Video during mass

[Karen107]

Homes are not sacred spaces, they are allowed to have TV sets in them. Churches are supposed to be sacred spaces, so they should not have TV sets in them. It’s not so much that videos are being played during Mass, but how did a TV set get on to holy ground? We have lost our sense of propriety.

How did a webcam or video recorder get on Holy ground? And do you not see the problem that can be created when people choose to watch a mass on TV over physically being with the body of Christ and receiving the body and blood of Our Lord? To me this is a much greater problem and no one seems to pay mind to it. We can potentially become a family of TV evangelizers like we are seeing elsewhere and people won’t be coming to mass.

1 Corinthians 11:33 So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all ‘eat together’.34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.

 

[Karen107]

I will state this plainly. I believe that Vatican II has opened the door for media to be used in places where it wasn’t before and we have to be very careful how we proceed. I’m sure the Bishops are regularly in dialogue over this because media can either hurt or help causes.

 

[adamhovey1988]

So during mass yesterday, the priest played a video instead of giving a homily. It was about the Annual Catholic appeal. The same thing happened this time last year, at a different nearby parish. I can reasonably assume that this action was condoned by the bishop, as the bishop appeared in the video.
Is this liturgical abuse? I know that the homily may be omitted but…a video during mass? Really?

I don’t know, but I am guessing that you might be in the same Diocese as I.

 

[phil19034]

No one uses “projectors and videos” anymore. It’s all done by computer, and it’s no more disruptive than Father reaching towards his collar to adjust his microphone.

It all boils down to this–how shall the people of the Church be informed of various financial needs?

An old-fashioned letter? This is expensive, even with group rates, and time-consuming, and the chances are excellent that most of these letters will end up in the trash or recycling bin without ever being opened/read.

A seminarian visiting every Mass? Sounds like a good plan if it’s feasible. That’s a lot of Masses. Our parish has 8 Masses on weekends, and there are several parishes in our city that have 3 or more Masses. There are a lot of cities and towns in our diocese–is it really feasible to send seminarians out to all these Masses?

But even if a seminarian was sent out, what would he say? He would read an announcement from the bishop describing the financial needs. Most people would pay no attention because it would be boring. There is no way that the seminarian can “dress up” the announcement, or use some spiffy marketing techniques to get people to pay attention–this would be offensive to the Mass.

How about having the priest announce the financial need either after the Mass during the announcements or after his homily? After Mass, people charge out of the church building the instant the closing hymn starts up, sometimes sooner, so many people would miss the announcement. And according to many people here on CAF, the attention span of most people is very short, and so most people would probably tune out any announcements immediately after the homily. (I don’t think they listen to announcements at the end of Mass.)

How about email? Yeah, right. You know what would happen–any letters from the Diocese would be deleted. No one would actually read them.

So then we come to the video during the Mass, right after the homily before the Liturgy of the Eucharist (so the people must watch it if they wish to stay and receive Holy Communion). I doubt that this was an easy decision for bishops to make 30 years ago. I’m sure they argued about some of the same questions that are being discussed on this thread, mainly whether a video is allowed by Canon Law, and whether it is disruptive to the spirit of reverence and worship in the Holy Mass.

But they decided that yes, videos are the best option. And as the technology has improved, the videos done on computer have made the process less disruptive than the old-fashioned projector or VCR or DVD player.

The point is, the people have to be told about financial needs. The bishops have chosen a method to tell them. It would be so wonderful if we could all “sense” the needs of the Church, or if we could welcome with joy verbal requests from priests for funds. It would be so nice if we were not the type of people who have such short attention spans that we can’t even listen to an announcement but instead, must watch an engaging video written and filmed by the Church’s professional marketing staff.

I’m ashamed of myself. We all should be ashamed. We SHOULD be eager to give our money to Holy Mother Church to help out with her many needs and missions.

*But we aren’t. * And the bishops are doing what they feel is most efficacious to persuade people to give to the very worthy causes of the diocese. They have chosen a method (videos immediately after the homily) that apparently is working to raise the funds that they need.

Would you rather the Church simply cut out these endeavors so that fundraising doesn’t have to be done? I myself believe in limited government and I would like to see our Federal and State budgets slashed by eliminating many of the programs that I don’t believe are justifiable use of my tax monies.

But we’re not talking about government programs. We’re talking about the needs of Holy Mother Church. We can’t just slash and burn. We have to tell the people of the Church about the needs and use whatever means work to do this and to persuade them to give money to help.

If you have a better idea for parting the people from their money, tell the bishops!

Cat - don’t get me wrong… I have no problem with a video. I just take issue with it being delivered during the homily. While ideally, it would be played in the Parish Hall, I see less issue with it being played during “announcements” or immediately after mass, BEFORE the processional.

In most Catholic Churches (especially ones with traditionally styled sanctuaries), they do not have projector screens in the Sanctuary. So even if the video is being played via computer (which they all are now a days), the projector screen has to be set up, and projector wheeled into place. Or if the parish has a large flat screen TV, then that has to be wheeled into place.

In my opinion, it’s a disruption. However, if a pastor wants to play it after communion, during the announcements, I can accept that.

I totally agree that playing a good video is a great way to raise money, and I agree that it should be before everyone leaves to go home. However, I don’t think the time to play it is during the homily. Read the letter during the homily if requested, but play video during the announcements and/or before processional.

God Bless

 

[Corki]

I know that in our diocese, the Cardinal sends a video and a letter. The instructions, as I have been told, are to include them at Mass but there is no directive that they be read/played during the homily, let alone replace the homily entirely. Even so, our pastor does not play the video during Mass, nor does he read the letters. He has copies of the letters in the seating and handed out with the bulletins. He references the letter and puts a reminder in the bulletin. He does instruct the ushers to hand out the pledge envelopes but hardly anyone fills them out during Mass.

And yet, we surpass our goal every year even though we are a poor (relative to neighboring parishes) rural parish.

I suppose the video spiel can be done without sacrificing the dignity of the liturgy but I love the fact that our pastor does not try to merge the two.

 

[phil19034]

How did a webcam or video recorder get on Holy ground? And do you not see the problem that can be created when people choose to watch a mass on TV over physically being with the body of Christ and receiving the body and blood of Our Lord? To me this is a much greater problem and no one seems to pay mind to it. We can potentially become a family of TV evangelizers like we are seeing elsewhere and people won’t be coming to mass.

Hello Karen,
There is nothing wrong with the webcam or video recorder being on Holy Ground. There is also nothing intrinsically wrong with TVs. For example, in the Cathedral Basilica of St. Peter and Paul in Philadelphia, whenever there is a large mass, chairs are added to increase seating capacity. A lot, if not most, of those chairs cannot see the Altar. So TV monitors are temporary placed in discreet locations so people in the chairs can see the Altar.

Also, in regards to broadcasting Mass over TV (like on ETWN, etc), the purpose is to provide a service to the sick people and “shut-ins” who cannot come to Mass. They can watch and receive spiritual communion. Plus, hopefully, in regards to the “shut-ins” they have an extraordinary minister of holy communion coming to provide them with communion on Sundays. Watching Mass on TV does not satisfy anyone’s obligation to attend Mass.

The above are examples of acceptable means of using video during Mass.

What’s not OK and what was not permitted by Vatican II is the use of video as PART of the Mass. PowerPoints and videos should not be played during a homily. Lyrics for Hymns should not be projected for all to see.

To me, watching a video during the homily is no different than Father delivering his homily via Skype.

Again, I understand the importance of video. There are some awesome ones out there: Symbolon, Catholicism, Catholics Come Home, etc… but if they need to be “played at Mass,” they can be played after communion.

God Bless.

 

[pnewton]

How did a webcam or video recorder get on Holy ground? .

It gets there the same way that the microphones, electrical lights and furniture get there - installed by people. :whacky:

 

[Digitonomy]

There is nothing wrong with the webcam or video recorder being on Holy Ground. There is also nothing intrinsically wrong with TVs… TV monitors are temporary placed in discreet locations so people in the chairs can see the Altar.
…The above are examples of acceptable means of using video during Mass.

What’s not OK and what was not permitted by Vatican II is the use of video as PART of the Mass. PowerPoints and videos should not be played during a homily. Lyrics for Hymns should not be projected for all to see.

This is an interesting opinion, but you word it in such a way that one might infer Vatican II explicitly permitted the first paragraph, but prohibited uses in the second paragraph. If so, please cite your source, but I am certain that is not the case.

 

[Cat]

Lyrics for Hymns should not be projected for all to see.

Why not?!

Why on earth shouldn’t all be encouraged to see the words to the hymns?!

If you can’t see to read the missallette (even the large print missallette) and the hymns are projected and you can actually see those words–apparently you’re participating in an irreverent act by reading them.

Of course, you could bring an Ipad and make the words as big as you want–but that will definitely distract people who assume you are checking out Facebook.

This thread is driving me crazy. Absolutely crazy.

Catholics sure are easily distracted. The list of distractions includes everything from the shoes the priest is wearing (or not wearing) to the halter top that the teenaged girl is wearing (or barely wearing) to the perfume that the lady in front of you is wearing to the loud singing that the Protestant converts behind you are blasting to the toddler who is munching on goldfish crackers to the old gentlemen who is loudly asking his wife what time it is to the organist playing too loud (or too soft or too lively or too dull or not playing the organ at all but a worldly piano that reminds you of a lounge)…

It’s a wonder anyone ever gets anything out of a Mass in the U.S.!

Maybe everyone ought to work to develop better concentration and not get so easily distracted over every little thing. Think of the poor Catholics who live in countries where Christianity is banned. I think a big head-chopping knife would distract me a lot more than a projected image of the diocescan appeal for desperately-needed funds.

 

[jmcrae]

How did a webcam or video recorder get on Holy ground? And do you not see the problem that can be created when people choose to watch a mass on TV over physically being with the body of Christ and receiving the body and blood of Our Lord? To me this is a much greater problem and no one seems to pay mind to it. We can potentially become a family of TV evangelizers like we are seeing elsewhere and people won’t be coming to mass.

1 Corinthians 11:33 So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all ‘eat together’.34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.

I agree with you, and having been to Masses that were being video recorded, I do find it distracting that it’s being recorded, even when the videographer is being as discreet as possible - and I can’t imagine that the videographers are getting much out of the Mass, if they are continually worrying about camera angles, etc.

However, I do see a huge difference between watching TV at home while relaxing, and it happens to be a Mass on TV, and watching TV in Church, when we are supposed to be worshiping God.

 

[Karen107]

I agree with you, and having been to Masses that were being video recorded, I do find it distracting that it’s being recorded, even when the videographer is being as discreet as possible - and I can’t imagine that the videographers are getting much out of the Mass, if they are continually worrying about camera angles, etc.

However, I do see a huge difference between watching TV at home while relaxing, and it happens to be a Mass on TV, and watching TV in Church, when we are supposed to be worshiping God.

Thank you for agreeing with me on point one. Here’s an idea about that point. Web stream the mass to be brought in by nursing home staff via the internet and send home bound ministers of the Eucharist to nursing homes locally so they can receive the Body of blood with the rest of us at the same time. At least this will help to some really feel they are part of the mass. ‘Televising’ the mass every week to anyone turning on the TV set is too open to the abuse of the Lords Supper.

As for your last comment, when you think about it, why would learning about the missions going on in the Church during the mass via a film be any less worshiping God? Because it uses media to aid in the message? If that were the case wouldn’t microphones and speakers take away from worshiping God because they are also media tools? All of these things are meant to give glory to God, from raising our voices to demonstrating the needs of the greater Church.

I mean I’ve heard plenty of homilies about almsgiving and I’m sure we will hear more as Lent begins. The point of the videos are not to take away from the mission of the Church, but to aid us in understanding where and why our help is needed so that people will give more generously now they have a clearer picture where their money is going. I hate to say this but as we learn from Jesus, the reality is that people have a hard time parting with their money most especially if they feel it’s not really needed or used improperly. To me the idea of having a video is the same as when they bring in a priest from a third world nation to speak about the needs of their parishes and then a collection is taken up for them after the first ordinary collection. So then after the homily two baskets are passed, one right after the other.

It seems that the films are driving the point in that we learn from Jesus.

Matthew 26:40"The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

 

[phil19034]

Thank you for agreeing with me on point one. Here’s an idea about that point. Web stream the mass to be brought in by nursing home staff via the internet and send home bound ministers of the Eucharist to nursing homes locally so they can receive the Body of blood with the rest of us at the same time. At least this will help to some really feel they are part of the mass. ‘Televising’ the mass every week to anyone turning on the TV set is too open to the abuse of the Lords Supper.

As for your last comment, when you think about it, why would learning about the missions going on in the Church during the mass via a film be any less worshiping God? Because it uses media to aid in the message? If that were the case wouldn’t microphones and speakers take away from worshiping God because they are also media tools? All of these things are meant to give glory to God, from raising our voices to demonstrating the needs of the greater Church.

I mean I’ve heard plenty of homilies about almsgiving and I’m sure we will hear more as Lent begins. The point of the videos are not to take away from the mission of the Church, but to aid us in understanding where and why our help is needed so that people will give more generously now they have a clearer picture where their money is going. I hate to say this but as we learn from Jesus, the reality is that people have a hard time parting with their money most especially if they feel it’s not really needed or used improperly. **To me the idea of having a video is the same as when they bring in a priest from a third world nation to speak about the needs of their parishes and then a collection is taken up for them after the first ordinary collection. So then after the homily two baskets are passed, one right after the other.
**
It seems that the films are driving the point in that we learn from Jesus.

Matthew 26:40"The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Why can’t the video & 2nd collection be played & taken after communion?

When I was growing up, my parish had a second collection at every single mass. The 2nd collection was always taken after communion.

Why can’t “we” compromise and have the video played after communion?

On one side, we have people who almost demand the video be played during the homily and on the other we have people who demand the video be only played in the parish hall.

To the people who are in favor of playing the video during homily, what’s wrong with the compromise of playing the video after communion?

God Bless.

 

[phil19034]

Why not?!

Why on earth shouldn’t all be encouraged to see the words to the hymns?!

If you can’t see to read the missallette (even the large print missallette) and the hymns are projected and you can actually see those words–apparently you’re participating in an irreverent act by reading them.

Of course, you could bring an Ipad and make the words as big as you want–but that will definitely distract people who assume you are checking out Facebook.

This thread is driving me crazy. Absolutely crazy.

Catholics sure are easily distracted. The list of distractions includes everything from the shoes the priest is wearing (or not wearing) to the halter top that the teenaged girl is wearing (or barely wearing) to the perfume that the lady in front of you is wearing to the loud singing that the Protestant converts behind you are blasting to the toddler who is munching on goldfish crackers to the old gentlemen who is loudly asking his wife what time it is to the organist playing too loud (or too soft or too lively or too dull or not playing the organ at all but a worldly piano that reminds you of a lounge)…

It’s a wonder anyone ever gets anything out of a Mass in the U.S.!

Maybe everyone ought to work to develop better concentration and not get so easily distracted over every little thing. Think of the poor Catholics who live in countries where Christianity is banned. I think a big head-chopping knife would distract me a lot more than a projected image of the diocescan appeal for desperately-needed funds.

 

[phil19034]

Why not?!

Why on earth shouldn’t all be encouraged to see the words to the hymns?!

If you can’t see to read the missallette (even the large print missallette) and the hymns are projected and you can actually see those words–apparently you’re participating in an irreverent act by reading them.

Of course, you could bring an Ipad and make the words as big as you want–but that will definitely distract people who assume you are checking out Facebook.

This thread is driving me crazy. Absolutely crazy.

Catholics sure are easily distracted. The list of distractions includes everything from the shoes the priest is wearing (or not wearing) to the halter top that the teenaged girl is wearing (or barely wearing) to the perfume that the lady in front of you is wearing to the loud singing that the Protestant converts behind you are blasting to the toddler who is munching on goldfish crackers to the old gentlemen who is loudly asking his wife what time it is to the organist playing too loud (or too soft or too lively or too dull or not playing the organ at all but a worldly piano that reminds you of a lounge)…

It’s a wonder anyone ever gets anything out of a Mass in the U.S.!

Maybe everyone ought to work to develop better concentration and not get so easily distracted over every little thing. Think of the poor Catholics who live in countries where Christianity is banned. I think a big head-chopping knife would distract me a lot more than a projected image of the diocescan appeal for desperately-needed funds.

Hello Cat.

It’s not a matter of being easily distracted. It’s a matter of different people connect to the Holy Spirit via different ways. Father Barron does a great job of explaining the different kinds of prayers and each of us are different in how we connect to the Holy Spirit.

I understand that for some, the Charismatic Movement and charismatic prayer is very powerful and connects them to the Holy Spirit. For them, singing, use of audio/video, etc all enhance their connection to the Holy Spirit. For others, they require meditative prayer or mystic prayer to connect them to the Holy Spirit. For these people quiet and/or solemnity help them to connect to the Holy Spirit.

Neither method is better than the other, they are different and for different people.

Vatican II opened the door (and rightfully so) to accommodate charismatic prayer by allowing parts for the laity to pray/sing out-loud, vernacular use, etc. However, if we change our Masses to be totally or predominately Charismatic (with videos, christian rock, etc) then only those people who connect to the Holy Spirit via Charismatic prayer will get something out of the mass. Others will not.

For example, I rarely feel connected with God when I sing. However, I often feel connected when I listen to singing. This is because I can’t sing. However, I do feel connected when I chant, and I think this is because when chanting, the notes don’t matter. I’m not trying to read music, which I can’t do. I also prefer music where I don’t have to read a missal because I already know the words. I also read the missal before mass, so I don’t read along with the Lector and Deacon/Priest. I used to read the missal during the mass, but realized that it distracted me from connecting with the Holy Spirit. So now, I prepare for Mass before Mass, by reviewing the readings before hand.

On the other hand, I know people who the complete opposite is true. They connect to the Holy Spirit by singing, by reading, etc. We are all different.

If we don’t acknowledge our differences and try to balance those differences, we will either need to have separate Masses every Sunday (i.e. Latin Mass at 9am, Solemn English Mass at 10:30, Charismatic Mass at noon). Or we learn to balance the traditional with the contemporary and balance ritual with the charisma. Perhaps that means mixing in more contemporary music and traditional music. Or compromising by playing videos during the announcements instead of strictly arguing homily vs parish hall.

In closing, just like christian rock, audio/video & singing help the charismatic connect to the Holy Spirit, solemn ritual & liturgy help meditative and mystic people connect to God too.

I’m sure there is room at the Altar for all of God’s people, so lets find a way to accommodate everyone.

I pray that I make sense.

May The Lord grant us wisdom and understanding. Amen.

 

[Denise1957]

Why can’t the video & 2nd collection be played & taken after communion?

When I was growing up, my parish had a second collection at every single mass. The 2nd collection was always taken after communion.

Why can’t “we” compromise and have the video played after communion?

On one side, we have people who almost demand the video be played during the homily and on the other we have people who demand the video be only played in the parish hall.

To the people who are in favor of playing the video during homily, what’s wrong with the compromise of playing the video after communion?

God Bless.

I dunno. It seems to me that what we should be focusing on after receiving Holy Communion is our Lord, and we should spend some time after receiving to thank Him. Showing a video after receiving might be a bit of a distraction.

 

[phil19034]

I dunno. It seems to me that what we should be focusing on after receiving Holy Communion is our Lord, and we should spend some time after receiving to thank Him. Showing a video after receiving might be a bit of a distraction.

LOL. to be clear, I meant during the “announcements”

I agree with you though. For me, the preferred place would be in the parish hall right after mass. But I would rather have it during announcements or right after the dismissal before the processional. Not during the homily.

 

[phil19034]

This is an interesting opinion, but you word it in such a way that one might infer Vatican II explicitly permitted the first paragraph, but prohibited uses in the second paragraph. If so, please cite your source, but I am certain that is not the case.

I’m not saying that Vatican II explicitly did anything.

In regards to my first point, the Church allows microphones, etc. The use of a few ***discrete ***monitors (like how they use them in the Basilica in Philadelphia) is in the same spirit as microphones (in my opinion).

Using video screens during a homily breaks this Church law which Vatican II did not explicitly eliminate:

• 1. The use of any kind of projector, and particularly movie projectors, with or without sound track, is strictly forbidden in church for any reason, even if it be for a pious, religious, or charitable cause.

see Father’s post here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=12737704&postcount=54

God Bless

 

[Digitonomy]

In regards to my first point, the Church allows microphones, etc. The use of a few ***discrete ***monitors (like how they use them in the Basilica in Philadelphia) is in the same spirit as microphones (in my opinion).

I think your reasoning is faulty. Microphones are more analagous to cameras, in that they collect information as sound waves and light waves, respectively. Speakers and monitors project information in the form of sound waves and light waves.

phil19034:

Using video screens during a homily breaks this Church law which Vatican II did not explicitly eliminate:

If that law is in effect, using video screens in church outside a homily also violates it.

phil19034:

see Father’s post here:

Yes I saw that, which is what I addressed in my reply to you in post #91.

phil19034:

To the people who are in favor of playing the video during homily, what’s wrong with the compromise of playing the video after communion?

I wouldn’t say I’m in favor of videos during the homily, but I think their use is permitted. And so neither is there anything impermissible about the use of videos during announcements after communion.

On the other hand, if one holds (as you do) that De Musica Sacra is in effect, the use of video or audio recordings is prohibited during the entire mass.

If it’s just an audio recording, it is allowed after mass under paragraph 71:

1. The use of automatic instruments and machines, such as the automatic organ, phonograph, radio, tape or wire recorders, and other similar machines, is absolutely forbidden in liturgical functions and private devotions, whether they are held inside or outside the church, even if these machines be used only to transmit sermons or sacred music, or to substitute for the singing of the choir or faithful, or even just to support it.

However, such machines may be used, even inside the church, but not during services of any kind, whether liturgical or private, in order to give the people a chance to listen to the voice of the Supreme Pontiff or the local Ordinary, or the sermons of others…

Video projection, on the other hand, is prohibited in paragraph 73, which does not have this after-mass exception.

 

[phil19034]

I think your reasoning is faulty. Microphones are more analagous to cameras, in that they collect information as sound waves and light waves, respectively. Speakers and monitors project information in the form of sound waves and light waves.

OK, yes, speakers and monitors are more analogous. Churches are allowed to have speakers. Just because I screwed up the analogies doesn’t invalidate my point.

If that law is in effect, using video screens in church outside a homily also violates it.Yes I saw that, which is what I addressed in my reply to you in post #91.I wouldn’t say I’m in favor of videos during the homily, but I think their use is permitted. And so neither is there anything impermissible about the use of videos during announcements after communion.

On the other hand, if one holds (as you do) that De Musica Sacra is in effect, the use of video or audio recordings is prohibited during the entire mass.

If it’s just an audio recording, it is allowed after mass under paragraph 71:Video projection, on the other hand, is prohibited in paragraph 73, which does not have this after-mass exception.

please note: I mentioned that I believe that discreet monitors placed where people cannot see the altar to allow them to see what’s going on (especially during a solemn mass or ordination) is in the “spirit” of the rule. I believe it’s in the same spirit of using microphones and speakers so everyone in the back can hear. However, if the law is taken too literally it breaks it. But I think it is within in the spirit of the law. Cannon law is not like US law. The “spirit of the law” and the theology behind the law is often be considered.

But yes, I do believe that using video or an audio recording during the homily is what the rule was specifically addressing. I also believe (as does Father) that the rule is still valid.

My suggestion of playing them during the announcements is a compromise. I personally, would rather it happen in the parish hall or after the dismissal. But I could personally accept a compromise of doing during the announcements, especially since a video is an “announcement” and because it’s not uncommon for lay people or guests to sometimes read announcements.

 

[Karen107]

Why can’t the video & 2nd collection be played & taken after communion?

When I was growing up, my parish had a second collection at every single mass. The 2nd collection was always taken after communion.

Why can’t “we” compromise and have the video played after communion?

On one side, we have people who almost demand the video be played during the homily and on the other we have people who demand the video be only played in the parish hall.

To the people who are in favor of playing the video during homily, what’s wrong with the compromise of playing the video after communion?

God Bless.

I don’t have a problem with a video or a collection after communion of course though I don’t think the mass is over until the choir stops singing. I don’t remember a collection basket going around after communion. (just two offering baskets in a row before communion), except maybe there is a basket outside of church and envelopes in the pew. However, there are many who set their minds on leaving after communion so not sure how captive an audience there is at that time.