Ok, TV Execs Have Stats On DVR Users... So, Now What?

from the ah,-the-difficult-questions dept

We reported late last year that Nielsen was finally going to start releasing stats concerning DVR watchers, and when they actually watched recorded programs. While there have been some questions about how big the sample size of DVR-watchers really is, a much bigger (and better) question might simply be what does the data mean? It appears that, so far, no one really knows. While it may be a good thing to have the data on how many people watch shows within a day or a week of the original airing, no one's quite sure what that means when translated into ad sales negotiations -- meaning that everyone's going to try to spin it to their own benefit, while having no real idea what's important and what isn't.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Mike, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 5:41am

    Yes

    Porno!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    David Bradley, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 5:41am

    DVR as a stepping stone

    I think DVR's are just a stepping stone to on demand programming. A fair bit of money could be saved if "broadcasters" were removed from the mix.

    Essentially I would subscribe to various series through a provider. I could choose to view it with or without commercials depending on how much I was willing to spend. I'd be able to watch the series at my liesure, much like the DVR's afford us today. And DVR's might be part of this technology as well. Downloading episodes when available.

    The biggest benefit of this over the current DVR's is that I pay for what I watch. I'm not paying $50 a month to watch 500 channels that maybe I use 10 of, and probably only watch a small percentage of the programming on those channels.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Evan, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 5:54am

    No Subject Given

    Let me get this straight, you already reported Neilson was gonna release DVR ratings, and now you're reporting: "What will that mean? We don't know." What was the point of this article?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Mark, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 6:10am

    let me be the first...

    to draw the comparison between companies compiling stats on what you watch on t.v. versus the government asking search engines for search criteria. The only difference I see is that the cable/satelite providers know exactly who you are and are free to sell that information to whoever they want. Whereas, the government was only asking for search criteria with no personal information attached. Am I the only one to notice this?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 6:18am

    Re: let me be the first...

    you can search for a lot of things that you'd rather nobody know about... illegal things maybe. whereas, everything on cable is legal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Nick Burns (profile), Feb 13th, 2006 @ 7:14am

    Nielsons and VCRs

    We were a Nielson family for about 2 years. We had 3 VCRs, 1 of which was a TV/VCR combo. We watch a LOT of TV and because of our setup the tech was basically out to our premises every other week for the first 2 months, trying to get the right data transmitted. We found out that what they tracked was when the channel was watched (we don't have cable/satellite/etc). So if we were recording 3 shows and watching a 4th, to their system, it looked as though we were watching 4 channels simulataneously. Then when we did actually watch those other tapes, the only thing their system saw was that were watching a tape rather than any TV. It didn't know whether that tape was a previously recorded show or a movie. I don't see why this would be any different with DVRs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    mike, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 7:22am

    Re: Nielsons and VCRs

    because vcr's and vhs tapes dont store any sort of tag to discern tapes from eachother

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 7:29am

    No Subject Given

    I don't see what good this data would do them when people will just fast forward or skip the commercials anyway. Who cares if 50 million people watched your show if no one saw the commercials...

    Unless they're going to try and push more product placement in their shows

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 7:41am

    Re: No Subject Given

    They just want to bend you over the barrel then proceed to screw you over by making more mindless crap that people "watch" when you leave the PVR on over night, and you yanks have to pay for your personal video recording privalges other than for the set top box, you are getting screwed royally then

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Feldmarschal Von Tivo, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 7:57am

    Re: No Subject Given

    Quote from Anonymous Coward:
    ---------------------------------------
    "I don't see what good this data would do them when people will just fast forward or skip the commercials anyway. Who cares if 50 million people watched your show if no one saw the commercials...

    Unless they're going to try and push more product placement in their shows "
    ---------------------------------------


    Product placement is the way to go. Get rid of commercials all together. I think the entire idea of commercials is dreadful. Sure it's nice to get up and get a drink at a commercial; but, with a DVR you can just hit pause. Axe commercials and go with product placement! Cheer for product placement!! :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Mike, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 9:06am

    Re: No Subject Given

    How are they going to do product placement on say the new Battlestar Galactica or other Sci-Fi shows where Earth isn't around? I say make all media except PBS pay, get rid of the censorship and let people pick what they want to watch or hear.

    The DVR argument is the same as the VHS one was. I know that I have rarely seen a commercial since I got the HDDVR. We purposely start watching shows 30 minutes after they start so we can skip all the commercials. That's assuming we don't have anything queued up in the DVR playlist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    Mike (profile), Feb 13th, 2006 @ 9:45am

    Re: No Subject Given

    Let me get this straight, you already reported Neilson was gonna release DVR ratings, and now you're reporting: "What will that mean? We don't know." What was the point of this article?

    I love it when people tell us what we're not supposed to write about. :)

    As for the point, isn't it fairly interesting that Nielsen made such a big deal over adding DVR info, and now everyone is saying they have no idea what to do with the info?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    bob, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 11:46am

    product placement or commercials

    -------------
    I don't see what good this data would do them when people will just fast forward or skip the commercials anyway. Who cares if 50 million people watched your show if no one saw the commercials...

    Unless they're going to try and push more product placement in their shows
    -------------

    I've found that commercials often aren't skipped when watching the TiVo in my house. We've had the TiVo about a year now and the family just isn't used to skipping the commercials yet. About 1/2 way into a commercial break someone might remember, but more often than not we'll forget until the end of the show. That doesn't mean we watch the commercials. We still use them for other stuff and only pause if breaks go beyond commercial time. (at which point we remember we can skip the things and promptly do so next break)
    so, there's a few generations of ingrained behavior that need to be rewired.

    Product placement and tiered payemnt of commercials/no commercials is a good way to go as well.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Hersh, Feb 13th, 2006 @ 10:27pm

    I've been dreading this

    I've had this fear that the only reason companies still advertise on TV is because of habit. And that if they ever got concrete data to show that people aren't watching their commercials, they'd all stampede away from television and go dump their advertising budgets somewhere else--somewhere where we can't avoid the message so easily with a fast-forward button.

    Can you imagine if say 50% of the billions spent on TV ads went online--to spammers, pop-ups etc--the internet would become a total pain-in-the-gazoonga. Not to mention many of our favorite TV shows might get cancelled if the studios don't quickly learn to find other content outlets.

    Why can't we just keep the fact that none of us watch TV commercials anymore a secret, for a couple more years, until Steve Jobs and those other guys figure out how to get us our Battlestar Galactica episodes for free online (not that I pay when using bittorrent).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    ted, Jul 26th, 2006 @ 10:59am

    fast forward

    I probably fall into the average who fastforward 70% of the time. In that event I usually catch the first few seconds of the first commercial (grabbing the remote) and last few of the last (rewinding to show's re-entry).

    When fast forwarding I do pay more attention to the images in between. The screen has my full attention as I need to know when to stop (and back up).

    I think smart advertisers are starting to take advantage of this by using large print and more stable images that can be recognized during fast forward. If I were an advertiser I would also want to be placed at the beginning or end of the break rather than in the middle.

    I don't think this changes the viewing "attention" on the ads much from live tv as I feel I'm actuall giving more attention albiet for a shorter period. Advertisers just need to be cognizant of how more and more people will be "seeing" their ads and design them for best recognition.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This