Long Live Television Part 75

We've certainly seen our fair sharing of hemming and hawing about the new Nielsen study, which declared that 99% of video viewing happened on a television set. Long live TV, peeps.

So a few points:

SEVEN - Is this really so shocking, anyway? How much video do you watch online? It's easy for me to hook the mac to the hdtv and watch hulu on the big screen, but I still don't do it all that often - and I never did it pre-mac because it's damn near impossible on the pc. And why would I watch long-form content on my computer if I can watch it on TV - AND play on my computer at the same time?

THREE - While TV viewing is increasing, so is everything else. The younger you get, the more you "multi-task." And multi-tasking seems to mean not necessarily focusing on multiple things, but many things, one at a time. So if you watch TV, then text or play on your computer during the ad breaks, obviously the ad becomes that much less effective. And frankly, so does the stuff between the ads.

FOUR – The sample size is 300 people. Just something to keep in mind.

But I would consider the shuffling over this to be a symptom of the same old advertising myopia. Our success doesn't depend on the watching part alone, and what happens after the ad is just as important as whether or not they see it (or pay attention to it) at all.

And while we may be watching more TV than we were 15 years ago, the action we take after the ad is vastly different. We don't just go to the store, we go to google. We go to amazon. We comparison shop and ask our friends, far more easily than we could just a couple years ago.

Cheering a couple television studies is in many ways beside the point. No, television isn't dead. Nor is the TV ad - but our ability to use it in a vacuum is at least taking its last breaths. Just like the ability of a bad movie to make it past the first weekend by avoiding reviews. Or Microsoft's ability to sell a just okay music player by spending 100 million dollars.

TV didn't die, but the absoluteness of Television did. So before you go back to thinking everything is okay, you may want to consider that it's never been about the medium, but the people. And they have changed.

(pic via emilyyday)

UPDATE: I immediately went from writing this to feeling like we've had this argument so many times that I immediately wanted to rip this post down. But that would probably void some sort of bloggy social contract. So - yeah - my apologies and all that.

F FX (except IASIP)

 
Well, friggin' great. Super. Way to steal my tagline FX. I stole that fair and square, thus it should be mine and mine alone. Since FX is stealing my taglines, I have decided to strike along with the rest of the writers. From now on, I will only be writing for reality programming. That is all. (And thanks to Fred for the find)

More on the Strike

A faithful viewer of the Daily Show or the Colbert Report like me, or any other late-night talk show surely has noticed by now that the networks are run by idiot lawyers who are less concerned with long term solutions and doing the right thing than with making the most short-term dollars as possible. Assholes.

The last big writers strike in '88 led to a 22 week break from new teevee. Back then, the choices were much fewer, for both the viewer and the writer. And tv still took a significant loss. Now everybody is a potential star. The TV executives are morons. I don't think that can be said strongly enough. The industry took a huge hit 19 years ago, but 22 weeks off today may just be the final nail in the coffin.

And good riddance, networks are little more than brands when distribution is nearly free, and brands aren't doing all that great past Apple and Google. Nobody really gives a shit about NBC, they watch for the Office, 30 Rock and Conan O'Brien. But, that's a concept apparently lost by these pompous executives.

But I vote it lasts 22 weeks. Shit, I hope it last 222 weeks. Let's start this thing over and see where we could really take entertainment and information with the investment base a little more spread out. Not saying it'll work better necessarily, but it sure as hell will be a lot more interesting.

Support your writers. F the networks. And then invest like hell in new talent. If this thing lasts long, there will no doubt be a new ruling class ushering in a new era for our entertainment industry (and much more quickly than it would have happened otherwise). And it probably won't be focused in LA.

Absolute Bullshit Crap.

Really ABC? This is what makes for prime-time television these days? A crap knock-off of candid camera,  except less funny and with no host? At least they didn't forget the annoying canned laughter.

Good thing those advertising rates are still going up. Fucking hell. First commercials become television shows, and now dumbass youtube bits warrant an hour of ABC's Tuesday night. Can you smell the desperation?

Why not put Ask a Ninja, or Rocketboom, or ZeFrank, or whoever on your network? These shows are popping up all over the place, all with working formulas. Yet you waste our time with bullshit drivel like "Just for Laughs." Ugh...I hate you. Until Lost comes back on. Then I'll begrudgingly accept you again.

That's what I get for turning on the teevee. Back to blogging, thanks...

Advertisers have a Joost Responsibility

Coca-Cola, Nike, Lionsgate, General Motors, Visa, Electronic Arts, Kraft, Microsoft, Nestle, Purina, IBM, L'Oreal, HP, Intel. All among the 31 advertisers signed up to support the launch of Joost, becoming the first crop of advertisers to test P2P television. It's all very exciting.

But, I fear it. I've spent some time railing on Joost for relying on traditional 15 and 30 second mid-rolls, and using traditional television techniques as a crutch, rather than working towards more innovative definitions of the ad spend. And, I stand by that, although the minimal interruption of one 30 second spot per episode does seem rather reasonable.

And, they will be testing different techniques to generate revenue, such as still images, overlays, widgets, and a so-called "ad bug" that appears on the corner of the video, like network logos do on traditional television now.

But it doesn't matter until the advertisers push the limits of Joost, as well. The real question today is less about a Joost innovation (they've proved themselves a willing partner there), and more about whether agencies and advertisers are willing to take the wheel from time to time, pushing each other and the platform into more consumer-centric strategies.

Can Joost really make television better? The answer relies partly on us.

ps. I've got a couple tokens left if any of you haven't yet signed up for beta.

pps. Joost also signed a one-year partnership with IPG's Emerging Media Lab. I guess we'll see how this affects the landscape....

NBC Further Opens the Network

I may be making more out of this than I should, but I think when NBC starts putting one of its most hyped, critically acclaimed shows up for online viewing only, that spells a major industry shift in thinking. The Black Donnellys went off air a few weeks ago, with no real promise of return. But the thing is, this Paul Haggis show is fucking good. So, with the dearth of good programming, I was a little miffed.

Apparently, that's not really a problem in this quickly changing television age. Three new episodes are already online, and they're releasing new episodes each Monday at 9pm ET. Obviously, this move was made out of desperation from lost viewership, but it's potentially something that could save a show that would have been, in any other era, considered walking dead.

Luckily, they've woken up to the fact that online viewership doesn't necessarily steal from television viewing, but sustains it, by allowing those who missed the regular showing to not lose the content, when before they may have given up altogether. For the Black Donnellys, it could just save the whole damn show.

Combine that with the 81% recall rate for ads viewed 2 or more times, and NBC may just have something cooking. (In case you haven't tried it out, everyone views the same ad 2 or more times, by the way)

Now, I'm still wishing failure on ClownCo, but it does mean more interesting times ahead. We can just hope that online only versions can actually make money. Then we'll be sittin' pretty.

And so it continues...

Just in case anybody really loved the Jaffe interview, or if you'd like to see it in print, go here to see it transcribed for the Madison Avenue Journal.

Also, my latest full piece, The Decomposition of the Television Set, is now available here.  The theory is that the convergence of the internet and the television set will not end television, but will unlock abilities that we couldn't have imagined only 5 or 10 years ago.

A couple excerpts:

"Luckily, we will no longer be shackled to a 30-second increment. Our ability to grow will be firmly tied to our ability to innovate and engage. Without the crutch of forced viewing, we will be enabled to create and connect in ways video has never been allowed to before, with interactivity not even imagined in the Jetsons."

"These changes aren't evolutionary shifts. They are revolutionary. And, as with revolutions, two things can happen. You win big, or you lose big. There generally is no revolutionary middle class."

Hope you guys enjoy!

The Bachelor: Recapped.

File this under the, "Why it's a bitch to measure influence in the blogosphere" category.  At the beginning of the year, I set up a quick blogger blog for a former employee at my agency, Lincee.  She had been emailing around recaps of The Bachelor for a few seasons, but her email list was getting out of control, and she needed an easier distribution model.

So, here it is. 

But I ask you this, how do you measure its influence?

Do links measure influence?  Well, sometimes.  But Lincee only has 28 links from 22 blogs. Not bad, but probably not enough to get on too many radars.

Can comments measure influence?  Well, again, sometimes, but Seth would probably tell you that those aren't the end all be all.  But for Lincee, she has 2609 comments across only 14 posts.  Now, that's just incredible.  That also includes 3 posts by me telling her faithful readers to hold their collective horses. 

My only real point here is that metrics are relative, and are largely a product of the creators.  Number crunching is a fickle thing, and it's not too difficult for whoever doing the massaging to lead others down the primrose path.

As an aside, Lincee has become a little bit of an ABC darling.  She had a nice little story done about her on the local Houston news, plus The Bachelor host Chris can be seen regularly in the comment thread.  I would have called bullshit, until Lincee was invited on the tell all episode at the end of the season.  Smart move ABC.  Screw your enemies, keep your friends the closest!