Reed Hastings, chief executive officer of Netflix, is concerned that "overpersonalization" of media might create borders where viewers will never sample new TV or video. Hastings spoke at a meeting of the Broadcasting Board of Governors in Washington. This is interesting coming from Netflix, which has, in part, caused some of the audience fractionalization -- though probably not "overpersonalization."
In the current environment of big-time media mergers and acquisitions, some analysts believe the next wave will be new TV/media distributors and operators buying premium TV producers and filmmakers. But content generation for the masses is no easy task. Even content generation for niche audiences is not easy.
To get the big TV dollars to shift to your pockets, it's increasingly a case of "If you can't beat 'em, (almost) join 'em." Facebook is taking another page from traditional TV networks by limiting the supply of its new video advertising opportunities, in hopes of grabbing high premiums for cost-per-thousand (CPM) viewers.
You've gotta hand it to Beyonce -- and, I'm guessing, Jay-Z. Here's her lesson: Release your entertainment product and tell no one. No "Today" show interviews. No big commercials; no Pepsi sponsorship deals. And hey, no pre-release social media plan. Instead, on the release date of her new album "Beyonce," she told her 8 million Instagram followers: "Surprise!" And all 14 songs and 17 videos from the new album went on sale via iTunes.
Aereo, the company that gives consumers low-cost monthly digital access to broadcast networks, is telling the broadcasters to bring it on: Let's go to the Supreme Court. Tough talk.
Nearly $6 billion a year went to video advertising on YouTube worldwide, according to eMarketer. What effect will this have on the $50 billion spent on national advertising with traditional U.S. TV networks? It is something CBS, NBC, Fox and ABC should be concerned about? Not exactly, because these networks also gain from their own digital video businesses.
Can TV advertisers still make the case that anything past three days of time-shifted viewing doesn't amount to much for their brands? Les Moonves, president and chief executive officer of CBS Corp., says hogwash, because 80-85% of TV commercials are not "time-sensitive." Therefore they should be counted and paid for by marketers, no matter when they are see
What is the promotional value of Netflix and Amazon Prime for TV networks? David Zaslav, president and chief executive officer of Discovery Communications, says his cable network group is looking to license some newer content to Subscription Video On Demand (SVOD)companies in order to gain a benefit beyond additional revenue: the boosting of ratings for new episodes on the cable networks.
Some competition for traditional cable operators -- in the form of new technology-backed broadband pay TV services -- might be happening sooner than we think. Now is the time to think consumer marketing. News of a possible launch was spurred by Philippe Dauman, chief executive of Viacom, speaking at an industry media conference on Monday. He said this could happen as soon as next year (only a few weeks away). Who? What? Dauman didn't say.
Perhaps the issue isn't time-shifted viewing but rather available TV time itself. Consumers have squeezed more media into their lives over the past few years. But specific TV time-shifting on a per person basis has remained much the same. Brian Wieser of the Pivotal Research Group says the saturation point might have hit in 2009. He writes: "We have long noted that once people have DVRs or access to other time-shifting technologies their consumption of time-shifted TV does not change materially." This includes DVR technology as well as video-on-demand services.