Posted on 02/12/2008 7:04:40 AM PST by abb
More users are doing it as networks make it easier
By Heidi Dawley Feb 12, 2008
With TV writers going back to work tomorrow, many are wondering whether their three-month strike, largely over payment for online work, was worth it.
A new study suggests it was.
While many believe it will be years before watching full-length TV shows on the internet catches on, this new report from JupiterResearch contends that time is already here. Says Jupiter analyst Bobby Tulsiani: “The internet streaming era has arrived.”
The interest has been there, reports Jupiter. What's changed is that it's so much easier to do these days. "Things are finally coming into place to do this,” he says.
A 2006 survey found that 15 percent of respondents were interested in watching full-length TV shows online. But as Tulsiani notes, a survey the following year found that only 10 percent actually had done so.
The reason, he believes, is that it was too hard for users to find the content, and when they did find it, the viewing experience wasn't good. The networks wanted it that way, fearing that if they made the content easily available online it would cannibalize TV viewership.
But in the time since, they've come to see the internet as akin to a DVR, as a place for fans to go to catch up on episodes they've missed or want to see again.
So they've moved to make content easier to find on their sites but also to get it out onto sites like Hulu, the just-launched video site, as well as mainstream portals like Yahoo.
And while the quality might not be comparable to that of a traditional TV set, Tulsiani believes it's good enough for viewing on a standard PC monitor.
Tulsiani also thinks that interest in watching full-length TV shows has risen since those earlier surveys and may now be as high as 20 percent to 25 percent.
“We would have seen bigger adoption in the autumn if it wasn’t for the writers’ strike. If the internet is acting like a DVR, people will go to watch if there are new shows. If there are no new shows, they you don’t go,” he says.
But challenges do remain that keep viewing of full-length episodes on PCs from going mainstream.
For one, not all episodes are put online. Networks limit episodes to protect DVD sales. And that's not going to change until they figure out how to better monetize content--make money from advertising, chiefly.
And that's still some time off, Jupiter figures. While ad revenues will be growing quickly, by 35 percent or so a year, it's from a small base. Jupiter forecasts it to grow from $760 million this year to some $3 billion in 2012. While that seems a hefty figure, it's still well short of the roughly $20 billion made in the DVD market.
But the big drawback is that consumers still see their TV set the place of choice for watching full-length episodes of TV shows.
At some point, the technology to allow viewing of streamed shows on TV sets may be in place, but it's not there yet, nor is the quality of shows streamed over the internet.
What you have now, says Tulsiani, is the internet competing with cable over who can better provide on-demand programming, and both face challenges.
For the cable companies, the TV set doesn’t provide an easy way to search through a library. For online, the search is easy, but the quality of the stream is not. Says Tulsiani: “They are battling each other. Whoever gets to the middle first might be the winner here.”
Meanwhile, in online ratings for the week ended Feb. 3, according to Nielsen Online, Google claimed the top spot among parent companies, followed by Microsoft, Yahoo, Time Warner and News Corp. Online. The top five brands were Google, Yahoo, MSN/Windows Live, AOL Media Network and Microsoft.
NexTag was the No. 1 advertiser with 7.1 million impressions, followed by No. 2 Experian Group Limited at nearly 6 million. With 33.4 million ads served, Yahoo was again the top advertising site, well ahead of No. 2 MySpace at 4.2 million.
Sessions per person per week were even to the previous week at 17, and domains visited per person were down one to 41. PC time per person was even compared with the previous week, at 18 hours and 16 minutes.
Network evening newscasts will go dark after the '08 elections and their news divisions disbanded.
ping
I understand what "length" means, as in measurement, and what "full" means, as in the entire length... but what does "TV" mean? ... and what does "shows" mean?
perplexed...
I don’t agree.
What I see is a merging of TV and computer/internet, especially with the advent of HDTV (and HDTV video cards).
What I envision is the end of the TV schedule as we know it, with archived content & streaming media allowing consumers to create their own schedules, even mixing current and past seasons plus movies, creating their own episode marathons, etc. TV networks will morph into Tv + internet, much as they are already. The popularity of big screen TV just goes to show that the comfort and convenience of watching entertainment from the couch or easy chair will never disappear. What you will see is a “command center” of sorts, with networked components able to mix and match media type and content. Whether you are watching broadcast sports, downloaded content, etc. Take it one step further and imagine making your grocery list with the help of your refrigerator & cupboards and their scanned content, combined with a cooking show on TV or a recipe database online.
People are building all of these things, piece by piece. By the time the big boys get ‘round to integrating things, people will have been doing it for years.
The network news will not die because they have too much power.
Look at how they successfully killed off thompson, hunter, and all the others and foised us with RINOs.
In fact, even the Super Bowl broadcasting could change. If ESPN/ABC gets to broadcast the Super Bowl again, I can see them doing a Full Circle broadcast on all ESPN channels, with ABC doing over-air broadcast, ESPN using over-air audio but with different viewing angles, and ESPN2 using different announcers and even more different viewing angles.
I respectfully suggest that what you have described would be - by definition - nothing like what we have known all our lives as network television.
That is “command” viewing via three or four viewing pipes relayed from a central control along AT&T Long Lines to remote million watt broadcast transmitters scattered about the country. You watched what they wanted when they wanted. And they had control over content creation.
The future will be nothing like the past. And as viewers flee to other forms of entertainment, advertisers will follow. Television “networks” will just fade away.
I don’t why we’re delaying, it’s so freakin’ simple.
Broadcast the shows then immediately put them on demand or streaming through the net. Keep the commercials. Finally leave them up for only a week.
If they do that I’ll stop dl TV shows this instant.
What people consider “TV” nowadays is nothing like TV was say, 25 or 30 years ago. Network TV has evolved to include cable and internet. Just as early TV wasn’t much more than radio with pictures, the 50’s to the 70’s saw big changes, as did the 70’s to the 90’s. Network television will not fade away, all the affiliates will still broadcast local news plus other content obtained through the network. A network of affiliated stations is still the best way to disperse media and information to the largest number of people. As I said, what you will see is more content types delivered through more delivery methods.
Same crap, different format...who cares.
We live in an area with no cable and a dish would require some major tree removal - have been using tvuplayer (free) which brings in Fox News (I know, they suck), Spiketv, Sci-fi Channel, and several others on our DSL line. Also check out TVOKAY, veoh.com, plus Streamnettv.com. It cures our TV fix with no additonal monthly bill. A 20 inch LCD monitor helps.
We shall see, shan’t we? Local TV affiliates are having problems, too.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6531052.html
Big Layoffs at Young Broadcasting’s KWQC Davenport, Iowa
Station Lays Off 12, Cancels Newscasts at 6:30 a.m., 9 a.m.
By Michael Malone — Broadcasting & Cable, 2/11/2008 11:26:00 AM
KWQC Davenport, Iowa, became the latest Young Broadcasting station to experience heavy layoffs. A total of 12 employees were let go, and the NBC affiliate’s 6:30 a.m. and 9 a.m. newscasts were dropped.
Young Broadcasting
Among those to be dismissed were weekend news anchor Chris Williams and production director Rick Greenlee, AP reported.
Neither the station nor a Young spokesman returned calls as of press time, although a KWQC source did confirm the number of layoffs and the cancellation of the newscasts.
Just a few weeks ago, the Quad City Times reported that news director April Samp and chief meteorologist Terry Swails were leaving KWQC. Samp told the paper it was time to move on, and Swails was apparently let go in a corporate decision.
The Young stations are reportedly attempting to excise as much as $20 million from the budget. WTEN Albany, N.Y., reportedly cut 10 staffers in late January, and WKRN Nashville, Tenn., let at least as many go.
Young is hoping for a speedy sale of KRON San Francisco to free up cash.
That’s the result of paying way too much for a different station (KRON), doesn’t necessarily mean local broadcasting itself is in any jeopardy. The problem is they’re still carrying debt from the 1999 purchase and that’s killing their bottom line. Nothing beats up a company like seriously overpaying for an asset.
The switch to digital is going to seriously alter the broadcast landscape. Networks are going to be running 4 by broadcasts which will give viewers customization from the TV itself. Yes the internet will play more into it, but the idea of networks ending anytime in the next quarter century is laughable. If anything networks are actually going to EXPAND, your local ABC will now have more over the air broadcast ANY the internet as opposed to just one air broadcast.
Here's why that won't happen. Advertising and money. "Broadcast" by definition is inefficient and wasteful of advertising dollars. Last week's NY Times article about the death of newspapers mentioned that advertisers reach their customers via newspaper websites for $0.05 per customer compared to $1.00 per customer via dead-tree newspaper ads.
The exact same is true of television broadcast. Many ads are aired that never get look at by target eyeballs.
Think of the internet as "narrowcast." Advertising is much more targeted and efficient.
At least that's how I see it working out.
It’s already happening, the digital spectrum is being sold off, for lots of money. What’s going to happen with advertisement, what’s already happening with advertisement, is going back to the old 50s way of embedding ads right into the show. Product placements will rule the roost. You can already see the pendulum swing, not a single episode of Heroes went by without somebody getting into or out of a Nissan Versa, if you’re watching a football game on Fox you’ll get the Dodge halftime show.
Narrowcasting ads has other problems, the big one being finding your target audience. The internet hasn’t had nearly the demographic analysis done that’s already out there for print and broadcast media. Every advertiser knows who’s watching show-X, they aren’t so sure about website-Y, currently they’re using the related media to decide, they know that if show-X is drawing their target market then websites related to show-X should also, but for fully independent stuff it’s a crap shoot.
I just saw this piece. It’s pertinent to our debate.
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=125012
Nielsen to Track Online Video Use Through Its TV Panel
Goal to Eventually Measure All Video Consumption
By Brian Steinberg
Published: February 11, 2008
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) — With more consumers starting to consider the idea of watching TV programs and other video online, Nielsen said it would “introduce measurement of TV viewing on the PC screen in our TV panel by the end of 2008.”
“The clients want it,” said Jim O’Hara, president of media product leadership for Nielsen Co. “Our ultimate goal will be to bring full internet measurement to the TV panel for both streaming and navigation.”
Nielsen’s effort is part of a strategy to measure all kinds of video consumption, whether it take place on the traditional TV screen or on smaller video perches such as mobile phones or iPods. The effort is not an easy one, however, primarily because people don’t watch programs or video content in the same way across different venues. And yet, with the number of online video viewers projected to rise to 183 million in 2011 compared with 114 million in 2006, according to statistics from eMarketer, the need to link audience behavior as viewers travel from one medium to another is becoming more pressing.
Advertisers will want to know whether a viewer of ABC’s “Pushing Daisies,” for example, watched part of the program online, or simply was pushed to an ABC site by the program, or if a viewer watched a piece of the program via another video-sharing site.
Hurdles online
Nielsen hopes to take a “first step,” said Mr. O’Hara, but recognizes there will be some hurdles in its quest. Last year, “we conducted research into, among other things, whether former TV panelists would permit us to install meters on their computers. The level of internet usage measured included all forms of video streaming and website navigation,” Nielsen said in a letter to clients today. “Out of 98 eligible households, 44 agreed to participate in the internet measurement.” Those that refused “told us that although they trusted Nielsen to maintain their confidentiality with TV measurement, they felt computer data is more personal and personally identifiable than TV data.”
Nielsen expects to begin installing technology with its TV panelists in the third or fourth quarter of 2008, said Mr. O’Hara. The company has other ways to measure video consumption online, including a service known as VideoCensus. The company expects its panel to grow to about 20,000 homes encompassing approximately 60,000 people by the end of 2009, compared to about 14,000 homes at present encompassing approximately 32,000 people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.