Nielson: "TV Still King In Media Consumption" -- Internet/Mobile Video Still Lagging

[Woochifer]

Nielson's latest roundup of how people consume video content tells a familiar tale that seems obvious to everybody except techies and tech bloggers (y'know those socially-challenged and vitamin D-deprived guys who are convinced that cord cutting and watching TV over the internet now dominate the media landscape) -- the vast majority of media consumption is still done through traditional live TV viewing. Wow, people watching TV content using TVs!

Nielsen: TV Still King In Media Consumption; Only 16 Percent Of TV Homes Have Tablets | TechCrunch (http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/07/nielsen-tv-still-king-in-media-consumption-only-16-percent-of-tv-homes-have-tablets/)

Live TV Viewing Time: More Than Internet Surfing, Network/Mobile Video, Gaming, DVD/Blu-ray, and DVR COMBINED
The average viewing time is nearly 145 hours a month, which works out to just under 5 hours a day. In actuality this is a decline from a few years ago, when Nielson's survey found that the average daily viewing time was around 5 hours, 20 minutes. But, it still blows away every other form of video content viewing. And it's more than all forms of media consumption combined, including internet usage.

In fact, I think that the slight decline in live TV viewing might stem from the fact that DVR adoption has now reached 85 percent. The Nielson report indicates that the time-shifted TV viewing accounts for 11 hours, 33 minutes per month (just over 20 minutes per day). I don't recall Nielson's previous figure, but with higher DVR adoption, this might also increase the time-shifted TV viewing.

Network/Mobile Video Still Way Behind
For all the hype surrounding online video and mobile video, their overall viewing time numbers, while growing, still make up only a miniscule amount of daily viewing compared to all other forms of media consumption.

Network video (which includes Netflix and all other internet video feeds) account for an average of less than 6 hours per month (roughly 12 minutes a day). Mobile video (which includes smartphones, laptops, tablets, and other mobile devices) accounts for an average of only 5 hours, 20 minutes per month.

The combined viewing time for network and mobile video devices averages about 22 minutes a day. This is an increase from three years ago, when the daily viewing times were closer to ~15 minutes. But, with how much hype the online video segment gets, how buzzworthy is it really when the viewing time amounts to only about 8% of the viewing time that old antiquated live TV gets?

Paid Subscription TV Still Dominates
For all the ink and bits wasted talking about cord cutting, the Nielson survey finds that cable and satellite subscription rates remain very high, with a market share of about 85% of TV owners.

In fact, the linked article found that the big decline occurred with people who watch TV only with OTA antennas. Since 2003, that audience has declined from 16% to 9% of total TV owners.

Tablets and Networked TVs Have Not Made a Big Impact Yet
The survey found that 16% of households now own a tablet device. Considering that this figure was closer to 0% just two years ago, this is actually a trend worth monitoring. Also consider that networked TVs have been marketed for a longer amount of time, and their adoption rate is only 4%.

Ever since the iPad came out, I've seen tablets as the best opportunity for a convergence device that links TV viewing and networked content. With booming tablet sales, a lot of content providers now view the tablet as a supplemental device to the TV. I see it the same way, since a tablet is very lounge chair and sofa-friendly -- something you could never say about other networked PC devices.

We already see a lot of apps that allow tablets to control and view satellite/cable TV content, and some Blu-ray discs (e.g., Marvel's The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises)now work with tablet apps that will stream supplemental content simultaneously with the movie and control the Blu-ray player.

I doubt that tablets will replace TVs as the primary viewing device in the house, but they are much more useful as supplemental devices than anything else that has come around recently. Given how quickly tablet adoption has occurred, I see a lot of new and inventive ways of using tablets with TVs and home theater components.

Smartphones?
Smartphone adoption is now over 50%, but I also doubt that smartphones will make the kind of impact on media consumption that techies have been pining for. There's just no getting around it -- smartphones SUCK for viewing movies and TV programs. That's why mobile video will always be limited to short clips and other content that doesn't require a lot of viewing time. Even with so many smartphones now in use and so much video content now available on the internet, the actual usage for mobile video remains limited.

[Smokey]

Live TV Viewing Time: More Than Internet Surfing, Network/Mobile Video, Gaming, DVD/Blu-ray, and DVR COMBINED

The average viewing time is nearly 145 hours a month, which works out to just under 5 hours a day. In actuality this is a decline from a few years ago, when Nielson's survey found that the average daily viewing time was around 5 hours, 20 minutes. But, it still blows away every other form of video content viewing. And it's more than all forms of media consumption combined, including internet usage.

In your link it says that "Traditional TV viewing eats up over six days (days! or 144 hours, 54 minutes) worth of time per month. And Internet on a computer: 28 hours, 29 mins."

What about watching movies and TV shows from Netflix and other internet streaming services on big TVs? Would that be part of traditional TV viewing hours or count as Internet on a computer viewing hours. There seem to be a gray line with all the smart devics that are hooked up to big TVs that get their content from internet.


In fact, the linked article found that the big decline occurred with people who watch TV only with OTA antennas. Since 2003, that audience has declined from 16% to 9% of total TV owners.

Are you sure those numbers are right?

I figured it will be the other way around with OTA TV watching climbing instead of declining since local channels switching to HD. I also get local HD channels via cable (QAM tuner) and picture quality is not near as good when receiving same channels via the air waves.

[Woochifer]

In your link it says that "Traditional TV viewing eats up over six days (days! or 144 hours, 54 minutes) worth of time per month. And Internet on a computer: 28 hours, 29 mins."

What about watching movies and TV shows from Netflix and other internet streaming services on big TVs? Would that be part of traditional TV viewing hours or count as Internet on a computer viewing hours. There seem to be a gray line with all the smart devics that are hooked up to big TVs that get their content from internet.

Looking at previous Nielsen releases, Netflix and other streaming services would count as networked video. They separate out the time spent watching internet video versus other internet activities. But, no matter how you dice up the numbers, live TV viewing still overwhelms everything else.

If you want to make a case for online/mobile video, consider that the viewing time for both is now greater than DVD/Blu-ray. But, even 3 years ago, more than 60% of people said that they view online video. So, the market penetration has been there for a while. It's just the viewing time that remains low. With DVD/Blu-ray, I recall that the viewing time has never been especially high.

Also, note that the article notes that only 4% of TVs are internet enabled. That does not indicate to me any groundswell of smart devices hooked up to TVs.


Are you sure those numbers are right?

I figured it will be the other way around with OTA TV watching climbing instead of declining since local channels switching to HD. I also get local HD channels via cable (QAM tuner) and picture quality is not near as good when receiving same channels via the air waves.

Or alternatively, people figured that the digital transition was the right time to finally get cable/satellite service. You're also presuming that people upgraded to DTVs to begin with (considering how long it took you to finally upgrade, you should relate to that, right? :D). For a lot of OTA viewers that chose not to upgrade their TV, the digital UHF signals (coupled with a converter box) were not as reliable as the old analog VHF signals. So, cable/satellite service was the only way to keep watching those channels on their older analog TVs.

[Smokey]

Also, note that the article notes that only 4% of TVs are internet enabled. That does not indicate to me any groundswell of smart devices hooked up to TVs.

That does not explain how come Netflix is hogging 33% of prime-time web viewing internet traffic if numbers of smart devices hooked up to TVs is that low...

Netflix's secret strength? Prime-time viewing- MSN Money (http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=60fb7513-9071-4078-ac42-fb0025b48efc)

I think the Nieslon rating is behind the curve on this one :)


For a lot of OTA viewers that chose not to upgrade their TV, the digital UHF signals (coupled with a converter box) were not as reliable as the old analog VHF signals. So, cable/satellite service was the only way to keep watching those channels on their older analog TVs.

But cable/satellite does not carry all of local channels. I get 29 channels via OTA, but only get around 15 local channels via Comcast cable. So going with cable might be a downgrade if trying to get local channels.

[Woochifer]

That does not explain how come Netflix is hogging 33% of prime-time web viewing internet traffic if numbers of smart devices hooked up to TVs is that low...

Netflix's secret strength? Prime-time viewing- MSN Money (http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=60fb7513-9071-4078-ac42-fb0025b48efc)

I think the Nieslon rating is behind the curve on this one :)

C'mon. You're better than this. :nono:

Video traffic consumes a helluva lot more bandwidth than social networking, web surfing, or any other internet activities. Even in standard resolution, Netflix streaming consumes upwards of about 900 MB per hour. This is about 15X the bandwidth needed for music, and even more than what's needed for more basic activities such as e-mail or photos.

It does not take a huge number of users to gobble up a huge chunk of the data activity. AT&T has indicated that 2% of their broadband subscribers use about 20% of the available data capacity.


But cable/satellite does not carry all of local channels. I get 29 channels via OTA, but only get around 15 local channels via Comcast cable. So going with cable might be a downgrade if trying to get local channels.

Not in all cases, and certainly not in mine. On my cable service (I subscribe to Comcast's bare basic service for the bedroom TVs), the broadcast channel selection is far greater than what I can pull in via OTA. When I first got the HDTV, I tried an antenna and it would not even pull in all of the major network affiliates. At that time, the analog channels were still active, and on the VHF band, my analog TVs could pull all of the network affiliates (the analog UHF stations were a different story).

With the bare basic service (which has now transitioned to 100% digital, and Comcast sent us a converter box), I not only get more broadcast channels than I can pull in using an antenna, but Comcast also carries all the digital subchannels and even FM radio.

[Hyfi]

That is just nonsense! People now almost do not watch TV (http://time.com/3615387/tv-viewership-declining-nielsen/), they switched to computers. And even if they ARE watching TV, they look at the screens of their smartphones and tablets, as this article (http://www.adweek.com/lostremote/accenture-report-87-of-consumers-use-second-screen-device-while-watching-tv/51698)states.
As a "techie" myself (I work here (https://magora-systems.com/mobile-application-developers-london/)) I find it insulting when you address me like this and say such things. As for me, I definitely prefer my smarphone to other devices, I have Galaxy S7 but no TV at all.

Keep in mind that the comments are from an article, not an AR member, so don't get so personally insulted.

I also work in the High Tech field but prefer to leave it at work. I still use a 10 y/o Razor Flip Phone and dread the day I have to get a Smart Phone and become a walking zombie that has to look everything up instantly and tell everyone around me what I googled.

I still use Over The Air TV and a VHS Recorder and a Roof Antenna.

I don't own a Tablet and cannot watch TV or Videos/Movies on a Computer or tiny screen.

Also, I do not listen to music on tiny low quality devices with dirty little earbuds.

[Jack in Wilmington]

I too watch everything on a 50" Panasonic Plasma. Unlike Hyfi, I have Verizon Fios High Definition cable package and DVR most everything we watch. I recently got a Roku and stream programs that I can't get on cable. For movies I move to my audio room and watch on my 46" Panasonic Plasma while enjoying the benefits of 5.1 surround sound on my home theater package.

I do have a smart phone but I mainly use it to listen to satellite radio while I'm at the gym.