Commentary

Should DVR Playback Be Viewed As Less-Urgent TV?

by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, March 10, 2009

Two of the lowest-rated TV networks -- NBC and CW -- have the highest levels of DVR playback.

What does that tell you? That people like these networks, but don't necessarily rush to view their programs? To me, DVR playback is like putting a magazine on the seat next to where you are sitting thinking "I'll get to this later."

In the world of journalism, that's a kiss of death. If you're not top-of-mind and of the moment, then there's no pressing need to access the content you deliver.

Of course, we are dealing with entertainment here. For the CW's sake, those young viewers, especially women 18-24 and 18-34, consume TV a bit differently. NBC has a different story to tell, I'm sure.

Though not everyone has a DVR -- only 25% of the country -- there is still an "urgency" component at work here.

Fox has the best numbers -- lowest DVR playback -- in part because of "American Idol"s urgent nature, as a singing contest where fans want to know results quickly. "Idol" can swing Fox to these levels because the show can represent more than a third of the network's overall rating grab among 18-49 viewers. CBS and ABC are the next-most-urgent networks.

For different reasons, big shows such as "Grey's Anatomy" and "House" add high actual viewer numbers to their totals -- all because they are valuable, and viewers can watch at their own convenience. Typical high-rated shows can add 20% to 30% to their ratings total because of DVR playback.

But what do you make of Fox's struggling "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles"? That show's premiere grabbed a whopping 70.4% of its audience in playback mode! It seemed consumers were anointing the show worthy enough to give it some precious space on their DVR hard drive.

Not necessarily.

"Terminator" might not make a return next year since it is only averaging a microscopic three million viewers and a 1.0 rating/4 share among 18-49 viewers.

Now let's do some rewinding here: If 70% of viewing of "Terminator" is in playback, and viewers are fast-forwarding through commercials 70% of the time -- what were the advertisers getting in the first place?

Being DVR-worthy has its strong points -- but only after consumers believe the show is worthy enough in the first place, to consider watching a live showing

18 comments about "Should DVR Playback Be Viewed As Less-Urgent TV?".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Mike Spring from Voice Coaches, March 10, 2009 at 11:02 a.m.
I find fault with your logic that shows on the DVR are less urgent. My wife and I don't watch an TV shows live anymore. With twin 2-year-olds, we are constantly behind. For instance, even though we're currently a few episodes behind, we haven't missed an episode of Desperate Housewives in five years because of our DVR. I also love Terminator: The Sarah Connors Chronicles, but I play in a sports league on Friday nights. Should I stay home just to watch it? And how about the fact that most nights during primetime, we record two shows at the same time at least once per night? How would I watch both of them live if I were so inclined? One of them has to get relegated to the DVR. Or how about Supernatural? It's hands down our favorite show on TV (the only one we record in high def), but we never watch it live. Why? Because we refuse to watch it while doing work, folding laundry, or any other activity that would divert our attention for even a moment because it's such a good show, and many nights of the week we have other activities to do while watching TV. Last but not least, when I know repeat weeks are coming up, I like to stockpile some of my favorite shows to make them last longer. That's why it took us two weeks to get to the season finale of Privileged, our favorite new show of the season. Yes, there are challenges to be found in advertising to DVR users, but there also needs to be a better way to count our viewing habits into the ratings. I may not watch Terminator when it airs every week, but I never miss it, either.
Reply

Walter Graff from Bluesky Media, March 10, 2009 at 11:14 a.m.

DVR recording is like going to the supermarket hungry. People want to record all the shows that they like, but in the end, they satisfy their hunger and have a DVR full of shows. They either never get to them, or they "eat" them so fast just to catch up that they don't enjoy them.

Kate Arbit from FOX Broadcasting, March 10, 2009 at 11:44 a.m.

There are various reasons for people to time-shift, and the action doesn't make a program any less valuable-in fact it gives ratings a boost. TSCC is a Friday night program, the second least watched night of the week, and if the audience takes the time to playback the program than clearly there is some value to it. As far as fast forwarding goes, several studies have shown that fast forwarding does sometimes result in better recall than live viewing because viewers have to watch the ads, can't switch the channel, to know when the next segment of the show begins. All this to say time-shifted viewing is not a bad thing it allows veiwers to stay current on their favorite shows at their leisure and practically guarantees the advertiser for its message to be seen across competitive programming.

Howie Goldfarb from Blue Star Strategic Marketing, March 10, 2009 at 11:57 a.m.

Personally I view DVR viewing along the same lines as Hulu.com. The commercials that are viewed in DVR playback mode as well as those seen on Hulu are confirmed viewings. While in my opinion less than 25% of people pay attention to real time commercials or are busy on their laptop. I would rather pay for 30% of DVR eyes balls than an unknown number of real time eyeballs that can not be measured no matter what the media and research companies say.

L.a. Peters from Audience Research Analysis, March 10, 2009 at 12:05 p.m.

Urgency is not a currency.

Douglas Ferguson from College of Charleston, March 10, 2009 at 1:02 p.m.

True, urgency is not a currency. You either watch it or you don't. Order doesn't matter, except that you see fewer commercials on playback. In our house, we save the good shows for DVR, like dessert, when we can savor it and replay scenes for someone who may have stepped out of the room: Back up, back up, you gotta see this! And skip those pesky ads.

Your mileage may vary. But I fail to see the value of urgency, except that, once lost, we make our decisions differently.

And, no, the VCR ain't the same. We barely used it because it was linear and clumsy. The DVR is nonlinear and easy, so you can quit and rejoin all ordering of shows, and get a season pass that keeps track of scheduling shifts so you don't have to.

Many is the time I decided while recording a live show, I think I'll go do something else and come back . A VCR will not "pause" live shows like that.

Tom Cunniff from Combe Incorporated, March 10, 2009 at 1:13 p.m.

We live in a post-scarcity world of content. If urgency ever did matter, it doesn't now. And, it's a safe guess that it never will again.

With the exception of a few live events, there is no such thing as "urgent" TV. There isn't even (to borrow a phrase) "must-see" TV.

Instead, the deluge of TV content is part of a broader deluge of information. What's needed now are smarter filters, and a DVR is one of them. If you're young, male and geeky you know more about this filtering need than anybody -- and have more tools at your disposal. In my opinion, that's why "Terminator" is so heavily DVR'd. I bet it's also more Torrented than other shows, too.

Karl Meisenbach from HDNet, March 10, 2009 at 1:55 p.m.

the most common story you hear from DVR users is that even when they prepare to watch a show 'live' they start the DVR to record, then go about doing something else for 20 minutes - from watching another show to doing chores around the house to putting the kids to bed - then they come back to their TV to play the show and that by the time they skip all the commercials they catch up to the show 'live'

Diane K De from , March 10, 2009 at 2:02 p.m.

The DVR gives a person a chance to watch on their own time and have more control over the rest of their life. I go out on Friday nights, the night Terminator is on. Thus, anything that's on Friday automatically gets watched over the weekend. This is not a matter of "urgency" but a matter of being able to have a social life AND watch these shows.

Similarly, during the week, I can meet friends for dinner instead of rushing home.

Running home to watch a TV show doesn't make it more "urgent", it just paints a person as not having a life.

Brian Olson from Video Professor, Inc, March 10, 2009 at 5:21 p.m.

Not "Less-Urgent" but instead, "More Convenient."

We have 4 satellite receivers (2 are HD) at our house and all are DVR equipped.

some shows we record over a season for use during the summer at our cabin.

But for most series, it's to watch our favorite shows on our schedule, not one dictated to us.

Sometimes it's simply a delay of a few minutes, for others it's a day or a week.

But we watch. DVR=Viewer Empowerment.

C. Phillipps from Yoohooville, Inc., March 10, 2009 at 5:22 p.m.

Actually, the problem isn't the DVR. Its that the industry isn't listening to its users.

I have six programs that I DVR - the same ones I used to tape on my VCR prior to getting a DVR.

Two are on their because they are craft shows that are shown at 4:30 am. Who in their right mind is going to get up that early to watch TV? Even though crafters have told DIY network this over, and over, and over again, they have refused to move the shows from insanely early timeslots. So I DVR.

Two are on there because they are shown at the same time. I don't want to have to "decide" which on to watch, so I DVR both and watch them both later.

The other two are on there because they are detail oriented shows that I feel the need to watch and re-watch scenes. If I didn't I don't think that I would watch them because I would continually be "lost".

And TV as a model is suffering because it puts quality programming at the odds of its viewers schedules. How could I watch Terminator if I'm out at dinner with my husband (a typical Friday night activity I'm sure other viewers share)? It doesn't make sense to try and build an audience for a show in a timeslot that they know is going to suffer.

I also agree with Dana Mulvaney that more ads need to be captioned. Its fun to watch some ads, and I don't think that the hearing-impaired market should have to suffer for want of a couple hundred dollars. And I too, if I see an ad that looks funny in captions, will stop my DVR and watch it.

I just don't see that watching TV "live" or with "urgency" is a good metric anymore. Consumers have demanded better, and DVR and Hulu have answered.

Jeffrey Minsky from OMD, March 10, 2009 at 5:48 p.m.

Just a couple of quick points, since most of my other thoughts have already been covered:
- Shows that are viewed later are not Less Urgent, but may be in fact more important to the consumer as they have gone out of their way to ensure they do not miss the show: bodes well for Product Placement/Brand Integration
- Agree with you though on the fact that commercial skipping completely devalues the impact of the greater program engagement
- Finally, you minimize the impact by saying that only 25% of the country has a DVR. That may be true en masse, but once you head to the more afflunt (or used to be more affluent) we're closer to 50% DVR penetration and that is important.

Patrick Fitzgerald, March 10, 2009 at 6:16 p.m.

Status quo business models are preventing the TV networks from providing creative solutions. If I were a TV network executive, I would be scared as it seems advertisers aren't demanding more creative solutions. The advertisers didn't demand more from newspaper and radio, they just moved their money to digital platforms. Sports would be a great platform for this thread as it is entertainment and urgent. I time shift my sports to offset the commercials, it is ridiculous what I am asked to sit through to enjoy a football game, or any other game for that matter. The networks need only spend an afternoon watching the Fox Soccer Net to begin to craft their solutions. They need to deploy technology that will allow for in game advertising. Soccer is the most popular sport in the world, it is produced and consumed on a scale greater than our domestic market, across multiple cultural environments. The soccer watching experience can be done in 2 hours, roughly 60% of the time of an NFL game. There was a discussion a couple of weeks ago about making CPM the single currency across all ad platforms; that will be an essential part of this discussion going forward. TV will be a REACH medium, where an impression is valued as just that. Creative will be less important. Digital will be an ENGAGEMENT medium and creative will be at a premium. All that will be left for the TV networks to decide is if they are going to drive the change or have it put to them.

William Hughes from Arnold Aerospace, March 11, 2009 at 7:46 a.m.

Why doesn't anyone look at what KIND of Commercials are mostly skipped with a DVD? I'll bet you that the majority are the ones that try to push their product in the most obnoxious way possible, or are ones that are played so often they have become stale. I have a feeling people who have children living with them use DVRs to shield their children from certain types of Commercials that the Advertisers have the nerve to show at times when children are certainly watching!

Ken Ripley, March 11, 2009 at 9:38 a.m.

DVR's are a wipe-out for advertisers. There. I said it.

TV Networks, agencies and even advertisers have been harboring an even bigger secret for years...people channel surf. It took the accountability that digital media provides to even surface the commercial rating issue as something anyone wanted to take on board. 15 minute program ratings, who's kidding who?

In DVR households, 75%+ of commercials are skipped in shows cached and played back later. There is no discussion of urgency as it relates to advertising, only to the show itself.

Credit the Broadcast and Cable networks for turning out dramas of spectacular quality. It's no surprise Academy Award winning Hollywood talent has embraced TV, (once seen as an admission of career decline). This is the golden age of television. But that's the rub: it's expensive to produce 1 hour dramas. People respond to them by recording them, but they don't pay the price of admission by watching the ads.

Admit it advertisers, you're not getting what you paid for. Admit it Networks, you're viewers aren't holding up their end of the deal either. This model can't sustain itself as is.

And by the way, time shifting is an even bigger problem, and that doesn't show up as lost commercial viewers either.

Baris Sagiroglu from ASA, March 11, 2009 at 10:18 a.m.

I'm not familiar with TV advertising and was wondering if the the captions are used to place the ads. You can search certain words, i.e. search for "drug" and "depression" words in the caption and place the depression drug commercial right after.

William Hughes from Arnold Aerospace, March 11, 2009 at 11:38 a.m.

I hear you Mr Halloway! The only reason I haven't invested my money on a DVR is the lack of decent programming these days. As for the Ads being Skipped by those who do own DVRs, why are these ads being skipped? My guess is:

1. They have been repeated so many times that they have become STALE (Like those Auto Insurance Ads featuring either a Lizard, a Caveman or a stack of Play Money with Plastic Eyeballs. I hate to say this but the two people on this Planet who haven't seen those Ads DO NOT OWN an Automobile, therefore showing them these ads would not improve their Bottom Line!)

2. The way they present their product is in an obnoxious and/or offensive manner.

2A. They are for products that parents do not want their CHILDREN to see when they are watching TV (I have seen ads for "ED" Pills such as Viagra aired during weekend afternoon Sporting Events such as NASCAR Races, and even during Children's Programming!)

Does anyone else share my opinion?

bob pares, March 11, 2009 at 12:58 p.m.

fwiw - Am Idol actually has over 61% of its TiVo audience viewing from a timeshifted mode. And - while many would believe most of this is 'near live' viewing (from the 30 min buffer), the opposite is true...the majority of timeshifted viewing is done days later, and we see just shy of a 2 rating AFTER 3 days. Yes, a majority of ads are FF'd, but far from the 75% that too many claim. The reality is that there are too many beliefs based on too little info (standard currency) - when there are incredible insights to the impact of DVR-based viewing now at our fingertips. Change is often uncomfortable for many - but perhaps we should be saying "if you don't like change - you'll like irrelevancy even less!"