I actually had a rep complain to me that I send out so much stuff that he can’t keep track of it all, so he has to ignore all of it. This is not a good excuse in my book. If I send something out, its because its relevant to their job. I do send out a lot, but that’s because I am a RESEARCH DIRECTOR. I try very hard to edit all the information I receive, and only send out the most relevant stuff. Yet, I still get complaints.
And if I didn’t send this stuff, they’d complain that they’re not being kept informed.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Revenue drives Innovation
From a thread on Lost Remote.com:
ROB: There's a core issue right there in my experience: Revenue drives innovation. If the revenue isn't there, you're not getting that new widget, platform, hardware or tool. The expectation for the web in my general experience is that an immediate ROI is expected and if the up-front cost is too high to generate a nearly instantaneous ROI then you don't move forward.Managers in general are putting their mouth where the money is right now. They focus on the current breadwinner and as a result the web doesn't develop as fast as it needs to.
From me:
Whatever happened to "If you build it, they will come?" Managers won't build it until they have revenue. Advertisers won't buy it until there's an audience. The audience won't come if its not there. Its a vicious circle.
ROB: There's a core issue right there in my experience: Revenue drives innovation. If the revenue isn't there, you're not getting that new widget, platform, hardware or tool. The expectation for the web in my general experience is that an immediate ROI is expected and if the up-front cost is too high to generate a nearly instantaneous ROI then you don't move forward.Managers in general are putting their mouth where the money is right now. They focus on the current breadwinner and as a result the web doesn't develop as fast as it needs to.
From me:
Whatever happened to "If you build it, they will come?" Managers won't build it until they have revenue. Advertisers won't buy it until there's an audience. The audience won't come if its not there. Its a vicious circle.
Multimedia Journalism Workshop in Tampa March 8
Cross posted from St. Pete Times' Media Critic Eric Deggan's blog:
February 27, 2008
Sometimes I worry about the Tampa Bay Association of Black Journalists.
Mostly, I worry that because of our name, journalists who are not black or people who don't consider themselves journalists will not want to get involved with our programs.
It's an odd concept to explain, but the name of our group -- which is a local chapter of the National Association of Black Journalists -- mostly describes the focus of our organization. Anyone of any ethnicity who is in the media or communications field can join our group, and you don't even have to join the group to participate in our programs.
So it is in that spirit that I roll out a big welcome for TBABJ's second annual session focused on Multimedia reporting on March 8, featuring members who have done extensive work translating their newspaper or TV work into online platforms.
On deck so far: Ken Knight, multimedia reporter for Media General; Demorris Lee, reporter for the St. Petersburg Times, who recently completed a multimedia reporting fellowship at the Knight Digital Media Center; Boyzell Hosey, photo editor at the St. Petersburg Times and Eric Deggans, St. Petersburg Times TV/Media critic and editor/creator of The Feed blog.
Scheduled for 11 a.m. March 8 at the Tampa Tribune, 200 S. Parker St. Tampa, this seminar is free and open to anyone who wishes to attend.
During the panel discussion, we will talk about ways to think about expanding traditional journalism work to multimedia platforms, the advantages and challenges of blogging for journalists, the resources available for those who hope to learn more about this kind of work and more...
Last year, we got a great response from area bloggers of all ethnicities and had a chance to turn it into a wide-ranging discussion. Even if you don't consider yourself a journalist, but would like to learn more about this new field, please feel free to attend.
As we all work to try and understand these new media platforms,sometimes the most fun comes from getting together and swapping ideas on what it all means. And fellow bloggers, feel free to post this on your blog somewheres...
February 27, 2008
Sometimes I worry about the Tampa Bay Association of Black Journalists.
Mostly, I worry that because of our name, journalists who are not black or people who don't consider themselves journalists will not want to get involved with our programs.
It's an odd concept to explain, but the name of our group -- which is a local chapter of the National Association of Black Journalists -- mostly describes the focus of our organization. Anyone of any ethnicity who is in the media or communications field can join our group, and you don't even have to join the group to participate in our programs.
So it is in that spirit that I roll out a big welcome for TBABJ's second annual session focused on Multimedia reporting on March 8, featuring members who have done extensive work translating their newspaper or TV work into online platforms.
On deck so far: Ken Knight, multimedia reporter for Media General; Demorris Lee, reporter for the St. Petersburg Times, who recently completed a multimedia reporting fellowship at the Knight Digital Media Center; Boyzell Hosey, photo editor at the St. Petersburg Times and Eric Deggans, St. Petersburg Times TV/Media critic and editor/creator of The Feed blog.
Scheduled for 11 a.m. March 8 at the Tampa Tribune, 200 S. Parker St. Tampa, this seminar is free and open to anyone who wishes to attend.
During the panel discussion, we will talk about ways to think about expanding traditional journalism work to multimedia platforms, the advantages and challenges of blogging for journalists, the resources available for those who hope to learn more about this kind of work and more...
Last year, we got a great response from area bloggers of all ethnicities and had a chance to turn it into a wide-ranging discussion. Even if you don't consider yourself a journalist, but would like to learn more about this new field, please feel free to attend.
As we all work to try and understand these new media platforms,sometimes the most fun comes from getting together and swapping ideas on what it all means. And fellow bloggers, feel free to post this on your blog somewheres...
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Bizarre Media Math
As our market is in the process of converting from Metered Market to Local People Meters, I have encountered all sorts of bizarre ways in which agencies and clients are attempting to create ratings projections for the future. Every agency has been trained in the basic media math formula:
Shares (Most Recent Sweeps Period) X HUTS (From most recent sweeps falling into the quarter in which you plan to air spots) = Rating
The problem is, we still don't have HUT/PUT levels for the LPM market for February through June. Because you are mixing two completely different methodologies, I refuse to allow clients to project LPM shares against MM HUT levels.
This is leading our clients to develop all sorts of off-the-wall techniques for projecting. Some are using the most recent book, some are only looking at the traditional sweeps periods. Some are comparing the ratings from 2007 to 2006 and bringing down February and May 2006 ratings by that same percent. Some are comparing the total GRPs from 2006 to 2007 and bringing down estimates. Some are using actuals from the year before. One agency today came up with the most bizarre combination, involving comparing November 2007 HUTs to November 2006 HUTs, and adjusting 2006 ratings by the same percentage, and but then looking at LPM ratings and waving a fine dusting of fairy dust over it all - I just shook my head sadly at it all.
In my opinion (and since its my blog, all you get is my opinion), the agencies are making things more difficult than they have to. I now have seven months worth of trending data for all of my programs, and to be honest, I really don't see a lot of variation in the regular daily programs. If for seven months, a program has averaged to a 2 rating (maybe 1.9 one month and 2.1 the next), you can be pretty confident that the program will deliver a 2 in February and May. Let's all subscribe to the KISS theory here: Keep It Simple Stupid.
Shares (Most Recent Sweeps Period) X HUTS (From most recent sweeps falling into the quarter in which you plan to air spots) = Rating
The problem is, we still don't have HUT/PUT levels for the LPM market for February through June. Because you are mixing two completely different methodologies, I refuse to allow clients to project LPM shares against MM HUT levels.
This is leading our clients to develop all sorts of off-the-wall techniques for projecting. Some are using the most recent book, some are only looking at the traditional sweeps periods. Some are comparing the ratings from 2007 to 2006 and bringing down February and May 2006 ratings by that same percent. Some are comparing the total GRPs from 2006 to 2007 and bringing down estimates. Some are using actuals from the year before. One agency today came up with the most bizarre combination, involving comparing November 2007 HUTs to November 2006 HUTs, and adjusting 2006 ratings by the same percentage, and but then looking at LPM ratings and waving a fine dusting of fairy dust over it all - I just shook my head sadly at it all.
In my opinion (and since its my blog, all you get is my opinion), the agencies are making things more difficult than they have to. I now have seven months worth of trending data for all of my programs, and to be honest, I really don't see a lot of variation in the regular daily programs. If for seven months, a program has averaged to a 2 rating (maybe 1.9 one month and 2.1 the next), you can be pretty confident that the program will deliver a 2 in February and May. Let's all subscribe to the KISS theory here: Keep It Simple Stupid.
Nielsen Apologizes for Data Delays
Nielsen released a client communication today apologizing for the recent increase in data delays for its overnight ratings service. They blame the recent delays on three factors:
- Increased data volume from the Local People Meter markets
- Increased data volume from DVR usage
- Increased data volume from A/P Meter penetration
Nielsen made a big splashy announcement in June 2006 about how its finally joining the rest of us in this digital, high-tech world with its A2M2 (Anytime, Anywhere Media Measurement) announcement. They heralded all this fabulous new technology they were developing to measure media, announced that the top 25 markets would be LPM within three years and a new A/P Meter 3.0 in markets up to size 60 starting in 2008.
These were all very ambitious goals, but I wonder if Nielsen has gotten in a bit over its head. Not even two years from the date of the A2M2 announcement, with only 16 markets LPM (or currently undergoing the LPM transistion) and Nielsen is already admitting that they cannot handle the data overload.
However are they going to handle another 9 LPM markets, PLUS this new A/P Meter technology (you know, the new one that measures demos like a Local People Meter, but isn't a Local People Meter)? If Nielsen can't handle the data volume for DVR usage and high A/P Meter penetration now, however are they going to face a future when DVR and digital television is become ever more prevalent?
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Well, here's ONE way to take advantage of new media!
Although I full force support local television stations trying to find ways to generate revenue utilitzing the internet, I would definately not recommended this particular approach. From NBCAugusta.com's website:
Macon, Ga. (NBC NEWS)- It's a scam involving a so-called television station in downtown Macon, Georgia. The Web site for "Action 25 News" is ripping consumers off across the state, and possibly the nation. It's a story the Better Business Bureau is now investigating.
Courtni Klosloski thought she had found the perfect job. "I was thinking to myself, wow I'm going to be able to put a thousand dollars away for my daughter's college, I'm going to be able to pay this, pay that. Our lives are going to change," Klosloski said.
After posting her resume to monster.com, she was directed to a fake TV news Web site, WACT, Action 25 News, a cable channel out of Macon. The site was complete with weather updates, an "award winning news team", and a consumer reporter claiming to know how you can make $84,000.
"I fell for it hook, line, and sinker," Klosloski said. She used her credit card to purchase a set of job training DVDs, costing almost $300. "1 ... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... 5 ... and by six you know you have been scammed."
Frantically, she tried to reach WACT, but each try has led to a dead end. She also tried to call consumer reporter Dave Howard, the newsroom, human resources, even the operator, but was led to the same recording: "Please leave your name, phone numbers, and any message and your calls will be returned. Thank you for calling.
Our calls were not returned, so we visited the station address.
According to the website, Action 25 News stands here in the midst of Ben's Macon Radiator Service. Shop owner, Ricky Tucker was surprised to hear he was sharing an address with a scammer. "Well that's what they tell me, but its news to me," Tucker said.
The mailing address was another dead end. The Post Office box provided doesn't exist in the city of Macon. We also attempted to track the website domain name. It led to frank milan, but his account was set to private, offering no answers.
"If you could make $84,000 at home in your slippers, you and I would both be home, you know, it just doesn't happen," said Kelvin Collins with the Better Business Bureau. "They've sold the DVDs. That's all they are interested in doing. They couldn't care less. They sold you the DVDs--that's what they wanted to do," Collins said.
But that is little comfort to Courtni Klosloski, who still is unemployed.
According to the local BBB, Courtni, who lives in Alpharetta, is probably one of many across the country who has fallen for the scam. The national Better Business Bureau who will take over the case from here.
Macon, Ga. (NBC NEWS)- It's a scam involving a so-called television station in downtown Macon, Georgia. The Web site for "Action 25 News" is ripping consumers off across the state, and possibly the nation. It's a story the Better Business Bureau is now investigating.
Courtni Klosloski thought she had found the perfect job. "I was thinking to myself, wow I'm going to be able to put a thousand dollars away for my daughter's college, I'm going to be able to pay this, pay that. Our lives are going to change," Klosloski said.
After posting her resume to monster.com, she was directed to a fake TV news Web site, WACT, Action 25 News, a cable channel out of Macon. The site was complete with weather updates, an "award winning news team", and a consumer reporter claiming to know how you can make $84,000.
"I fell for it hook, line, and sinker," Klosloski said. She used her credit card to purchase a set of job training DVDs, costing almost $300. "1 ... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... 5 ... and by six you know you have been scammed."
Frantically, she tried to reach WACT, but each try has led to a dead end. She also tried to call consumer reporter Dave Howard, the newsroom, human resources, even the operator, but was led to the same recording: "Please leave your name, phone numbers, and any message and your calls will be returned. Thank you for calling.
Our calls were not returned, so we visited the station address.
According to the website, Action 25 News stands here in the midst of Ben's Macon Radiator Service. Shop owner, Ricky Tucker was surprised to hear he was sharing an address with a scammer. "Well that's what they tell me, but its news to me," Tucker said.
The mailing address was another dead end. The Post Office box provided doesn't exist in the city of Macon. We also attempted to track the website domain name. It led to frank milan, but his account was set to private, offering no answers.
"If you could make $84,000 at home in your slippers, you and I would both be home, you know, it just doesn't happen," said Kelvin Collins with the Better Business Bureau. "They've sold the DVDs. That's all they are interested in doing. They couldn't care less. They sold you the DVDs--that's what they wanted to do," Collins said.
But that is little comfort to Courtni Klosloski, who still is unemployed.
According to the local BBB, Courtni, who lives in Alpharetta, is probably one of many across the country who has fallen for the scam. The national Better Business Bureau who will take over the case from here.
A Moment of Silence for WTSP's Dick Fletcher
Its a terribly sad moment for Tampa Bay local news viewers. Longtime WTSP CBS 10 affiliate's chief meteorologist Dick Fletcher has passed away. Fletcher suffered a stroke last week and did not recover. With 30 years of experience in the Tampa market, Dick was beloved by many viewers.
Eric Deggans, media critic for the St. Petersburg Times offers this quote in his blog: "Dick was an icon in this market -- and his impact goes beyond the Tampa market to all the young meteorologists he helped train and inspire," said news director Darren Richards, who came to WTSP in April 2005. "The guy was encyclopedic in his memory -- not just about the weather, but about everything in the market. And if he didn't know the answerr, he would try to find the answer."
A moment of silence for the loss of a leader in Tampa's local news community.
Monday, February 25, 2008
This Blog Gets a Gold Star
If only because they are referencing my article:
Lost Remote
February 17, 2008
What happens when nobody needs a TV?
Last week, a Broadcasting & Cable editorial warned that TV newscasts could follow the way of the newspaper. This week, B&C’s Jennifer Yarter asks, “What happens when the web starts to replace the television?” Yarter said the catalyst of her column was a dinner with a group of tech-savvy 20-somethings who said they don’t watch TV or even subscribe to cable or satellite. They just watch whatever they want online. Yarter writes, “Most of these young adults are falling into a new territory of media consumption that could potentially eliminate the need for local television stations.”
Absolutely, and consider this: the only thing that most local TV stations produce is local news. Local TV news in its current form, when translated online, looks very similar to everyone else’s news. If it’s not truly original or unique, it’s a commodity (especially in aggregated environments). And as more people get their local news online instead of making an appointment to watch it on TV, revenue loss will accelerate. A solution here is to start producing original content that bridges platforms — that’s unique enough to not only to attract an audience but create fans. Fans are people who accept no substitutes. Can local TV news, by itself, create this kind of online loyalty? I don’t believe so. It will require new, innovative, locally-produced niche programming that spans TV, mobile and the web. In other words, a whole new approach. Similar to the newspapers, it will be a matter of survival.
Lost Remote
February 17, 2008
What happens when nobody needs a TV?
Last week, a Broadcasting & Cable editorial warned that TV newscasts could follow the way of the newspaper. This week, B&C’s Jennifer Yarter asks, “What happens when the web starts to replace the television?” Yarter said the catalyst of her column was a dinner with a group of tech-savvy 20-somethings who said they don’t watch TV or even subscribe to cable or satellite. They just watch whatever they want online. Yarter writes, “Most of these young adults are falling into a new territory of media consumption that could potentially eliminate the need for local television stations.”
Absolutely, and consider this: the only thing that most local TV stations produce is local news. Local TV news in its current form, when translated online, looks very similar to everyone else’s news. If it’s not truly original or unique, it’s a commodity (especially in aggregated environments). And as more people get their local news online instead of making an appointment to watch it on TV, revenue loss will accelerate. A solution here is to start producing original content that bridges platforms — that’s unique enough to not only to attract an audience but create fans. Fans are people who accept no substitutes. Can local TV news, by itself, create this kind of online loyalty? I don’t believe so. It will require new, innovative, locally-produced niche programming that spans TV, mobile and the web. In other words, a whole new approach. Similar to the newspapers, it will be a matter of survival.
Links of the Day
Since I read a TON of media-related blogs, I thought I'd sample up some of my favorites for you every week:
Lost Remote is talking about a new combined service between ABC and COX Cable, where you can get the latest ABC prime programs as Video-on-Demand. Luckily for local affiliates, there IS space for local ad insertions, and fast-fowarding will not be allowed This is supposed to combat the prevalence of DVRs and commercial fast-fowarding. I agree with Lost Remote, I'm not so sure this will necessarily work, but I like the creative thinking and the way the ABC network finds a way to get the local affiliates on board with this.
Terry Heaton's PoMo Blog: Direct Quote: "If you are currently employed in local media — regardless of the format — now is not the time to point fingers or make the assumption that your job or responsibilities are safe, because your company is well-run. Local media is in a full-blown business disruption, and the handwriting is on the wall — diversify your skill set for a digital world or find another line of work. Do it now while you’re still employed. There is no “us versus them,” worker versus management conspiracy. That archaic notion is foolishness, because the disruption doesn’t care whether your company is well managed or not. " If you work in media, read this, memorize this, live this.
Does the public really know about the upcoming DTV transition in February? Are broadcasters really doing a good job about educating the public? I post this particular blog simply because I really like the comments made by reader Safran.
Lost Remote is talking about a new combined service between ABC and COX Cable, where you can get the latest ABC prime programs as Video-on-Demand. Luckily for local affiliates, there IS space for local ad insertions, and fast-fowarding will not be allowed This is supposed to combat the prevalence of DVRs and commercial fast-fowarding. I agree with Lost Remote, I'm not so sure this will necessarily work, but I like the creative thinking and the way the ABC network finds a way to get the local affiliates on board with this.
Terry Heaton's PoMo Blog: Direct Quote: "If you are currently employed in local media — regardless of the format — now is not the time to point fingers or make the assumption that your job or responsibilities are safe, because your company is well-run. Local media is in a full-blown business disruption, and the handwriting is on the wall — diversify your skill set for a digital world or find another line of work. Do it now while you’re still employed. There is no “us versus them,” worker versus management conspiracy. That archaic notion is foolishness, because the disruption doesn’t care whether your company is well managed or not. " If you work in media, read this, memorize this, live this.
Does the public really know about the upcoming DTV transition in February? Are broadcasters really doing a good job about educating the public? I post this particular blog simply because I really like the comments made by reader Safran.
Tracking Sample Characteristics
So, I've spent the morning tracking our market's metered sample characteristics that are NOT balanced to Universe Estimates to try to estimate how much of an affect these have on our ratings. Nielsen sample balances the ratings to a few demographics, including age, race, presence of cable/ADS, presence of children and county.
But I feel these limited demographics are simply not enough to truly represent the market. Although I can receive information about the income, education, occupation, precense of DVR, HD and home phone lines in our sample, these characteristics are not balanced to universe estimates. A 35-year old Caucasion person who is college educated, with a DVR, and a household income $75,000 plus is going to watch television much differently than a 35-year old Caucasion person who has only a high school diploma and a HHI of under $10,000.
Demographics alone do cannot predict behavior. Consider this case study: Two men, both white, both older than age 50, both with household incomes above $100,000, both are homeowners with children. Both are married, college-educated and have professional occupations. According to demographic, qualitative research, we would assume both men would watch television, surf the internet, consume other media, and purchase similar products. Essentially, demographically, they are the same.
Who are the two men? George Bush and Howard Stern.
But I feel these limited demographics are simply not enough to truly represent the market. Although I can receive information about the income, education, occupation, precense of DVR, HD and home phone lines in our sample, these characteristics are not balanced to universe estimates. A 35-year old Caucasion person who is college educated, with a DVR, and a household income $75,000 plus is going to watch television much differently than a 35-year old Caucasion person who has only a high school diploma and a HHI of under $10,000.
Demographics alone do cannot predict behavior. Consider this case study: Two men, both white, both older than age 50, both with household incomes above $100,000, both are homeowners with children. Both are married, college-educated and have professional occupations. According to demographic, qualitative research, we would assume both men would watch television, surf the internet, consume other media, and purchase similar products. Essentially, demographically, they are the same.
Who are the two men? George Bush and Howard Stern.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
5% Frequency in Internet Advertising
I had the opportunity to attend an internet selling "bootcamp", allowing me an extremely in depth training on the terminology and technology of selling internet. While much of the training was simply a refresher of things I already knew, I was a bit shocked by some new information - the idea of "share of voice" or frequency. This is very prevalent in the television world, and I'm finding local websites are just coming around to this.
I develop numerous sales packages for our department, and each one includes an internet portion. The typical package includes roughly 100,000 impressions - a nice round figure that sounds like a lot of impressions for a relatively small amount of money. That is, until I started doing the math. Our website reaches approximately 20 million page views monthly. At 3 ads per page, that's 60,000,000 impressions worth of inventory for sale. Buy 100,000 impressions, and your ad will be done running within the first hour of appearing! No wonder our local clients never see their ads when they come to our page.
Local websites are moving towards increasing the share of voice, or frequency on their site. We all know that the optimum TV campaign aims for a 3 frequency. For internet, every campaign should reach 5% of the total impressions for that area of the site where the ad appears.
To reach 5% frequency on the typical ROS campaign that we had been throwing into every presentation, then our campaigns should be reaching 3,000,000 impressions (60 million x 5%) instead of the 100,000 we had! Since few advertisers could afford to purchase that many impressions on a monthly basis, it is key that we limit each advertiser's campaign to specific sections of the site, or limit the advertiser to single weeks or single days in the week.
Another key area which seems to me to be a bit new to local websites is dayparting. Obviously, this is something we've typically always done in television. The dayparts are, of course, different than television. "Primetime" for internet is weekdays 8am to 4pm - typical internet surfing during the work day. (It is after all, the #1 white collar crime!) "Evenings" run 4pm to 1am. "Overnights" run 1am to 8am. Like television dayparts, different people are on the internet at different times, and even the same people will be on the internet for different REASONS at different dayparts.
To further increase frequency on internet campaigns, in addition to the restrictions I mentioned above, experimenting with dayparting has the potential to increase the effectiveness of the campaign.
I develop numerous sales packages for our department, and each one includes an internet portion. The typical package includes roughly 100,000 impressions - a nice round figure that sounds like a lot of impressions for a relatively small amount of money. That is, until I started doing the math. Our website reaches approximately 20 million page views monthly. At 3 ads per page, that's 60,000,000 impressions worth of inventory for sale. Buy 100,000 impressions, and your ad will be done running within the first hour of appearing! No wonder our local clients never see their ads when they come to our page.
Local websites are moving towards increasing the share of voice, or frequency on their site. We all know that the optimum TV campaign aims for a 3 frequency. For internet, every campaign should reach 5% of the total impressions for that area of the site where the ad appears.
To reach 5% frequency on the typical ROS campaign that we had been throwing into every presentation, then our campaigns should be reaching 3,000,000 impressions (60 million x 5%) instead of the 100,000 we had! Since few advertisers could afford to purchase that many impressions on a monthly basis, it is key that we limit each advertiser's campaign to specific sections of the site, or limit the advertiser to single weeks or single days in the week.
Another key area which seems to me to be a bit new to local websites is dayparting. Obviously, this is something we've typically always done in television. The dayparts are, of course, different than television. "Primetime" for internet is weekdays 8am to 4pm - typical internet surfing during the work day. (It is after all, the #1 white collar crime!) "Evenings" run 4pm to 1am. "Overnights" run 1am to 8am. Like television dayparts, different people are on the internet at different times, and even the same people will be on the internet for different REASONS at different dayparts.
To further increase frequency on internet campaigns, in addition to the restrictions I mentioned above, experimenting with dayparting has the potential to increase the effectiveness of the campaign.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Big Brother is Watching
New York, NY and Berkeley, CA - February 7, 2008 - The Nielsen Company today announced that it has made a strategic investment in NeuroFocus, an innovative firm that specializes in applying brainwave research to advertising, programming and messaging. The two companies will work together in an alliance to develop new forms of measurement and metrics based on the latest advances in neuroscience. Based in Berkeley, California, NeuroFocus applies brainwave, eye-tracking and skin conductance measurements to track the effectiveness of advertising, branding, packaging, pricing and product design across a broad range of consumer touchpoints. Leveraging marketing, engineering and neuroscience expertise from UC Berkeley, Harvard and MIT, the company measures - on a millisecond-by-millisecond basis - attention, engagement and memory retention.
~~~~~~~~
I've got to be honest, this newest development from Nielsen kind of creeps me out. As a research geek, I am completely in favor of new, in-depth research, but I believe there is a line, and Nielsen has crossed it.
With the exception of the internet, television is the highest research advertising media available. On a local level, I can tell viewing down to the quarter hour in any demo every single day. On a national level, the movement is toward minute by minute ratings. The agencies already contact our station on a daily basis if a single quarter hour does not post up to expectations. Can you imagine if we had to endeavor to meet the demands of neuroscience research? In the future, will Mr. Advertiser calls up and demand a make good if our audience glances away from his commercial for a split second?
Big Brother is not only watching, he is wired directly into your brain. It's all a bit too Orwellian for me.
~~~~~~~~
I've got to be honest, this newest development from Nielsen kind of creeps me out. As a research geek, I am completely in favor of new, in-depth research, but I believe there is a line, and Nielsen has crossed it.
With the exception of the internet, television is the highest research advertising media available. On a local level, I can tell viewing down to the quarter hour in any demo every single day. On a national level, the movement is toward minute by minute ratings. The agencies already contact our station on a daily basis if a single quarter hour does not post up to expectations. Can you imagine if we had to endeavor to meet the demands of neuroscience research? In the future, will Mr. Advertiser calls up and demand a make good if our audience glances away from his commercial for a split second?
Big Brother is not only watching, he is wired directly into your brain. It's all a bit too Orwellian for me.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
WHERE VIEWERS GO, WFLA TAMPA WILL FOLLOW
Market Share by Arthur Greenwald
WHERE VIEWERS GO, WFLA TAMPA WILL FOLLOW
TVNEWSDAY, Feb. 18, 8:37 AM ET
Link to Article: http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/02/18/daily.5/?promo
Jennifer Yarter, a researcher at the NBC affil, is closely tracking the digital habits of consumers so the station can offer new services and sell against the ones that are watching and win over the ones that aren't.
By Arthur Greenwald
When it comes to prognosticating how TV stations can make money from new media, I’m often reminded of Will Rogers’ famous observation that “It’s not what we don’t know that gets us intro trouble. It’s what we know that ain’t so.”
Here’s a fresh example: Earlier this month, the Solutions Research Group’s Digital Life America study reported that 43 percent of U.S. Internet users—that’s 80 million people—have watched one of their favorite TV shows online. That’s up from 25 percent one year ago. And 20 percent of all users say they watch TV online at least “weekly.”
Top online attractions include Heroes, Grey’s Anatomy, Dancing with the Stars, Ugly Betty, Chuck, CSI, House, Kitchen Nightmares, Smallville and Gossip Girl.
So what’s a station executive to do? Complain to your network’s affiliate relations chief? Double-check your portfolio to see if early retirement is an option?
Jennifer Yarter took a different approach. As research manager of Media General’s WFLA in Tampa, Fla., Yarter was determined to turn this information into useful action. She began by grilling her fellow tech-savvy twenty-somethings about their own media viewing habits.
As Yarter wrote in a letter to MediaPost.com, “Nearly everyone told me that their household currently has a high-speed Internet connection, but no connection to cable or satellite TV. The consensus was: "I don't need cable. Anything I want to watch on TV, I can get on the Internet."
Now, if this signals a trend, it’s really bad news for stations—a growing group of young viewers who not only prefer to ignore your service, they don’t even have a way to receive it.
Yarter described how she quickly dove into the Scarborough Research data for Tampa. “I estimate the total number of (Internet-only) homes to be about 7.5 percent of the total Tampa Market. But while 7.5 percent is nothing to scoff about, among adults 18-34, 11.4 percent (of the homes) are Internet-only.”
Then Yarter asked a crucial and provocative question: “Is there a place for the local television affiliate in this new Internet-driven consumer-focused media world?”
I was impressed. Neither a cheerleader for new media nor an apologist for the old, Yarter may be the herald of a new breed of station researcher who’s equally at home digging into the Nielsens or watching Heroes on an iPhone.
Naturally, I called her to ask what became ominous findings. Did it cause a panic at WFLA? Quite the opposite, Yarter assured me. “At WFLA we’re already looking beyond what it means to be just a television station,” said Yarter. “We’re actively developing different platforms to distribute video content—whether it’s on the Internet, on iTunes, or on cell phones.”
Like other Media General stations, says Yarter, WFLA has been creating a “converged market” for almost 10 years now, a fact reflected on its co-branded website Tampa Bay Online, which also features content from Media General’s Tampa Tribune and Centro, their Spanish language paper. Although the companies remain autonomous, Yarter explains, “all three news organizations are in one building working towards one common goal: to deliver their content through one mobile technology.”
OK, so that’s the goal. But how do you turn information about, say, Internet-only viewers into an action plan? That’s a problem, admits Yarter. “The Nielsens of the world are very slow in catching up with all of this new technology. It’s very difficult to know who’s actually watching—older viewers? Women? Young men?”
Yarter’s solution: “I tend to look at a lot of Scarborough data. It may not say specifically that viewers are watching NewsChannel 8 online, but it can tell us how many people say they’ve watched a TV station’s newscast in the past month. I can cross-reference that data with page view data on our own site and (draw some conclusions) about who has watched. For example, I can show that those who watch online video tend to have higher incomes or buy more electronics. These are things that can help advertisers reach the right audience.”
In other words, a strategy not unlike what worked for local cable ad sales until people meters finally delivered meaningful cable ratings. “Exactly,” Yarter agrees. “The cable people had to sell more on the concept of the cable networks—the kind of people who like to watch the Home & Garden Channel or fishing—rather than the actual channel ratings.”
A gross inference? Maybe. But apparently it works until something better comes along, says Yarter.
“We carry NBC Weather Plus on our digital subchannel. It’s a great product. We can do a lot of great things with product placement on it, but I don’t have any ratings because it doesn’t reach the minimum cume for Nielsen to record it. I know that Nielsen Media Research is working on its A2—Anytime, Anywhere Media Measurement plan. They’re still a couple of years away from having anything tangible.”
Armed with these insights, Yarter helps the WFLA sales team turn inferred viewers into paid advertising.
"It’s easy to get sales reps to go out there and sell spots and dots. But now we make sure our TV and newspaper and Internet reps all know a little bit about selling each of these media. We want them all to cross-sell everything a little bit more. They’ve got to convince the client, who may not know anything about the Internet or a podcast’s reach or how these media benefit their product.”
In the past three years, Media General has made great strides in cross-selling, says Yarter, “but in the future it’s going to become even more of a challenge with all these new media.”
Not to mention having to adapt to sudden changes in the media environment like the apparent growth of Internet-only households. But even here, Yarter cites a comfortable precedent. “One good example I have is the cell phone-only household. It used to be that if you didn’t have a home phone, you were not in the Nielsen sample.”
“It used to be that only a very small percentage relied solely on cell phones. Last year it was 18 percent of our sample. Enough that Nielsen changed its methodology to include them. But now we have to figure out, ‘who are these people?’
“We’re finding out that cellphone-only households tend to be lower income, they’re more ethnic, they tend to be renters, a lot are college students and they tend to be broadcast-only homes. They don’t have satellite or cable although they might have Internet.”
Yarter also discovered these homes watched a lot less TV than other viewers, including less news, although they do watch the Daily Show on Comedy Central and they’re interested in politics.
“On the other hand, they don’t have health insurance. A lot of them haven’t gone to a doctor recently. So this 18 percent is simply not going to care when we cover new medical procedures or miracle drugs.”
Of course, that’s no reason to change the main newscast and risk alienating traditional viewers, but it does suggest opportunities for shorter, targeted newscasts that play solely on broadband and eventually mobile TV.
Meeting each technical innovation with the right content has become something of a mission for Yarter. “No company can afford to jump full force into every new technology,” she says. “Our company has to look closely and figure out what is truly the Next Big Thing and which is a flash-in-the-pan.”
One piece of content not likely to change is WFLA’s nom du guerre NewsChannel 8.
“I’ve monitored the Nielsen diaries and regardless of our cable or digital channel, viewers still call us Channel 8. So that’s how we’ll keep branding ourselves. We’re NewsChannel 8. Our weather is StormTeam 8. Our help line is 8 On Your Side. We have a very strong reputation within this community. Our anchors and meteorologist are well known. So we’d like to carry that positive association into all these new platforms we’re working in.
Besides, laughs Yarter, “What else are we going to call ourselves? NewsChannel Text Alert on your Cell Phone?”
Market Share by Arthur Greenwald looks at what TV stations are doing to promote ratings and sales every Monday in TVNEWSDAY. Tell us about your efforts by writing to Arthur at greenwald@tvnewsday.com.
Copyright 2008 TV Newsday, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article can be found online at: http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/02/18/daily.5/.Please visit http://www.tvnewsday.com/ for more on this and other breaking news concerning the TV broadcasting industry.
WHERE VIEWERS GO, WFLA TAMPA WILL FOLLOW
TVNEWSDAY, Feb. 18, 8:37 AM ET
Link to Article: http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/02/18/daily.5/?promo
Jennifer Yarter, a researcher at the NBC affil, is closely tracking the digital habits of consumers so the station can offer new services and sell against the ones that are watching and win over the ones that aren't.
By Arthur Greenwald
When it comes to prognosticating how TV stations can make money from new media, I’m often reminded of Will Rogers’ famous observation that “It’s not what we don’t know that gets us intro trouble. It’s what we know that ain’t so.”
Here’s a fresh example: Earlier this month, the Solutions Research Group’s Digital Life America study reported that 43 percent of U.S. Internet users—that’s 80 million people—have watched one of their favorite TV shows online. That’s up from 25 percent one year ago. And 20 percent of all users say they watch TV online at least “weekly.”
Top online attractions include Heroes, Grey’s Anatomy, Dancing with the Stars, Ugly Betty, Chuck, CSI, House, Kitchen Nightmares, Smallville and Gossip Girl.
So what’s a station executive to do? Complain to your network’s affiliate relations chief? Double-check your portfolio to see if early retirement is an option?
Jennifer Yarter took a different approach. As research manager of Media General’s WFLA in Tampa, Fla., Yarter was determined to turn this information into useful action. She began by grilling her fellow tech-savvy twenty-somethings about their own media viewing habits.
As Yarter wrote in a letter to MediaPost.com, “Nearly everyone told me that their household currently has a high-speed Internet connection, but no connection to cable or satellite TV. The consensus was: "I don't need cable. Anything I want to watch on TV, I can get on the Internet."
Now, if this signals a trend, it’s really bad news for stations—a growing group of young viewers who not only prefer to ignore your service, they don’t even have a way to receive it.
Yarter described how she quickly dove into the Scarborough Research data for Tampa. “I estimate the total number of (Internet-only) homes to be about 7.5 percent of the total Tampa Market. But while 7.5 percent is nothing to scoff about, among adults 18-34, 11.4 percent (of the homes) are Internet-only.”
Then Yarter asked a crucial and provocative question: “Is there a place for the local television affiliate in this new Internet-driven consumer-focused media world?”
I was impressed. Neither a cheerleader for new media nor an apologist for the old, Yarter may be the herald of a new breed of station researcher who’s equally at home digging into the Nielsens or watching Heroes on an iPhone.
Naturally, I called her to ask what became ominous findings. Did it cause a panic at WFLA? Quite the opposite, Yarter assured me. “At WFLA we’re already looking beyond what it means to be just a television station,” said Yarter. “We’re actively developing different platforms to distribute video content—whether it’s on the Internet, on iTunes, or on cell phones.”
Like other Media General stations, says Yarter, WFLA has been creating a “converged market” for almost 10 years now, a fact reflected on its co-branded website Tampa Bay Online, which also features content from Media General’s Tampa Tribune and Centro, their Spanish language paper. Although the companies remain autonomous, Yarter explains, “all three news organizations are in one building working towards one common goal: to deliver their content through one mobile technology.”
OK, so that’s the goal. But how do you turn information about, say, Internet-only viewers into an action plan? That’s a problem, admits Yarter. “The Nielsens of the world are very slow in catching up with all of this new technology. It’s very difficult to know who’s actually watching—older viewers? Women? Young men?”
Yarter’s solution: “I tend to look at a lot of Scarborough data. It may not say specifically that viewers are watching NewsChannel 8 online, but it can tell us how many people say they’ve watched a TV station’s newscast in the past month. I can cross-reference that data with page view data on our own site and (draw some conclusions) about who has watched. For example, I can show that those who watch online video tend to have higher incomes or buy more electronics. These are things that can help advertisers reach the right audience.”
In other words, a strategy not unlike what worked for local cable ad sales until people meters finally delivered meaningful cable ratings. “Exactly,” Yarter agrees. “The cable people had to sell more on the concept of the cable networks—the kind of people who like to watch the Home & Garden Channel or fishing—rather than the actual channel ratings.”
A gross inference? Maybe. But apparently it works until something better comes along, says Yarter.
“We carry NBC Weather Plus on our digital subchannel. It’s a great product. We can do a lot of great things with product placement on it, but I don’t have any ratings because it doesn’t reach the minimum cume for Nielsen to record it. I know that Nielsen Media Research is working on its A2—Anytime, Anywhere Media Measurement plan. They’re still a couple of years away from having anything tangible.”
Armed with these insights, Yarter helps the WFLA sales team turn inferred viewers into paid advertising.
"It’s easy to get sales reps to go out there and sell spots and dots. But now we make sure our TV and newspaper and Internet reps all know a little bit about selling each of these media. We want them all to cross-sell everything a little bit more. They’ve got to convince the client, who may not know anything about the Internet or a podcast’s reach or how these media benefit their product.”
In the past three years, Media General has made great strides in cross-selling, says Yarter, “but in the future it’s going to become even more of a challenge with all these new media.”
Not to mention having to adapt to sudden changes in the media environment like the apparent growth of Internet-only households. But even here, Yarter cites a comfortable precedent. “One good example I have is the cell phone-only household. It used to be that if you didn’t have a home phone, you were not in the Nielsen sample.”
“It used to be that only a very small percentage relied solely on cell phones. Last year it was 18 percent of our sample. Enough that Nielsen changed its methodology to include them. But now we have to figure out, ‘who are these people?’
“We’re finding out that cellphone-only households tend to be lower income, they’re more ethnic, they tend to be renters, a lot are college students and they tend to be broadcast-only homes. They don’t have satellite or cable although they might have Internet.”
Yarter also discovered these homes watched a lot less TV than other viewers, including less news, although they do watch the Daily Show on Comedy Central and they’re interested in politics.
“On the other hand, they don’t have health insurance. A lot of them haven’t gone to a doctor recently. So this 18 percent is simply not going to care when we cover new medical procedures or miracle drugs.”
Of course, that’s no reason to change the main newscast and risk alienating traditional viewers, but it does suggest opportunities for shorter, targeted newscasts that play solely on broadband and eventually mobile TV.
Meeting each technical innovation with the right content has become something of a mission for Yarter. “No company can afford to jump full force into every new technology,” she says. “Our company has to look closely and figure out what is truly the Next Big Thing and which is a flash-in-the-pan.”
One piece of content not likely to change is WFLA’s nom du guerre NewsChannel 8.
“I’ve monitored the Nielsen diaries and regardless of our cable or digital channel, viewers still call us Channel 8. So that’s how we’ll keep branding ourselves. We’re NewsChannel 8. Our weather is StormTeam 8. Our help line is 8 On Your Side. We have a very strong reputation within this community. Our anchors and meteorologist are well known. So we’d like to carry that positive association into all these new platforms we’re working in.
Besides, laughs Yarter, “What else are we going to call ourselves? NewsChannel Text Alert on your Cell Phone?”
Market Share by Arthur Greenwald looks at what TV stations are doing to promote ratings and sales every Monday in TVNEWSDAY. Tell us about your efforts by writing to Arthur at greenwald@tvnewsday.com.
Copyright 2008 TV Newsday, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article can be found online at: http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/02/18/daily.5/.Please visit http://www.tvnewsday.com/ for more on this and other breaking news concerning the TV broadcasting industry.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Free speech in the Blogosphere
Re: http://www.thepomoblog.com/archive/blogger-loses-day-job-with-cnn-over-blogging/
Is it right for a television network, normally a defender of the Constitutional right to free speech, to fire an employee for exercising his right to free speech, in the form of a blog? Chez Pazienza, a producer at CNN, was fired for his long-time blog (http://www.deusexmalcontent.com/). Why? No where on Mr. Pazienza's blog does he mention that he is an employee of CNN, nor does he make any implication that his opinions represent the opinion of CNN Network.
In my experience, I find media companies extremely terrified of their employees voicing an opinion in a public forum. I have been on the receiving end of this. At one point in my career, I worked for a PBS affiliate on a temporary basis, producing local coverage of local state government congressional meetings. I wrote a letter to the editor of the local newspaper about a particular news story. The next day, I was pulled into my boss' office and lambasted for writing that letter. The opinion I wrote was not particularly incensed or offensive in any way. The reason I was reprimanded was because the PBS affiliate was afraid someone in the legislature would read my article, somehow know that I was affiliated with the station, become angry at my letter and yank the funding for the station. I only worked at that station for a very short, temporary work assignment - I was a very young nobody in that organization. Yet the station was extremely fearful someone would connect the dots.
I would not be surprised if a case like this eventually ends up in court. If companies restrict the blogging activities of their employees, where do you draw the line? Would my company be able to fire me for the contents of my personal blog (the one written to family and friends about my daughter)? Perhaps the company does not approve of my parenting skills demonstrated on my blog. Hmm. Ok, if that is the line, what about emails? I know companies have the right to read your work email, but what about personal email accounts, or social networking group accounts? If I go on MySpace and post a bulletin about how I had a crappy day at work, could THAT be a fireable offense?
Let me be very clear here - this blog represents my own personal experiences and opinion about the media industry and the art of media research. In NO WAY does this blog represent the opinion of my parent company (which, by the way, is not mentioned here).
Is it right for a television network, normally a defender of the Constitutional right to free speech, to fire an employee for exercising his right to free speech, in the form of a blog? Chez Pazienza, a producer at CNN, was fired for his long-time blog (http://www.deusexmalcontent.com/). Why? No where on Mr. Pazienza's blog does he mention that he is an employee of CNN, nor does he make any implication that his opinions represent the opinion of CNN Network.
In my experience, I find media companies extremely terrified of their employees voicing an opinion in a public forum. I have been on the receiving end of this. At one point in my career, I worked for a PBS affiliate on a temporary basis, producing local coverage of local state government congressional meetings. I wrote a letter to the editor of the local newspaper about a particular news story. The next day, I was pulled into my boss' office and lambasted for writing that letter. The opinion I wrote was not particularly incensed or offensive in any way. The reason I was reprimanded was because the PBS affiliate was afraid someone in the legislature would read my article, somehow know that I was affiliated with the station, become angry at my letter and yank the funding for the station. I only worked at that station for a very short, temporary work assignment - I was a very young nobody in that organization. Yet the station was extremely fearful someone would connect the dots.
I would not be surprised if a case like this eventually ends up in court. If companies restrict the blogging activities of their employees, where do you draw the line? Would my company be able to fire me for the contents of my personal blog (the one written to family and friends about my daughter)? Perhaps the company does not approve of my parenting skills demonstrated on my blog. Hmm. Ok, if that is the line, what about emails? I know companies have the right to read your work email, but what about personal email accounts, or social networking group accounts? If I go on MySpace and post a bulletin about how I had a crappy day at work, could THAT be a fireable offense?
Let me be very clear here - this blog represents my own personal experiences and opinion about the media industry and the art of media research. In NO WAY does this blog represent the opinion of my parent company (which, by the way, is not mentioned here).
I was speaking with a fellow research consultant who said that he believed that those who "own the screen" will win the day. In my opinion, those who own the "screen" WILL win the day, but only if you consider a computer monitor is a screen too! I believe television and the internet will be merged in the future into one central media center in the home. If we can examine the strengths and weaknesses of each medium and link them into ONE source - think of the possibilities!
Consider this:
Television Strengths:
Consider this:
Television Strengths:
- Local Local Local
- Personalities people know and trust
- A big beautiful visual screen that families gather around (ever gather your family around a computer monitor for "quality family time"?)
- Viewers' comfortable home in urgent news situations
- Mass reach
Internet Strengths:
- On Demand, Consumer Driven
- Vast source of content
- User-generated Content
- Interactivity
- Social networks
- Viewer feedback
I imagine a world in the not so distant future, where I can turn on my HDTV, watch a combination of entertainment programming and local news in whatever order I desire, while simultaneously checking my email, surfing the web. A commercial comes on the TV with a program I want to buy? I click a button on the remote and purchase it directly from the advertiser, without ever leaving the program I am viewing. If the news station wants to run a poll on the current elections, I can vote right there during the newscast using my remote. Imagine a weather cast where I can zoom in right to my particular area WHILE the weatherman is delivering the weather - or better year, the weather map automatically defaults to my location during the news. If there is a hurricane, my newscasters can talk about open shelters, and point to a link right next to their head, telling me to click here for local shelters. The wireless keyboard connected to the TV will sit side by side with the remote in every home. My head is reeling with ideas for "Local News Station 2.0".
Where that leaves newspaper? I'm not sure. I think there is still a place for newspapers. Perhaps part of the problem is that newspapers have been reigning king of media for a hundred years and haven't quite figured out that they really need to change their ways. Why in this world of pay-per-click internet ratings and minute-by-minute television ratings are newspapers still out selling on 6 month old ABC Audit total circulation numbers!?!?
Monday, February 11, 2008
Project Runway: A Brand That's doing Interactivity Right
I am very intrigued by the corresponding relationship between television and internet in this consumer-driven media world, so as an experiment, I thought I’d try to chronicle all the different ways a consumer can interact with a single television show. For my experiment, I chose one of my current favorite shows… Bravo’s Project Runway.
Media Source: Television
~ Watch the program on Bravo Network on its originally airing, Wednesday nights at 10:00pm
~ Watch any of the various repeats of the program on Bravo throughout the week
~ Record the program on DVR and watch at my leisure
Media Source: Internet
~ Visit PR website on www.bravotv.com to get general info on the show, bios on all the judges, contestants and models (usually with links to their individual websites)
~ Video video video – previews, recaps, behind the scenes, exclusive content
~ Behind the scenes photo galleries
~ Blogs by all the judges, Tim Gunn and contestants
~ Forums/Message boards from Fans
~ Episode recaps – including interactive voting, video, photos and blogs
~ Online Project Runway themed video games
~ Links to purchase fashion items featured on the show, plus any number of PR themed merchandise
~ Auctions to purchase items seen on the show – everything from designers’ sketches to the actual fashion items created on the show
~ User Generated content: Viewers can design their own fashion and submit them for weekly contests, viewers can edit together and submit their custom clips from the show
~ Downloadable “widgets” to put blog and video updates directly on various social networking sites (MySpace, Facebook, Friendster, LiveJournal, Blogger, Google, Yahoo, plus many others I’ve never even heard of), or you can get content emailed to you or sent to your cell phone
~ MyBravo – a Bravo-themed social network dedicated to PR
~ Exclusive online only spin-off “television” series – one featuring the full cast of contestants creating three looks for a challenge, which fans will vote on to decide the winner, and a second series of seven videos featuring fan favorite past contestant Malan Breton at Fashion Week
~ Plus! Any number of independent Project Runway dedicated fan sites and blogs, many of which have the full support of the PR producers
Media Source: Mobile / Cell Phones
~ In commercial breaks during the show, I can vote for my favorite designer via text message. The winner will be revealed in a commercial break at the end of the show.
~ The Project Runway Mobile Fan Club sends exclusive content to my cell phone every week.
~ The Project Runway Guide to New York offers an interactive map of New York, highlighting places to see and things to do in NYC
~ PR mobile website, with video, photos, contests, blogs, interviews, polls and games
Whew! I’m exhausted just thinking about all this! While the list does seem exhaustive, as if the producers of PR put every idea they ever brainstormed on the website (the “everything including the kitchen sink” theory), apparently there is a market for this. The PR brand includes everything all good brands should have in this “Media 2.0” environment – cross media content, viewer interactivity, user-generated content, internet-exclusive content, mobile technology and content, contesting, the personal connection through contestant blogs, viewer feedback and discussion area via forums, links to related content, use of social networking sites and perhaps most importantly, advertising that is prevalent, but not irritating. No matter how the consumer wants to consume content, these producers have produced content to meet that need – and they have figured out ways to generate revenue without alienating the consumer!
Local TV Tops for Urgent News
Continuing the theme of the rise of internet and the local television affiliate...
Run a search on the subject of my last blog, and you'll find the subject is nothing new. There are umpteen articles, blogs and forum posts about the subject of the internet and local tv affiliates. Everyone has a opinion about the future of the local TV affiliates, with theories ranging from the complete demise of local TV to a broad integration of local TV stations, live streaming video on the internet and local TV stations broadcast to cell phones.
To those who think the local TV affiliate will go the way of the newspaper into the realm of "antique media", I disagree. There will always be a place for local television, particularly when it comes to breaking news. Think back to that terrible morning, seven years ago in September. Every person in this generation remembers exactly where they were and what they were doing the morning of September 11th - where did you FIRST go to for information? I guarantee that it was most likely your local television affiliate. I remember seeing that dramatic video of the plane crashing into the towers, and the live video of the towers falling - it was a moment I shall never forget.
Had I gone to the internet first, however, it most likely would not have had as much of a powerful effect on me. Nevermind that internet video had not reached the technical capabilities in 2001 that we see now. Imagine, for a moment, that 9/11 happened this morning. The majority of people would still turn to their local television affiliate for full news coverage. The small minority that turned to the internet would see a small 300x250 pixel video pillow, surrounded by perhaps hundreds of flashing banners and ads for cars and homes and travel - all the typical "mess" that occupies most video websites today. The impact would have been lessoned significantly.
Research shows us that time and time again people turn to television first and foremost in urgent news situations. We are the comforting home for information, when people need us most. So, the next question becomes, if people are more than willing to embrace local television in urgent news, how do we get them to embrace television at other times?
Run a search on the subject of my last blog, and you'll find the subject is nothing new. There are umpteen articles, blogs and forum posts about the subject of the internet and local tv affiliates. Everyone has a opinion about the future of the local TV affiliates, with theories ranging from the complete demise of local TV to a broad integration of local TV stations, live streaming video on the internet and local TV stations broadcast to cell phones.
To those who think the local TV affiliate will go the way of the newspaper into the realm of "antique media", I disagree. There will always be a place for local television, particularly when it comes to breaking news. Think back to that terrible morning, seven years ago in September. Every person in this generation remembers exactly where they were and what they were doing the morning of September 11th - where did you FIRST go to for information? I guarantee that it was most likely your local television affiliate. I remember seeing that dramatic video of the plane crashing into the towers, and the live video of the towers falling - it was a moment I shall never forget.
Had I gone to the internet first, however, it most likely would not have had as much of a powerful effect on me. Nevermind that internet video had not reached the technical capabilities in 2001 that we see now. Imagine, for a moment, that 9/11 happened this morning. The majority of people would still turn to their local television affiliate for full news coverage. The small minority that turned to the internet would see a small 300x250 pixel video pillow, surrounded by perhaps hundreds of flashing banners and ads for cars and homes and travel - all the typical "mess" that occupies most video websites today. The impact would have been lessoned significantly.
Research shows us that time and time again people turn to television first and foremost in urgent news situations. We are the comforting home for information, when people need us most. So, the next question becomes, if people are more than willing to embrace local television in urgent news, how do we get them to embrace television at other times?
Friday, February 8, 2008
Response from Joe Marcoe, Senior Editor of Spots N Dots
Jennifer:
Thanks for your letter. I enjoyed reading it.....
....I'm not quite as pessimistic as you are (and I've been in the business since the days when people would still ask: "Cable? What's cable?") As a buyer, national rep, station GSM, LSM and NSM before we started Spots 'n' Dots, I've come to believe--and I still do--that television advertising is the greatest ad medium the mind of man has ever come up with....and I still believe in the pitch that when you can get 30 seconds of sight, sound, color, motion, and E-motion--and can get 30 seconds for a penny a home ($10 CPM), that will work time after time for almost any advertiser.
In my personal opinion, the next great wave of TV is yet to come. I personally believe that once the digital transition is completed, the next killer app for cellphones will be live, local TV on cellphones--a no-brainer technologically and being done already in many parts of the world. Simply turn the cellphone into a TV receiver, and viewing will skyrocket. Once the dummies at Nielsen figure out how to measure it (or maybe Arbitron will get back into TV measurement with the PPM), you'll see huge numbers. And as far as people not even owning a TV, no way....ain't going to happen! Once someone makes it easy to move images from a computer to a TV, people will want to watch it on a TV.
As far as networks not really caring about their affiliates, that's nothing new......the days are long gone when affiliates wee really important to networks, and Bob Wright was talking about an affiliate-free network ten years ago. But there's too much inertia built into the system for that to happen, and stations have congresspeople in their pockets who won't let it happen.
I wouldn't worry....TV has evolved, and evolved, and evolved again in the forty years I've been in the business. We're pretty good at that....and stations will be around for a long, long, time!
Thanks again....Joe Marcoe
Thanks for your letter. I enjoyed reading it.....
....I'm not quite as pessimistic as you are (and I've been in the business since the days when people would still ask: "Cable? What's cable?") As a buyer, national rep, station GSM, LSM and NSM before we started Spots 'n' Dots, I've come to believe--and I still do--that television advertising is the greatest ad medium the mind of man has ever come up with....and I still believe in the pitch that when you can get 30 seconds of sight, sound, color, motion, and E-motion--and can get 30 seconds for a penny a home ($10 CPM), that will work time after time for almost any advertiser.
In my personal opinion, the next great wave of TV is yet to come. I personally believe that once the digital transition is completed, the next killer app for cellphones will be live, local TV on cellphones--a no-brainer technologically and being done already in many parts of the world. Simply turn the cellphone into a TV receiver, and viewing will skyrocket. Once the dummies at Nielsen figure out how to measure it (or maybe Arbitron will get back into TV measurement with the PPM), you'll see huge numbers. And as far as people not even owning a TV, no way....ain't going to happen! Once someone makes it easy to move images from a computer to a TV, people will want to watch it on a TV.
As far as networks not really caring about their affiliates, that's nothing new......the days are long gone when affiliates wee really important to networks, and Bob Wright was talking about an affiliate-free network ten years ago. But there's too much inertia built into the system for that to happen, and stations have congresspeople in their pockets who won't let it happen.
I wouldn't worry....TV has evolved, and evolved, and evolved again in the forty years I've been in the business. We're pretty good at that....and stations will be around for a long, long, time!
Thanks again....Joe Marcoe
Thursday, February 7, 2008
The next wave of "TV" viewing
From today's Spots N Dots: A new study from the Solutions Research Group reveals a big increase of people viewing primetime programming on the internet in the past year. SRG says that almost 80 million Americans -- 43% of the online population -- have watched one of their favorite shows on the internet. That’s up significantly from 25% a year ago.
I was having dinner with some tech-savvy 20-somethings a few weeks ago, and got onto the conversation of media. I made a somewhat shocking discovery (at least to me) that most of these young adults are falling into a new territory of media consumption that could potentially eliminate the need for local television stations altogether. Nearly everyone told me that their household currently has a high speed internet connection, but NO household connection to cable or Satellite TV. I suppose I assumed the high speed internet connection went hand-in-hand with a cable/satellite subscription, but apparently, I was wrong. The general consensus among the group was:
"I don't need cable. Anything I want to watch on TV, I can get on the internet."
In this multi-media world, TV employees are getting ever more used to working in a multi-media environment. We already translate nearly everything we do onto the internet. But what happens when the web starts to replace the television entirely? Where is there a place in this environment for local television, local news or local television advertisers? Going to ABC.com to watch the most recent episodes of Ugly Betty or Grey's Anatomy is all well and good for the ABC Network, but what about the local ABC affiliate, who's revenue depends on viewers tuning into their favorite ABC programs on local television? Is there a place in this new internet driven, consumer focused media world for the local television affiliate?
This internet-driven viewing is bound to only increase dramatically in the future, and local affiliate television executives must find ways NOW to evolve into this new world. The TV execs are bound to look at this small subset of internet-only-non-cable households and think that the number of homes falling into this category is too small to be of any worry. A quick check of Scarborough Research, and I estimate the total number of homes falling into this category to be about 7.5% of the total Tampa Market. While 7.5% is nothing to scoff about, if you look at Adults 18-34, 11.4% of these homes are internet-only.
Our market ignored the impact of homes with cell-phone only (no home phones), thinking that the number of homes was too small to worry about. When the percent of cell-phone only homes reached 18%, AND Nielsen changed its methodology to include these cell-phone only homes, the resulting ratings drop caused TV General Managers across the market to sit up and pay attention.
We cannot afford to sit back and wait and be surprised by the next great wave of changing media habits - the internet-only, non-cable homes.
I was having dinner with some tech-savvy 20-somethings a few weeks ago, and got onto the conversation of media. I made a somewhat shocking discovery (at least to me) that most of these young adults are falling into a new territory of media consumption that could potentially eliminate the need for local television stations altogether. Nearly everyone told me that their household currently has a high speed internet connection, but NO household connection to cable or Satellite TV. I suppose I assumed the high speed internet connection went hand-in-hand with a cable/satellite subscription, but apparently, I was wrong. The general consensus among the group was:
"I don't need cable. Anything I want to watch on TV, I can get on the internet."
In this multi-media world, TV employees are getting ever more used to working in a multi-media environment. We already translate nearly everything we do onto the internet. But what happens when the web starts to replace the television entirely? Where is there a place in this environment for local television, local news or local television advertisers? Going to ABC.com to watch the most recent episodes of Ugly Betty or Grey's Anatomy is all well and good for the ABC Network, but what about the local ABC affiliate, who's revenue depends on viewers tuning into their favorite ABC programs on local television? Is there a place in this new internet driven, consumer focused media world for the local television affiliate?
This internet-driven viewing is bound to only increase dramatically in the future, and local affiliate television executives must find ways NOW to evolve into this new world. The TV execs are bound to look at this small subset of internet-only-non-cable households and think that the number of homes falling into this category is too small to be of any worry. A quick check of Scarborough Research, and I estimate the total number of homes falling into this category to be about 7.5% of the total Tampa Market. While 7.5% is nothing to scoff about, if you look at Adults 18-34, 11.4% of these homes are internet-only.
Our market ignored the impact of homes with cell-phone only (no home phones), thinking that the number of homes was too small to worry about. When the percent of cell-phone only homes reached 18%, AND Nielsen changed its methodology to include these cell-phone only homes, the resulting ratings drop caused TV General Managers across the market to sit up and pay attention.
We cannot afford to sit back and wait and be surprised by the next great wave of changing media habits - the internet-only, non-cable homes.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
TNS vs Nielsen Media Research
I recently read of a deal between TNS Media and DirecTV which allows TNS to create an opt-in pool of 100,000 DirecTV users to monitor their viewing habits. Recording directly from the DirectTV box, TNS will be able to compete with Nielsen and deliver second-by-second viewing ratings. I’m always in favor of more research, particularly cutting edge digital measurement that is finally catching up to the way people actually consume media (will those antique Nielsen diaries ever disappear?). Right off the bat, I had a few questions and concerns about this deal.
Their sample size is probably not representative of the overall US demographics. For one thing, utilizing only DirectTV participants excludes great segments of the population that are not satellite consumers, so their sample is most likely skewed to upper income homes. Many people ask me why Nielsen doesn't simply tie into their cable box and record from there. This seems like a simple, quick solution, but in actuality is more complex. For one thing, roughly 10% of homes do not have cable or satellite, getting their signal over the air via antenna only. This is a particularly large segment of homes to be ignoring.
The sample they have is an opt-in sample, verses a selected sample that balances to universe estimates. By default, generally in opt-in samples, you get a skewed group of people who have high regard for television in general and want to share their voice. It goes back to a simple theory of research – people are more willing to participate in surveys about things they like. (i.e. People who like to cook will participate in cooking surveys. People who never cook won’t waste their time on the survey.) This naturally skews the survey in favor of these high-television viewers. This is a problem we had in Tampa, until Nielsen changed the methodology, allowing more non-tv viewers to participate. All of a sudden, we saw viewing levels drop across the board, and it was mainly due to the fact that there are more people in the sample that watch comparatively less television.
TNS is making a big deal about their sample size being 100,000 homes, but in statistics, big is not necessarily always better. You generally come to a point where the sample size stabilizes, and getting a bigger sample won’t statistically affect the results. I haven’t the statistical analytical skills or the necessary data to run the equations to figure out what this optimum sample size is for the whole US, but I’d be interested in seeing whether 100,000 homes really matters that much more than Nielsen’s 14,000 homes, in terms of the statistical results.
TNS has a long way to go before they could compete with Nielsen on a national level. They are positioning this new service as something that “fills in the gaps” of Nielsen research, not necessarily directly competing. A sample size of DirectTV homes might give a market some insight on consumer viewing behavior, but the market would never accept this sample size as a source for overall, end-all ratings, due to the sample bias towards DirectTV homes.
I was very interested to read that TNS’ new service was able to see that although popular thought is that all sporting events are watched live, there was some DVR recording and playback of the Superbowl and its commercials. This type of research gives validity to the DVR ratings released by Nielsen and will hopefully give us some ammo to fight against advertisers who are convinced that everybody in the world is fast forwarding through every single commercial on television.
Second by second ratings?! Wow, my head spins thinking about it! The good thing, at least for me right now, is that none of this will filter down to the local level for a long time. National agencies and broadcasters will argue over minute-by-minute versus second-by-second ratings, but my local agencies are still struggling with basic concepts of Local People Meters and DVR ratings. It has always been my contention that the national research firms (particularly Nielsen) do not do a good enough job educating the smaller local agencies about methodology, and it is the local television stations that bear the brunt of educating the market. I shudder to think of the advertisers' facings staring blankly at me when I try to explain second-by second ratings in the future.
Their sample size is probably not representative of the overall US demographics. For one thing, utilizing only DirectTV participants excludes great segments of the population that are not satellite consumers, so their sample is most likely skewed to upper income homes. Many people ask me why Nielsen doesn't simply tie into their cable box and record from there. This seems like a simple, quick solution, but in actuality is more complex. For one thing, roughly 10% of homes do not have cable or satellite, getting their signal over the air via antenna only. This is a particularly large segment of homes to be ignoring.
The sample they have is an opt-in sample, verses a selected sample that balances to universe estimates. By default, generally in opt-in samples, you get a skewed group of people who have high regard for television in general and want to share their voice. It goes back to a simple theory of research – people are more willing to participate in surveys about things they like. (i.e. People who like to cook will participate in cooking surveys. People who never cook won’t waste their time on the survey.) This naturally skews the survey in favor of these high-television viewers. This is a problem we had in Tampa, until Nielsen changed the methodology, allowing more non-tv viewers to participate. All of a sudden, we saw viewing levels drop across the board, and it was mainly due to the fact that there are more people in the sample that watch comparatively less television.
TNS is making a big deal about their sample size being 100,000 homes, but in statistics, big is not necessarily always better. You generally come to a point where the sample size stabilizes, and getting a bigger sample won’t statistically affect the results. I haven’t the statistical analytical skills or the necessary data to run the equations to figure out what this optimum sample size is for the whole US, but I’d be interested in seeing whether 100,000 homes really matters that much more than Nielsen’s 14,000 homes, in terms of the statistical results.
TNS has a long way to go before they could compete with Nielsen on a national level. They are positioning this new service as something that “fills in the gaps” of Nielsen research, not necessarily directly competing. A sample size of DirectTV homes might give a market some insight on consumer viewing behavior, but the market would never accept this sample size as a source for overall, end-all ratings, due to the sample bias towards DirectTV homes.
I was very interested to read that TNS’ new service was able to see that although popular thought is that all sporting events are watched live, there was some DVR recording and playback of the Superbowl and its commercials. This type of research gives validity to the DVR ratings released by Nielsen and will hopefully give us some ammo to fight against advertisers who are convinced that everybody in the world is fast forwarding through every single commercial on television.
Second by second ratings?! Wow, my head spins thinking about it! The good thing, at least for me right now, is that none of this will filter down to the local level for a long time. National agencies and broadcasters will argue over minute-by-minute versus second-by-second ratings, but my local agencies are still struggling with basic concepts of Local People Meters and DVR ratings. It has always been my contention that the national research firms (particularly Nielsen) do not do a good enough job educating the smaller local agencies about methodology, and it is the local television stations that bear the brunt of educating the market. I shudder to think of the advertisers' facings staring blankly at me when I try to explain second-by second ratings in the future.
Welcome to my blog!
Welcome to my little section of the internet. As a television research director for a station in a Top 15 market, I am bombarded with new trends in the media world, and I thought I'd start this blog as a way to document my own thoughts and insights on these trends - from the point of view of a Research Director at a local TV station.
When it comes to the media world, local TV stations seem to be the bottom rung of the media ladder. We're often the last to hear of changes to programming, changes to research methodology, changes to agency assignments - changes that often can cost our station hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue. As an RD, its my job to keep abreast of these changes and help the station predict and plan so that we don't lose this revenue. In the meantime, it's also my job to be the end-all expert on what's happening on our station today - from a quantitative ratings perspective AND a qualitative demographic perspective. It's not easy. I often feel as if I'm drowing in data. I finish this short first post with the above animated gif a fellow RD sent me this morning. It pretty much sums up the job of a Research Director, more oftentimes than not.
When it comes to the media world, local TV stations seem to be the bottom rung of the media ladder. We're often the last to hear of changes to programming, changes to research methodology, changes to agency assignments - changes that often can cost our station hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue. As an RD, its my job to keep abreast of these changes and help the station predict and plan so that we don't lose this revenue. In the meantime, it's also my job to be the end-all expert on what's happening on our station today - from a quantitative ratings perspective AND a qualitative demographic perspective. It's not easy. I often feel as if I'm drowing in data. I finish this short first post with the above animated gif a fellow RD sent me this morning. It pretty much sums up the job of a Research Director, more oftentimes than not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)