Philips Electronics has done it again. Flush with heady optimism after successful products such as the digital compact cassette (DCC) and the super audio CD (SACD), the redoubtable European giant has developed a way to keep television free for the masses for the foreseeable future—a patent application for a device which prevents a user from changing the channel during commercials.

To put it bluntly, the television industry has been having some economic problems of late. The classic model of running a commercial break every 10 or 15 minutes during a program is breaking down as consumers discover the joys of avoiding ads through channel surfing and outright skipping via digital video recorder.

It's a given that the TV networks need to somehow generate revenue in order to produce content. With commercials becoming less lucrative, TV has borrowed a dirty page from the movie industry and begun engaging in product placement within the programs themselves.

As a result, in the past few years, we've seen sitcom plots involving competition for a role in an Herbal Essences TV ad, various characters discussing how much they enjoyed "Memoirs of a Geisha," and a wife waxing philosophical about a Wal-Mart perfume as her husband lays dying a few feet away. Enter Philips, a company prepared to put its foot down on that sort of artistic compromise.

The device Philips envisions would scan any broadcast or recording for digital signals labeled as commercial content. Just as many new DVDs begin by displaying ads that the viewer cannot bypass, a channel running a commercial would be locked until that commercial was over. Similarly, the fast-forward or skip controls on your digital video recorder would be disabled while a commercial is playing.

Now, I know that many regular readers are thinking that this is the part where I point out how such a device isn't feasible, could result in a huge migration away from commercial television, and at best, would create a healthy underground for hacks which would no doubt be subject to prosecution under the DMCA. All of those things may be true, but that's simply because I believe the device doesn't go far enough.

The fundamental downside to merely forcing commercials to run unimpeded is that the viewer retains freedom of movement which would allow him or her to leave the room, cover the TV with a blanket, or eat or use a product in direct competition with an advertisement. For the propaganda to be most effective, the device needs to work in concert with the couch to prevent any unauthorized activity or movement while a commercial is running. Ideally, all phones in the vicinity would also be put on hold, and it would become impossible to deactivate the TV, even if unplugged.

Taking the idea to the next logical step, the overhead of producing programs could then be reduced or eliminated altogether, making commercial viewing far more efficient. If the viewer is tethered to the couch during commercials, programs represent little more than an opportunity to escape, therefore, such extravagances must be eliminated. To maximize return on investment, the phones would be reactivated, but could only be used to order products currently being advertised.

So far, there is only one problem left to solve: consumers need to earn money if they are to remain consumers, and "couch potato" is not a paying career unless you're a writer. So, in the spirit of practicality, for eight hours a day, one third of all TVs would automatically shut off. During that period, the now-active phones would be used to collect product orders from the two thirds of the population whose TVs remain on. Thus, the ultimate consumer becomes an integral part of the supply chain, and the perfect society is achieved. Take that, Plato.

As to Philips? Yeah, keep up the good work guys. We're right there with ya.