LOS ANGELES The best proof of the almost infinite arrival of television today is on the street. In a city dominated completely in advertising terms for the entertainment industry can be found at any stop motor carrier of passengers, for example, an invitation to see “anytime, anywhere” one of the 180 episodes of Seinfeld , probably the last great American sitcom.
The most interesting thing is to stop the host of the reunion. It’s called Hulu and is one of the most powerful new stars of the television firmament. Along with Netflix and Amazon, names more familiar to the Argentine public, Hulu provides its subscribers via streaming a host of content (movies, series, documentaries and special programs) that slowly allows us, with a surprisingly growing frequency, assuming that there is television content available on a large scale for unlimited time and space. And above all without the need for a TV.
This idea of ”television without television,” coined a few weeks ago in The Hollywood Reporter by columnist Michael Wolff, we connect us with what we noted from this same column a week ago. A dilemma that is being debated here and whose resolution will tell us a lot about the future of TV as we understand it. Wolff’s thesis is clear: today who insist on seeing only television in the conventional sense, as an apparatus having fixed location in a home and broadcasts programs whose audience can be measured in numbers the next day, you must take the loss of 30 percent of the audience.
To understand things sometimes achieved with a single example. At SpoilerTV.com it was revealed last February the series Wayward Pines (which in Argentina issued Fox) rose by 68% its audience from keeping records what happened to her in the days after the issuance of each chapter days. To remain solely and exclusively with numbers that original date would result in lean and frustrating.
What explains the new statistics is a different way of measuring the rating, judging by what begins to happen Europe has an almost inexorable destiny in the world where the TV is a decisive actor. The daily rating could still be used to assess the public’s response to the issuance of a news program, a sports event or a special program. But in the case of fiction, which often function as exponents of the best television, the most difficult to do and more prestige achieved, it is essential to start looking at things differently. Wolff the same question is asked in his valuable column: how did Mad Men to become a global media phenomenon, debated everywhere, if the coldness of the rating of the cable in their own country origin sheds close to those of a failure?
The answer lies in numbers a definition that many analysts increasingly used. We are in the era of “ moving content “. The contents are moved from one side to the other, arranged in multiple screens that younger consumers carry with them wherever they go. The age issue is another essential fact: a recent study of hearings conducted by Nielsen, the company always takes care of measuring the rating on US television, he found that the range of between 18 and 49 showed a decrease of 7% in consumption of traditional television in the last quarter of 2014 compared to the same period last year. Many describe here this decline as historic, perhaps because it marks a trend that can not be back.
The need to better understand this phenomenon field looking towards Europe. In Norway, for example, for some time television ratings without limitations of space or time it is measured. Enters audience measurement that is issued in the home, but also in a bar, on a cell phone and through the Internet via streaming . This process reversed course the figures: what until recently was a reflection of a negative rating now marks an overall increase in TV audience (no restrictions before) 15%
here. in America, some influential players left some months to deliver the media rating of their programs the next day makes. HBO and Discovery, for example, now prefer to wait and managed with another perspective that includes the echoes of their content in a much more extended time frame, to also consider the response on other platforms, including video on-demand . This is what is generically known as the Live + 3 or, expanded version, the Live + 7. In other words, handle with numbers extended in time and not only the program’s response on the day of issue, and that does not weight underestimates the response of younger audiences and new uses and tools of television consumption. Today, the range represented by older viewers 55 years is the only remaining true and unshakable conventional TV.
In that strip of consumers and those still clinging habits unchanged today one of the key players the television behavior: advertisers. Here and there are responsible for validating and certifying the number ratings, whose verdict defines almost all investment strategies (often millions) companies carry forward on the small screen. It could be said that advertisers are those with the key that will accelerate or delay the recognition of a reality of changing habits and consumption that seems final.
But that key can open the door to another crossroads . Originally, the cable emerged as an alternative that offered viewers assume a cost to avoid the hassle of advertisements. Today, with pay TV systems so widespread, the only way to avoid the uncomfortable batch is to use an option Premium or via the streaming . As Netflix and equivalents, which pay 3 billion dollars per year to the traditional TV rights to broadcast programs in their new platforms such as Seinfeld . Will the future hold such a mechanism without some sort of advertising support? .
No comments:
Post a Comment