A Non-Linear TV First: Tops 50% Share Of Viewing In July
- by Wayne Friedman , August 15, 2023
Nielsen says linear TV usage fell below a 50% share for the first time in July, while streaming usage continued its growth -- rising to an all-time leading share of 38.7%.
Broadcast at a 20% share and cable at 29.6% sank to new lows, and their combined results yielded a 49.6% share for linear TV, according to The Gauge Nielsen metric, which measures total day viewing for persons two years of age and older.
Cable slipped under a 30% share for the first time. A year ago, cable commanded a 34.4% share.
Linear TV had a combined 51.4% total share in June 2023 compared to 57.5% in June 2022 and 63.6% in June 2021.
Streaming usage rose 10% versus the previous month (June 2023) and was 23% higher vs. a year ago. Nielsen says streaming benefited from new acquired programming during the period, including Netflix's “Suits” and Disney's "Bluey".
advertisement
advertisement
Streaming, combined with the "Other" category, means non-linear TV usage now tops 50%. Nielsen's “Other” category of non-linear TV or streaming use -- which includes unmeasured video-on-demand (VOD), streaming via a cable set-top box, audio streaming, gaming or DVD playback use -- registered an 11.4% share compared to a 10.9 share in June.
In July, three streaming services registered their highest usage: YouTube at 9.2%, Netflix with 8.5%, and Amazon Prime Video at 3.4%.
Fox Corp's Tubi TV was the leading FAST service (Free Advertising Supported Television) -- rising 12.1% to a 1.4% share, Nielsen says. It is now tied with Warner Bros. Discovery's Max.
Tubi also has a higher share than NBCUniversal's Peacock (1.2%) and Paramount Global's Paramount+ (1.0%).
The “Other Streaming” category -- which includes smaller individual streaming platforms (not virtual pay TV providers) -- was at 5.1%, unchanged from June 2023.
This story has been updated.
Linear TV increasingly is a junk yard for the proles.
"A junkyard for the proles"---I assume that this means working class folks who, presumably, are lower class and, hence, not very bright. That, at least is the implication I get from the word "proles". Actually, most linear TV is consumed by people aged 50+ and a large percentage of these people---thanks to the baby boom following WW2 and the rush to get college eductions that followed---- have the benefit of a college education. They also have a lot of buying power and, on average, their net worth far exceeds that of the average adult aged 18-29. I don't think that "linear TV" content such as "The Today Show", the NFL games,"Face The Nation", "Jeopardy", "NCIS"," America's Got Talent", ---and even "Judge Judy" reruns---to cite only a smattering of "linear TV" programs---- are necessarily for dumb people while streaming is only---or mostly---for smart people. The program content is mostly the same. The only real differences are streaming's on- demand function and how you go about accessing content.
Ed P. - Nicely done. Linear is purely a delivery device at this point. "T Bo" seems to be a troll or at the least, someone who is afraid to put their actual name on their "opinions".
Interestingly, I had a viewer griping about Dish and their latest "blackout" negotiating ploy with some broadcaster or another in their market (who can keep up?). They were missing ABC in their home market. The CW doesn't air on Dish in Nashville, for similar reasons. When I suggested they buy an OTA antenna the viewer objected that "money was tight".. How ironic? They're paying Dish a monthly fee to not get the channels that they want that are free over the air if they'd just pay the one-time fee of $40 or so to get an antenna. IMHO broadcasters should be mailing out antennas for free, or at the very least doing a better job of letting consumers know how to watch their signals FOR FREE. But alas, Retransmission Fees are the "Holy Cow" untouchable taboo despite the fact that this "cash cow" is on its "last legs".
PS - If Nielsen says it, it must be true? Since when has this company become credible to the TV community? Their research sample sizes are far too small to be accurate and their methodology is woefully inadequate. Better than nothing? I'm not so sure.
Thanks, Robert.
In defense of Nielsen, the data MP is citing is based on the company's national panel which has a sample size that is quite sufficient for this kind of reporting and has long been accepted as the standard---albeit not a perfect one---for national TV ratings. The local market situation, of course, is very different and small sample bases are only one of the problems faced. But here, it's not Nielsen's intent to deliberately use small---too small---samples. That's purely a function of the stations---mainly in mid sized and smaller markets ---being unable---or unwilling to fund the costs of much larger samples.