January 25, 2023
TV Trends: More Internet TV Viewers Erode Trad Media
- by Wayne Friedman , March 18, 2010
Viewers have tripled their use of watching TV shows via the Internet since 2006 -- and some of this has hurt traditional TV viewing.
Media researcher Knowledge Networks says this trend affects a broad range of viewers: ages 13-54. Viewing of complete TV shows from streaming or downloaded video has climbed to 22% from 8%.
This also has climbed faster for younger 18-34 viewers, rising to 30% from 12% to 30% of 18-to-34 online users.
When it comes to making the sometimes more labor-intensive connection of hooking up TVs to PCs, 7% of 13-to-54 viewers have streamed or downloaded TV shows, and 11% for 18-to-34.
Knowledge calls this "over-the-top" viewing.
There has been some erosion of traditional TV viewing from all of this, the study says. Of those that have reduced or canceled TV service in the past year, due to their online viewing of network TV programming -- or expect to do so in the next year -- 6% of 13-to-54 viewers and 9% of 18-to-34 viewers said they have made these decisions.
advertisement
advertisement
David Tice, vice president and group account director at Knowledge Networks, stated: "Growing numbers of "connected TVs" -- those that access the Internet -- are making this option increasingly user-friendly. The fact that over one-third of TV homes now have a bundled TV/Internet service package is no doubt accelerating this blurring of boundaries."
13 comments about "TV Trends: More Internet TV Viewers Erode Trad Media".
Read more comments >
Next story loading 
Unfortunately, reported behavior is often different from reality, and the numbers simply don't bear this out. Time spent with streaming video may be growing, but overall TV usage hasn't decreased. And, Nielsen's most recent Three Screen Report shows that 99% of viewers' time is still spent with traditional TV. There's just no objective evidence to support the headline.
Brian, we absolutely agree with your statement about TV viewing. I would just like to clarify that, while we have found that there is a small but noticeable shift in service choices, nowhere in this release or in the full report do we claim there are any changes in actual TV use. That is something we track via our MultiMedia Mentor service, and that data is in agreement with all of the key benchmarks we have seen (e.g. TV viewing is not eroding).
Thank you for clarifying - but I think you'll agree that the headline could be misleading. Sorry to split hairs, it's just that we often get questions from clients when articles like this are published because ostensibly, it conflicts with the information we have been providing them. Thanks again.
The real casualty of such a fragmented on-demand media marketplace isn't the reduced usage of a particular medium, it's the inability of any medium to scale.
We've traded our proven ability to reach people in scale for the specious opportunity to target them instead.
Ever wonder why companies like P&G buy 2 billion ad impressions a day? Because the first 1,999,999,000 don't, indeed can't, reach the target.
We still call them mass media, but the mass is missing in action?
Brian: You're correct, in the short term. In the long term, you're dead wrong. As young people flee traditional media, it may take a few years for the meltdown, but you need only examine what has happened to print media to be concerned. Yes, it didn't happen overnight. But they, too, were in denial (for too long).
Don't think of the question as "are they watching TV through screen A or screen B?" That's not how these audiences are thinking of it. They are looking for ways to watch programs they want when they want to watch them, and they are finding ways, even if they have to make some compromises or go to extra effort. This is an important dimension of demand, and if it is growing, then the supply is going to break wide open before long.
They don't owe you the ability to reach them in mass. It was easy to take that for granted because it prevailed for several decades. But when you give your audience or customer base a sufficient motive to look elsewhere, any lack of options will ultimately turn out to be temporary.
Brian, you are absolutely right. Recalled, self-reported viewing is just not accurate--it almost always differs significantly from observed behavior. When it comes to viewing of TV series, studies by Nielsen and others show that online series viewing is largely to catch up on a missed episode--so it augments traditional viewing rather than cannibalizing it. And regardless of online viewing, numerous studies show that cord-cutting isn't a widespread phenomenon. This article offers an attention-grabbing headline, but is really merely a press release.
This headline is absolutely in conflict with the conclusions of NBC from the billion dollar media lab called the winter olympics. David perhaps you should come to the ARF conference next week and hear what has actually been learned, that in fact TV viewing is helped by the availability of online video. http://www.thearf.org/assets/rethink-10 it builds engagement with the media property thought of in a trans-media world, which is the world we live in. This is the ARF synthesized learning.
Nielsen uses diaries. To all the traditional proponents. Just fe careful about bashing self-reproted data.
David - I don't understand why a TV/Internet bundle would accelerate the blurring of traditional TV and web-TV viewing. Currently telcos or cablecos are selling bundles but acting in silos. My TV and Internet provider isn't leveraging its TV rights on the Internet but at least its not just a dumb-pipe. (PS - Did place-shifting gadgets make much of an impact in this OTT TV study?)
I've compared the release KN sent out yesterday with your article and I think you're mixing up cord-cutting with erosion of viewing. According to the release, people who have "cut the cord" OR who would consider doing so in the next year, amount to 6% of 18-54s--and this group skews strongly toward 18-34s. This may have very little effect on TV viewing, as 18-34s have always spent much less time watching TV than their older counterparts. It's quite possible that cord-cutters are people who never have been very engaged with TV in any case.
In addition traditional TV audience is graying quickly. The median age for broadcast TV (not including DVR Usage) is 51.
For the 2008-2009 TV Season the media age was as follows:
• CBS: 55 (with DVR factored in: 54)
• ABC: 51 (with DVR factored in: 50)
• NBC: 49 (with DVR factored in: 47)
• Fox: 46 (with DVR factored in: 44)
• The CW: 34 (with DVR factored in: 33)
So for brands looking to reach 18-49 if you’re only using traditional TV you’re pretty much flushing dollars down the drain.
Brian - the article and the title does not infer a reduciton in TV viewing - rather quite the opposite. Traditional TV is in for an unfortunate breakup - the disruptive event will start on the 3rd of April with th iPad shipping. What people don't see is the growing desire of the consumer to see what they want when they want. Apple will announce a subscription service designed for first run content to be streamed directly to the consumer when they want it - the traditional linear video broadcast model is destined to go the way of IXC voice services before the advent of VoIP.
The article does a so-so job describing where the viewers are going and - in fact are increasing.
Lastly be careful of the internet Nielson numbers - they are not necessarily the best most accurate measurement for overt the top video.