Are the researchers, with their various
methodologies, identifying trends that are
heading the same way and at the same
velocity? Are their findings factored into
an integrated communications landscape
or merely hype for the anointed tech du jour?
One viable benchmark is the interpretation
of actual usage, rather than spreadsheet
speculation about future adoption
rates. Discounting the “novelty effect” for
new technology, actual consumer adoption
is a valid metric. And most significantly,
the best viewpoints are those that
offer research with relevance: conclusions
about how the new technology affects
current operations at existing media companies,
including broadcasters.
That’s why a new deluge of studies
about multiscreen adoption is individually
“interesting” and collectively “valuable.”
Together they offer a roadmap of the
evolving cross-platform ecosystem, plus a
guide for how broadcasters will be part of
this emerging environment.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND
The research on shifting viewing practices
includes data from the demand side
as well as various sectors on the supply
side, including hardware, program content
and delivery systems. By digging into
the reports concurrently, you can design
plans for a market where viewers are
headed.
For example, the latest Global Video
Index from Ooyala Inc. confirms a rapid
shift in online video viewing toward
long-form content (including movies, TV
shows and live sports events) rather than
the short YouTube-type videos of a couple
years ago.
Ninety-three percent of viewing time
of Internet-delivered shows (including
video streamed from Netflix and Amazon)
is devoted to long-form content, according
to Ooyala, an online video management,
publishing and analytics provider,
with many media industry clients.
Almost simultaneously, GfK Group, another
global research firm, published its
measurement of Netflix viewers, which
found that the average customer watches
5.1 TV shows and 3.4 movies per week.
That adds up to about eight hours of
weekly Netflix time in subscribing homes.
The Media Behavior Institute’s September
“USA TouchPoints” cross-platform
report brought the issues of social TV into
the evaluation. More than 15 percent of
adults use social media while watching
live TV, and 10 percent are participating
in e-commerce during their viewing sessions,
MBI said.
Its study offered a low-ball assessment
of the number of homes watching streaming
movies and TV shows (barely 8 percent
of U.S. homes), but pointed out that
that level is up 40 percent since the previous
status check six months earlier.
The MBI study also found that 20 percent
of tablet owners ages 16–64 watch
videos on that device at least once per
week. On a more conventional level, MBI
also found that 40 percent of Americans
watch programs via a DVR each week,
and 18 percent make use of the DVR daily.
Those figures are vastly larger than usage
of video-on-demand, which is watched 13
percent weekly and 3 percent daily, says
MBI, whose client list includes advertising
agencies, media buyers and TV networks.
Meanwhile, NPD DisplaySearch, in its
“Connected TV Study,” found through its
hardware-centric research that “TVs are
increasingly becoming devices of choice
for consumers, particularly since an increasing
numbers of sets have either builtin
connectivity or can be connected to
the Internet via a peripheral device.”
Twenty-five percent of consumers surveyed
said they view online content on
their TV [sets] several times a week, according
to Riddhi Patel, NPD DisplaySearch
research director-consumer insights.
Patel confirms that “movies are the most
popular source of entertainment for consumers
viewing Internet content on TVs,” with “broadcast video programming” also
high on the list.
The NPD DisplaySearch study also offers
an alternative view about the appetite
for Internet-delivered video: 44 percent of
respondents say they have “no interest in
viewing that content on their TVs,” and
about 30 percent do not own the necessary
devices. Of these respondents, only
one-third say they would be interested in
viewing online content on their TV sets if
given the possibility to do so, according
to Patel.
LEVERAGING THE KNOWLEDGE
Sorting out and developing plans
from all these data are daunting tasks.
The reports extol sweeping enrichment
prospects, such as Ooyala’s conclusion
that longer online viewing sessions give
content providers “more revenue opportunities.”
With the growing amount of
time spent watching online video on all
platforms, Ooyala points out that “inserting
multiple mid-roll ads will increase the
average revenue per minute of content.”
McKinsey Global Institute takes a
broader look at five emerging business
models for “social technologies,” a few of
which are suitable for current broadcast
operations. (The others could be adopted
if broadcast owners migrate toward other
revenue structures).
McKinsey’s roster includes advertising,
e-commerce, IT software/services, donations
and value-added services such as
marketing analytics and e-learning. Advertising
and t-commerce, a television version
of e-commerce, are the most pertinent for
broadcasters, and “donations” and e-learning
may work best for public media.
Although much of McKinsey’s study
(“The social economy: Unlocking value
and productivity through social technologies”)
focuses on processes that companies
can use to enhance productivity
“through faster internal communication
and smoother collaboration,” the analysis
offers several perspectives valuable to
media firms.
“Companies that depend very heavily
on influencing consumers can derive considerable
value by interacting with them
in social media and by monitoring the
conversations to gain a richer perspective
on product requirements or brand image—
for much less than what traditional
research methods would cost,” according
to the McKinsey report.
It also acknowledges that legacy corporate
structures, developed well before the
current interactive era, may pose barriers
to implementing “the power of social
technologies.”
Creating conditions that enable the
use of social technologies “will be far
more challenging than implementing the
technologies themselves,” the McKinsey
study concludes. Its fundamental premise,
though, is that the revenue potential
($250 billion in the advertising category
alone across all media) makes social technologies
worth the effort.
Typically, this avalanche of research
studies and management consultant recommendations
offers an aggressive and
confusing array of options. The core message
to broadcasters is that audiences
are definitely exploiting their alternative
viewing options.
Equally important: corporate partners
(including technology providers and advertisers)
are revamping their priorities
and ways of doing business.
Turbulent times have never been so
promising—if you can figure out how to
navigate them.
Gary Arlen is president of Arlen
Communications LLC, a media/telcom
research firm. He can be reached at
GaryArlen@columnist.com.