Butterflies Or Blips?

Posted on May 22, 2013 by Keith

A report came out yesterday afternoon which got me to think again about the changing television business. Coupled with a few other things going on, I wonder if they’re the harbingers of some sort of butterfly effect in the media business or if they’re just aberrations. Let’s see what you think.

Cable tv

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The report is from the Leichtman Research Group (LRG) and it showed that video subscriber gains in the first quarter of 2013 by top U.S. service providers were not enough to avoid a first-ever net subscriber loss in the category over a four-quarter period.  In other words, fewer people signed up for pay TV – which is pretty much any kind of cable or other video service – than cut one off.  As Multichannel News reported:

Leichtman attributed the downward trend to a combination of a saturated market, an increased focus by service providers on acquiring higher-value subs, and seeing some consumers opt for a “lower-cost mixture of over-the-air TV, Netflix and other over-the-top viewing options.”

So that’s one thing – cord cutting.  Is it overemphasized by many at this point?  Probably, but when you see something happen for the first time ever, you need to pay attention.  Then there is the bill submitted by Senator McCain to use regulatory incentives to encourage programmers and distributors to unbundle their channels and offer a la carte programming.  This means that if you don’t watch a channel you wouldn’t have to buy it as part of a bundle.  So if you’re effectively paying $5 for ESPN as part of a basic cable package and don’t watch it or want it available, you might get a price break.  Then again, those of us who do watch it might be paying substantially more each month as the user base diminishes.  Do I think the bill will pass?  Probably not since the idea has been around for years.  However, it might just be another butterfly flapping its wings, especially given that there are many more options for video (see point 1!).

Finally, ESPN cut staff yesterday despite record profits.  One would assume they know what their projected P/L looks like and they have committed a lot of money to rights over the next few years.  Making cuts now ahead of the new rights kicking in can help maintain that profitability   Again, another butterfly but pair it with the potential for ala carte cable and fewer pay TV buyers, and then ask if these are butterflies or just blips?  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Filed under: Thinking Aloud, What's Going On | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Running Radio On TV

Posted on May 21, 2013 by Keith

I think I can state without any fear of being contradicted that no one would run a radio ad on TV.

English: A typical "As seen on TV" l...

Giving up the sight, motion, and color of TV to use an existing radio creative is wasteful.  The opposite is true as well – we’re all familiar with TV commercials in which the audio is just music and the video handles the branding and other messaging.  Running one on radio might provide a nice musical interlude but not much in the way of marketing.

I bring this up because a recent study on how publications are presenting themselves on emerging platforms got me thinking about it:

Of the 78 consumer-facing English language publications detailed in the report, 83 percent have at least one app available in the Apple® App Store, Newsstand app or the Google Play™ service. Of these, 65 percent have published iPhone® apps and 40 percent have published apps for the Android™ platform. All 78 publish on the iPad® device. However, only 25 percent of these were optimized for any form of tablet display, with most publishers using scaled-down versions of their desktop sites instead.

That’s from a new report from the Brand Perfect™ initiative by Monotype Imaging Inc.  And it’s not just print publications who are at fault here:

Despite the emergence of responsive Web design, which enables optimal viewing experiences across a wide range of devices, the report identified that publishers are not supporting its use in online advertising. Where device-ready sites are not available, advertisements served are scaled down, often resulting in illegible typography and distorted imagery.

In the broader sense, we’re all content creators, even if that content is labelled “advertising.”  Restating the obvious (one of my specialties ), the TV ad on radio is as ineffective as a scaled-down, illegible banner in mobile.  A publisher who can’t support marketers’ efforts to use proper cross-platform technology is a TV station continuing to broadcast in black and white or only in Standard Definition.  Putting out content in a less than optimal form for new devices is buying a Ferrari to drive to and from the market at 35 MPH.  The technology has moved along, as have your consumers.  You need to catch up!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Filed under: digital media | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Reading Yesterday’s Papers

Posted on May 8, 2013 by Keith

As I’ve mentioned before here on the screed, I’m an old-school newspaper reader. Yep – ink on my hands and everything.
From time to time, I get tied up in other activities – work, sports viewing, family activities, whatever – and I can’t get to a particular day’s papers until a day or two later.  Last week was one of those weeks and I spent last night catching up on four days’ reading. As I was doing so, I noticed something that spurred a business thought I’d like to share.

Many of the articles I read were predictive in nature.  Something had happened, the reporter gathered the facts, and based on that looked forward.  Many of the pieces contained quotes from analysts of one sort or another - professionals or just the average person talking about what was going to happen next.  What I noticed, with the benefit of hindsight, was how often they were wrong.  Generally, that wasn’t because they made incorrect assumptions but something else had happened in the interim that changed the circumstances and, therefore, the predictions or suggestions for courses of action were off target.

Given the “right now” demands of media, most which come from the immediate nature of digital reporting, I wasn’t surprised   How often recently have we seen big headlines splashed across the Web that are totally wrong an hour later?  Even the delay built into the print medium (it takes time to get that ink on paper) isn’t quite long enough to improve the analysis dramatically.  Which is the business thought.

Business has been mirroring digital.  Every enterprise seems to have a “do it fast and fix it later” mandate.  Maybe what’s needed is to wait to react to  the reporting - the data we get on a minute by minute basis – until a more clear picture emerges?   Go follow the print editions of a story across a week and see how things change (most print publications make that possible on their sites).  You’ll be surprised   Now imagine if that story was about your business.  What would change each day that would change the actions taken the day before?

I realize we don’t all have the benefit of reading yesterday’s business with that kind of hindsight.  Maybe we ought to work on a way to bring that perspective more front and center?  After all, deciding not to decide is a decision, right?  Many of the deadlines we impose are self-directed.  In my book, a little more perspective with which to frame what we know (or think we know) can’t hurt.  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Filed under: Consulting, Thinking Aloud | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Next Page »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,816 other followers

%d bloggers like this: