Tubi's new series “Big Mood,” starring Nicola Coughlan and Lydia West, debuts April 19. The dark comedy revolves around Maggie and Eddie, two women who have been best friends for 10 years. But when Maggie’s bipolar disorder returns, it puts their relationship to the test. The six-episode series is written and created by Camilla Whitehill and directed by Rebecca Asher (“Dead to Me”). To kick off the show, VaynerMedia produced a series campaign branded “All The Moods.” Clips from the series will be promoted on Spotify, Tinder and the brand’s social channels. "'Big Mood' has a feral, frenetic energy that immediately comes through in its very first scene — and that was something that stuck with us as we began developing the marketing with VaynerMedia," Nicole Parlapiano, Tubi's chief content officer, told Agency Daily. "When we were pitched the "Maggie Mob" idea, we knew they'd captured the essence of the series and doubled down on introducing Maggie in the same unhinged way we meet her in the first episode." The campaign features “Maggie Mob,” a social spot with a variety of actors on scooters wearing blond wigs and attire that matches the main character's look in the opening scene. To further drive U.S. interest, Snapchat users can use “Big Moodmoji,” a Snapchat lens prompting users to select “What Mood Are You?” Tubi is also making the show’s presence known throughout New York City and Los Angeles with digital out-of-home placements in Time Square, West Hollywood Sunset Spectacular and Westfield Century City. Additional digital work appears in New York subways, street-level guerilla postings and LinkNYC spots. "The complex relationships and turbulent mental states explored in 'Big Mood' closely reflect today's Zillenial experience. We wanted the work to capture all these nuanced moods that exemplify both the show and our audience," added Aaron Howe, executive creative director at VaynerMedia LA.
Overdelivering once again -- and cementing its dominant control over the streaming TV business -- Netflix posted 9.33 million new global paid subscribers in the first quarter of 2024, up 16% versus the fourth quarter of 2023. This resulted in a total of 269.6 million global subscribers and 82.7 million in the U.S. and Canada. This increase in key metrics is largely attributable to “free” subscription sharers who have made the transition to paying Netflix subscriptions. Revenues also beat industry estimates, growing by 15% growth to $9.37 billion year-over-year. Netflix offered similar guidance in revenue for the second quarter -- up 16% to $9.5 billion. Netflix also continues to reap big benefits from its $6.99-a-month "Netflix With Ads" option, with subscribers rising 65% year-over-year in the fourth quarter of 2023, and 70% in the first quarter of 2024. “And we expect more room to take price post upfronts,” writes Laurent Yoon, media analyst for Bernstein Research. Netflix says that 40% of all sign-ups in its ad markets come from its ad plan. In the U.S. and Canada -- with a net growth of 2.5 million subscribers (up 11%) -- that would mean 1.0 million went to its ad option plan. The company did not disclose its total number of ad-option U.S. and Canadian subscribers. Netflix in March had a 8.1% share of all U.S. TV viewing, according to Nielsen -- steadily rising from 7.2% in October 2023. Going forward, Netflix looks to move beyond password sharing efforts “to lean heavier into local-language/locally-produced content across international markets where penetration rates are lower,” says Yoon. Continuing to show strength, “we believe there’s a plausible runway to continue to see net-sub growth hold up in the 15% to 20% year over year range outside the U.S./Canada tied to these efforts.” Analysts believe all this continues to put the pressure on streaming competitors that are desperate to find a way to achieve stable profitability. Jeff Wlodarczak, CEO and media analyst at Pivotal Research Group, writes: ”While not necessarily needed by Netflix, we believe other streaming players/media players will have no choice but to continue to sell their premium library content to Netflix to offset their own poor returns in streaming... which enhances the value of Netflix service allowing it to drive higher subscriber growth, reduce churn and increase ARPU.” Netflix's global average revenue per user (ARPU) per month may be a disappointment to some analysts, inching up only 1% to $11.90 in the first quarter -- except for the U.S. and Canadian subscribers, which rose 7% to $17.30 in the first quarter from $16.64 in the fourth quarter. Bernstein estimates global ARPU will slowly rise from $11.90 in fiscal 2024 to $12.50 in fiscal-year 2025. Yoon pondered the question of where Netflix goes from here in terms of its "full" stock price. “When comparing the health of the business to our media coverage peer group, it’s easy to justify a premium valuation,” he says. Going forward, however, that calculation may be tougher for investors to determine. Netflix said it would not disclose or offer guidance on the number or gains and losses in subscribers or ARPU measures. “In our early days, when we had little revenue or profit, membership growth was a strong indicator of our future potential,” says the company in its quarterly shareholders letter. “But now we’re generating very substantial profit and free cash flow (FCF)... It’s why we stopped providing quarterly paid membership guidance in 2023 and, starting next year with our Q1 '25 earnings, we will stop reporting quarterly membership numbers and ARM [Average Revenue Per Month].”
Automotive year-to-date estimated national TV spending is down 9.1% year-over-year after falling another 1.9% in March. Household TV ad impressions of automotive ads is also down 11.4% in March and 9.4% year-over-year, according to iSpot.tv. National TV spending in March by automakers was $214 million compared to $218.2 million last March. Year-to-date estimated national TV spending was $699.1 million compared to $769 million for the same period in 2023. Household TV ad impressions of automotive ads in March were 23.6 billion compared to 26.6 billion in March of last year. Year-to-date household TV ad impressions were 66.7 billion compared to 73.5 billion for the same period in 2023, per iSpot.tv. The top five brands by estimated national TV Ad spending in March were GMC ($35 million), Nissan ($26.1 million), Ford ($18.9 million), Buick ($17.6 million) and Jeep ($11.4 million). The most-seen automaker ads by share of household TV ad impressions in March 2024 were Hyundai, "Add More Joy" (5.55%); Jeep, "Room for the Unexpected" (2.57%); Subaru, "What the Future Holds" (2.25%); Ram Trucks, "Do Trucks" (2.18%) and GMC: "THE Truck" (2.16%), according to iSpot.tv. Over half of the total automotive industry TV ad spend during March went to men’s college basketball, with all of the top five brands advertising during games across the month. Industry spend was up 18% year-over-year for men’s college basketball, and spend during women’s college games also increased by 8.7% compared to March 2023. “Basketball’s TV ad reach typically scores for automakers in the spring, but we’re seeing more focus on the women’s game as well over the last few years as those audiences skyrocket,” Stuart Schwartzapfel, executive vice president, media partnerships at iSpot tells Marketing Daily. “TV ad impressions more than doubled during the NCAA Women’s Basketball Tournament year-over-year -- and automotive marketers were smart to get ahead of that growing interest.” Nissan upped its outlay for college basketball, increasing spend during men’s games by 7.7% year-over-year and on women’s games by 14.7% vs. March 2023 -- but also went after the late-night crowd, increasing investment during “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” by nearly 24X year-over-year, per iSpot.tv. Buick also targeted basketball action: 93% of its total spend for the month was allocated to men’s college basketball, but it also saw a 12.5X increase in spend during NBA games compared to March 2023. While Jeep grew its spend on men’s college basketball by 26.4% year-over-year, it also upped outlay on Today (+35.4%), “Vanderpump Rules” (+126.3%) and “CBS Saturday Morning” (+631.6%), according to iSpot.tv. The top five brands by share of automaker household TV ad impressions, March 2024 were Toyota (8.46%), Nissan (7.90%), Ford (7.30%), Hyundai (6.36%) and Honda (5.91%). The biggest estimated spend increases among top 15 brands by spend, March 2024 (vs. March 2023) were Land Rover (+821.3%), Ford (+606.6%), Toyota (+64.9%), GMC (+57.3%) and Subaru (+24.4%), per iSpot.tv. Men’s college basketball fueled much of the growth for automakers with the biggest year-over-year spend increases, in particular for Ford (which didn’t advertise during games in March 2023, but this year spent 82% of its budget there) and Land Rover (+15.6X increase in spend year-over-year). Subaru grew its men’s basketball outlay by 265%, with GMC and Toyota seeing more modest increases (59% and 32%, respectively). Land Rover also placed a focus on general entertainment programming, spending on “House Hunters” and “Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives” — two programs it did not advertise during in March 2023. For Toyota, “Ridiculousness” was a new target, ranking third among programs by spend for the month (behind NASCAR and NBA); the automaker did not advertise during the show in March 2023. Subaru doubled down on morning news programming, increasing outlay by over 2X for both “Good Morning America” and “Today” year-over-year. Outside of sports, shows with some of the biggest year-over-year TV ad impressions increases for automakers included “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” (+258.8% vs. March 2023), “La Casa de los Famosos” (+183.5%) and “American Idol” (+93.7%). The top networks for automakers by share of household TV ad impressions in March were CBS (14.51%), ABC (6.97%), ESPN (5.49%), NBC (4.97%) and TNT (3.73%).
In an effort to help brands get the attention of as many viewers as possible, YouTube is launching a “Select Shorts” ad offering, to give advertisers the ability to engage audiences across a variety of content genres by placing their ads alongside best-performing Shorts. According to the Google-owned social platform, YouTube Select Shorts will allow advertisers to choose to place their ad alongside the app's top Shorts across five categories including entertainment, beauty, fashion and lifestyle, food and recipes, gaming and automotive. With the option to select which types of content an advertisers wants their campaign to run with, they may have a better chance of relating to a niche YouTube audience that aligns with their brand. According to numbers provided by YouTube, the company's short-form video product is its most promising, amassing an audience of 2 billion logged-in users per month and 70 billion daily views, with Shorts viewership on TVs increasing rapidly due to improved presentation of the short-form clips on its CTV app. In addition, Shorts ads are viewed for 90% longer than ads on other social competitors, according to a report from MediaScience. Kantar research has also shown that by applying YouTube’s “ABCD principles,” which stands for Attention (“hook and sustain attention with an immersive story”); Branding (“brand early, often and richly”); Connection (“help people think or feel something” ); and Direction (“Ask them to take action”), short-term sales likelihood can lift by 30% and long-term brand impact can lift by 17%
Top rookie WNBA players make a base salary of $76,535 a year (according to Sport Trac) with the average player making $102,751 (according to World Sports Network). Are these good enough working salaries for a growing professional sports league -- amid now sharply rising TV viewership for women's basketball? This ball is now bouncing. The obvious follow-up question is: What about NBA players? They make an average of $9.7 million for the 2023-2024 season, according to several sources. Perhaps now you know why WNBA-er Britney Griner needed to travel to Russia to play for a basketball league there in the off-season to make a little extra money. For some, things are changing. The highly celebrated, now all time college basketball points leader, Caitlin Clark -- who just got selected by the Indiana Fever -- will do a bit better. Reports are that she struck an eight figure sponsorship deal with Nike. Yes, that company, which put Michael Jordan on the map, branding his name to shoes back in the 1980s, Air Jordan, that started a revolution for NBA player basketball shoes. Clark will get some of this shoe Swoosh-brand action as well. Why do WNBA players get low comparative salaries? In part, it is about league revenues -- arena ticket sales, sports rights fees, and, of course, national TV advertising. It is far lower than that of the NBA. Thirty NBA franchises pulled in a collective $10.6 billion in revenue in 2022-2023 with total valuation for the league at $86 billion. By comparison, the WNBA pulls in a tiny $60 million a year of which $12.3 million is distributed to the players. WSN says Jewell Lloyd is the highest paid player -- $228,094 per year. (In the NBA, that is Stephen Curry, at $48 million). Arena attendance average shows 5,679 for the WNBA, and 17,184 for the NBA. For its entire season a year ago -- 2023 -- the league took in $19.6 million in national TV advertising sales, according to EDO Ad EnGage. For sure, WNBA players understand the overall business dynamics at work here -- at least to an extent. But in a 2022 interview, Las Vegas Aces star Kelsey Plum said it is not about what men are getting paid: “We're asking to get paid the same percentage of revenue shared.” One hint of better days to come focused on the recent WNBA draft on ESPN, which exploded in TV interest -- 2.5 million viewers. This was three times higher than its previous high in 2004. The draft show included Clark, as well as other up-and-coming players from the college ranks -- LSU's Angel Reese, South Carolina’s Kamilla Cardoso -- who Clark competed against in the NCAA Women’s Tournament Will marketers -- on and off air -- see the opportunity to ride this real spike in consumers and business attention surely to come?
If you click on the video above, you can hear for yourself. But no, it's not Donald J. Trump. Or John Barron of John Miller or David Dennison or any of the many fake personas he has used himself, but a not-so-deep fake courtesy of AI voice generator Parrot.ai. I created that video in seconds after first reading about it in a dispatch from NewsGuard this morning, which reported on how deepfake tools like it were being used by disinformation campaigns by Iranian state media faking military success against Israel. You can see NewsGuard's reporting, as well as samples of Iran's deepfake videos here. You can also see an update on its unreliable AI-generated news site tracker, which has identified 802 to date. The post also includes a link to Parrot.ai so you can play around with it and create your own, which no doubt is a lot of fun -- but not in the way JibJab videos were a dozen or so years ago, because unlike JibJab, some users may not know these are fabrications. And that's the point of Trump's endorsement of "Red, White & Blog" today: We all need to be skeptics and question the source and authenticity of unverified news, video and other content that might be trying to misinform us. In the meantime, thank you, John... er, I mean, David... er, I mean Donald. Or whoever you really are.
Can you be fair and impartial? That question, asked of jurors, has been bugging me since the beginning of The People v. Trump, aka the “hush money” trial, now proceeding in a downtown New York City courtroom. Among other things, the former president is charged with falsifying business records in connection with the payment he made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels in 2016. Even if you think you could be a potential juror, these days, who could come up clean after teams of lawyers comb through your social media posts? Though it’s hard to pick a jury in any trial, the degree of difficulty here is nuclear. For starters, the case involves the prosecution of one of the most powerful people in the world, an overwhelmingly polarizing personality who has not only been president, but is now running for that office again, and arrives in court protected by a phalanx of Secret Service agents. So far, the media has worn out the word “unprecedented.” Adding to the challenges of jury selection, Trump, who has long believed that the U.S. justice system is weaponized against him, has not stopped posting complaints about the trial, the venue, and the judge to Truth Social. That’s in defiance of gag orders, just as he did in the E. Jean Carroll case, for which he was severely penalized. This week, after day one, the defendant came in hot, attacking the number of peremptory challenges that each side’s lawyers get in the trial. “I thought STRIKES were supposed to be 'unlimited' when we were picking our jury? I was then told we only had 10, not nearly enough when we were purposely given the 2nd Worst Venue in the Country," he wrote. He went on to describe the case as "election interference" and part of a "witch hunt,” two of his regular go-tos. Of course, even before proceedings began, and while Trump and his legal team were still attempting to delay, he was excoriating both New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan (“who “HATES ME,”) and attacking the judge’s daughter for being “Super Liberal.” But part of his brand, which he’s a genius at building, is being persecuted and taking on the mantle of the victim. It delights his followers, who also feel like victims of a liberal conspiracy, and are moved by his contention that he is taking the slings and arrows for them. Still, while sitting in court, looking a bit flattened, especially while sleeping, Trump has almost been reduced to human size, an ordinary man with foibles, which is weird to consider. And being a juror in any case Is about putting away biases and acting on the evidence. On the first day of the trial, the judge asked 97 prospective jurors if they couldn’t be fair and impartial in the case. Fifty-seven out of 97 raised their hands and were dismissed. Still, the court managed to eke out seven potential jurors that day. By Thursday, two jurors were let go, one due to the fear of being identified, a legitimate worry, considering the doxxing, threats, and direct attacks that are part of the MAGA arsenal. So are there any precedents for this trial? There’s that other “Trial of the Century,” involving O.J. Simpson, which has some similarities in that O.J. was also a celebrity and enormous personality, and people thought they knew him through his performances on television. In the book “The Run of His Life,” Jeffrey Toobin contended that lead prosecutor Marcia Clark lost the case due to sheer arrogance, believing that she knew better than the jury consultant, who tried to advise her that African Americans (and African American women in particular) tended to be supportive of Simpson. She had previously prosecuted domestic violence cases successfully, and believed that she’d win over the women on the jury by focusing on the horrors of what O.J. did to Nicole. She was entirely wrong. Of course, Trump is sui generis. He has no peers. But presidentially, Richard M. Nixon comes closest, as the first president to resign from office when the evidence of his illegal conduct during Watergate became overwhelming. Nixon avoided trial and possible imprisonment when his replacement, Gerald Ford, pardoned him “in the interest of the country.” It was not a popular decision. Nixon remained defiant. Afterwards, in a famous TV interview with David Frost, he proclaimed “"Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Though not according to the law. Can the jumpy and quick-to-anger Donald Trump sit through a trial? He’ll have to. And that will be difficult. But I do believe that with persistence, a jury will be found, and that the former president will get a fair trial, even in that “hellhole,” New York City. Despite all the hitches, I think People v. Trump will show that democracy and justice can work.