Tag Archives: Television

May 21, 2013 · 10:06 am

Running Radio On TV

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

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 30, 2013 · 9:42 am

The Business And The Binge

The folks at Harris Interactive released some new information about TV consumption and it doesn’t bode well for the traditional business models – not even for the dual revenue model that empowered cable and which traditional broadcast is mimicking these days.  While I think any of us who pay attention to viewing research both via the boob tube and via other platforms are aware that things have changed, these numbers show that they’ve done so to a far greater extent than one might think.  Let’s see if you agree.

Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You can read the data from Harris here but in brief what it shows is that younger people stream more stuff and set their own viewing times.  They also tend to “binge” view – they’ll watch all the episodes from a season of a show straight through over several hours.  If you’re over 55, there’s a 2 out of 3 chance you’re being your own program scheduler.  If you’re under 40, that becomes a 9 out of 10 chance.  Most of the way that on-demand viewing is done is NOT via a system controlled by the cable operators among younger demos.  While the older audience tends to use the services the operators make available via their set-top box or DVR, younger people have wandered well off the ranch.

As Harris points out:

Self-scheduled and binge television viewing trends suggest implications for the television industry at large, potentially impacting both advertisers and content producers.  For advertisers, the clearest impact is that some of these viewers will be taking in contact on platforms beyond their reach, such as Netflix and Amazon’s VOD services.

Content producers, meanwhile, have both positive and negative implications to explore. On the upside, the ability to quickly catch up on past seasons of existing shows, particularly ones with complex storylines, could give more viewers the opportunity to jump into new episodes without confusion. On the downside, viewers watching when they choose, not when it airs, can play havoc with ratings.

Taking that to next the step, when the traditional currency of TV – ratings – suffers through a huge deflation, the basic underpinning of the business will follow.  Yikes!

I don’t know that the above research is huge news – look at how your own media habits have changed.  What is surprising is the extent to which these changes are now a way of life.  Let’s see how the business follows the audience – nothing like “interesting” times!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, What's Going On

Tagged as , , , , , ,

April 18, 2013 · 8:25 am

Is Streaming Hurting Traditional TV?

Once in a while a piece of research shows up that’s just confusing and such was the case the other day.  GfK Research has been doing annual surveys of network TV viewing for the past six years and the seventh iteration has produced some data that I can’t quite figure out.  Maybe you can help me.

Diagram of Streaming Multicast

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Over the last seven years:

the proportion of those who say they “expect to be able to watch my favorite shows on a device of my choice” has nearly doubled, from 19% in 2006 to 34% now. But those who watch network programs via streaming options are now more likely to say that this erodes their “traditional” viewing of the same shows. One in three (33%) report that they watch less “regular” TV as a result of streaming viewing, compared to one in four (24%) who say they watch more — a net differential of -9 percentage points.

In other words, viewers expect the networks to hand them the weapon with which the viewers murder the nets’ business.  After all, if they’re watching less, there are fewer eyeballs to sell.  It’s the old “trading analog dollars for digital dimes” argument.  But let’s turn to the man (Jeff Zucker, then of NBC, now of CNN) who made that argument and gain a bit of insight into the research:

“We believe in ubiquitous distribution, we want our content to be available everywhere,” Zucker said, also noting that “We’re not afraid to try things and stop them.”

He continued: “What we’ve lost in terms of viewers and ad dollars on the traditional analog systems is not being made up for on the digital side. Until we do that, there’s a risk to all our business plans,” said Zucker.

So actually, it seems that what the research is saying is not that interest in what the networks are airing is lessening – quite the contrary.  27% of those who use streaming or downloaded video now say that they “watch a greater number” of shows because of these options — more than double the 2006 figure of 12%. And 21% report that they spend more time watching TV content thanks to digital viewing options.  The problem seems to be with “regular” TV, which I assume means the program stream as offered by the network through your TV at specific times.  Survey results show 33% say they watch less traditional TV with streaming options, while 24% say they watch more.  As recently as 2008, GfK’s research showed that streaming options provided a net benefit to regular TV viewing; that year, the differential was +5 points, with 25% saying they watched more regular TV, while 20% said they watched less.

What all of this seems to mean is overall TV viewing isn’t declining.  The question for TV nets is how to derive as much revenue from streaming as traditional viewing. GfK also found 32% are visiting network sites via a mobile device so let’s put that inventory into the mix as well.  Maybe the research is a cry for sellers to do a better job of getting premium CPM’s for these measurable engaged viewers of the streams?  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , , ,