More evidence grows over multitasking multiscreen viewing. Almost two-thirds of tablet owners -- 63% -- watch TV while using their tablets, per a study from GfK MRI.The research says this is significantly more than any other activity done concurrently with tablet usage. Overall, 41% of tablet owners’ total TV viewing time comes from this type of two-screen viewing.What kind of attention? Thirty-six percent of concurrent TV/tablet users said their primary focus was on their tablet, 36% say the focus was equal between the TV and tablet; and 28% said their primary focus was on the TV screen.Most activity on a tablet during TV time? Social media. Thirty-four percent posted comments on Facebook, Twitter, a blog or another site regarding a show. Other TV-related stuff: 25% visited a network or show’s Web site, fan site or app; 21% looked for information of a TV show being watched; 16% watched a video clip about a show; 11% voted in a contest/event for a TV show; and 9% chatted live about a TV show.Good news for advertisers: 28% of two-screen viewers used their tablet to look up more information about a product advertised during a show they watched and 12% purchased a product advertised during a show.Risa Becker, senior vice president of research operations at GfK MRI, stated: "This is particularly good news for marketers; having a tablet at hand makes it much easier for consumers to respond instantly to commercial offers while they are top of mind.”
To promote its educational technology products, computer giant Dell this summer ran a first-of-its kind campaign for the company that ran across Web-connected TVs, the desktop Web and mobile devices. The aim was to track individual consumers across the three platforms to correlate the impact of one channel with the other two. “This type of campaign allowed us, for the first time, to have an integrated, cross-channel dialogue with our target demographic across their multiple connected devices, further reinforcing our educational technology messaging,” said Mary Ellen Dugan, Dell’s executive director of global brand and advertising. Working with Dell on the effort were WPP mobile agency Joule, GroupM’s MediaCom and cross-platform ad technology specialist Tapad. The company delivered 15- and 30-second Dell spots to some six million connected TVs. Joule CEO Michael Collins said the mobile ads, linking to rich media sites, ran on a defined list of sites and apps. “However, within that site/app list, we targeted consumers who had already seen the connected TV ad and those who had not, so we were able to see the difference in performance between these two groups,” he said. The ability to reach the same users across multiple devices helped Dell to approach the campaign in terms of audience rather than specific channels, he noted. After the campaign ran for a month from mid-July to mid-August, Joule and MediaCom found a 68% lift in the time viewers spent on Dell’s mobile site compared to viewers who only saw the ads on a single device. “Our research shows that consumers who see ads on more than one device are far more inclined to take action,” said Tapad CEO Are Traasdahl. The company says its tracking technology doesn’t use personally identifiable information (PII) and that it provides clear and persistent opt-out notification to consumers. According to a recent study by YuMe and research firm Frank N. Magid Associates, 30% of all Internet homes have connected TVs, and users of those sets are generally receptive to advertising. Almost 90% said they noticed ads on the platform, with 60% noticing pre-rolls. People were also more willing to watch ads in exchange for getting free content than paying a fee. Without connected TVs, Collins said it wouldn’t have been possible to link a specific TV and smartphone to the same person in the Dell campaign. “This cross-channel engagement is the beginning of a big shift in how brands will communicate with their consumers,” he said.
ESPN will again offer ads this fall on one side of the screen while the action continues on the other in 10 NASCAR races. Also, as ads roll in NASCAR NonStop, the ticker will continue on the top of the screen so viewers can follow the order of the drivers.ESPN’s coverage of the 10 races that make up the Chase for the NASCAR Sprint Cup runs through Nov. 18. All will air Sundays in competition with NFL football, while one will be on ABC on Saturday in prime time.NASCAR NonStop began last year. The ads will run during the second half of each race, while the first part will have traditional full-screen spots.All but the race on ABC will be available, as with most live-event ESPN offerings; viewers with smartphones, tablets and PCs see it via WatchESPN.ESPN Deportes, the Spanish-language network, will air all 10 races on tape delay, while ESPN analyst Dale Jarrett will make a weekly appearance on ESPN’s “Mike and Mike” radio program.Ratings for the Chase this year may help determine how aggressive ESPN is in bidding to keep NASCAR rights beyond 2014. The company recently invested heavily in Major League Baseball.
Looking to tap into its key demographic of women 25-54, T-Mobile is moving into the social gaming world, by sponsoring a social networking version of King.com’s “Bubble Witch Saga” on Facebook. The primary focus of the campaign is to build awareness around the launch of T-Mobile's new myTouch devices by advertising on Bubble Witch Saga, which has more than 17 million monthly players, most of whom are women ages 25-54. Using technology developed by MediaBrix, the campaign will utilize video advertising within the game to promote the myTouch devices. Bubble Witch is a puzzle game in which players match similarly colored bubbles with each other to pop them and gain points. T-Mobile’s sponsorship includes a pre-game advertisement noting the game is now available on mobile devices (and displayed on several T-Mobile devices), as well as a logo in the upper right-hand corner of the game during game play. "King.com's Bubble Witch Saga is a natural fit with T-Mobile, given the audience demographic, the large player base and the high engagement levels of players of the game,” said Mark Charkin, executive vice president of advertising at King.com, in a statement. “Over a year following its launch, there are now more than 17 million monthly players of the game and the average user plays many times a day.”
It may still be early days, but Apple has a long way to go if buzz for the iPhone 5 is to surpass the video marketing efforts of competitor Samsung for its new line of Galaxy smartphones. On YouTube, Apple’s “Introducing iPhone 5” video, launched yesterday, currently has around 120,000 views. As Jim Edwards of Business Insider says: “That it's 7 minutes long -- an age in Web video -- doesn't help either.” However, it should be noted that this video is mostly about product specs, rather than being purely promotional. By comparison, a hands-on video for Samsung’s Galaxy Note II has been seen by 2.5 million people since the beginning of the month and is the most-shared video in social media in the last 24 hours and seven days, according to Unruly Media’s viral video chart for tech ads. Samsung’s strong viral position may not be a coincidence, Edwards points out, as a simple search for “iPhone 5” on YouTube yields sponsored ads from Samsung at the top of the page. “And the fact that Apple hasn't yet launched an iPhone 5 commercial on its YouTube channel isn't helping either,” he adds. “It's left Samsung in the enviable position of serving video content into the gap created by Apple's lack of new advertising.” Have a look at both videos below:
Quality. Scale. Pick one. Bet you can’t pick both. Can you? If you can find a way to deliver those two things to advertisers, investors will reward you amply. As a producer of content, I know the quality vs. scale conundrum all too well. Producer vs publisher Every producer is a storyteller. For some, their weapon of choice is the pen, for others it’s the microphone. For fewer still, it’s a camera. Either way, producers start off by dreaming of creating content they are passionate about, building an audience of dedicated viewers, growing their brand -- and for those who work online, landing advertisers, because as we know, content is now meant to be “ad-supported.” That’s the “dream,” even though for purists the concept of blending church and state is blasphemous. The reality, however, for most is they forego all that and take on production mandates for others. Fortunately, apart from a couple of mandates early on, my company’s never needed to shoot weddings and bar mitzvahs, and by and large, 99% of what we’ve produced has been “our content.” The “artists” among producers prefer to create their own content, while the “business oriented” producers know that there are no M&A multiples in production: acquirers and investors pay a premium to technology and distribution plays, less so for publishers, and practically nothing for pure-play producers. Of course, once you realize that investors don’t finance content producers anyway, then you can let go of that dream and embrace production deals (for others). Most producers need to take on such production deals not because they want to, but because they need to keep the lights on. Content production is a very tough segment of online video. Just because content is made available for free to viewers, doesn’t mean it’s cheap to make, let alone free to produce. But whereas production scales very differently (read: slower) than distribution, it’s not a zero-sum game. As such, if you can hang around long enough for last call, you’ll end up walking away with the spoils. But so many content producers have faded or run on empty because they mistimed or miscalculated the market. Mistiming the Market I’ve long referred to how my company is among the third wave of video-content producers. The first ones like Pop.com or Pseudo were too early (no one had broadband). The second wave like Mania, Ripe and Heavy had to build their own infrastructure and invest in marketing. The third wave wave also included players like Revision3 and Next New Networks, which have exited. We’re now seeing more and more of these third wavers who are practically only on YouTube, which may or may not work, if they don’t… Miscalculate or Misread the Market Once you don’t have to absorb marketing and infrastructure costs, you can build a solid video content business provided you don’t bite off more than you can chew. What the Revision3 sale to Discovery showed was that online video may never be “commercial” (that is, it won’t generate enough revenue to really matter) to old media, but it is certainly “promotional” (it can create promotional value to linear, traditional programming, where the big ad budgets remain). The One Advantage of Online Video is Its Biggest Disadvantage, Too You are also now seeing a new wave of content creators bet perhaps too heavily on YouTube, forgetting that what made cable (and broadcast) successful was the power of linear programming. As we’re seeing everywhere, the democratization process comes with its share of headaches, too. Simply launching YouTube channels -- regardless of whether YouTube is funding them or not -- isn’t a bona fide successful strategy in of itself. Ultimately, you’re a YouTube back-end producer -- and we know how poorly investors reward producers. But to get there, you need to cut through the clutter. With 4 billion daily video streams and 72 hours of new content uploaded each minute, in all likelihood, no matter how “cool” and “awesome” your content is, no one will watch it; or rather, not enough people will watch it to make it matter to advertisers. And users will by and large be drowned with too much content – be it ultra-premium, super-premium, premium, prosumer, or user-generated – for you to build your brand. Which means, ironically, that for many content creators who aspire to build their own content catalog and brand, their only shot at survival is turning to production for hire work, be it for YouTube or someone else. As such, if you don’t misjudge the market, you can create the kind of content you want, while building your brand and the company you want.