NBC: 21% Digital Time Share For 9 NBCU Nets, Driving Higher Reach
- by Wayne Friedman , September 24, 2020
NBCUniversal says digital TV-video viewership amounts to an average 21% of the total time that 18-49 viewers consume nine of its TV networks’ content.
The NBC Television Network has the highest level of digital time share -- with around 35% of its total watch time going to digital viewing and the remainder going to live and time-shifted linear TV.
This comes from NBCUniversal’s One Audience Cross Consumption September 2020 report.
Bravo, MSNBC and CNBC pull in about 21% to 22% of its total time for digital viewership. The networks coming in with less -- 10% to 15% -- are E!, Oxygen, Syfy, Telemundo, and USA Network.
Digital content here is defined at digital long-form and short-form programming.
For marketers, NBCU says advertisers who shift budgets to more digital platforms from live, linear TV can improve overall reach.
advertisement
advertisement
Ramping up one’s percentage of digital media to 13% from 2% can lead to a 26% growth in reach.
This new adjustment of more digital spend can boost reach to 42.3% from 33.6%.
NBC says this new optimized plan can also help lower frequency by 18% -- to 4.2 exposures for an overall campaign -- from an average 5.1.
In one case study looking at casual restaurant dining, NBC says cross-platform exposure using linear and digital TV-video can boost foot traffic by 75%, compared to TV-only exposures.
This amounted to a 14% lift using linear and digital versus a linear TV-only lift of 8%.
Interesting---but, not surprisingly, this raises questions. For example, what's the definition of ad exposure? For "linear TV" I assume it's the good old "average commercial minute audience"---which does not tell you how many people actually saw your commercial or were even able to watch it as upwards of 30% were not even present when the ad appeared on their TV screens. As for digital, are we using the IAB's two second rule---namely if an ad message is on the screen for at least two seconds the "user"---who may not be present if its a desktop and, to a lesser extent, a tablet or smartphone--"saw" your message. Even if the definition is expanded to require the message to be on-screen in its entirety, that, too, is no guarantee of ad exposure. So when you jiggle the mix so your reach goes up, while your average frequency is reduced from 5.1 ( per month? )to 4.2 has anything actually been accomplished. The 5.1, might really be 2.2 while the 4.2 might really be exactly the same---if we had a way to determine whether people actually were attentive to the ad---which is what this is all about.
Don't get me wrong. I applaud NBCU's push in this area as well as its attempts regarding less cluttered breaks, better targeting, etc. --all of which are designed to garner larger ad revenues but, at the same time could benefit certain advertisers. The problem is we are rushing to get these new ways of buying time into large sacle practice---without providing the analytical tools to make them meaningful. Device usage is the beginning---but by itself it muddies the waters to the point where the whole exercise is greatly reduced in value. Why not come up with measurements that fit the new designs, first, rather than disappointing advertisers who jump in---eagerly---only to find that nothing much was gained? As the ad agencies learned the hard way---long ago---with their computerized media "selection" models, once you fail to deliver the goods because you rushed in without proper preparation, you lose credibility. Which was a shame---as the basic idea---if handled well---had considerable merit.