Advertising Age writes that traditional advertising is far more prevalent than the Web 2.0 fraternity assumes
( http://adage.com/article?article_id=111377)
They note that, according to Jupiter Research, "7% of American adults write blogs and 22% read them; about 8% listen to podcasts and 5% use RSS feeds. According to a separate study by WorkPlace Print Media, 88% of the at-work audience doesn't even know what RSS is. And recent data from word-of-mouth research group Keller Fay indicate 92% of brand conversations were taking place offline -- far more than the commonly assumed rate of 80%."
In the same article, Pew Research Center for the People & the Press is quoted as surveying 3,204 adults and finding that " their online interactions were broad -- but not deep. Those who logged on for news spent an average of 32 minutes online daily, significantly less than the time the same group recorded for other media sources -- 53 minutes watching TV news, 43 minutes listening to news on the radio and 40 minutes with a newspaper."
All very well, but considering that these technologies were unknown 5 years ago thats still a fairly "interesting" shift. What goes unsaid in the article is what the growth rate of these new approaches is....and will they top out at these tiny percentages, or will they still grow rapidly?
In addition the report cites research by Universal McCann, who recently polled what it considers "heavy internet users." More often than not, they said they'd miss TV more than the internet in the case of media withdrawal.
Hmmmm.....I moved house recently, losing broadband and TV for a few eeks. We missed TV not a jot, but no broadband was a crisis for the adults and children in the household.
This report also flies in the face of Ofcom's recent survey in the UK that showed that the 'networked generation' - those aged 16 to 24 - are increasingly turning to the Internet for entertainment and information.
While the article makes the sensible point that the mainstream media is still dominant, it glosses over the key other point its own statistics make - that these new technologies are taking mindspace, and were not around a few years ago so are clearly making an impact. It also ignores 3 key points:
(i) A shift of audience even of 5% can be a major disruption as it is a non-trivial reduction in industries where margins are often already wafer thin, and reperesents huge growth for the small online advertising businesses - hence the "hype" and shift of attention
(ii) Interactive online advertising is different, typically more targeted - is one minute with online ads the same as one minute with broadcast ads?
(iii) There was no mention of surveys showing that people's use of traditional media is both reducing in time and relevance, sich as the recent Ofcom survey of UK 16 - 24 year olds. ( http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2006/08/nr_20060810)
It is my empirical observation that TV is increasingly used as media wallpaper while people use other media in the living rooms.
I write this from my laptop on the couch, with the TV on in the background.....)
Where the 16-24 year olds go today, more will go tomorrow, so the future is with the Internet.
.Among the findings were that:
- they spend one hour fewer per day watching television on average than other viewers.
- they are shifting away from terrestrial TV, spending only 58 per cent of their viewing time watching the five channels.
- they also listen to the radio an average 15 minutes less per day than the wider population.
- More than 70 per cent of young Internet users go on social networking sites such as MySpace and Friends Reunited, compared to 41 per cent of other adult users.
- they favour downloadable content which can be used on devices such as iPods and mobile phones.
- mobile phones are more popular among this age group. They make on average seven more calls and send 42 more texts per week than other users
