Commentary

What's Next For TV?

If there's anything constant about television these days, it’s the constant change. From digital compression a few years ago to today’s connected TVs, multi- and cross-platforming, second screens, STBs, OTT and Big Data sets, it's hard to keep pace. But thankfully there are conferences like MultiChannel News/Broadcasting & Cable’s Next TV Summit to help frame the changes

Today’s TV landscape faces a viewer in transition. While there are still mainstream couch potatoes, according to keynote speaker Eric Free from Intel, there is also a burgeoning class of connected viewers who tend to skew younger and are not constrained by the current media business model. He spoke of three pillars of change: consumer behavior, technology infrastructure and current business models, which are all occurring right now, ready or not. Free is optimistic about this type of future. He believes that the best attributes of live television are merging with social features in order to offer better discovery and social activity for younger connected consumers that will encourage them to stay within the TV ecosystem.

advertisement

advertisement

We should hope he’s correct. It may be that the advent of connected televisions will enable the television industry to maintain relevance with these younger connected viewers. And so, this technology could not have come at a better time.

It is arguably within the current business model that television will find its greatest challenge for future hearts, minds and eyeballs. Content providers continue to experiment with forms of storytelling and methods for bridging platforms to complete the full viewing experience. But cord cutting, cord shaving and cord “nevering” will continue. And therein lies the rub: We as an industry continue to cleave to old and eroding business models, metrics and, yes, mindsets, even as our world shifts to completely organic viewing experiences. Why still target demographically, for example, when the marketplace really needs to target psychographically? We say that measurement is critical, but the old metrics are still silo-ed by platform and applied to business tracking.

MultiChannel News’ Todd Spengler moderated a panel on “TV Everywhere: Disruption, Innovation & Invention" that brought the measurement issue into focus. Thomas Siegman of RSG Media noted that the rights issue was impeding measurement possibilities: “We need rights for streaming and we need to gauge the total value of a view.” And John Heller of FreeWheel argued for speed because “moving too slow is worse than too fast.” Watermarking is another challenge. Is there an industry standard?

Michael Bishara of Synacor went one step further, listing the top five challenges of TV Everywhere. They are

1.     Marketing in the form of awareness, early stages of VOD, education, rights and gaps in content and its availability.

2.     Economic.  How can we monetize?

3.     Competition. Content alternatives out there that are equally compelling. 

4.     Technology == but it will become automated in future.  Authentication. Credentials.

5.     Consumer experience. Don't make consumers work. Unify and make sense for the consumer.

So how can we as an industry best face the future, overcome the challenges and succeed in an evolving landscape?  Mark Greenberg, President & CEO of EPIX, may have provided the best advice. He admonished us to change the rules. There is a lesson to be learned from the music industry versus Napster. We need to battle arrogance, indifference and ignorance and find new ways to monetize content on every platform and build relevance among younger viewers. “Cable used to be the revolutionaries,” he said. “Cable used to be the destructive force bringing value to the consumers. Now we are the problem. Disrupt or be disruptive. Don't rest on our laurels. Let’s get back into the disruption business.”

Amen.

4 comments about "What's Next For TV? ".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. John Grono from GAP Research, April 4, 2013 at 6:50 p.m.

    Great post Charlene. Reading about the "burgeoning class of connected viewers who tend to skew younger and are not constrained by the current media business model" brought to mind something I was reading in the current Admap article focussing on neuroscience. "Millenials tend to rely more heavily on each other for validation of their brand and product choices. The pre-frontal cortex is still developing as late as our mid-twenties. Until that time, the brain tends to rely more heavily on social groups in decision-making. Millenials are still defining themselves in a fundamental, neurological way". This rang a bell with me, as I did some work in the mid '90s as the Internet started to flourish and started to impact on TV viewing - especially in the 16-24s. There were dire warnings from local pundits that a 'whole generation of TV viewers would be lost to TV'. Well it is now 15 years later and you know what, those 16-24s are now all in the 25-39 cohort. When you look at the long term trend of 16-39 viewing over the past 20 years, yes it has dipped but nothing like the forecasts of doom. Maybe this is all a neurological life stage thing? Any thoughts? Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

  2. Charlene Weisler from Writer, Media Consultant: WeislerMedia.blogspot.com, April 5, 2013 at 11:26 a.m.

    Thank you John. Yes I think neuroscience comes into play. The difference between then and now is that we have the internet that can be used as an entertainment / "tv" viewing platform. I am not sure how the Millenials will evolve - will it be "back to basics" of the TV set or will it be, because of connected TV and the generational financial stress that will not be solved soon, more online. It is a different media landscape now, full of options.

  3. Doug Garnett from Protonik, LLC, April 5, 2013 at 6:04 p.m.

    Key to the question of monetizing is the underwhelming advertiser economic power (so far) of TV everywhere. As of right now, none of the video alternatives to traditional TV (like TV everywhere) generate even a tenth of the impact per dollar spent of traditional TV. So technologically a lot is quite possible. And it may monetize so some vendors make money. But so far there's no indication any massive shift away from traditional TV will do anything but leave the economy in the lurch - without the truly astounding power of traditional TV.

  4. Charlene Weisler from Writer, Media Consultant: WeislerMedia.blogspot.com, April 6, 2013 at 11:58 a.m.

    Hi Doug, Yes it is true that the CPMs are not there yet. And maybe it will never reach the levels of traditional TV. I agree that this is a limitation.

Next story loading loading..