Comments for Curiously Persistent http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com Persistently Curious Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:15:23 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by neilperkin http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1264 neilperkin Sun, 08 Nov 2009 22:15:23 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1264 Interesting debate. I don't disagree with much of what's been said but I do wonder if the impact of simultaneous social media activity is being underplayed. When the BBC is developing an iplayer app for Facebook ( http://bit.ly/bei7X ) you have to think that for some, scheduling may eventually be just as likely determined as much by the shared interests of a group of friends than by the whims of TV company schedulers. I can see that it won't be for everyone, and that big spikes are naturally driven by 'event TV', but good entertainment is always more fun if it is shared. Just a thought. Interesting debate. I don’t disagree with much of what’s been said but I do wonder if the impact of simultaneous social media activity is being underplayed. When the BBC is developing an iplayer app for Facebook ( http://bit.ly/bei7X ) you have to think that for some, scheduling may eventually be just as likely determined as much by the shared interests of a group of friends than by the whims of TV company schedulers. I can see that it won’t be for everyone, and that big spikes are naturally driven by ‘event TV’, but good entertainment is always more fun if it is shared. Just a thought.

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by graeme http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1263 graeme Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:54:03 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1263 Absolutely - I'm not arguing with the current data, but then we can't currently decide to watch something at the same time as a group of friends across different screens and all chat about it live - we can only do that if we follow the linear schedule. It's a natural extension of normal TV watching behaviour (except the discussion has always been the day after) - CNN's Facebook experiments, or ITV's Primeval previews show that social TV works: it is only a matter of time & technology before that natural desire to chat about what you are watching becomes easier and so more widely spread. Hence the movie model, where you make an appointment to view based on when other people are going, rather than when a single screening is on. If Sky put Facebook Connect on my Sky+ I'd probably never stop watching.... As with most of my future gazing, I'm probably underestimating the time it will take, but "we overestimate change in the next two years, and underestimate change in the next ten" according to Bill Gates. (in 2004, while he was underestimating Google and Apple) Absolutely – I’m not arguing with the current data, but then we can’t currently decide to watch something at the same time as a group of friends across different screens and all chat about it live – we can only do that if we follow the linear schedule. It’s a natural extension of normal TV watching behaviour (except the discussion has always been the day after) – CNN’s Facebook experiments, or ITV’s Primeval previews show that social TV works: it is only a matter of time & technology before that natural desire to chat about what you are watching becomes easier and so more widely spread. Hence the movie model, where you make an appointment to view based on when other people are going, rather than when a single screening is on. If Sky put Facebook Connect on my Sky+ I’d probably never stop watching….

As with most of my future gazing, I’m probably underestimating the time it will take, but “we overestimate change in the next two years, and underestimate change in the next ten” according to Bill Gates. (in 2004, while he was underestimating Google and Apple)

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by Tess Alps http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1262 Tess Alps Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:24:18 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1262 I think Simon is right about linear scheduled viewing dominating, Graeme. And we really haven't got a vested interest either way. Homes with DTRs are a reasonable surrogate in the sense that all their viewing could be on-demand but it remains somewhere between 15% and 20% of viewing and that is true for UK and US. People really like the sense of being part of something 'live' (even when it's recorded) and social media is enhancing the desire to watch at the point of broadcast. You can't live blog or join in a Twitter conversation after the event. New BARB research on VoD in cable home shows what the proximity to broadcast is for on-demand; 50% within a day and down to only 2% of viewing after 5 days. Of course after 7 days BARB doesn't record it at all. I agree with the notion of a release date but I think the window of excitement will be briefer than for cinema, simply because there's so much more new content on TV pushing yesterday's stuff from centre-stage. The further away from transmission the less and less likely you are to view what you've recorded on your DTR! I think Simon is right about linear scheduled viewing dominating, Graeme. And we really haven’t got a vested interest either way. Homes with DTRs are a reasonable surrogate in the sense that all their viewing could be on-demand but it remains somewhere between 15% and 20% of viewing and that is true for UK and US.

People really like the sense of being part of something ‘live’ (even when it’s recorded) and social media is enhancing the desire to watch at the point of broadcast. You can’t live blog or join in a Twitter conversation after the event.

New BARB research on VoD in cable home shows what the proximity to broadcast is for on-demand; 50% within a day and down to only 2% of viewing after 5 days. Of course after 7 days BARB doesn’t record it at all. I agree with the notion of a release date but I think the window of excitement will be briefer than for cinema, simply because there’s so much more new content on TV pushing yesterday’s stuff from centre-stage. The further away from transmission the less and less likely you are to view what you’ve recorded on your DTR!

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by Simon Kendrick http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1261 Simon Kendrick Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:08:22 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1261 Hi Graeme - absolutely agree about the TV becoming a computer, hence me using the quotation marks in point 5! I like your description of future scheduling, but am sceptical about the majority of people watching this way. It goes back to the tyranny of choice - people just want to watch something without having to make a conscious choice or tradeoff. It's OK when you have ten films to choose from, but not thousands of TV shows. This is one reason why the radio persists in competition against self-selection options Cheers Simon Hi Graeme – absolutely agree about the TV becoming a computer, hence me using the quotation marks in point 5!

I like your description of future scheduling, but am sceptical about the majority of people watching this way. It goes back to the tyranny of choice – people just want to watch something without having to make a conscious choice or tradeoff. It’s OK when you have ten films to choose from, but not thousands of TV shows. This is one reason why the radio persists in competition against self-selection options

Cheers
Simon

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by Graeme http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1260 Graeme Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:23:47 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1260 I'd agree with most of that (although to be pedantic about it 100% of viewing will take place on a computer a few years from now. It'll just be a TV shaped computer). Surely you don't mean linear scheduled TV in point 1 though? I can see how scheduling will survive by becoming more like movie releases (an opening weekend, a couple of weeks of cultural relevance, and a long tail), and will be much more socially-enabled (see Last.TV) to make sure that you still keep up with what your friends are talking about. Linear scheduling seems like VHS or record companies - great when there wasn't an alternative, but hopelessly outdated now. I’d agree with most of that (although to be pedantic about it 100% of viewing will take place on a computer a few years from now. It’ll just be a TV shaped computer). Surely you don’t mean linear scheduled TV in point 1 though? I can see how scheduling will survive by becoming more like movie releases (an opening weekend, a couple of weeks of cultural relevance, and a long tail), and will be much more socially-enabled (see Last.TV) to make sure that you still keep up with what your friends are talking about. Linear scheduling seems like VHS or record companies – great when there wasn’t an alternative, but hopelessly outdated now.

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by Simon Kendrick http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1259 Simon Kendrick Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:18:58 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1259 Well, firstly I should point out that I plucked the number out of the air. But it is based around - That there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of channels. 5% would be at least 25 channels - People have a limited repertoire of what they will watch - Big events - X Factor, World Cup etc - will continue to dominate and driver viewers to the biggest channels that can afford to show these sorts of shows - There will always be a hierarchy of channels - starting with the PSBs and moving down the the Sky Ones, Daves etc Well, firstly I should point out that I plucked the number out of the air. But it is based around
- That there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of channels. 5% would be at least 25 channels
- People have a limited repertoire of what they will watch
- Big events – X Factor, World Cup etc – will continue to dominate and driver viewers to the biggest channels that can afford to show these sorts of shows
- There will always be a hierarchy of channels – starting with the PSBs and moving down the the Sky Ones, Daves etc

]]> Comment on Five predictions on the future of TV by Simon L http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/five-predictions-on-the-future-of-tv/#comment-1258 Simon L Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:45:31 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=773#comment-1258 Tres interesant predictions. Would you explain why "60% of viewing on 5% of channels is believable". Not that I disagree, I find interesting as to why. Tres interesant predictions. Would you explain why “60% of viewing on 5% of channels is believable”. Not that I disagree, I find interesting as to why.

]]> Comment on Is TV advertising responsible for Apple’s success? by Nisha http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/is-tv-advertising-responsible-for-apples-success/#comment-1256 Nisha Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:02:05 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=561#comment-1256 Great post. Thank you for sharing this. If you have a moment, check out my site as well over at http://seobizniche.com :) cheers! Great post. Thank you for sharing this. If you have a moment, check out my site as well over at http://seobizniche.com :) cheers!

]]> Comment on A guide to corporate blogging (beta) by Watch the class blog for … « Social Issues and Social Change http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/09/30/a-guide-to-corporate-blogging-beta/#comment-1252 Watch the class blog for … « Social Issues and Social Change Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:18:34 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=757#comment-1252 [...] A guide to corporate blogging (beta) (curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com) [...] [...] A guide to corporate blogging (beta) (curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com) [...]

]]> Comment on Remove the zombies from research by Simon Kendrick http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/remove-the-zombies-from-research/#comment-1226 Simon Kendrick Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:51:48 +0000 http://curiouslypersistent.wordpress.com/?p=768#comment-1226 I totally agree - the nature and presentation of the work is objective dependent. Sometimes the person commissioning just needs that rubber stamp to please his or her internal budget holder. But on the occasions where research is more exploratory or looks to answer questions without pre-defined answers, there is plenty of scope to be creative in communications. And creative beyond the inclusion of a 20 second video that can bring a bar chart to life I totally agree – the nature and presentation of the work is objective dependent. Sometimes the person commissioning just needs that rubber stamp to please his or her internal budget holder.

But on the occasions where research is more exploratory or looks to answer questions without pre-defined answers, there is plenty of scope to be creative in communications. And creative beyond the inclusion of a 20 second video that can bring a bar chart to life

]]>