At first my answer to my own question was "definitely yes". I generally don't like Transit TV's newsreel, the volume at which it's played, etc. Isn't one of the perks of transit being able to read? Looking at Transit TV's website some interesting things come to light. They site a 2006 study about Transit TV's advertising effectiveness.
The first thing that comes to light is LA transit demographics. According to the study only 67% of transit riders in LA are employed and 29% are students (3). This means that the Census transportation to work question isn't capturing a lot of the rides that transit patrons in LA make.
Secondly, as you see in the picture above, the study claims that 71% of riders find Transit TV entertaining and 64% think it makes the ride go faster. Disturbingly, 58% reported that Transit TV was their primary source of news. Most importantly from a corporate perspective, the study claims that 83% of viewers could recall at least one ad they saw on Transit TV.
Is this study objective and done with reasonable methods? Or was it manipulated by Transit TV, which is a product of the Transit Television Network, which is a product of TEZO Systems Unlimited Inc. to make a better sales pitch? I don't know. The study was done by Arbitron.
Metro gets under 40% of its revenue from fares and advertising according to its 2009 financial report (17). Maybe I should just learn to tolerate Transit TV. Or maybe it just sucks and there's a better way to deal with Metro's budget problems.