Despite its dubious
methodology
and predictably
self-serving results, the
June 2012 “Dyle Mobile
TV Data Report” does
confirm the growing demand
for mobile video
content. Its arrival at the
same time as four other equally self-serving
research reports underscores the audience
appetite and industry opportunities for mobile
and online video advertising and production—
but it far from guarantees a role
for traditional broadcasters in this emerging
category.
Conveniently, the Dyle study surfaced
just weeks before the group closed its first
deal with a mobile phone carrier to market
a Samsung handset that can pick up Dyle
TV signals. MetroPCS, the country’s fifth
largest wireless company with about 9.5
million customers, will offer the Samsung
Galaxy S Lightray 4G handset and Dyle service.
MetroPCS has not yet disclosed if Dyleready
phones will be sold in all of its primary
markets, which coincide with cities
where broadcasters backing Dyle are located,
including Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth,
Detroit, Los Angeles, San Francisco and selected
East Coast markets from Boston to
Baltimore.
The “Dyle Mobile TV Report”—sponsored
by the Mobile Content Venture, a
coalition of broadcast groups—found that
68 percent of viewers would watch more
TV if they were able to watch it live on
mobile devices. The study also identifies
news, weather and sports (mainstays of local
broadcasters) as well as movies, sitcoms,
dramas and children’s cartoons as the favorite
program categories if viewers had access
to “live mobile TV service.”
Overall, the Dyle results confirm consumer
interest in mobile video at levels
similar to those found during 2010’s Open
Mobile Video Coalition (OMVC) field trial
“showcase” in the Washington-Baltimore region,
according to OMVC Executive Director
Anne Schelle.
 |
Samsung Galaxy S Lightray 4G with Dyle service |
Almost simultaneously with the Dyle
report, several other benchmarks emerged,
demonstrating the ascent of “new video”
viewing, although not by any means suggesting
a significant role for traditional
broadcasters.
More significantly, the other studies offer
a context about the shifting interests
of viewers and their growing engagement
with nonbroadcast platforms.
THE NUMBERS
June was a record-breaking month for
online video access, according to comScore.
More than 180 million U.S. Web viewers
looked at 33 billion pieces of online video
content, including 11 billion ads, comScore
tallies showed.
In total, Americans watched 4.5 billion
minutes of video ads that month. comScore
estimates 53 percent of the total U.S. population
saw online video ads in June, averaging
68 views per person during the month.
While the ads were not necessarily seen
on tablets or smartphones, it is obvious that
the increasing reliance on those devices
means that viewers are watching video
commercials on the same devices that
Dyle’s surveyors expect to reach.
The comScore report also found that
each of the top five video ad sites, including
YouTube, Hulu, BrightRoll, Adap.tv and
TubeMogul, also had a record-breaking June,
with each delivering more than one billion
video ads.
Separately, yet another evaluation of
global video trends recommended that media
companies should diversify their marketing
plans to reach the increasingly connected
multiscreen audience.
The VideoPlaza report, “A Future for TV:
IP-Delivered Advertising in a Connected
World” notes that big brand advertisers
have not yet found a way to create brand
awareness via Internet TV; but it expects
marketers to develop a way to tap into IPdelivered
video by the decade’s end.
“The rush to deliver content to the growing
range of connected devices presents a
business and technology challenge to traditional
TV platforms, caught between old
business models and the need to innovate,”
according to remarks by Videoplaza CEO
Sorosh Tavakoli. “This research highlights
that, as media companies move to address
the connected audience, they must complement
their content with a clear IP monetization
strategy.”
PEW SAYS...
As if backing up the VideoPlaza study,
yet another July report—this one from the
Pew Research Center’s Internet & American
Life Project—confirmed that half of all adult
mobile phone owners now incorporate
their mobile devices into their television
watching experiences.
Pew’s research found that 38 percent of
mobile device owners used their phone to
“keep themselves occupied during commercials
or breaks in something they were
watching on conventional TV sets; 23 percent
used their phones to exchange text
messages with someone else who was
watching the same program in a different
location; and 22 percent used their phone
to check whether something they heard on
television was true or not. About one out
of every five viewers visited a website that
was mentioned on a TV show.
Although the results of each study offer
a different perspective on viewers’ expectations
and media/marketing companies’
plans, taken together the studies provide a
larger context for Dyle’s promising, but narrow,
findings.
The Dyle report, conducted by Research
Now, a company owned by the Dallas-based
loyalty marketing firm e-Rewards, concluded
that “live TV matters” and that “smartphones
and tablets are key devices.” Both
conclusions are reasonable and obvious, although
the online survey of 510 Americans
(aged 18–54) left it up to the respondent to
determine what “mobile video” meant.
From Pew, comScore and other research
data, it is obvious viewers are in the process
of developing their own concepts about
“mobile video”—including video from
ESPN, CNN, Weather.com and from the online
sites of broadcast networks and local
TV stations.
The Dyle survey questionnaire offered
a broadcast-skewed description of mobile
TV. Here’s the query as supplied by Research
Now: “You will be able to watch
broadcasters such as NBC and Fox exactly
as you do at home—live and as presented
by your local TV station. Watch the ‘The
Today Show’ as you wait in line at the coffee
shop. Catch the local News, Weather, or
Traffic right before you head home from
work. Or avoid missing a single moment of
the football game or ‘Glee’ when you are
the only one at home that wants to watch
it.”
Given such a broad “what-if” query, respondents
were likely to respond positively,
based on shows with which they are now
familiar, such as the online video offerings
they can see on tablets and smartphones.
Although Dyle’s excited spin on the
findings may have some credence, it is
more likely that viewers will find their way
to whatever platform offers the content
they want.
And that perception comes through
in a British study that coincided with the
Dyle and other reports. “Screen Life: The
View from the Sofa” emphasizes the value
of handset viewing in the larger context of
the multiscreen environment.
The ThinkBox study, conducted by COG
Research, was designed to help marketers
understand the context of multiscreen
viewing. In a complex psycho-physiological
analysis to examine actual program and
ad break engagement, the study identified
that 81 percent of “multiscreening” viewers
stayed in the room and did not change
the channel during the ad break, compared
to 72 percent of TV-only viewers. Think-
Box identified a number comparable to
Pew’s—22 percent in this case—of viewers
who texted about the show while
watching.
Although mobile TV—as envisioned by
the Mobile Content Venture, which sponsored
the Dyle Report, and by the Mobile
500 Alliance—may play a role in the coming
TV ubiquity agenda, the reality still is a
work in progress.
The Mobile Marketing Association is
in the very early stages of developing ad
standards to be used across all mobile
platforms, including broadcast mobile TV.
Until those standards are set, advertisers
may continue to eschew the broadcast
platforms, favoring the more established
online video options.
The MetroPCS/Samsung deal may
supply real-world experience—not just
“what if” survey results—about consumer
preferences for broadcast TV content on
their handsets. OMVC’s Schelle says we
can “start to see” devices by October and
points out that tablet makers are “starting
to look at ATSC chips;” she expects an expansion
of handset options in 2013.
Dyle—or the other studies—do not indicate
whether or not that is soon enough.
Gary Arlen is president of Arlen Communications
LLC, a media/telcom research
firm. He can be reached at GaryArlen@columnist.com.