A small device with social effects
The technology of the remote control is straightforward, but its effects on couch viewing habits were large. Once a handset sat on the sofa arm, the television changed from an object one walked to, to one that was managed from a seat. The change was gradual, since remotes were rare in the 1950s and 1960s and became close to universal by the 1990s, and it was tied to other changes such as cable and the video recorder.
Who holds the remote
One of the clearest social effects was a new question in the household: who has the controller? A set with knobs on the front could be adjusted by anyone who stood up, and in many families the person nearest the set, often a child, became the default channel changer. With a remote, control moved to whoever held it. Many surveys and magazine pieces over the years describe the remote as a symbol of status in the household, and as a source of minor arguments. Humorous writers have long used it as a source of jokes about family life. These are cultural impressions rather than precisely measured facts, and patterns differed between households and countries.
Remotes also made it easier for one person to shift a shared screen according to their preference, and manufacturers eventually offered second sets for separate rooms, partly because of such disputes. In households with several screens, the issue became less pressing.
Channel surfing
The most widely discussed effect is channel surfing, moving rapidly among channels, sometimes called “zapping” or “flipping”. Before remotes, changing channels cost effort, which meant viewers tended to stay with one program longer. After remotes, a dull moment could be escaped in a second.
Surfing became more common as the number of channels grew. With only three or four channels, there was not much to surf. Once cable systems offered dozens, the remote became the natural tool for exploring the dial. Observers in the 1980s and 1990s noted a style of viewing in which people moved quickly among channels in search of something interesting, and they sometimes watched more than one program at a time during commercial breaks. Researchers have studied the habit, though their results depend on the method, and the size of the effect on total viewing remains debated.
The effect on advertising
For advertisers, the remote created a new risk. A viewer could mute the sound or change the channel the moment a commercial began, behavior sometimes called zapping. Industry research from the 1980s onward attempted to measure how much avoidance there was. Estimates varied, and the video recorder, which recorded on magnetic tape and allowed viewers to fast-forward through ads in recorded programs, added another form of avoidance.
Advertisers and programmers responded in several ways.
- Shorter ads: Many commercials were made shorter, and 15- and 30-second spots became standard.
- Attention-grabbing starts: Ads and programs put eye-catching material at the beginning, so a viewer who landed on a channel by chance would be likely to stay.
- Product placement: Brands appeared inside programs, which cannot be skipped by a remote as easily as an ad break.
- Sponsorship and live events: Sports and awards shows, which are best watched live, kept their appeal for advertisers.
- Cliffhangers and teasers: Programs ended segments with a hook before a break to encourage viewers to remain.
Some networks also began to run credits in a smaller part of the screen, or placed promotion for later programs over the end of shows, to prevent viewers from changing channels at those moments.
Changes in programming
The way programs are structured was also affected, though it is difficult to separate the role of the remote from that of cable and competition in general. Opening sequences became shorter, and many dramas started with a teaser before the title. Programs aimed to give viewers a reason to stay through the first minutes. Promotions for upcoming shows were placed prominently. Some critics argued that these practices encouraged fast cutting and short attention, and others countered that television had always sought viewers’ attention, and the remote simply made the competition more direct.
From the couch to the screen in hand
The remote also prepared the ground for later forms of control. People accustomed to a handset felt comfortable with an on-screen menu, a program guide and, later, pausing and rewinding live television with a digital video recorder. Streaming services take that further, with no schedule and the viewer in charge of what plays and when. In these services, the viewing habit centered on the remote has shifted to smartphones, the app and voice assistants.
The remote control demonstrates that a technical convenience can have broad consequences, even when its inventors intended only to save a walk across the room.