This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

About this blog

M&M’s Blog goes behind the headlines to offer a running commentary on the business dynamics within the international media and marketing industry. The M&M editorial team joins forces with industry experts and local market heroes to balance a bird’s eye view of global trends with the importance of local insight.

RSS feed Subscribe to blog feed

Go Back

TV

  • Can we watch any more TV?

    02 May 2013

    By George Peters, broadcast manager, Carat

    The UK watches more TV than ever before. According to a survey by Telescope our TV consumption has increased by more than 30 minutes since 2006 and we now watch four hours a day. But only three minutes of this is viewed on a device that isn’t a traditional TV, according to the latest Thinkbox review.

    This leaves two options for the future. Either our consumption of TV content will increase, or the way we watch it will change.

    In 2013, we have many more devices with the ability to stream TV than we did back 2006. A plethora of smart phones, connected TV’s, set-top boxes, consoles, tablets and even “phablets” means we can access video content wherever we are, whoever we’re with and whenever we want.

    Not all of these devices have reached critical mass and many are still in their infancy. Surveys put tablet ownership between 11 and 22 per cent in the UK and just five per cent of homes have a smart or connected TV. Only two thirds of these smart TV owners actually connect them to the internet.

    Evolution of these devices will provide us with easier, better and quicker access to content. The USA is two or three years ahead of the UK in the advancement of set-top boxes, according to Nigel Walley of Decipher. Set-top boxes in the US now have 2 TB of storage, faster internet connections, six to eight tuners - Sky+ has two and Virgin/Tivo has three - and smarter software to utilise these connections. In the console market, both Microsoft and Sony will step up the game substantially with their next generation consoles. Microsoft has reportedly filed a patent to project augmented reality 3D images onto walls to provide outstanding quality for the next-gen Xbox whilst the PS4 is largely expected to be at least 4K capable.

    Then there’s the technology that may seem a pipe dream but will be here sooner than we think. Google recently asked the public to trial Google Glass which allows people to be connected wherever they want through a simple face-frame. Watching EastEnders as you walk down the road might well be dangerous but that won’t stop people doing it! Both Samsung and Apple reportedly working on a new “smartwatch” whilst researchers at Queen’s University, Canada have developed digital paper, Papertab. It’s easy to imagine how this could turn into devices to watch TV wherever we are.

    Then there are innovations which could simply free up our time to watch more TV. Google’s self drive car is one of the tech giant’s latest “moon shots”. It’s easy to imagine that your windscreen could become your TV screen as your car “drives” you about town!

    It’s not just the devices on which we’ll be watching TV that needs to be considered – there’s also the question of what we’ll be watching in the future.

    The internet is opening up connections for the world to share all kinds of knowledge and creative TV content will surely benefit. The big concern is will there be enough organisations to fund future creativity.

    In the UK, traditional content providers such as the BBC, ITV and C4 are looking out for more revenue streams to challenge the likes of Sky, which has income from 10m subscribers as well as advertising. The US Networks are taking less risks than previously, with new commissioning strategies meaning only half of first series are commissioned to limit risk.

    However there are new entrants to the market. Netflix has received a lot of PR around its distribution model of the critically acclaimed House of Cards and has picked up the next series of Arrested Development to distribute in the same way. YouTube is supporting popular users of the platform to create new content, such as mock-interviewer KassemG and the Sam Macaroni’s Epic channel. Reports also suggest that Spotify will join this space and start to fund video content.

    And we shouldn’t ignore advertiser’s attempts to get in this space. Advertising funded programmes aren’t new but in the past have had to rely on TV channels to broadcast them to large audiences and meet certain “standards”. In the future, with the above expansion of devices and platforms, distribution could become a lot easier, more varied and targeted. Bite-size series, such as David Mitchell’s Soapbox, have already been produced. The only constraint to producing 30 minute shows rather than 3 minute shows will be financial.

    In summary the devices are there to free up our time and more people have the opportunity to get in the content game than ever before. If there is demand, there is certainly room for us to watch more than four hours of TV a day.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: TV

  • Is the Golden Age of TV here to stay?

    23 April 2013

    There has been much talk recently about how we are experiencing a ‘Golden Age’ for television. There’s certainly no doubting the quality of the programmes being produced; from Breaking Bad, Mad Men and The Walking Dead (to name but a few) in the US to the likes of Downton Abbey, Sherlock and Dr Who right here at home.

    But what is it that has made this such a great time for TV and, as business models and viewer behaviours continue to change, how much longer can we expect it to continue?

    One reason is, as ever, money.  As Derek Thomson has argued, the so-called ‘Golden Age’ can be traced back to the rise of cable channels, in particular HBO, who led the way with a business model based around subscriptions, rather than advertising.

    Channels dependent on viewer subscriptions need to attract loyal subscribers, not just casual viewers. And they quickly found that the best way to do that is to create ‘must see’ shows like The Sopranos and Sex and The City that would keep viewers tuning in month after month and that would justify a monthly fee.

    Another factor to consider is the changing way that we consume content. We all know that the way we engage with TV series has changed. Previously, you’d have to tune in at the right date and time (or programme your clunky VCR) in order to catch your favourite shows. Today, these programmes are, in more ways than one, genuinely unmissable. Forget to tune in for the latest episode of, say, Game of Thrones and you can simply catch up on Sky Go. As such, hit shows are increasingly made as much for the DVD boxset and on-demand market as they are for linear viewing.

    And, as viewers become more loyal to shows and content becomes more accessible, content makers have been able to push the boundaries further, making shows that are more ambitious and more complex: a trend that has been referred to in some quarters as the ‘novelisation’ of TV.

    These trends are driving a convergence between content creators and content platforms. As content creators become increasingly focused on delivering their content direct to the audience (for instance, HBO is investing heavily in its online offering), businesses that have traditionally profited from delivering that content themselves are looking to create their own. Netflix is probably the most high profile example of this. Having built a business from making other people’s content available on-demand on a subscription basis, it is now making its own shows with Kevin Spacey starring in House of Cards earlier this year. Netflix has been open about the fact that convergence is driving this strategy, with the company’s chief content office admitting that "the goal is to become HBO faster than HBO can become us."

    In many ways, Netflix typifies another major change in viewer behaviour. Rather than release episodes of House of Cards a week at a time, Netflix opted to make the whole series available all at once. Many people have discussed how this approach – making everything accessible, instantly – is helping to create a ‘binge-viewing’ culture, with viewers racing through entire series in a single evening or weekend rather than over several months.

    Some are concerned that this binging behaviour will in itself change the content we consume, with shows already leaning towards shorter series of 10-13 episodes rather than the 20+ that was common in the West Wing era. The creator of Heroes, Tim Kring, also spoke at MIP this month about this issue. He was more relaxed about the impact binge-viewing might have on content, comparing it to the way that pop songs or films have found an optimum length over time and emphasising that any medium will always need to adapt to its audience’s expectations and attention spans.

    There is no doubt that, as changing viewing habits both enable and necessitate new business models, the nature of the shows we watch will also change and there are arguments to be made for both sides about whether this will extend or curtail this ‘Golden Age’. Ultimately however, the quality of the TV industry’s output can speak for itself and, despite the transitions at the heart of the industry, I suspect that audiences will have plenty of great shows to enjoy in the years to come.

    What do you think? Are you a binge-viewer? Or do you value the anticipation of waiting for a new episode each week? And how do you think changing methods of consumption will change the content itself? Do let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

    By Stella Medlicott, chief marketing officer, Red Bee Media

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: TV

  • What does the future hold for TV?

    08 April 2013

    There has been a real buzz about online video advertising as TV moves into a digitally connected world. I caught up with some of the leading experts on the convergence between TV and online video and discussed the changing landscape of AV advertising and asked how programmatic trading is revolutionising how media is bought and sold.

    Daniel Knapp, Director of Advertising Research at IHS, points out that while there has been two crises in the advertising industry in the last three years, the TV industry has had no such crisis and has remained stable. This has been coupled with the seismic shift in audience consumption away from linear content to DVR and across multiple devise - 15% across tablets and mobiles. Online video for broadcasters has been a good way for broadcasters to diversify, and the majority of online video has been ad funded. There has also been a shift from the way advertising has been traded towards programmatic trading, and he predicted that by 2016 all online display advertising including online would be traded programmatically across the board.

    Anthony Rhind, former co-CEO of Havas Digital, makes the point that technology's role is getting beyond the constraints of human capacity. He implored the industry to let technology manage volume and speed, but also take into account human instinct. He points out that brands are built through awareness, reputation and consideration and notes that there has been a lot of chat about whether RTB delivers higher CPMs. In TV we have a huge opportunity, but the question is just how quickly will the take up be?

    Chris Locke, UK Trading Director of Starcom Mediavest Group, says that we will get to a model that combines targeted online advertising at scale with fame spots on TV. Other media can do scalability in RTB better. Ad sales is all about long term relationships and RTB is traded on short term relationships. We also need to take into account the social aspects of TV. RTB could be used on second devices rather than second screen, where there is no real data. Advertisers are not moving fast into the video space as they want to sell it at a premium. Chris points out that as a medium, advertisers would want to monetise their off peak.

    David Fisher, Head of Futures at Sky feels that targeted audiences will mirror planned audiences in programmatic TV advertising. Adsmart, launching in August, will be bringing targeted advertising to linear TV. It is supply side and has technical capabilities and encompasses the long journey to programmatically trade linear TV. David feels that in the VOD world it will happen sooner.

    Richard Wheaton, Managing Director of Neo@Ogilvy, says that it is agencies that are bringing in innovation and capabilities to the debate - brands are not asking for this. "Programmatic" should be called "insight" as it delivers layers of information. Richard feels that the term undervalues the value of agencies. He also points out that all media is digital these days and all the lessons we learned from digital are now applicable to TV.

    What we need to ask ourselves is the time right for TV and online to converge?

    By Andrew Moore, EMEA managing director, SpotXchange

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Online, real time bidding, TV, Video

  • Animation: The Almighty

    26 March 2013

    For decades, animation has excited audiences with its creativity and imagination, cementing its position as an integral component of TV schedules around the world. Spawning a raft of favourites from Bagpuss to Bob the Builder, The Flintstones to SpongeBob, the global animation industry is continuing to grow at a phenomenal pace, despite economic challenges, the rapid advancement of multiplatform technology, and most notably, the ever competitive TV landscape.

    Animation is one of the most versatile genres in the world. The common ingredients of its success comes from great characters, engaging storylines, cleverly crafted humour – and a magical touch of the absurd! After all, who would have thought that a yellow sponge or a talking pig would set the world alight for so many children, not to mention adults, around the world? But they did. And the fans want more.

     

    The evolution of new platforms and new technologies means audiences demand ever more exciting and daring iconic content, and on the eve of MIP-TV next month, there’s no question that content buyers will have animation at the top of their wish-lists – but why?

    Simple. Animation transcends borders, cultural differences and demographics more so than any other genre. It shares common themes and values that resonate with audiences globally – and it can be easily dubbed. Long gone is the day when animation used to be the preserve of the under 10s; it now engages teenagers, adults and the whole family, with series like The Simpsons, South Park, King of the Hill and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles blending demographics around the world. 

    The genre of animation is vast, adaptable and tremendously resilient, encompassing motion graphics, short films, TV cartoons and full-length 3D features (inspired by Pixar’s Toy Story back in 1995). And as technology continues to transform our world, creative opportunities are endless: content creators and producers are now able to delve even deeper into the worlds of Stop-Motion, Claymation and CG, to enrich the audience’s experience.

    And whilst exploring opportunities for the new, animation also draws strength from its roots. The resurgence of classic properties such as Thunderbirds and The Flintstones proves animation is timeless. Animation continues to dig deep into the hearts of old and new audiences, sparking the current trend for reinventing classic IP for a contemporary, cyber-savvy audience. Galvanise this offering with a touch of the new, and you have yourself a genre showing no sign of tiring!

    As for content creators, the commercial appeal of animation adds even more value generating long-tail revenue streams, including consumer products, apps and digital media. Take for example the success of global, multi-million dollar, consumer product lines for brand franchises including Turtles and Toy Story, contributing to a licensing market worth around £84bn (and growing!).

    Now more than ever, the animation genre is recession-busting - able to sustain and grow revenue streams, during a time when many other content models have gone into decline or even ceased to exist.

    Animation is a force to be reckoned with. Animation is almighty!

    By Caroline Beaton, senior vice-president,international programme sales, Viacom International Media Networks (VIMN)

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Content, Animation, TV

  • CES 2013: what’s big and what’s next?

    11 January 2013

    Samsung with its bendy screens, paper tablets, a Luminae glass keyboard, eight-core chips, 3D printers, 4K TVs and the YotaPhone (not a Star Wars pun but rather a smartphone that doubles as an e-reader when flipped over) – just a few of the latest technologies being unveiled at this year’s Consumer Electronics Show (CES), which took place from January 8-11 in Las Vegas.

    Smart technology

    Gadgets and apps certainly took centre stage this year, with vendors from across the globe coming together in Vegas to showcase their latest offerings. With gadgets for the home, in the office, in the car – well pretty much everywhere you can think of – it’s clear that technology is becoming bigger and better than ever.

    While Microsoft may have announced last year that it was pulling out of what is the biggest show of its kind and no longer giving the historic Microsoft opening keynote address, yet its chief executive Steve Ballmer somehow still managed to steal the show, making a surprise appearance on stage during Qualcomm chief executive Paul Jacobs’ presentation, to preach the virtues of Windows 8 and Windows Phone.

    Former US President Bill Clinton also took to the stage with Samsung to discuss the power of the internet, in which he stated that “technology can help overcome challenges that are not even economic”. He also highlighted how impressed he was with technology and how it is affecting our lives, urging the world not to take technology for granted.

    If there’s one thing to come out of CES 2013, it’s that the future looks bright and the future looks big! It will be interesting to see which of these latest technologies and trends will be the next big thing to take the tech world by storm.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Jenni Baker

    Tags: Tablet, Technology, exhibitions, TV

  • Yahoo, Mofilm and RTL Interactive battle it out to impress Nestlé at FOMG

    17 April 2012

    Outgoing Yahoo EMEA senior vice-president and managing director Rich Riley managed to impress Nestlé head of digital and social media Pete Blackshaw, following a head-to-head battle against RTL Interactive managing director Marc Schröder and Mofilm president and co-founder Andy Baker to ‘woo’ him with their advertising solutions.

    In a unique session on the second day of the Festival of Media Global, the three media owners were pitted against each other as they took part in a session entitled ‘What happens when TV isn’t the only screen?’ The aim of the game was to each take it in turns to convince Nestlé that their platform was the future of the TV advertising budget.

    Yahoo emerged victorious after Riley presented Yahoo’s offering to the client. Blackshaw said he was particularly impressed with Yahoo’s TV companion service ‘Into_Now’, that creates a content and social community around TV shows, in addition to its full-page takeover option that ran in Brazil.

    During his pitch, Riley said that “TV is huge and may stay huge” but “the tablet changes the game”. He continued: “Multiscreen and second screen will be big and advertisers have a huge opportunity to leverage the second screen.”

    RTL Interactive’s Schröder argued the case that traditional TV wins in the digital world. He recognised that “digitisation is a challenge, but also an opportunity” to extend the reach of traditional television.

    “Television is the most evolving and most social as it is often consumed with more than one person,” says Schröder. “Digitisation means more messages in more channels but it’s still about three things: objective, message and medium. It’s all about combining the strengths.”

    Mofilm’s Baker pitched his case around “quality, price and speed”. He alluded to the Guardian’s ‘Three Little Pigs’ campaign, and posed the question, “Why can’t we do this with content?”

    When making his final decision, Blackshaw spoke about a brand building framework where there are meaningful cross-platform synergies. “All advertising buying needs to be thoughtful of the paid, owned and earned model,” he says. “Would Nestlé pay for premium relevance? Absolutely!"

    You can keep up-to-date with all the action from the Festival of Media Global 2012 by following #FOMG12 or check out our dedicated Festival page.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Jenni Baker

    Tags: Connected TV, TV, Video, Festival of Media Global

  • Making differentiation meaningful again

    26 January 2012

    In a recent Media Post article titled, “TV Brand Names Become Irrelevant,” Aaron Baar states:

    With so many HDTVs offering the same features (Internet connectivity, high definition, etc.), the brand names are becoming irrelevant.

    I am sure he is right. Why? Because I had to get up and check whether I own an LG or a Samsung. From memory, all I could have told you was that it’s not a Sony.

    The BrandZ database also lends credence to Aaron’s statement. The correlation between familiarity with what the brand stands for (Presence) and what brand was bought last is over 90 percent. In other words, familiarity appears to drive most of the variation in sales in this category, unless, of course, I am in good company and nobody else can remember what brand they own.

    A couple of brands do break away from the general category relationship. LG is more likely to be owned than familiarity alone would suggest. By delivering a good product at a good price, a “justified premium” in BrandZ terms, LG wins people over at the point of purchase rather than relying solely on brand reputation. Panasonic, with almost equal Presence, fails to deliver as many owners, in part because it fails to convince people that it is better than the cheaper brands.

    This said, most brands seem locked into a battle where share of mind and store matter more than differentiation. Why? Simply because most brands fail to deliver any meaningful differentiation. They either compete on price or seek to justify a premium based on ever more sophisticated features that simply leave most people bewildered and unimpressed.

    So what would break this deadlock? Meaningful innovation. In the same Media Post article, Aaron references the rumored Apple iTV, which may include voice control (à la Siri). Now you are talking! Imagine just being able to say, “Find me Star Trek The Next Generation” instead of hunting through the cable menu. Right now I access all my video through a HDTV connected to a Mac Mini and the Internet, but the interface is a pain. The cursor is almost too small to see. But voice recognition could change all that and make life far more convenient.

    Such an introduction would mean that for a short period of time the category status quo would be disrupted. Only one company would offer the killer app. Familiarity with the new offering would be boosted as much by media coverage and word-of-mouth as Apple’s own marketing activity.

    Sure, every other TV brand would attempt to follow suit and launch their own voice control system. But they would have a lot of ground to make up. Not only do they need an effective system, they need to promote it without the buzz multiplier. After all, the benchmark would already exist. Comparisons would always be made to the incumbent brand. As an example, take Windows Phone, Microsoft's answer to Google's Android and Apple's iOS platforms. It has received good reviews from pundits but uptake has far lagged behind the two incumbents.

    And now over to you. Are HDTVs meaningfully different or do you just buy on price? Would voice control make a difference? Please share your thoughts.

    This blog post was spotted on Straight Talk with Nigel Hollis.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: TV

  • Will social TV really promote virtual togetherness?

    11 January 2012

    Millward Brown’s Global Futures Group recently issued its Top 12 Digital Predictions for 2012, with forecasts related to wide-ranging topics including gamification, mobile wallets and social e-commerce. 

    But the one that gave me pause for thought was Dave Barrowcliff’s “Virtual Togetherness.” What, I wondered, would make me want to interact with a TV show, or post about it on Facebook, and when would I do so?

    Don’t get me wrong, I know shows like American Idol and X Factor attract a ton of interaction in the form of texts and tweets, but those shows lend themselves to mass interaction like voting. Recent research revealed that 51 percent of UK X Factor viewers used Facebook as they watched the show. Can you imagine people voting on whether the polar bear gets the seal in an episode of the BBC's Frozen Planet? Or being asked to choose between endings in Homeland (yes, Brody was turned by Al-Qaida: no, he is a good guy after all).

    And Dave is absolutely right when he states:

    TV has always been a sociable activity, whether it’s family and friends gathering to watch a program or colleagues gathering around the water cooler at work to discuss last night’s episode.

    But, and maybe this is just me, I can’t help feeling that social media interaction lacks the immediacy and intimacy of throw away comments made by people watching something in the same room. (A horrible vision just occurred to me. Will we all sit in the same room and tweet each other rather than speaking? Speaking, that’s so 2011.)

    Millward Brown

    So maybe it is the real-time element of social TV that I am concerned about. Heck, I know that people will share content after the event, but if a show is that gripping or enthralling, am I really going to chat with people about it online while trying to follow the plot? Maybe it is a question of segmentation. Am I the only one that wants to turn their brain off, sit back and relax in front of the TV?

    I am not saying that Dave’s prediction is wrong, I just wonder how far and fast the phenomenon will travel. One thing is for sure, Dave is right when he says that TV producers and networks will use social TV data for ideas and inspiration, but they might want to think about what the data really means. Lots of idle chit chat during the show might actually indicate a lack of involvement with the content. A lesser volume of comments during the show, followed by a spike in commentary, could indicate the opposite. This means they will have to play close attention to the sentiment of the comments as much as the volume.

    So what do you think? Are you already a social TV participant? Is social TV most applicable to sports and reality shows or does it play elsewhere? Is there a segmentation aspect to its adoption? Please share your thoughts.

    This blog post was spotted on Straight Talk with Nigel Hollis

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: Mobile, Social Media, Online, TV, Facebook

  • Why are major US brands increasing their spend on TV?

    10 November 2011

    For years we have heard how TV’s power is being eroded by digital video recorders (DVRs) and alternative digital media. So how come The Association of National Advertisers (ANA) reports that 47 percent of major U.S. brand owners have increased their TV advertising budgets in the last two years?

    I continue to believe that TV is unique in its ability to combine the compelling nature of video with broad reach. And it seems like I might not be alone.

    Quoted in the ANA’s press release, Bill Duggan, Group Executive Vice President of the ANA states:

    There was much chatter in the past about the television medium and 30 second spot being dead, but this survey has shown that TV advertising is very much alive - perhaps even more so than in the past. Even with the risk of competition from other media platforms and the use of DVRs, there are still many opportunities for marketers to optimize TV into their marketing mix.

    As my colleague, Dede Fitch, points out in her latest POV, DVRs have definitely not had the disastrous impact on TV viewing that was expected five years ago (and I take some pleasure in having said so then). In part, this is because fast forwarding through a commercial pod requires you to attend to the screen far more diligently than you would while watching normally.

    But there is another more important reason. Like Dede, I think the proportion of time shifters and commercial zappers is far higher among the advertising and market research industry than the remainder of the population. Most people watch TV in order to sit back, relax and be entertained. If nothing else, they have to find the remote before they can zap the commercials.

    Digital Video Recorders

    This raises another question about the supposed demise of TV. Are alternative digital channels really a threat? Dede suggests that rather than worry about DVRs, advertisers should be more concerned about smart phones and tablets providing even more distraction to the viewing experience.

    She may well be right, but I can’t help feeling that good old fashioned laziness is going to keep most people in couch potato mode. And besides, if these devices help promote a more social viewing experience then it can only be a good thing for broadcasters and advertisers alike. That’s why Twitter’s announcement that its users will be able to vote for contestants in The X Factor is so interesting.

    So yes, there are threats to TV’s supremacy out there, but I think they are overstated. I think TV plays very well to a major proportion of the viewing audience who just want to chill out and be entertained.

    On that count, Hulu and Netflix might be a bigger threat than social media, but I think the biggest challenge is the need for broadcasters to provide compelling and interesting content. And the same applies to advertisers. If you want people to watch your ad on TV, there is no substitute for a compelling piece of creative: something gripping, something enthralling or something funny, or something so engaging people not only want to watch it again, they want to tell their friends about it too.

    So what do you think? Is TV going to take the majority of ad dollars for the foreseeable future? What alternatives will challenge its position?

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Nigel Hollis

    Tags: TV, Ad Spend

  • Capturing the value

    13 October 2011

    Fremantle Media Latin America senior vice-president of sales and new business development Jack Alfandary shares his top tips for branded entertainment at the Festival of Media LatAm:

    Brand knowledge
    Think outside the box, working with content creators and producers
    Concept development

    Translate brand positioning into content

    For updates from the Festival of Media LatAm in Miami follow the hashtag #fomla11 on Twitter.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Jenni Baker

    Tags: Emerging Markets, TV, Festival of Media LatAm, branded content

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. Next page