Showing posts with label TV3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV3. Show all posts

Tuesday, 24 May 2016

Television Effectiveness Versus Digital Video? The Mad Debate.




It's a worrying time when the debate about Television being more effective than Digital still labours on. Nastily.

I don't know how many traditional TV Campaigns we've managed in our pasts..... If it's not in the thousands, it's certainly in the hundreds and that doesn't necessarily gives us authority, but it does give us experience. Saying that too as the author is both a former Madison Avenuer and Fellow of The Advertising Institute. Agency blue-blood.

And how many Digital Video Campaigns have we managed? Thousands too.

But this debate seems to become angry with Traditionalists Versus Digital Evangelists whereas really what matters, is what is the audience doing? 

Where are the eyeballs going?

The TV traditionalists seem to blindly like TV, because that's the way it's always been done without understanding, that the world, their world, has changed 360 degrees.

Clearly too, one is not a substitute for the other, despite traditional TV data produced (and paid for) by TV Broadcasters which is dubious, at best.

It's common sense to understand that the TV audience is in decline.

With the high penetration of Social Media (Facebook, Twitter) predominant and with their peak usage in evening times, has to mean less TV is being watched. You can't be actively doing both.

The increasing high penetration of Ad-free streaming services (Netflix has over 250,000 homes in Ireland alone) which are watched at peak time, has to mean less TV viewing. 

The cable chord cutters are watching less TV too de facto. The prevalence of second screen viewing, must mean less TV is being watched. The huge growth in YouTube especially amongst the youngers, means they're watching less TV.

The decline in published ratings, means less TV is being watched in itself albeit, US broadcasters are now dependent on live sports rather than traditional "shows".

The growth of Apps (Tinder for example) at the very least, diminishes the OTS (opportunity to see) of TV. The growth of Mobile activity takes away from TV viewing. Better broadband brings homes more digital viewing opportunities as well. The Ipad and ITunes. 

And so on it goes on, common sense. The more distractions, especially at key peak time (high advertising expenditure times), the more TV viewing will decline. 

It struck us in this week especially, what a great example of video effectiveness this was.




In less than two days, this online digital video topped over 100 million views and is now Facebook's most video live video ever. We have no doubt it is already over 200 million views.


The Hasbro mask (44.99 usd) sold out (http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/chewbacca-mask-sold-online-womans-video-super-viral/story?id=39292349)

And the Media cost? Zero. Nothing. Nada. Except the cost of producing the video.

Now what TV Campaign could deliver that audience? None. 

And at what cost? Certainly millions of dollars if you could achieve it using TV.... which you can't.

And the one big reason? Shareability. 

You can't share a TV Commercial and that's one big downside of traditional TV viewing (despite audience numbers) where Digital has the advantage (as this video shows).

Not only can it be shared, but to a like-minded demographic (friends and followers), a marketers dream in fact. Thereby, effectively communicating the message exactly to the target. 

So when we talk about TV Advertising effectiveness, let's not kid ourselves because we want Clients to keep thinking it....in our own vested interest, or, because we can't keep up with the digital age.....


And let's not argue blindly.

There's a role for both, absolutely. 

One is growing, one is declining, but all that means is that the eyeballs are switching. And as marketers or Ad men and girls, that's what should concern us most. 

Rather than defend a position because it's all we know. What are we afraid of here? It's good news because online video creates new, long form opportunity. No longer are we hampered by that 30 second Commercial length for example which should nurture creativity. 

Stopping Digital Video is like standing on Dollymount Strand and trying to push out the waves. 

Let's not do that and let's give the correct answer to Clients. Impartial arbitors of media.

Like the peasant's in Lamb's essay, we know not how to roast pork, other than to burn the house down. 

Streamabout.com

Wednesday, 27 November 2013

The death of TV pure and simple. New Nielsen data shows Google + Facebook have a higher audience than TV. Ad Agencies need to start diluting TV spend.



Just when TV thought thought recent reports went unnoticed about their demise....along comes another Car crash.

Following my blog on Monday (which is below this) which highlighted those recent shocking data reports about the demise of TV - through a collapse in ratings, a collapse in subscribers and bizarrely, rising Ad costs - another credible piece of research worsens TV's pain. Both are based on facts and that's what's causing all the trouble. Facts.

This time it might be terminal.

Credible research, because it's current (November 2013) but completely credible because it's from Nielsen - as I often say, the doyenne of TV research. This to be fair is brave by Nielsen because in effect, they are shooting themselves in the foot. But the truth will out.

Facebook AND Google active monthly users, are both going to take over from TV in total reach. That means, more people use Google and Facebook, than TV. 435 million as against 294 million. That's a HUGE difference.

It is the death of TV, nothing less.

Google and Facebook combined, both already have a much larger audience than TV, but of course, there will be duplication between Google and Facebook users.

And yet, time and time again I've said it, Media buyers are spending significantly more of their budgets on TV. Over 55% goes on TV. 

Why oh why? 

Laziness? Sweetheart back end margin deals? What can be the reason for these supposed data-driven buyers? How can the dominant continued use of TV on a Media schedule, to the detriment of online, be justifiable?

And I do understand how it works, having recently owned the biggest media buying Agency in Ireland. But I cannot for the life of me, understand why it's still going on? Perhaps old habits die hard....but it is now, indefensible.

A UK TV Station (UTV) has recently announced plans to start broadcasting in Ireland with all the expense that goes with it. 

With these results now, they might be better off, opening a Facebook page.