60 Minutes. That made for a much more meaningful and productive program. Thanks to CBS for giving this a try and to Philips for making it possible. We watched more closely and learned much more. Thank you - and please try to make this a regular part of the program process.
Reply to this comment
by bbaum117 November 1, 2005 11:47 PM EST
We were very pleased with the reduced time for ads on the 10/23 version of 60 Minutes. That made for a much more meaningful and productive program. Thanks to CBS for giving this a try and to Philips for making it possible. We watched more closely and learned much more. Thank you - and please try to make this a regular part of the program process.
Reply to this comment
by radicalmiddl October 31, 2005 1:24 PM EST
Your exploration of the ramification of CIA agent Valerie Plame\'s betrayal by this Administration dismayed and outraged me. There is a fundamental flaw in our government when administrations deliberately out CIA agents or even trade arms for hostages, a violation of the Constitution, and such acts can be ignored by a partisan Congress, and yet a base personal tryst triggers impeachment proceedings. This country is still looking for true moral leadership, and we haven\'t found it in an administration since Jimmy Carter.
Reply to this comment
by zak0072 October 31, 2005 2:21 AM EST
Robert Novak should be charged with treason and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. What he did was at least, irresponsible, and at most, traitorous to this country. It is a real shame that reporters can blanket themselves under the protection of the first amendment to commit what basically amounts to treason in order to get a story published. It is doubtful that the framers [of the constitution] had \"outing CIA operatives and jeopardizing the lives of people whose job it is to keep this country safe\" in mind when they wrote the first amendment. It is also ironic that this administration plays on the American people\'s fear of terrorism to win an election or lies to the American people to justify going to war, and then turns around and gives confidential information to reporters in retaliation of criticism and possible exposure of their lies. Exposing this confidential information threatens the lives of people whose job it is to fight the real \"war on terror.\" The next time terrorists attack American soil, maybe people will (finally) open their eyes and see that we do not have the necessary counter-terrorist measures in place because people like Robert Novak place their careers above responsible journalism, the safety of CIA operatives, and the American people.
Reply to this comment
by stevefourake October 31, 2005 12:56 AM EST
I love the format, but I thought your interview of Prince Charles was insulting to both him and us. The questions and comments by the interviewer seemed to infer irrelavence of the Prince and his pursuits. I got the feeling these were dumb questions being asked by a guy with a mocking smirk on his face.
Reply to this comment
by lmhill-2009 October 30, 2005 11:40 PM EST
1. I love the longer segments and the shorter advertising. Thanx Phillips and CBS. Please do this on all your shows! 2. The segment on the CIA operative uncovered was disturbing (Valorie Wilson). I would like to know why Mr. Novak (sp?) the journalist who exposed here, chose to do that. It seems like an unethical, and mean, thing to do. Was he paid off? Did he think this would help his career? Did he hold a grudge against Mrs. Wilson? What was his purpose?
Reply to this comment
by stevep1495 October 30, 2005 11:12 PM EST
Excellent edition of 60 Minutes tonight, especially the expose on the Valerie Plame debacle. Can\'t say I disagree with Andy Rooney\'s views on hospital and doctor advertising, either. I\'d like to hear his comments on the plethora of prescriptions medicine advertisements, aimed at the naive public who are advised to \"ask their doctor\" to prescribe THIS medication to cure all their ills, as in \'Vioxx!\' Far more dangerous...
Reply to this comment
by swoozie228 October 30, 2005 10:44 PM EST
We really liked the idea of fewer ads and I must admit we paid more attention.
Reply to this comment
by momskates October 30, 2005 12:37 PM EST
Who\'s \"nastier and meaner to his friends\" than anybody he interviews,according to Andy Rooney?
Reply to this comment
by October 29, 2005 1:07 PM EDT
Why would you be interviewing the lying Joe Wilson, now that Libby has been cleared of leaking his wife\'s name? About half of America will be checking to see if you can be accurate about this.
Reply to this comment
See all 335 Comments
.
The Best of Andy Rooney on DVD. Order now! Order Now »
60 Minutes on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...