Many broadcast networks have shied away from overarching marketing themes in recent years -- and none are on the verge of starting one up. But ABC's video montage upfront presentation to advertisers ends with a message that might make the leap. It leaves marketers with the tagline: "Why just watch when you can feel?" Concerning the video presentation, Paul Lee, president of ABC Entertainment Group, told reporters at a press conference: "It's really an emotional piece. I thought that sort of sums up what this brand is about." Two other pressing advertising/marketing issues have come up in recent days at other networks' upfront events. 1) A push by NBC to change the advertising currency to C7 -- commercial ratings plus seven days of time-shifting from current C3 metric; and 2) Dish Network's new technology called AutoHop, which allows viewers to more easily skip commercials in prime time. Concerning AutoHop, Lee says: "Ads are key to our business; we are going to look into it." Regarding the change to C7 that NBC's Ted Harbert strongly suggested on Monday: "We led with pushing for C3. We would be pleased to see C7 as well." Unlike previous seasons, ABC is not totally revamping its fall prime-time lineup -- but it still has 10 new shows that hit the schedule throughout the broadcast year. "We don't have as many needs. We had a strong year," says Lee. Like NBC and Fox each announced the day before, ABC will try to bulk up its comedies -- which include “The Neighbors." That show gets a big lead-out position at 9:30 p.m. after ABC's high-rated "Modern Family" on Wednesdays. "We knew we wanted a family comedy," says ABC's Lee. "The neighbors are [actually] aliens." Country music-themed soap "Nashville" will be a new addition at 10 p.m. on Wednesday. There will be an all-star version of the "Dancing with the Stars" reality show this fall, bringing back big "Stars" winners from the past. In January, two comedies will replace the "Dancing with the Stars" results show on Tuesday at 8 p.m.: "How to Live with Your Parents (For the Rest of Your Life)," starring Sarah Chalke, formerly of "Scrubs," and “The Family Tools,” about a handyman, his relationship with his father and other family members. Thursday will see nuclear drama “Last Resort," at 8 p.m. and a shift at the end of the night with "Scandal," scheduled at 10 p.m., and "Private Practice" moving to Tuesday at 10 p.m. In November, after the comedy “Last Man Standing” at 8 p.m. comes another sitcom, "Malibu Country", starring Reba McEntire, at 8:30 p.m. That is followed by "Shark Tank" at 9 p.m. and “20/20” at 10 p.m. "I think Friday could become a night for broad family entertainment," says Lee. Sunday gets an uplift from the strong rookie show, "Once Upon A Time." "Revenge" will move to 9 p.m. The rookie urban supernatural drama "666 Park Ave" will start at 10 p.m. Other shows coming this season are “Mistresses,” about four women and their scandalous lives, crime-thriller-drama “Red Widow,” and “Zero Hour," about a paranormal junkie. Shows not returning are "Missing," "Cougar Town" (which goes to TBS) and "GCB." ABC's 2012-2013 Prime Time Schedule DAY TIME SERIES MONDAY: 8:00 p.m. “Dancing with the Stars” 10:00 p.m. “Castle” In January: 8:00 p.m. “The Bachelor” 10:00 p.m. “Castle” TUESDAY: 8:00 p.m. “Dancing with the Stars the Results Show” (new time period) 9:00 p.m. “Happy Endings” 9:30 p.m. “Don’t Trust the B---- in Apartment 23” 10:00 p.m. “Private Practice” (new time period) In January: 8:00 p.m. “How to Live with Your Parents (For the Rest of Your Life)” 8:30 p.m. “The Family Tools” WEDNESDAY: 8:00 p.m. “The Middle” 8:30 p.m. “Suburgatory” 9:00 p.m. “Modern Family” 9:30 p.m. “The Neighbors” 10:00 p.m. “Nashville” THURSDAY: 8:00 p.m. “Last Resort” 9:00 p.m. “Grey’s Anatomy” 10:00 p.m. “Scandal” (new time period) FRIDAY: 8:00 p.m. “Shark Tank” 9:00 p.m. “Primetime: What Would You Do?” 10:00 p.m. “20/20” In November: 8:00 p.m. “Last Man Standing” (new time period) 8:30 p.m. “Malibu Country” 9:00 p.m. “Shark Tank” 10:00 p.m. “20/20” SATURDAY: 8:00 p.m. “Saturday Night College Football” SUNDAY: 7:00 p.m. “America’s Funniest Home Videos” 8:00 p.m. “Once Upon a Time” 9:00 p.m. “Revenge” (new time period) 10:00 p.m. “666 Park Avenue”
With the season nearly complete, CBS has moved into a virtual dead heat with Fox in the ratings that matter most to advertisers: C3 ratings among 18-49 viewers. Kelly Kahl, senior executive vice president for CBS Primetime, said at the network's upfront press conference that CBS was actually tied with Fox a week ago -- but now down a tenth. Fox is at a 2.5 Nielsen 18-49 C3 rating; CBS is at a 2.4 number. C3 ratings are commercial ratings plus three days of time-shifted viewing. But the network is now much closer to Fox in this measurement than a year ago. Plus, Les Moonves, president and chief executive officer of CBS Corp., reiterated that CBS is the only major network to win year-to-year in 25-54 and 18-49 viewers. Looking forward to possible other possible metric changes, CBS did not have a specific position about a push to a C7 number -- which Ted Harbert, NBC Universal senior executive, touted on Monday. According to some estimates, moving to C7 would seem to add some 5% to 10% in additional ratings points. Jo Ann Ross, president of advertising sales of CBS, says any changes in the system would typically come -- as they have in the past -- from the advertisers/media agencies: "It depends on what the client wants." She adds that there are still some advertisers currently on the CBS roster that don't have C3 guarantees; one marketer even has an older live program rating guarantee. Concerning the upfront marketplace, Ross says it seems "similar to the marketplace of a year ago." Estimates are that the upfront market will rise in pricing -- around mid-single digits, but perhaps not as strong as the double-digit price gains of a year ago. With much good news, CBS -- as in recent years -- needs only to make a few program changes to its schedule for the fall: three new dramas and one new comedy. Perhaps its biggest change comes on Thursday where "Two and a Half Men" will run on Thursday at 8:30 p.m. after "Big Bang Theory." "Men" had been a longtime leader for CBS on Monday nights for its comedy block. Later on Thursday, at 10 p.m., CBS will start up "Elementary," a modern-day Sherlock Holmes-drama featuring Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu, playing his partner Dr. Joan Watson. Shuffling its strong Monday night comedies, CBS adds "Partners," a new relationship comedy, starring David Krumholtz ("Numbers") running at 8:30 p.m. after "How I Met Your Mother." Strong rookie show "2 Broke Girls" now moves up to take the "Two and a Half Men" 9 p.m. time slot. Tuesday night brings "Vegas" at 10 p.m. after the usual double bill of "NCIS" and "NCIS: Los Angeles." This new 1960s-style drama features Dennis Quaid and Michael Chiklis. "Made In Jersey," a new female legal drama, will run on Fridays at 9 p.m. Why did "CSI: Miami" leave the schedule where "CSI: NY" remains? "It was a jump ball," says Nina Tassler, president of entertainment for CBS. She says it came down to keeping as much of CBS' schedule intact as possible. "The Mentalist" moves to Sunday night from Thursday night at 10 p.m. Tassler says CBS' strategy continues to be the same: "We want to make big hit shows. We don't get confused. We don't get sidetracked. Our philosophy is that we introduce stories that have great characters and great relationships." CBS 2012-2013 PRIME-TIME SCHEDULE (N=New, NT=New Time, all times ET/PT) MONDAY 8:00-8:30 p.m "How I Met Your Mother" 8:30-9:00 p.m. "Partners" (N) 9:00-9:30 p.m. "2 Broke Girls" (NT) 9:30-10:00 p.m. "Mike & Molly" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "Hawaii Five-O" TUESDAY 8:00-9:00 p.m. "NCIS" 9:00-10:00 p.m. "NCIS: Los Angeles" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "Vegas" (N) WEDNESDAY 8:00-9:00 p.m. "Survivor" 9:00-10:00 p.m. "Criminal Minds" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" THURSDAY 8:00-8:30 p.m. "The Big Bang Theory" 8:30-9:00 p.m. "Two and a Half Men"(NT) 9:00-10:00 p.m. "Person of Interest" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "Elementary"(N) FRIDAY 8:00-9:00 p.m. "CSI:NY (NT) 9:00-10:00 p.m. "Made in Jersey"(N) 10:00-11:00 p.m. "Blue Bloods" SATURDAY 8:00-9:00 p.m. "Crimetime Saturday" 9:00-10:00 p.m. "Crimetime Saturday" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "48 Hours Mystery" SUNDAY 7:00-8:00 p.m. "60 Minutes" 8:00-9:00 p.m. "The Amazing Race" 9:00-10:00 p.m. "The Good Wife" 10:00-11:00 p.m. "The Mentalist" (NT)
With upfront season in full swing -- and many TV watchers predicting record commitments to new programming from ad buyers -- VideoNuze’s Will Richmond says that now is the perfect time to remind everyone in the media ecosystem about live television’s inexorable decline. DVR penetration is approaching 50% of U.S. households, which he says means “the days of forcing viewers to tolerate almost a minute of advertising for every two minutes of TV programming they viewed are fading.” Thankfully, online video advertising is maturing at precisely the right time, he says. So why should content providers and advertisers alike be optimistic about online video? Richmond provides four main reasons: 1. Most online video ads cannot be skipped. Viewers also tend to be more tolerant of the ads they see in videos because online streams come with fewer ads. 2. With online distribution, the TV network or content provider is able to set the ad policy, whereas with cable TV, the pay TV provider sets the ad policy. 3. The movement towards enhanced targeting and analytics will increase the value of video advertising. Competition will also lead to greater transparency, which ultimately means better metrics for advertisers. 4. Because clicking on a video is a lean-forward rather than lean-back action, video advertising can move into the realm of interaction, or engagement. If done right, Richmond says this should lead to better ROI and a better user experience. Richmond acknowledges that video advertising still has measurement and structural issues (particularly on the agency side) that prohibit marketers from being able to reach key objectives (like buying a quality audience at TV-like scale). Nevertheless, as live television viewing continues its slow march toward becoming completely on-demand, and as these issues are sorted out, he says online video advertising will become more and more attractive to both buyers and sellers.
In comments filed to the Federal Communications Commission on Monday, the National Association of Broadcasters said that Web-based live TV providers like ivi and Aereo offer services that, in the words of the filing, "expropriate broadcast signals at will." Following a recent spat over access to programming between Internet TV provider Sky Angel and Discovery Communications, The FCC has solicited industry opinion on whether Web-based video services should be regulated like cable and satellite TV systems. The federal agency is seeking to redefine the words “multichannel video programming distributor” and “channel.” In its comments, the NAB decided to focus on services that pose a threat to its members’ business models, rather than the likes of Hulu or Netflix -- two services that might qualify as multichannel video programming distributors under a revised definition. As Tech Daily Dose’s Adam Mazmanian says: “It's not surprising that NAB didn't want a piece of the bigger picture argument, considering that Hulu is a joint venture of three of NAB's network members (Fox, NBC and ABC) and that network production arms get licensing fees from Netflix.” Services like Ivi and Aereo have tried to provide unauthorized access to television content. Ivi, which describes itself as a ”virtual cable company," has had its service suspended after being hit with an injunction following several suits by TV networks, affiliated stations and studios. It previously charged $4.99 per month for access to 70+ channels, but it did not pay content providers outside of a $100 compulsory licensing fee to the copyright office. The company had argued that because the FCC didn’t classify it as a cable company, it did not need to seek retransmission consent from broadcasters. Aereo, which is also being sued by broadcast networks, is another live TV subscription service that makes broadcast programming available via multiple devices through a network of tiny antennas. Its co-founder is Barry Diller, current chairman of IAC/InterActive Corp. and the creator of Fox Broadcasting. Aereo charges subscribers $12 per month and its service is still live.
IPG’s MagnaGlobal has struck a deal with Networked Insights (NI) to provide it with social media data and analysis related to TV programming. NI monitors the social media space to glean insights about audience interests and opinions about content and brands. NI’s analytical platform delivers recommendations on the exact TV shows a brand's audience is watching by analyzing conversations in social media across the Web. The platform collects and synthesizes data by using proprietary tools to discover topics and themes to measure conversations, impressions and sentiment. The deal, which is not exclusive, is designed to help Magna -- as well as sibling media shops Initiative and Universal McCann and their clients -- make better bets on which TV shows to advertise in. The agreement is effective immediately. NI will be providing data in time for the 2012 upfront marketplace. NI CEO Dan Neely stated that MagnaGlobal has “recognized the value social data has to inform TV media planning in order to get the most reach for all of their clients.” He noted that NI will provide Initiative with such data throughout its global network. According to Tim Spengler, worldwide CEO of MagnaGlobal, the NI data and analysis “will make our recommendations for clients that much sharper and more effective.”
NBCUniversal has announced how some of its Summer Olympics coverage will be divided across its properties. Notably, Bravo will be an Olympic outlet for the first time since 2004. The network with the “Real Housewives” franchise will house the tennis competition, which will take place at the venerable Wimbledon site. Live coverage will air in an early morning to midafternoon for the most part. NBCU is no doubt hoping Serena and Venus Williams find their way onto the U.S. team. CNBC will again serve as the home for boxing coverage, including the first female competitions. The finals of each will appear on the financial-news network. Six hours of live coverage will appear daily on the weekends, same-day delayed coverage will air on weekdays after the U.S. stock markets close. MSNBC will air men’s basketball and women’s soccer --although if the U.S. team appears in both or either, games could be moved to NBC. Overall, it will have 18 medal rounds in 20 sports. Its coverage offers the first competition of the London Games, which start two days before the Opening Ceremony when Great Britain plays New Zealand in women’s soccer. The U.S. men’s team did not qualify. Even as the election season heats up, the news channel will air Olympic coverage daily from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. All Olympic events will be streamed live on NBCOlympics.com in some form, although for much of it, customers of cable/satellite/telco TV services will have to prove they pay for TV service to gain access. NBCU will announce plans for NBC and the NBC Sports Network later, while Telemundo will air ample Spanish-language coverage.
Tribune Media Services, which provides information about entertainment and related content to TV program guides, movie listings and other metadata-reliant applications, is partnering with Digitalsmiths, which specializes in video content discovery, to offer TMS customers new APIs that expand the range of uses for TMS metadata. Using the new TMS-Digitalsmiths APIs, TMS customers can create applications that present TMS metadata on entertainment options --and related content including images and video -- in new formats that better serve consumers. For example, media companies and service providers can create online listings that allow consumers to find TV shows starring certain celebrities, see video on demand options, or find content that can be viewed on a variety of different devices. Under the terms of the deal, TMS also has the ability to market Digitalsmiths’ Seamless Discovery platform, the software and technology package powering their new collaboration, which includes integrated search and content recommendation capabilities. Seamless Discovery maintains a large library of frame-level metadata for movies and TV content, indexed by references to people, places, dialogue, subject matter, objects, and actions, among other filters. On the consumer side, it analyzes data about viewing habits to determine user preferences and deliver content recommendations. It can also blend these profiles to deliver relevant recommendations to an individual, a couple, a family or a group. Seamless Discovery analyzes information from a number of social media sources to help users find the buzzed-about content of the moment.
Despite the increasing number of options available to consumers, they’re still watching the majority of their video programming on television sets -- a behavior that has some effect on consumers’ purchase considerations. According to the Consumer Electronics Association, viewing of television programming is up 28% over the previous year, with consumers citing factors such as convenience and the appeal and variety of programming as their top factors for the increase. Two-thirds of consumers said HDTVs were their primary viewing devices, although other devices such as laptops (62%), desktops (55%), smartphones (33%) and tablets (17%) were gaining in popularity. “Certainly there’s a lot of things going on that could collectively dethrone the television from its current perch,” Shawn DuBravac, the CEA’s chief economist and director of research, tells Marketing Daily. “But for now, TV is the primary device for video consumption.” The continued dominance of HDTVs as the primary viewing device factors somewhat into consumers’ preferences when it comes to purchase considerations, DuBravac says. Among consumers who plan to purchase a television in the next 12 months, nearly half (48%) will be doing so to replace an aging, obsolete or broken set. Of them, half will be looking for a better picture quality in a new display and a similar amount will be looking for a larger screen size. Among the other features consumers are looking for: Internet connectivity (25%), OLED display (21%) and 3D capabilities (24%). DuBravac notes, however, that the two main drivers behind television sales are price and features. While televisions continue to dominate the video viewing world, consumers are also using other devices to watch their programming. Forty percent of consumers said they were watching more programming on portable video devices than they were a year ago. Many of those devices are being used in conjunction with television. Two-thirds of consumers (66%) watching video on television reported they were simultaneously using other consumer electronics devices. Not surprisingly, the behavior is more prevalent among younger consumers than older consumers.
Last Friday, China Dailyreported that Taiwanese manufacturing giant Foxconn -- which makes Apple’s iPad, iPhone and other consumer electronics devices from various companies -- said it would begin working on “iTV, Apple Inc’s rumored upcoming high-definition television.” The story claimed that Foxconn CEO Terry Gou had said the company was preparing to build the TV, but that “development or manufacturing has yet to begin.” On Monday, Foxconn refuted these claims. "At no time did (Gou) confirm that Foxconn was in development or manufacturing stages for any product for any of its customers. He did say that Foxconn is always prepared to meet the manufacturing needs of customers should they determine that they wish to work with Foxconn in the production of any of their products," the company said in a prepared statement. For years, analysts and industry watchers have said that Apple is planning to launch a smart television. In his biography, Steve Jobs tells Walter Isaacson, his biographer: “I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use. It would be seamlessly linked with all of your devices and with iCloud. It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it.” Apple, meanwhile, has refused to comment on speculation that it is working on a smart TV.
Katie Couric’s deal to work on projects with ABC News involves a significant “get” later this month with an exclusive interview with Prince William and his brother --part of coverage of Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee. Tapping into the American fascination with the British royals, Couric will host two prime-time broadcasts about the Queen’s milestone. Couric has an arrangement that involves ABC News and her coming daytime show backed by ABC parent Disney. The interview with Prince William and Prince Harry will include thoughts from William about his deceased mother, Princess Diana, and his 2011 wedding, ABC said. "Good Morning America," which has landed some notable ratings victories over NBC’s “Today,” will air live from London in June as the Jubilee celebration unfolds. ABC’s online partnership with Yahoo will also offer coverage. "The Real Queen: By Her Own Royal Family with Katie Couric" on May 29 will be a two-hour special of “20/20. "Concert for The Queen: A Diamond Jubilee Celebration with Katie Couric" airs June 5 as a two-hour special. ABC has exclusive U.S. rights to the concert with performers such as Elton John and Paul McCartney. Couric’s anticipated daytime show, which reunites her with former “Today” show producer Jeff Zucker, kicks off Sept. 10.
Audiences continue to own more HDTV sets, but the number of ads shot in high-definition appearing on Hispanic-targeted networks and stations lags behind the general market, according to new research. Extreme Reach, a video ad serving company, says 60% fewer HD ads were aired on Hispanic-targeted TV than non-Hispanic-aimed TV in the first quarter of 2012. Extreme Reach said Consumer Electronics Association data shows that 78% of Hispanic audiences own an HDTV versus 68% of non-Hispanics. Yet in the first three months of this year, only 7% of ads running on local Hispanic-aimed stations were in HD, versus 18% across all local broadcast outlets, according to Extreme Reach. “By distributing HD advertising to Hispanic broadcasters in markets where there is high HD adoption, advertisers may be able to make a difference with sizable, yet underserved Hispanic audiences, given the effectiveness of the HD format in building brands,” stated John Roland, CEO of Extreme Reach. Extreme Reach also found that in the top five Hispanic markets by size, Houston had the largest gap between HD adoption of local Hispanic broadcasters (33%) and HD adoption by the other broadcasters (60%). In Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Dallas, HD adoption by Hispanic-aimed stations are closer to the national average (54%) for HD adoption by local stations. Extreme Reach data was culled from 1,750 advertisers and 225,000 HD and standard-definition ads delivered in the first quarter of 2012. Hispanic-Americans represent the fastest segment growth of all U.S. consumers, according to Nielsen, which says their buying power will rise by 50% to $1.5 trillion in 2015.
I was struck by two articles that appeared in The New York Times last Sunday, May 13, on the subject of the television industry and its well-being.On the face of it, they seemed to be diametrically opposed. The first one, “Audiences Now Rarely Drawn To Live Television” by David Carr focused on the apparent looming -- even overdue -- death knell of conventional television, based on his experience of alternative viewing options and a certain amount of data.The second was entitled “In Evolving Media Landscape, Television Holds Sway” and was written by Stuart Elliott, who basically reports that while on the surface TV would seem to be increasingly threatened by new modes of viewing, it still stands head and shoulders above anything else when it comes to quickly delivering mass audiences for brands in an impactful way.As Elliott points out, all projections for the upfront are, as the name might suggest, up over last year -- by between 2% to 4% for broadcasters and by 4% to 6% for cable. Let’s not forget that last year was generally considered a good one.So who’s right?Well, inevitably they both are -- to a greater or lesser extent.For my money, if I had to side with one article over the other I’d go with Elliott's. There is no real prospect of the distributors of TV content being left out of the game in the coming years that can be identified right now.Not only are they actively engaged in the emerging distribution channel, as Glenn Britt says: “Anything with a screen is a TV set as far as I’m concerned.”), but they are also the largest commissioners of content. It will take a long time for any organization with the distribution potential of say Facebook to gain the skills and body of content to seriously disrupt the current landscape. They may come to be a player over time, but it will be a long time, made longer by the constraints of life as a post-IPO company.This is not to say that Carr’s article does not have merit or that the threat of dis-aggregated viewing is not real. As more content is available through a wider range of on demand options and platforms, more people will inevitably shift more of their viewing to take advantage. What is not known is the rate at which this will happen.Personally, I do not believe the picture at present or even for the next five years is a as bleak as portrayed in Carr’s article, due simply to the enormity of the gap between the position of TV versus any and all other forms of viewing.Like Carr, most of my viewing is done off-schedule. We have cable in our household, but we mostly use the DVR or OnDemand service. We also have a Roku Box (courtesy of friends who got two freebies when they attended TED) as well as a plethora of computers and game consoles.Unlike Carr, however, I cannot see in my family’s viewing patterns a reflection of what the nation is doing. Not fully. Not yet.Directionally speaking, I believe we will head further to the on-demand world that is already envisaged and encapsulated in the cable industry’s moves to embrace cross-platform viewing, such as TV Everywhere, HBOGo and XFinity. But right now my household, Carr’s household and quite probably yours are statistical freaks of nature. And our time is some way off.
Okay, bubelas. “Dark Shadows,” the latest episode, certainly had a dark (and shadowy!) streak, in that it was all about competition, and the effects of jealousy. It was about working to get your mojo back, but still needing to poison the well of others who threaten you, even though you may have gotten “everything.” Sadly for Pete, this week he makes another failed attempt for power and to gain Don’s swagger with the ladies. Plus, he prematurely tells the partners about his inclusion in the New York Times Magazine piece, and his long talk with his new best friend, “Victor." The magazine piece, by Victor Navasky, did indeed appear at the time, and divided top (not “hip”) agencies into competing schools of philosophy: In a note, ace commenter Tom Messner broke it down for me as: “Ally is called existentialist and BBDO is pragmatic. Ogilvy is Platonist, if I recall. Bates is empiricist. Wells (which Don disses as “Peter, Paul and Mary”) is the Theater of the Absurd…. No wonder Navasky would not include SCDP--they should have sent Cooper. He could have been… the Shintoist.” But Bert Cooper loses some of that Zen when he and Roger join in to snatch an account without Pete’s knowledge of Pete. (“When two men really, really, hate each other,” Roger explains to Michael Ginsberg, as if explaining the birds and bees of SCDP.) The fact that Roger hates Pete is not new. But I was surprised that with his less-than-honest actions this week, Don shows that he’s developing a parallel problem with Ginsberg. The kid with the frayed collar has been on a creative tear. Going over the agency’s work to submit to the Times, Don sees that Ginsberg’s been doing everything -- and it gets under his skin. Looking through Michael’s “Shit I gotta do” file, Don gets inspired to create some ads of his own for Sno Ball. On presentation day, he leaves the kid’s work in the cab, even though the “Sno ball in your face” idea is better than his own. (A case of picking the devil you know, I guess!) In its literal aggression, Ginsberg’s idea reminded me of “How’d you like a nice Hawaiian punch?” –- which, as a catchphrase in the mid ‘60s, was the scourge of elementary school teachers who had to supervise playgrounds at the time. And the roster of people shown in Ginserg’s ad -- cop, teacher, Indian chief -- also suggested the “You don’t have to be Jewish to love Levy’s” campaign, which was winning awards for DDB around then. After Don sells his devil to the client, the two have that rough (hellish) scene in the elevator, in which Draper dismisses Ginsberg with “I don’t think about you at all.” While it’s a pretty chilling putdown, it’s also a big, fat lie. Whereas Roger is so charming, and Pete is so unlikable, that their struggle isn’t as sad. Roger’s reconnection with Jane at first seemed typical -- they were using each other, but she got the better end of the bargain. (And closed on an apartment in a remarkably short time. The “Fiddler on the Roof” “cast or audience?” line was pretty funny. I also loved his assertion at dinner that he likes the way Jews, (or “you people” ) keep “track of each other.” But because he was jealous that the Fiddler’s rich son was flirting with hisbeautiful, Semitic soon-to-be ex-wife, he had to go back and poison her new digs -- a parallel action to Betty’s polluting of 73rd and Park. Let’s talk about less-fat Betty. The minute I saw her still-padded wrist weighing her four ounces of protein on her little kitchen scale in the opening scene, I knew it was coming: Weight Watchers! Full disclosure: my uncle, Albert Lippert, founded W.W. with Jean Nidetch in early 1963, in a room over a movie theater in Little Neck, Queens. (A movie ticket was $2, so that’s what Weight Watchers charged per meeting.) Based on the solid combo of the New York City Board of Health diet plus “group support,” the business grew so prodigiously that by 1978, Weight Watchers was bought for serious millions by, I swear, Heinz. And the most interesting sociological fact about the (still-going!) company, aside from its early awareness of, and attendance to, America’s obesity problem, is that in hiring clerks and lecturers who came directly out of the Weight Watchers classes, the company allowed for competent (now-thin and well-dressed!) housewives with no prior business experience to enter the work world. While the lecturer pictured seemed a tad more perfectly pulled-together than your typical group leader at the time, the portrait of the class was dead-on, except that members were weighed behind a screen in the back of the room. (But such authenticity would have deprived us of the good news, poundage-wise, about Judy Steckler!) Still, there’s no doubt that the program would have been big in Westchester by then, and would have provided someone like Betty with a much-needed outlet for support and feedback. The classes might have helped her lose weigh, although I don’t remember anything in the literature about sticking the nozzle of Reddi-Whip directly into your mouth, schpritzing, and then spitting it out, after seeing your ex-husband’s gorgeous, flat-bellied new wife in her swanky apartment, dressing. (Early bulimia, perhaps? Betty certainly has what we would now call a case of “disordered eating.” The reason she was losing so little or “maintaining” is that she was cheating.) Still, Betty could apply the psychologically based weight loss tips to the rest of her life, and it looks like she’s trying. The midnight eating scene with Henry was sweet. Obviously, the encouragement she was able to give was regurgitated from her new Weight Watchers vernacular. Henry’s pleased with her support, while she’s no doubt thinking that in divorcing Don, she also jumped ship too soon and backed the wrong horse. (And in mixing metaphors for a third time, even though he’s big in political circles, Henry can’t park wherever he wants; he’s “not an ambulance”!). I always wondered why Megan married Don so quickly when she could have had her pick. The note that Betty finds from Don to “Lovely Megan” goes some way toward explaining it. It’s incredibly smart and romantic, and odds are Betty never got one like it. (The fact that it’s written on the back of Bobby’s drawing of a smiling harpooned whale doesn’t help her mood.) Still, Betty’s telling Sally about Anna because she was jealous was such an awful and selfish thing to for a mom to do to a kid. Betty acted like the evil witch poisoning Snow White’s apple. (Meagan does look like Snow White, and she and Don live in the um, Big Apple!) Whereas Megan’s response -- telling Don that if he got on the phone and started a screaming match, it was just letting Betty win -- was knowing and insightful way beyond her years. She’s clearly more of a grown-up than either of them. But even she can’t keep the toxic air from getting into the apartment. I loved the juxtaposition of the Thanksgiving scenes, with Betty’s family looking just like a Norman Rockwell portrait. And how much better this Thanksgiving is than the previous one at Henry’s mother’s! Bobby says he’s happy to have two big houses and a sled. But in having to go between -- and psychologically navigate -- the two big houses, Sally is learning to be as cruel and manipulative as her mom. Betty’s little speech, that she’s thankful that she has everything she wants, but with the additional self-serving zinger -- "and that no one else has anything better" -- shows how much progress she hasn’t made. (As for her tiny-portioned plate, I’m pretty sure that Brussel sprouts are free -- as in, have as many as you want. Why stop with one?) As Roger tells an irate Peggy in the elevator, "This is the way it is. Every man for himself."
Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000172 EndHTML:0000006927 StartFragment:0000002981 EndFragment:0000006891 SourceURL:file://localhost/Users/lesluchter/Downloads/tvMay14.doc To party or not to party? Everyone likes a good schmooze -- especially when it’s connected to big-time television, and you can hang with Zooey Deschanel. Upfront presentations this week are looking to bring back some of the glamour -- NBC returns to Radio City Music Hall; USA Network joins the partyfest at the end of the week. Still, some like ABC don’t offer big parties for media buyers and sellers (though we know that small private dinners with key clients are still in vogue). Broadcast networks, and increasingly cable networks, are always tinkering with how best to entice senior media and marketing executives into believing their networks do a great job – whether through key research presentations or by serving a memorable dish or two. Back after the throes of the 2009 deep recession, broadcast networks toned down their flamboyant parties. Programmers and content owners didn't want to flaunt opulence in the face of many of their viewers’ miseries -- and media executives also disdained the belief that organic sushi and French-style Twinkies would directly translate to media budget increases. Some opulence may be returning -- and that may not be so bad. To some degree, the glamour-fun element t is a key part of broadcast networks’ identities -- even with declining ratings and perhaps a weakening of overall traditional TV advertising spending. Nero fiddled; Rome burned; but the city survived in the end anyway. The question is, when the smoke clears, will advertisers continue to pay more for broadcast TV shows? Yes, a bit. But overall volume has definitely slowed down, with many predicting at best 2% gains in overall yearly volume, to perhaps $9.3 to $9.7 billion. Future dollar growth looks to be had in other places -- through Netflix program fee deals, continued domestic and international syndication, and retransmission revenues. Perhaps they can spread their big party spectacles to those areas as well. Until then, happy shrimp and ceviche hunting.
Over a half century ago, TV measurement was invented. Advertisers wanted to know whether their TV ads were effective. How to define “effective”? The ultimate answer: Did the ads drive consumers to action, to buy the product or service being advertised? This kind of detailed information was simply not available, so the industry settled for a weak proxy: Were my ads even seen? A sampling system was set up to monitor if the TV program was watched by a small number of panelists who had an “opportunity to see” the ads And these panelists had to be actively engaged, raising all kinds of biases. Marketers still had no idea if their marketing objectives were being met, let along if those panelists even bought the product being advertised. But alas, a system was born and still exists today, supporting our $140 billion global TV advertising industry. But the industry has not given up pursuing those ultimate questions. Hence, 40 years ago the quest for single-source data began. Singles source is the idea of measuring data from the same homes over time to see which ads homes receive and how those ads change their buying behavior. Single-source data can also determine the best media to drive various purchasers, such as the type of purchasers that will more likely buy a brand after being exposed to its current ads -- we call that the ROI-Driving Segment. The vision of single source turned out to be elusive, as huge companies and leaders in our industry kept going into the single-source business then out of it again fairly rapidly, most often after ineffectively having spent up to hundreds of millions of dollars in their failed attempts (e.g., ScanAmerica, Project Apollo, etc.). Single-source data was expensive: panelists needed to be persuaded to do a lot of work recording their purchasing and viewing habits, and special equipment supplemental to what already may have existed had to be installed in their homes. As a result, despite high expenditures, the resulting sample sizes tended to be so small that the findings were statistically insignificant for most brands and for most TV networks in today’s highly fragmented viewing world. This approach continued for 20 years, with the assumption being, “if we throw enough money at the approach,” the vision of single source could be forcibly engineered. Later other companies had a different idea: Why not use naturally occurring data (NOD) -- hard data that was being regularly collected, without burdening consumers. Why not match data across households? Why not build an easy-to-use computing system to access this data and find the answers? .NET software had evolved to the point that this was possible. Storage costs had come down dramatically. And most importantly, these big digital data sets had become available. In television, NOD is the “hard” data that can come out of the servers and cable/satellite set top boxes. The box is there anyway. The box can datestamp and timestamp channel change and other events and send it up stream to the server. Some cable and satellite operators are already doing this. In purchase data, NOD is those point of sale “hard” data automatically collected for financial tracking and where the records are household-specific. Instances of this are supermarket frequent shopper cards, which we now see expanding to many other types of stores including department stores, specialty stores, fast food, coffee shops, and so on. For cars and trucks there are registration data. For pharma, there are prescription fulfillment records. This approach avoids the additional equipment previously required and the need to retain and coordinate homeowners as panelists. The idea revolutionized single source, by exploiting NOD and allowing buyers and sellers to manipulate that NOD to create actionable business metrics. The solution resulted in gathering sample sizes of Big Data, a huge problem with prior industry attempts, as the gathering of such data does not require installing any new equipment in people’s homes. It does not require giving them a new special credit card, barcode scanner or peoplemeter to use, nor require recruiting panelists. So long as the most rigorous privacy protection is adopted, such as Washington’s “privacy by design” objective (e.g., receiving ISO 27001 certification via continual audits and never accepting names and addresses or other personally identifiable information), NOD can be matched and massive passive single-source data created. This is now a reality. Dozens of advertisers are currently using an advanced business intelligence platform to mine hard NOD to find their right audience and measure the effectiveness of their advertising. Dozens of TV networks are also using that same platform to demonstrate to the advertisers that their networks are the right place to find their audience. After 40 years, a transparent single-source approach is finally capable of cost-effectively utilizing massively large sample sizes, yielding statistically significant findings for all brands. In retrospect, the idea may seem obvious -- but the top research companies in the world were apparently blindered into panel-based, old-fashioned equipment installation and panel recruitment approach and did not see the NOD idea. Today the idea of naturally occurring data is spreading far and wide. The idea promises to revolutionize marketing and media research. Now that you have read the meme “naturally occurring data,” you will probably start to have fresh ideas about how you can use naturally occurring data to drive your business.
This is a tough week for online video to get any attention. It’s TV upfront time, and the broadcast networks are touting their new fall lineups to Madison Avenue. Sure, digital extensions and online video add-ons will be part of many shows’ marketing efforts during the season, but the reality is online video won’t get much play at the TV upfront. The dollars TV brings in are just too big. Barclays Capital analyst Anthony DiClemente predicted that broadcast upfront revenue would rise 4.3 percent over last year, with cable money to grow 6.3 percent. That will bring primetime ad sales for the broadcast networks to $9.49 billion and cable’s haul to $9.88 billion. That’s nearly $20 billion for TV just counting upfront money. How does online video compare? MagnaGlobal’s most recent forecast said online video will grow 24% this year to hit $2.2 billion, while eMarketer has said online video ad spend would rise 40% this year to top $3.1 billion. Depending on which numbers you use, the TV upfront take will be six to nearly nine times the yearly haul of online video. Am I just trying to make online video publishers and ad networks feel bad? No, because online video has a big advantage as industry analyst Will Richmond at VideoNuze points out. “Online video advertising offers networks and advertisers the advantage of no ad-skipping by the viewer. True, some viewers flip over to other apps when an online video ad break occurs, but at least, they can't simply skip entirely, as they can with DVRs,” he said. In fact, DVRs are now in about half of TV homes and the amount of time-shifted TV viewers watch continues to grow each year, Nielsen noted in its most recent cross-platform report. That’s why networks like Univision plug their live viewership numbers. Univision’s prime-time programming is watched live 94% of the time, the network has said. Plus, online viewing alternatives are gaining traction. Research firm Solutions Research Group reported this week that premium movie channels, such as Starz and Cinemax, are being “Netflixed, cord-shaved or both,” as consumers rely more on streaming options. Take heart, online video business. It’s not your week, but it might be your decade.
What a disappointment the previous season of “The Office” turned out to be. A show that was once a glory of television comedy has now become merely “pretty good.” Last year at this time, I pondered whether any sitcom could retain its creative energy for more than seven seasons, especially after the departure of its main star, and now I think we have the answer. Unlike other great comedies that decided to go out on top (“The Dick Van Dyke Show,” “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” “Cheers” and “Seinfeld”), “The Office” clearly lingered past its natural end point. It’s not that “The Office” was terrible this year. If you’d never seen the first seven seasons and came to the show fresh last September, you’d still think it was ground-breaking. It remains unique among television comedies in depicting life in these United States as it is actually experienced. Instead of jokes and wisecracks that no one but a comedy writer would say, the humor still grows organically out of the absurdity of the modern workplace and from psychological insights into how people actually behave. And the pacing is unique – no one has ever done a better job depicting the deleterious impact of sheer boredom on contemporary life. Yet it’s impossible not to wish “The Office” had made a smoother transition into the post-Michael Scott world. There were many problems this year, including the exhaustion of the Pam/Jim story arc, which had given the series much of its emotional weight, and its inability to develop the inner lives of the other characters. But its retreat from a realistic depiction of office life, which had made the show so compelling in the first place, also dragged the series down. The show sealed its fate in the first five minutes of the season when it revealed that Ed Helms’ Andy Bernard had been named the new office manager. What a crashing downer! Our hopes for something more compelling had been raised by the “beauty contest” at the end of the previous season in which multiple candidates had interviewed for the manager’s job. Certainly, we hoped, someone with the outsize personality of a Michael Scott would emerge from that process. As we learned at the start of this season, James Spader’s Robert California, a Zen-like mind-game champion, had initially been chosen as regional manager, but the CEO, played by Kathy Bates, had decided over the summer to star in “Harry’s Law,” -- um, make that, “had decided to take some time off.” She then selected Robert as her successor, who put Andy in change. As “Office fans know, Michael Scott might have been narcissistic and wildly inappropriate, but he was a good salesman. Andy Bernard, by contrast, is incompetent all the way around. Making him the boss was a betrayal of the compact that the show had made with its viewers. Andy’s hiring wasn’t the worst of it. In previous seasons, the Dunder Mifflin Scranton branch had occupied a recognizable place within the corporate world. It was only one of several branches that competed with each other. It reported into a New York headquarters, which both tempered Michael Scott’s most outlandish tendencies, and gave us insight into the corporate mindset. After imploding as an independent company in Season Six, Dunder Mifflin was bought by Sabre, an office equipment maker that expected to derive cross-selling synergies by pairing a copy machine business with a paper business. This was all too realistic because it’s exactly the kind of deal that makes perfect sense to investment bankers and financial analysts, and is always doomed to failure on the ground. Still, the Sabre subplot initially breathed new life into “The Office” as the Scranton crew adapted to a different, more modern corporate culture. Unfortunately, as the Sabre story wore on, the show withdrew into itself and rarely seemed to be part of a wider world or bigger company (except during the four Florida-based episodes.) Why was Robert California, the CEO of a major multidivision corporation, always working out of the Scranton branch? What happened to the other branches? And why wasn’t Andy reporting to a vice president, like Michael had reported to Jan Levinson Gould in the early seasons? Realism was important to the early success of “The Office” because the characters were depicted as mere cogs in a larger, more dangerous universe. But when it regressed into its own self-contained sitcom world, where outside forces played little role, it became more like a traditional TV comedy where the stakes are lower and the emotional payoffs less compelling. It looks like we’ll have a reboot for next year. Dunder Mifflin has been bought back by its former CFO, and the character of Robert California has been cut loose. Behind the scenes, co-executive producer and frequent writer Mindy Kaling, who also plays Kelly, and showrunner Paul Lieberstein, who plays Toby, are headed to other shows, as may be the case with Rainn Wilson, who plays Dwight Shrute. I’ll be happy if NBC decides that “The Office” will wrap up at the end of Season Nine and its writers put all their energies into a story arc worthy of the this great series. Unfortunately, it’s bad sign that Andy is coming back again as manager. Much better to focus again on Jim, who is the most important figure on the show now that Michael Scott has gone. He was always at the emotional core of the show, but he was shunted aside for other stories this year. How great would it be if he emerged as the leader we know him to be and finally fulfilled his potential?