blog

TV Week reported that Solutions Research Group found that 20% of Internet users watched a TV show online each week compared to 14% who watched a TV show on video-on-demand.  The conclusion?  TV online must be leaving TV video-on-demand in the dust implying that we'll all be watching through our computers.  Whoa.  Not so simple.  We will, but only because our TVs will have PC like capabilities with Internet connections (yes, IPTV).

I have a tough time believing 2 out of day people watch a full length show at least once a week on their PC (which is what online still means).  I would believe the are watching clips.  But TV is still all about the full show.  Even if it's true, it doesn't mean online on a PC is superior, it may simply reflect the fact that VoD is a pain to use, has a small library and, perhaps most important, does not sit in front of many consumers all day.  Many Internet users are always online at work, at school etc so have more opportunity to watch with a click.  All this may be a temporary matter as TVs get online (would you rather watch a show on your couch or in your desk chair) and the world realizes that we (TV viewing and PC viewing) can in fact all get along.

Key points to keep in mind are as follows:

1. TVs will all end up online (check out all those network connections in the latest TVs at CES 2008)
2. TV viewing and PC based viewing will be complimentary not competitive.  TV is for leisurely (which can include interactivity) full length viewing.  PC is great for quick clip or mobile viewing. 
3. It's all just about what size screen you want.We are shifting television to be the large screen of a computer based entertainment system (e.g., a set top IPTV box, an LG/Netflix box, an Xbox etc).
4. So if the above study reflects anything, it reflects that TVs are behind in getting online and the media world is behind in treating this not as a fight between watching videos online on a PC vs. a TV, but as a changing media ecosystem where people will get their content in a variety of formats (clip, show) on a variety of fixed and mobile screens.   That's the future...and for those getting some decent IPTV service (not me), it's probably already closing in.
   

Comscore released data that should make packaged goods public relations teams and marketing teams work a little more closely on Web strategy.    What did Comscore find?  That people were doing online searches and going to web sites for product information.  The study found a majority of U.S. consumers visited at least one package-goods web site during the three months ended in April, with search driving a substantial proportion of those visits.   Shocking?  Not really. But you wouldn’t know it from most Web search engine marketing and PR strategies.

Go online and search for baby safety products and what will you see?  A lot of ads for the sale of baby good products and a few for information on those products.  According to the data, people are more likely to 1) search when they are about to purchase products; and 2) click on the information links as opposed to the sales oriented links.

Marketing and public relations teams interested in leveraging this behavior should be conducting a few checks on their search engine strategy:

• Is information oriented content being optimized in a way that complements the sales oriented information (good)? Or is the sales oriented information taking the priority (bad)?
• Are keyword advertisements being placed for both information as well as sales oriented literature?  The Comscore information indicates people may be more likely to click on the information ad over the sales ad.
• Is the information content being looked at from purely a marketing point of view (usually meaning mostly company literature)?  Or is it being looked at from a public relations point of view (third party testimony, links to other third party blogs, discussion groups etc)?
• Are media results being leveraged in terms of reprints and links appearing on the site?  This can raise the value of media results exponentially over the value of the initial placement (as more people can view it through your site than might have seen it on the publication date).
  

These are just a few starting points but asking these questions should highlight if and how a company is either capturing or missing those many eyeballs (and lucrative ones, according to Comscore) looking for pre-purchase product information.

I’ve always pointed to political campaigns as a consistent example of advertising effectively used as a direct public relations tool.  In these campaigns, advertisements are used to communicate information to very specific interest groups and in a manner that complements other forms of communications (speeches, media appearances, direct mail etc). 

I’ve already been testing Facebook Flyers, and found it a great way to target specific groups by sending a specific message to a specific type or community of people at a specific time.  This is a valuable companion to keyword search advertising which allows me to send specific messages to specific people, based on their search criteria, but only when they come looking for that message.

My only complaint, or hope, for this beta service was that the targeting could be even more specific.  According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook and Myspace (through a new HyperTargeting ad program) are about to launch tools to provide more specific targeting.    Public relations, corporate communications and public affairs executives should all take note and follow this development closely.  These advertising tools have the potential to be the center piece of direct to consumer public relations.  I’ll be testing them over the next several months and reporting results.

As I sit here and analyze a client’s video content on third party entertainment sites, it seems that web video is accelerating the shift away from pushing people to branded online destinations is over.  With Web video, the era of distributed branded material may have truly arrived as we focus more on driving branded content like Web video to existing online communities. 

This is more of a shift of focus than a switch.  Since the Web exploded, communications professionals - from PR to advertising - have been focused on driving to traffic to destinations.  This was true whether it was for informational purposes (such as in PR or branding programs) or for sales.   This is like focusing marketing on getting people to go to a store just to learn about the product instead of teaching them through the magazines they read and the TV shows they watch.  It can be a lot of effort for relatively little return. 

Now efforts are shifting to distributing branded or messaging carrying content.  The focus is moving to getting information to all the appropriate places where consumers congregate.  Go where the consumers are, put information in the context that they, and the community in which they congregate, naturally appreciate. 

The three main drivers of this shift - social networking, Web video video and personal portals like Netvibes of My Yahoo that are driven by RSS feed - have gained an enormous amount of momentum the last few years.  However, marketers have only experimented with these sites and remained focus on driving traffic to proprietary sites. 

Ad budgets will focus on driving traffic to third part sites.  We already see micro-versions of this with Facebook ads driving users to branded Facebook pages.  Next we might see a Yahoo based ad driving a user to a branded video channel on Heavy.com or section of Dailymotion (disclosure: a client).

But a careful balance will have to be sought.  Advertisers will still want to capture that traffic and not simply invest to build up traffic to someone else site.  I would not be surprised to see some third party sites make it easier for advertisers to register users on those sites.

Strategic communications programs are best executed using a variety of tools that allow for specific targeting in terms of editorial, context and audience.    However, this is still a huge challenge when trying to communicate key messages via television advertising.  TV ads can still be too broad as compared to other communications tools (e.g., search engines, direct mail etc).  However, if online video is any indication of the future of television, the day is near when television ads are used for highly targeted communications.

A study by Simmons found that consumers are 47% more engaged by online TV viewing than by watching on a TV set.  You can read the article to learn more about the study itself but I think the article needs some context as it is comparing apples to oranges – in other words, you can’t compare television to online video…at least just yet.  When I watch an ad on Hulu it’s one ad per show, one break, and often has high relevance to the content I’m watching.    When I watch an ad on Heavy, Break.com or Dailymotion (disclosure: Dailymotion is a client), fewer ads are often directly relevant to the content, increasing engagement.  In other words, TV has lousy engagement but broad reach.  Video can have terrific engagement, but lousy reach.  

However, this is all likely to change.  Online video can afford the experimentation at this early growth stage.  Television, being a more mature and far broader audience medium (as of today) has to be more conservative - mistakes due to experimentation made on TV will be of a far larger scale than mistakes online.

At some point, the lessons learned online make their way to television due to innovation in technology and advertising formats.  Until then, it’s worth keeping in mind the differences both in their capabilities and uses while also looking at how we may see online lessons make their way to television.

1. Online video is experimenting with the model of fewer ads and messages per video segment.  This means less time to leave for the bathroom and less clutter to dilute message reception.  TV may eventually adopt this too (or return…like the old main sponsor shows).
2. Increased interaction with advertising is also coming online with interactive in-video ads.  This can provide instant interactive marketing especially with video content tied to the marketing content.   Think American Idol but with voting on the screen instead of via cell phone.
3. Increased contextual relevance is already coming online.  Companies like Scanscout match in-video text ads to video content automatically and sponsors match their ads to specific groups of content on sites like Heavy.com and Dailymotion (disclosure: a client).  A contextual approach has been taken on TV advertising for some time but as marketers look to increase not only awareness but engagement through brand communications, increased contextual targeting will become a more precise technology both online.
4. We already see a variety of in-video ad formats online.  Some of this may transfer to TV with Web video or just on traditional shows.  With channel logos and promos already on shows so are brief in-show ticker ads so far away?

All this is about the future, not the present.  While a lot of people watch online video, it’s only a fraction of those watching TV (essentially, everyone).  So if you’re looking to reach those demographics watching online video the above points are critical.  Otherwise, it’s going to be a bit longer before online video marketing has the same reach as television based marketing.  Of course, at that point we may be watching all that content on our television.

(See the original post at http://www.fortexgroup.com/blog/2007/12/27/higher-consumer-engagement-online-is-the-future-of-television/)