Wibbitz, which is the business of automatically adding video to online print stories, has a new survey “Live Videos, Chatbots, Wearables & VR: Investing In the Future of News Technologies.” It comes to the totally uncontroversial decision that, right now, a news organization is wise to invest in live streaming.
As I said, that’s totally expected. Given those four types of new tech available to news content creators, live is not only light years ahead in obvious popularity, it’s also the one that’s already been pushed the hardest without breaking.
Over half the respondents expressed positive to very positive impressions.
Findings about some of the more nascent technologies are interesting, though i can’t believe this survey will or should alter anyone’s investment decisions.
Of the 1,001 people who participated in the Wibbitz survey held in July, live video was the technology the gung-ho “innovators” most likely had tried before. Conversely, 26% of the laggard group, called laggards just to show 'em, would never try any of these technologies. The one they were least likely to have tried already was virtual reality. They want no part of VR.
Broken down, though, we discover the Least Likely to Be Appreciated leaders are, basically, everything but live video.
For chatbots, 40% believe they will be the second last wave of consumers to maybe get interested--kind of like saying “not very likely”-- and an impressive 28% say they’ll never, ever use chatbots to get their news. The aforementioned laggards.
This is almost exactly the same cold shoulder (or wrist, more appropriately) that wearables got from this panel. This time, 41% call themselves part of the “late majority,” defined as people who don’t see themselves using this technology, and 30% are laggards who will never use it, and are happy about it.
And you’d think, well, certainly virtual reality would find big interest as a news thing. But this group is not into it.
The Wibbitz survey classifies 23% of its respondents as people who don’t see themselves using VR, the so-called “late majority.” But incredibly, 43% say they never will use it. Flat out never. Tell The New York Times, though I doubt they’d find it news that is fit to print. On the plus side, half of the people who have tried it and are really excited about it. But that was only 2% of this group.
I don’t know which survey group is more suspicious; people who say they are planning on quitting a technology they are now regularly using, like cable, or people who say they will never try a technology that they have never experienced. That is this bunch.
On the other hand, live video is getting to be quite the thing, so popular that even old people like it.
Wibbitz reports 30% of its reported “fans of a live video” are 45-59 and 31% are 60+. Given the attitude advertisers have about older demos, I don’t know if that’s a brag, or a problem. But I suspect, more than anything, that this survey, if anything, is just one barometer of very broad trends,
Wibbitz is sold on live video, though. “It's clear that live video is the technology to invest in now (or better yet, yesterday),” the report says. And, in the face of its own survey, it says: “If Live video is the safest investment to make this year, VR is the smartest.. . . If publishers play their cards right and start investing now, the future of news consumption will be seen through VR goggles.”
Though the study just said 43% of its panel rejected it, totally. Go figure.
I will be on vacation until Sept. 22. If you have news, contact other reporters, editors and columnists. A link to their names and addresses is at bottom of the MediaPost home page.