Less Ads Mean Streaming TV Tops Traditional Viewing

Half of connected TV owners are more likely to stream content than to watch traditional TV because there are fewer commercials.

A new study from The Interactive Advertising Bureau also says that 40% of those surveyed consider TV commercials on connected TV platforms to be less intrusive than standard TV ads.

Seventy-six percent of those respondents say that connected TV streaming is just as good as -- or better than -- traditional TV, while 51% say it is “as good” and 25% say it is “better.”

The study says that 33% of Americans over the age of 18 own either a smart TV or a device that streams video to their TVs, with 38% of those individuals who were spending at least 50% of their TV viewing time streaming video to their television.



Research shows that 35% of connected TV owners are streaming more video to their TV than a year ago. In addition, 25% of smartphone and tablet owners and 20% computer owners say they are streaming more video.

Vision Critical’s Media & Entertainment Practice conducted the survey on behalf of the IAB from January 19 to January 21, 2015 -- a sample of 651 adults 18 and older, representative of the U.S. census/online adult over-18 population.

 In addition, 13 of the online survey participants were invited to a two-day online discussion forum.

3 comments about "Less Ads Mean Streaming TV Tops Traditional Viewing".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Nancy Brooks from Ball State University, April 21, 2015 at 3:04 p.m.

    Not "less" ads. FEWER ads.  Less cake; fewer cookies. Sorry. Pet peeve. I that sometimes it's whatever will fit in the headline but this is like fingernails on the chailkboad to me!

  2. Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, April 21, 2015 at 7:07 p.m.

    What they are trying to put over with this kind of research is that video ads are more effective in terms of ad impact than "linear TV" ads. Of course this is what such questionning and the highly subjective answers suggest. However, the only way to really "nail" this implied "finding" is to conduct an objective study replicating the real world setting and viewing situation of both forms of TV, then determine how many viewers can recall a number of commercials---including proof, via some form of message playback. Obviously, the commercials should be identical in both situations and placed in representative content. Also, the commercial breaks should contain the numbers of ads that are typical of breaks on both platfforms. Finally, the viewability issue must be addressed. If 100% of the "linear TV" ads can be seen in their entirety while a smaller percentage of streaming ads are normally "viewable" by the same definition, then, in the interests of true comparability, make some adjustment to account for this difference. It may still be true that lower ad/promotional clutter levels per break results in higher proven recall levels for video ads, but it will take something along the lines I have indicated to offer convincing evidence of this, not generalized, poll-style research that is not case-specific.

  3. Howard Zoss from Zig Marketing, April 22, 2015 at 8:27 a.m.

    Ed, agreed.  There has been some research in the last several years indicating ad recall and brand consideration lift, when Video and TV are running the same campaign simultaneously.  We know from years of media mix research that adding outdoor, radio or print to TV certainly boosts recall and comprehension.  So, it is not surpsing to see cross-platform TV/Video producing the same effect.  My hypothesis for pre-roll resulting in good recall is simply the viewer is watching one screen (online device) vs. two (TV and online) so attention is not divided. 
    Beside viewability and fraud, Video has scale and cost problems.  Many brands use :15 Cable as their base buy which is half the CPP of the standard :30.  But Online uses the :15 pre-roll as the standard unit.  We have found the CPP of Video to be comparable more to the TV :30.  Yes, you can buy supremely low in Programmatic, but the quality is real junk that no one sees or responds to.  Mobile and Video are not like the old days of TV when you could buy tonnage, because this tonnage runs in other countries and is rife with bots and click farming.  Additionally, scale on a DMA basis is difficult to muster currently and while you can go down to the zip code level, the reach is very low.  
    Video right now functions well as a secondary medium to TV, not as a primary one.  Slice off 10% of your TV budget and brands will see good recall and consideration lift plus excellent precision targeting capabilities with added DR functionality to drive coupon downloads and site traffic.
    All that said, major research needs to be conducted in many areas as Video viewership takes off, TV starts a slow decline and the onslaught of Connected TV and OTT becomes a reality

Next story loading loading..