Login
close
Login is restricted to DCN Publisher Members. If you are a DCN Member and don't have an account, register here.
Search

Digital Content Next

Menu

Tags containing: "video"

Innovation | Supporter Spotlight | Video

The media business is constantly evolving. Are your products?

Digital media has experienced a near-constant evolution in consumer behavior, preferences, and expectations over the past couple of decades. And things show no sign of slowing down. Many media companies are not just at a crossroads, they are at a point of no return. How they respond now will likely shape whether they survive or not.

Of course, some media companies have adapted skillfully to these changes. It’s now possible for consumers to watch TV on half a dozen devices whenever and wherever they want (possibly all at the same time if you’re my kid). We can read the news from anywhere, and the news now often comes packaged with games, recipes, communities, podcasts, and even in-person events. 

Meanwhile, advertisers can track viewers across platforms, and measure engagement on a deeper level, with more robust data than anything offered in the Nielsen era. Even the programming has changed, as media companies adapt to changing audience preferences.

As media companies continue to evolve and experiment, the challenge is to do this without potentially alienating their customer base. It requires the right mix of innovating with a product mindset to create something new: viewer experience, insights into customer wants and needs, and consumer engagement.

It all starts with product

What do companies need to consider to move the needle? They need to constantly shift with – and shift – consumer expectations. There is a cost in every decision that media companies make, and every action or inaction has consequences.

All of these decisions ladder up to the product itself. Product development never, ever stops, because if it does, it leads to stagnation (and even irrelevance). For example, media companies like National Journal have made their investments to differentiate, not just improve. Category leaders like Netflix, Instagram, and TikTok offer products that look very different today than they did a few years ago because they continued to evolve. They updated to both shift and meet consumer expectations and as a result, have remained the best at what they do.

For media companies looking to follow a similar pattern, there are three key considerations:

  1. Viewer experience 
  2. Insights into customer wants and needs 
  3. Consumer engagement 

Viewer experience

Developing cutting edge products requires alignment with users, because every innovation has to improve the experience. Every product must be highly-intuitive and easy to interact with. As companies push the boundaries on what’s possible, they also need to ensure that new functions work seamlessly. 

If you are a consumer, there’s nothing worse than loading a new application or website area only for it to raise questions in your mind. This extends beyond the technical components to other consumer touchpoints, including user support and billing. 

At the core, media companies need to design products that their customers love, and not just simply use.

Insights into customer wants and needs 

The goal of every media company is to build an experience that consumers love. To do that, companies need to constantly research and design for needs. The biggest insights in media consumption habits are the rise of free ad-supported TV (FAST) channels on streaming platforms and the dominance of short-form content. 

Consumers accept advertising because they know that it funds the media they are viewing, reading, or hearing. 

Media companies have looked for a way to layer advertising on top of their offerings in a way where advertisers see value, and consumers understand that the ads they see are funding the media they digest. FAST channels seem to strike this balance perfectly, much to the surprise of the ad industry.

Short-form content offers another, similar opportunity. TikTok’s massive adoption shows that consumers are ingesting information at a dizzying pace. Media companies should be seeking out ways to create and capitalize on this new form of content.

Consumer engagement

The natural benefit of designing for needs is that it improves user engagement. One of the biggest learnings about the FAST adoption described above is that consumers actually use ads as a way of engagement. This creates opportunities for media companies to use these ad slots to get consumers to engage with new forms of content. 

Ads are now interactive, with surveys or the ability to click to watch something new. By using data signals and programmatically serving tailored ads to customers, media companies can help drive consumers to other products and content offerings, building greater engagement.

Engagement goes much deeper than watching ads, of course. Media companies want consumers to spend time with their content, whether that’s as simple as watching a video or reading another article, or as deep as attending an event or paying for a subscription with unique benefits.

Streaming TV is largely viewed as TV in the traditional sense, but consumers don’t always engage with it on their couch in the living room. Some watch on the subway, some just run a TV show in the background and listen to it like a podcast. Media companies need to adjust their user experiences to better meet the evolving needs of these different audiences.

Learn without asking

As media companies work through the three considerations above, they need to keep one thing in mind: consumers aren’t necessarily going to tell you what they want. In fact, they may not know what they want. So if you adopt a product mindset and continue to evolve and push forward, it’s critical to analyze all of the data signals you have on consumer behavior and build something that meets the trends.

Product development never ends, and that’s especially true in the media space. A decade ago, no company would have been able to predict our current situation. It’s unlikely that any single enterprise can accurately predict the next 10 years of change, either. Regardless, evolution is key, so that media brands can remain in business and help define the next iteration of the industry.

Perspectives | Video

2 Key lessons international streamers can learn from the U.S.

For nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of helping lead media’s evolution, first as an executive at two U.S.-based companies that were early to market with streaming video products, and now as a digital transformation consultant working with a variety of international media companies.

Many of the global execs I meet these days are worried that they are behind when it comes to streaming—playing catch up with the U.S. But is playing catch up such a bad thing? I say it’s not. In fact, by “playing catch up,” late movers have an opportunity to learn two key lessons from the U.S. streaming market and thus serve viewers more effectively.

1. Streaming is a long-term investment

After several decades in which the basic methods of creation and distribution were relatively stable, digital technology came along and changed the game. Unfortunately, in the early days of digital, many U.S. media companies took a short-term approach to this massive shift.

Instead of undertaking streaming development as an opportunity to fundamentally transform viewer relationships, most U.S. media companies viewed streaming as an experiment or side project. This led to short cuts in product development. That resulted in dozens of copycat streaming interfaces that today all more or less look just like Netflix, for better or worse. This short-term approach also led to a lack of standards development. That resulted in dozens of measurement methodologies and little to no transparency in companies’ stated metrics for success.

Those who are late to market can take advantage of the learnings from this short-term thinking by setting expectations internally and externally about how long their transition will take. Investing long-term in more thoughtful products will strengthen viewer loyalty. Investing long-term in shared metrics standards will strengthen relationships with partners and investors.

Streaming video is a long-term investment in innovation. It is an ongoing commitment to continuous change. Executed successfully, streaming video should mean more value for viewers—increased options and the convenience of on-demand. And that will result in more loyalty for media brands and more value for investors.

2. Do what you do best

The U.S. is a singular entertainment market. It’s large, geographically and demographically diverse, and relatively affluent. The most game-changing media company from the past two decades of U.S. innovation—Netflix—was actually a unique by-product that arose from the proximity of Hollywood and Silicon Valley and the relatively early widespread adoption of broadband in the U.S. market. If your country is not the U.S., don’t assume your non-US-based media company should follow the same strategies as the U.S.-based giants. Your company doesn’t need to be the next Netflix. Nobody wants or expects that.

The U.S. has too many streaming services that are practically indistinguishable from one another from the viewer perspective. Many are stuck managing churn on mediocre products as opposed to building loyalty via truly excellent offerings.

Unfortunately, this came about because the media companies that launched these streaming services incorrectly thought they had to compete head-to-head with Netflix in a winner-take-all Hunger Games. Recognizing that there is room for many strategies and many types of streaming services in the U.S. would have saved many media companies from over-investing in the wrong places.

The lesson here is to chart your own path. You should know your core viewers and the nuances of your market better than anyone—and you should take advantage of that. Not having to compete amid the complexities and pressures of the U.S. market is an advantage for media companies in other regions. Latecomers can avoid the churn management Hunger Games by doing what they do best, focusing on what differentiates their brand rather than copycatting the struggling strategies of other media companies.

Similarly, while there is room for international brands in most markets, there are nuances to local cultures that can allow for native media companies to truly own their markets. This is also the best way to super-serve your audience: build out from your core identity while embracing new streaming technologies and models.

The bottom line

Let’s get one thing straight: streaming is not a war. The “streaming wars” are a narrative concept, convenient for headlines but ultimately an overly simplistic way to frame the latest evolution of the media industry. In fact, there are and will be many successful players, and as streaming further evolves, it will continually present new opportunities for media companies everywhere to entertain, inform, and engage.

The models might differ from company to company, but all should be investing in an ability to execute continuous evolution. Smart media executives can double down on a long-term investment in their core brands and on super-serving their audiences for continued success in their own markets and beyond.

Featured Post | Policy

Content production policy captures the global spotlight

Discoverability, funding, IP ownership, and cultural sovereignty are topics at the forefront of how and to what degree streaming companies should be put under government regulations. As today’s over-the-top streaming platforms continue to navigate emerging domestic rules and regulations, jurisdictions outside the U.S. have started to introduce new content and funding obligations for these services.

The ability to transcend borders has long been a defining characteristic of video streaming platforms: Anyone with an internet connection could view all the content. Initially, incumbent broadcasters and traditional distribution channels faced massive disruption as consumer preference shifted away from linear channels to the choice of what to watch and listen to from hundreds of options. With the wide adoption of digital distribution technology, streaming services became content creators themselves, while traditional content producers launched non-linear platforms to compete.

As is often the case with rapid technological advancements, legislation and regulation are now playing catch up. Local players in global markets have long made the case that the playing field must be leveled against the size of U.S.-based streaming companies, and officials have started to listen. Regulations are evolving to include localized content mandates and participation in domestic industry. Here’s how it’s playing out.

Europeans make early moves

In 2018, the European Union passed the Audiovisual Media Services (AVMS) Directive which included stipulations that the streaming platforms must offer a 30% quota of European content to European consumers. It also built a framework that allowed individual countries to mandate the streamers allocate revenues back into domestic production.

Right now, France is one of the countries with strongest local content rules. Streaming platforms must reinvest 20 to 25% of the domestic revenues back into French production. In France and elsewhere in Europe, since the regulations have been in place, Netflix has reached or exceeded the 30% local content requirements. 

English language markets feel the squeeze

Because of the cultural juggernaut that is the U.S., other English-language regions have long felt compelled to shore up local production with support from their respective governments. This trend continues to be a flash point in debates about government overreach.

At the end of January, the Canadian senate passed Bill C-11 or the “Online Streaming Act,” an updated version of the country’s Broadcasting Act, which will allow the federal regulator to include international streaming services in its powers to levy fees and control how content is displayed. It’s expected to become law within a few weeks. Canadian governments have long sought to counter the influence of the cultural output south of its border, and the legislation attempts to extend those rules into the online space. 

Similarly, Australia announced its own new “National Cultural Policy” around the same time. While it doesn’t outline the exact plans to regulate online streaming services, the Australian government laid out its goals to address the decline in local broadcasting revenues and bolster the creation of domestic productions.

While the report acknowledged the level of quality and popularity of the current slate of Australian content on the platforms, “these services have no requirements to make Australian content available on their platforms. The ready availability of mass content produced in other countries, particularly the United States, risks drowning out the voices of Australian storytellers,” read the Australian government’s cultural policy plan “Revive.”

While no longer part of the AVMS, the UK’s government continues to investigate the creation of rules so that the Office of Communication (Ofcom) will have jurisdiction over overseas streaming services. This recently came to a head when complaints about the Netflix docuseries featuring Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had no official avenues to be heard.

Canada’s new legislation stands out 

The proposed legislation north of the border has faced headwinds from entities both large and small because of the unique nature of the proposed laws. “C-11 is a bit of an outlier. In that it extends to user generated content on platforms like YouTube or Tik Tok. The European example does not,” said the University of Ottawa’s Canada Research Chair in internet and E-commerce law, Michael Geist. 

Major pushback has resulted in the inclusion of user generated content and subsequent amendments have been put forward to avoid some of the issues with attempting to put all online content under the Canadian regulatory umbrella.

In September, Disney and Spotify asked the federal government to be more flexible about what it considered “Canadian content.” The streaming services warned that certain material, while ostensibly produced in Canada with a Canadian cast, wouldn’t count under the current rules, which include Canadian ownership of intellectual properties.

However, it’s worth noting that trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) include provisions that protect the ability of companies to trade in audiovisual services across the Canada-U.S. border. Already, the U.S. embassy has expressed reservations about the proposed laws violating non-discrimination terms of the free trade agreements signed by the two countries.

While the bill is slated to pass the legislature, much of the specifics will need to be determined by the arms length content regulator the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunication Commission (CRTC). So the final rules and the structure of the regulatory framework remains unclear and will be subject to a public consultation process.

Despite the efforts in international English-language markets to avoid being drowned out, English language markets still generally benefit from the sympatico of shared language with the largest content producing sector in the world. 

“Those English markets have had significant success, attracting investment from large streaming services and large production companies,” said Geist. “To Canada’s case, it’s a thriving sector that’s based in part on tax, [and] part on proximity to the U.S. market. So I don’t know that that necessarily suggests that what you need is more protection.”

Featured Post | Innovation

Vox Media on effective multiplatform podcast extensions

Established in 2017, the Vox Media Podcast Network has enabled the publisher to bring together the podcasting efforts of its brands under one umbrella. Its 150+ shows span technology, news, pop culture, emerging trends, business and sports, with centralized teams to streamline production, monetization, workflows, and more.

Vox Media recently promoted two of its top podcast executives, Ray Chao and Nishat Kurwa. Chao is now SVP and GM of Audio and Digital Video, and oversees Vox Media’s digital video business as well as talent deals and distribution partnerships. Kurwa is SVP and Executive Producer of Audio, leading programming, production operations, content strategy and new show development across the Vox Media Podcast Network.

Having led a number of successful expansions of Vox Media’s podcasts into other platforms, Chao and Kurwa have a great deal of expertise in what does and doesn’t work for publishers looking to take shows to the next level. They spoke to DCN about their priorities for Vox Media’s Podcast Network this year, and what to consider when building out a podcast brand into live events, video, licensing and more.

Here are three factors that have made Vox Media’s podcast extensions so successful, and what other publishers can learn from them.

An audience-first approach

Vox Media’s podcasts have a wide range of extensions designed to engage audiences beyond just listening. Some, like tech and business podcast Pivot, have partnered to produce videos of the show, as well as launching their own tech conference. Others, like narrative series Land of the Giants, have been adapted into TV series. “When we’re thinking about extensions, everything is on the table for all of our shows,” said Kurwa.

When it comes to deciding where and how to expand, audience signals are crucial. “We get a lot of feedback from our audiences, which is really meaningful and helpful,” Kurwa explained. If they get a lot of the audience saying they’d love to see hosts on video or suggesting other ways of interacting, the feedback is all taken into consideration. “It’s a strong indicator for hosts as well when they think about how they want to spend their time,” she noted.

The audience is also the first measure the team turns to when evaluating the success of an extension. “We always ask ourselves, does this expansion resonate with audiences?” Chao said. “Is this something that our listeners, our viewers and our audiences are excited about? Are they listening and watching and engaging with the content?” 

Getting this kind of feedback can be challenging with podcast listeners. It’s important to encourage communication early on – and respond  – via channels like email and social media. This in turn will help when assessing which extensions will work well for audiences and the response to them.

Experimenting with video for audio

Video podcasts have become a hot topic, following studies that have shown YouTube is actually a top destination for podcasts. It’s still a fairly new area for Vox Media, who are approaching the use of video on a show-by-show basis.

Pivot is one of the publisher’s early forays into video podcasts. Their partnership with Salesforce+, an on-demand streaming service for business professionals, gives the platform four exclusive clips each week from Pivot. The partnership has been running for just over a year, and has taught the team a great deal about video production.

“You might think it’s as simple as sticking a camera in the recording room, taking that video and posting it, but it really does take a lot to get polished video, even for a conversation show like Pivot,” Chao explained. “We’ve learned a ton just in terms of video production and workflow.”

Videoing the shows has also given the team the opportunity to experiment with posting short clips on social. “It’s been so exciting for us to see how much listener engagement we have when we post short highlight clips of Scott [Galloway] or Kara [Swisher] reacting to something a guest has said on a  show,” said Chao. “It’s been really beneficial for us not just for the audience feedback, but because it helps us build and foster the community in a space like a social media platform. Those videos also spread the word about Pivot for people who might not have listened yet.”

Although it’s difficult to attribute growth specifically to clips on social, Chao said that Pivot has seen a lot of healthy audience growth recently, which they believe engagement on the video clips on social media has contributed to.

The Verge has also been experimenting with video clips across its two podcasts, Decoder and The Vergecast. The team behind the shows have been taking short video clips from the podcasts and posting them to TikTok and YouTube with the primary aim of finding new listeners.

“We are very much in a test-and-learn phase with video,” he acknowledged, when asked if any other shows would be trying it out. “We’re approaching it on a show by show basis.” 

The power of the Podcast Network

The Vox Media Podcast Network, where all of the podcasts are produced and supported under one umbrella rather than as individual brands, also lends strength to multiplatform extensions. “By having the network, we can pursue bigger, more exciting and more holistic growth opportunities than if it was one brand or one show on their own,” explained Chao. “We’re very connected to other parts of the business and editorial stakeholders that are working on projects and initiatives outside of the audio space.”

One example Chao illustrated this with is podcast subscriptions. Podcast Network division CAFE, which has a weekly interview podcast with former Manhattan U.S. attorney Preet Bharara as its flagship show, has a subscription product rooted in podcasting. 

“We learned a ton just by operating that podcast subscription product, growing it, and working with that team,” he said. “We’re now not only applying those learnings on the podcast subscription front to other podcasts that we’d like to launch subscriptions for in the future, but we’re leveraging a lot of the internal infrastructure that we’ve built for subscriptions outside of the podcast base.”

Whether it’s New York Magazine’s established subscriptions business, Vox’s contributions model, or paid newsletter experiments at The Verge, consumer revenue opportunities can work across both audio and non-audio. “On the business side, the product side, the engineering side and the marketing side, we’re able to really share learnings and best practices across the network to find new opportunities for growth,” Chao added.

Focus on the podcast first

Despite the success of the publisher’s various podcast extensions, Kurwa and Chao were adamant that when developing new shows, the quality of the podcast always comes first.

“We don’t approach our podcast conceptualization or production thinking about television adaptation,” Kurwa emphasized, when discussing the recent TV adaptation of their podcast Land of the Giants. “We’re focused on the podcast first. And that alleviates pressure.”

It’s an important lesson, especially as stories grow of podcasters selling out arenas, landing huge licensing deals, and more. If a podcast doesn’t work as a podcast first and foremost, any planned extensions are futile.

Finally, both executives urged caution with successful multiplatform extensions. What works really well for one show may not for another. 

“We’re not going down a laundry list of ‘here are all of the different things that a podcast could expand into’, but we’re trying to be thoughtful about what makes sense for the audience, what makes sense for the show, what makes sense for the host and the show teams, and what they have bandwidth for,” Chao noted. “We’re really looking for those types of opportunities that check all of those boxes for us.”

For savvy publishers, the opportunities to extend podcast brands beyond audio are limitless. But true success comes in expanding wisely.

Featured Post | Perspectives

Get smart, TV: Fix the usability experience

Do you have more than one remote to operate various connected and streaming devices?

Among your family members, are there as many different streaming habits and preferences as there are people? And do these disparate behaviors lead, for instance, to heated arguments over whether captions should always be on and who’s responsible for turning them on and off?

Have you rented someone else’s home for a short stay recently? If so, could you log in and start using your streaming services on the TV? Within five minutes? After multiple emails with the host?

For all the joy that streaming “Stranger Things” and “Abbott Elementary” has brought us, the user experience of Smart TVs and connected devices has delivered far too much frustration. The mere act of turning on the TV to find something to watch is an inexcusably disastrous viewer experience—a complete fail on the part of the television industry.

Unfortunately, the proliferation of streaming services has not improved viewers’ TV usability experience. In fact, it seems exponentially worse. This is despite 81% of consumers citing “ease of use” as the second-most important attribute for video streaming, close behind “cost” at 84%, according to a 2020 Nielsen study. If streaming service providers and device manufacturers spent as much time improving the viewer usability experience as they spend building pricing models, perhaps they wouldn’t be forced to continuously raise prices.

While I think we’d all agree that there are much bigger problems in this world, viewer frustration with streaming service features and connected devices illustrates how much the TV industry takes its customers for granted. Sure, some products are arguably better than others. And right now, there’s probably someone making the argument somewhere that their supposedly excellent usability is a competitive advantage. And though there are some excellent products out there, there is considerable room for companies to improve the viewer usability experience and to gain loyalty and attention for the entire sector.

Let’s examine a few areas in need of improvement:

The multiple remote e-waste factor

First, proliferation of different and incompatible remotes is rampant. This is not a new issue with the streaming era, but it is now even more difficult to solve. Universal remotes notoriously challenge even the most tech-savvy and usually end up taking space in a drawer. In fact, many people have drawers full of extra, old and broken remotes, exemplifying the wastefulness of this sector of consumer devices.

Perhaps we need a new way of looking at this particular frustration, beyond the fact that it’s hard for consumers to navigate. So, let’s look at a similar issue in which an entity made a decision intended to minimize e-waste long-term: In June, the EU mandated the use by 2026 of a common charger for all new portable devices such as smartphones, earbuds, wireless keyboards and laptops. The argument could be made that mandating even a baseline of standardization for TV and streaming device remotes would minimize e-waste. Which government wants to take it on?

The personalized feature set

Second, personalizing one’s TV experience, within the operating system navigation, is ridiculously complex. Because this topic is vast, let’s look at just one example – turning captions on and off. Nothing exemplifies the lack of care for the TV viewer more than the inaccessibility of captions, especially given that the original purpose of the caption feature is … accessibility!

In one family I surveyed, one person likes to always have captions on. This preference is not due a hearing issue. Rather, this person believes captions or subtitles augment their understanding of a show, especially while they simultaneously are playing a video game on their laptop and scrolling TikTok on their phone.

This sort of use case is hardly uncommon. In fact, four out of five viewers ages 18-25 say they use subtitles all or part of the time according to one study. Meanwhile, within the family surveyed, other members complain that captions ruin their experience, often revealing a joke or a plot twist before it happens on screen.

The difference in preferences means that family members sharing the same TV and streaming services must frequently turn captions on and off. If you’ve tried to do this at all, you know that every service and device is different. If you haven’t tried yet, please do just to see how needlessly complex it is.

As we know, the lack of standardization for caption functions is the same lack of standardization for everything from start to fast forwarding to volume functions. It’s all unnecessarily complex and frustrating for the consumer.

The unfamiliar TV panic

Third, the issue of standardization goes beyond consumers’ own homes. Based on my recent unscientific, informal survey of a half dozen short-term rental property hosts and their guests, struggles with unfamiliar remotes and/or TV operating systems are one of the top sources of friction between hosts and guests. This applies to those young and old, tech-savvy or not.

One guest called his host frequently, complaining that the TV was broken. In fact, the TV worked just fine, but the guest was flummoxed by the Apple TV remote, despite several lessons. The guest is still complaining about the host’s Apple TV, although he has moved on to another short-term rental property (and despite the fact that this TV-challenged property was a beautifully designed home in an idyllic natural setting).

Another host described a guest who emailed a half dozen times in advance of his arrival, concerned about how he would watch TV. He asked for photos of both the front and back of the TV and a detailed assessment of whether he’d be able to plug in an antenna to watch local TV. After his arrival, this guest complained that he found the remote “awkward.” The host described losing sleep over whether this guest would write a bad Airbnb review solely based on his TV experience.

The bottom line is that both hosts and guests clearly would appreciate a TV experience that just works, easily, without instructions. And they really don’t want to have to communicate with one another about it. By setting a new baseline common standard for TVs and streaming services, the industry could perhaps improve the rental home industry’s host-guest relations – and help the rest of us at the same time.

Let’s fix the consumer experience

Forget for a moment some of the common complaints about today’s streaming industry, such as too many mediocre shows or ideas that should have been 90-minute movies but are needlessly stretched to seven-part series. Given all the investment in Smart TV technology, and all of the money to be made from distributing content via that technology, the industry would benefit from providing viewers with a much better experience. For what we are paying, we certainly deserve it.

We should have more standardized devices, accessible navigation interfaces, excellent search capabilities across devices and services, and more. Achieving this would require some cooperation among the major players. But primarily, it would require that the players start to care about their customers. It’s evident that they don’t.

Industry-Research

Post-Covid TV viewership slows and goes on-demand

As in many countries, TV and video viewership in the UK registered a surge during Covid. However, as consumers re-emerged from lockdowns, TV viewing time declined. Ofcom’s fifth annual Media Nations UK 2022 Report offers insight into viewership patterns in the UK and the audience shift to on-demand platforms.  

On-demand takes time viewed

Total viewing time for TV and video in 2021 was 5 hours and 16 minutes per person per day, a decline of 25 minutes in 2020 but up from 2019.

Time spent on broadcasters, across live TV, recordings, and on-demand, declined by 9% compared to 2020 and 4% in 2019. As a result, broadcasters’ share of viewing continues to fall from 67% in 2019, to 61% in 2020, to 59% in 2021. Interestingly, broadcast video-on-demand (BVOD) increased by an average of three minutes per person per day compared to 2020, growing its viewership share from 6% to 8% in 2021.

Time viewing SVOD, at 58 minutes per day per person, declined by 6% from 2020. However, SVOD maintained its share of viewing, from 19% in 2020 to 18% in 2021.

SVOD market matures

Subscriptions to SVOD services (at least one service) declined slightly in the UK from 68% to 67%, or19.2 million households, compared to Q1 2022.

However, Ofcom’s analysis confirms a high concentration of multiple SVOD services among UK households. Nearly half of all UK households (46%), which is approximately 13.2 million, access two or more services in Q1 2022. Furthermore, of these households, 5.2 million—or about one in five homes—subscribe to the three most popular services: Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney+.

Netflix remains the largest SVOD provider in the UK, with 17.1 million households (60%) subscribing. It’s followed by Amazon Prime Video (46%) and Disney+ (23%).

Maintaining subscribers is crucial in a competitive SVOD market. According to Ofcom’s report, 2% of Netflix users, 4% of Amazon Prime Video users, and Disney+ users canceled their subscriptions in the past three months. Ofcom’s Public Service Media (PSM) tracker identified cost as the top reason for cancellation.

Audience attitudes

In addition to time spent, the Ofcom report provides details on viewer satisfaction and offers insight into audience engagement. Eighty-six percent of consumers who used Netflix in the past six months said they were satisfied with the service, while 81% said the same about Amazon Prime Video and Disney+, respectively.

Top Netflix attribute scores: 

  • Provides services that are easy to find my way around (82%);
  • easy to find something I want to watch (80%);
  • Appeals to a wide range of different audiences (82%); and
  • has programs that are relevant to me (75%).

Top Disney+ attribute scores:  

  • Easy to find my way around (78%);
  • easy to find something I want to watch (74%); and
  • appeals to a wide range of different audiences (73%).

SVOD market growth

Overall, the SVOD market performed strongly in 2021. It generated approximately $3.2 billion (or about £2.7 billion), an increase of 27% compared to last year. The top three services—Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney+—accounted for 89% of the market share.

Ofcom’s analysis highlights the evolving TV and video landscape and the divide between younger and older viewers. Almost nine in ten adults, 18-24, go straight to streaming, on-demand, and social video services when looking for something to watch. In contrast, 59% of adults aged 55-64, and 76% of adults who are 65+, turn to TV channels first.

The report also suggests that streaming services with hybrid business models may become more common among SVOD offerings. Introducing ad-supported tiers (e.g., Netflix and Disney+) subscription opportunities to hard-to-convert viewers may move the dial for new subscribers. As the on-demand market evolves, media companies must consider multiple access points, platforms, and price points to acquire new subscribers to grow their audience share.

Featured Post | Innovation

Live sports may be the ticket to growing streaming audiences 

Live sports have been the jewel in broadcast companies’ crowns for decades. The allure of a live and hugely engaged audience has proved to be an effective draw for brand advertisers, particularly those with high-value consumer goods to hawk. That allure hasn’t lost its luster. 

Sports broadcast rights remain competitive, expensive, and increasingly fragmented. But what has changed is how audiences choose to interact with sports content. The rise of social media and streaming platforms has changed the game, as their inherent interactivity enhance the appeal of live sport. 

Combine this with the investment other media companies have placed in their subscription- and advertising-based streaming platforms, and the growing cost of sports content, and you have a space ripe for disruption. And while the details of exactly how disruption is taking place varies by platform, sport and country, it ultimately has the same cause as the tumult across the media world: tech turning passive audiences into active participants. 

Social sport 

At Twitter’s recent Newfronts appeal to advertisers, the company announced the rolling over of the platform’s partnership with the WNBA. This marks the sixth year of the partnership which grants Twitter the broadcast license for live games. It is no coincidence this is designed to further engage a predominantly women-led audience at a time when bringing in new audiences is key. Following its 2022 regular season, the WNBA announced that the league “set records for engagement with 186 million video views (+36% vs 2021)” across its social media platforms. 

Twitter’s rationale for that partnership is its ability to offer real-time reaction to every basket and foul on. The real-time interplay between tech platform and sports content is part and parcel of how many media companies are selling their sports streaming to advertisers. 

Theo Luke, senior director of global content partnerships at Twitter, tells me, “A fundamental to the live sport experience is talking about it. Increasingly broadcasters are actively including social media rights in their deal renewals with leagues because they see the value of highlighting clips alongside the live streaming experience to capture larger audiences and other revenue streams.”  

“For example, through our recent Twitter Amplify partnerships with ITV and Formula 1, we offer a number of real-time highlights and the opportunity to engage with the moments that matter directly on people’s timelines,” Luke continues. “From an advertiser’s perspective, this not only allows you to align with premium video content, but also position yourself at the heart of the action and fanbases. When sport happens on Twitter, you don’t have a passive viewership, but an engaged, attentive and connected audience.” 

Live community interaction has also been Twitch’s core appeal from even before it was Twitch. Since its acquisition by Amazon, the livestreaming platform has been inching ever closer to a destination for premier sports content. That’s been accelerated by Amazon’s investment in the broadcast rights for sports, and the deeper integration of its advertising tech with the Twitch platform.  

In 2020, only two years after Amazon acquired some of the rights for Premier League matches, it was already streaming those high-value matches for free on Twitch, as well as NBA content. At the time, Twitch’s content acquisition lead, Eric Brunner, said, “They’re very open to exploring new ways to engage their community, like co-streaming USA Basketball on Twitch.”  

Effectively, then, the new streaming platforms are hoping the pre-existing live interaction that formed their core appeal will supercharge interaction around sports coverage. That creates huge opportunities for potential advertising partners, both in terms of activating those audiences in the moment and by providing analytics around the interaction. 

Sports clubs reap the benefits of streaming 

The transition to sports streaming on new platforms is also being driven by the sports leagues and clubs themselves. Andreas Jung, chief marketing officer for FC Bayern Munich, told me the club’s engagement windows have widened beyond match day: “This is the expectation that the fans have and they want to participate in everything. This means that they consume content everywhere and anytime… 24/7.” 

Fans can pay a yearly fee to be club members, and Jung says members, “have the expectation to get more information, to get to be closer with a club and therefore we have to bring them more information, we have to bring them more services and so on and so on.” As a result, Bayern is betting on its multi-year partnership with Adobe to boost its streaming content for users – and to deliver greater advertising revenue. 

Opportunities for smaller leagues and networks 

And while platforms and the bigger legacy leagues take advantage of the new advertising opportunities afforded by live streaming, smaller clubs and platforms are effectively launching as alternatives. Unbound by the limited amount of airtime on linear channels, new wrestling leagues are vaulting over the lower bar to entry to replicate some of the new opportunities – albeit at a smaller scale. 

Guildford Town FC is a regional soccer team in the UK, far removed from the glittering heights of the Premier League. Speaking about the club’s partnership with dedicated sports streaming platform Joymo, its manager Paul Barnes echoed the comments from larger clubs: “I believe this is where the world is going. We’ve talked about the benefits from a playing perspective and staying connected with our fans, but this is also a way for us to make revenues that can help the ongoing development of the club.” 

In the U.S., too, smaller leagues are using streaming to grow audiences and revenue. Overtime, a sports media company aimed at Millennials, recently raised over $80 million in a Class C funding round. Much of the confidence around the investment is predicated on Overtime’s strong social media and streaming offering, which includes 65 million followers across all of its 80 social media channels 

The strategy was pioneered by esports leagues, which grew from grassroots to huge events through judicious use of live streaming platforms like Twitch. What is especially interesting for wider media companies, though, is that even traditional broadcasters, such as BBC and BT Sport, are now adding esports coverage to their linear offerings.  

New audiences, new approaches 

“Twitter works alongside broadcasters and rights holders to help make live sporting events even bigger,” explains Luke. “Our platform connects people directly to what’s happening around live events and that conversation provides greater value to our partners.”  

He continues, “Most recently, we saw this with the UEFA Women’s EURO 2022, which saw the number of tweets [triple] ahead of the final and nearly 900 million impressions in the UK throughout the tournament. Watching live sport in 2022 isn’t just about consumption, it’s also about engagement.” 

James Hartnett, account director for sports-specialist marketing agency The Playbook, told me, “As the topics and ways they are discussed has also evolved, so too have the platforms sports fans turn to. The primary source of 39% of 18-24-year-old ‘social natives’ for sports news – including match highlights, unique moments and opinion commentary – is TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. The stats are much the same for 25-34-year-old, though they tend to prefer Facebook over TikTok.  

Streaming has indelibly altered sports viewing. This creates new opportunities across the ecosystem, especially when it comes to engaging new, often younger, audiences – a challenge most publishers can relate to. 

Featured Post | Innovation

3 reasons publishers need a dedicated YouTube strategy 

You probably have a presence on YouTube, but do you have a specific strategy for the platform? If you don’t, then it’s time to address that.

With close to 2.5 billion monthly active users, YouTube is the second most popular social network in the world. Only Facebook, with 2.9 billion users each month, enjoys greater reach. 

Despite this, many publishers’ presence on YouTube can often feel like an afterthought. The popular video-sharing network sometimes seems like an also-ran when compared with the content strategies (and resources!) being deployed across newer, shiner, networks like Instagram or TikTok. 

It’s time for that to change. Here are three key reasons why.

1. YouTube is too big to ignore

Originally created way back in 2005, YouTube is not exactly a new kid on the digital block. Yet it’s also far from being an internet dinosaur. 

According to Semrush, a software-as-service (SaaS) platform used for keyword research and online ranking data, last month YouTube was the second most visited website in the world with 60.9 billion visits. The average session visit was a whopping 29 mins 42 seconds.

Image: Screenshot(s) via Semrush, 22 August 2022

“YouTube is a seriously undervalued part of most publishers’ audience development plans,” Nic Newman, the lead author of the annual Digital News Report, recently told me during an email conversation about their 2022 study. 

The latest findings, which were published in June by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, found that across the 46 countries covered by the report, YouTube “is the second most important network for news after Facebook,” Newman says.

Because this is a global study, there’s considerable variance on a country-by-country basis. 

Nonetheless, in the United States, YouTube is the second most popular social channel for news in a typical week (19% of the sample). That puts it behind Facebook (28%) but some way ahead of Twitter (11%). 

It enjoys similar popularity when figures are aggregated across 12 major markets. This reflects the universality of its appeal and begs the question of whether publishers are giving the platform the attention it deserves.

2. YouTube is a versatile platform

User habits for news and other content on YouTube might also surprise you. As Micaeli Rourke explained in a feature for Digital Content Next last December, YouTube is something of an audio powerhouse. (Disclaimer: She interviewed me for the article.) 

YouTube was the leading platform for podcast consumption in the Ulast year, the 2021 Digital News Report found. They don’t provide comparative data for 2022. However, the latest study does note that YouTube is the second biggest platform for podcast consumption in Germany (19% of listeners) and the top source in Spain (30%).

Video-led podcasts are part of the reason for this popularity, as well as the opportunity to access content on multiple devices. This includes desktop and Smart TV consumption, which allows YouTube to play in the background, as well as more active “lean in” viewing. 

The rise of YouTube viewing on TV sets is one reason why mobile increasingly makes up a smaller percentage of overall views in many developed markets. This presents opportunities for content creators to reach audiences in new places and spaces.  

WIRED’s Auto Complete Interview with Ice Cube.

Meanwhile, the ease of publication (and lack of a requirement for a broadcast licence) has resulted in the emergence of YouTube TV-style shows and commentary alongside popular formats such as WIRED’s Autocomplete Interview (where celebrities answer the internet’s most searched questions about themselves) and Vogue’s 73 Questions video series. It also creates opportunities for historically text-centric outlets, such as Portland-based newspaper The Oregonian to go deep with long-form investigative stories. And it enables the Guardian (and others) to produce highly effective short explainer videos on issues du jour.

Looking ahead, Podnews revealed in March that YouTube is working to improve promotion, discoverability, and monetization opportunities for podcasters, including audio ads and “new metrics for audio-first creators.” Similarly, YouTube Shorts, its “TikTok clone,” is also a growing priority for the platform and another space that publishers may look to capitalize on. 

Collectively, these formats, along with more traditional video content found on the site, present a variety of means for publishers’ to harness YouTube as part of their engagement and revenue strategies. 

YouTube generated around $20 million in advertising revenue in 2020, CNBC reports. Arguably, that puts it in competition with publishers for ad dollars. However, creators can join the YouTube Partner Program (YPP) to earn income through mechanisms such as advertising, sponsored content, channel subscriptions and online shopping. YouTube’s revenue share model means that publishers typically take home 55% of the revenue from ads shown against their videos, Digiday stated back in 2020. 

That said, some of these returns might be less than publishers hoped for. Digiday notes that “news publishers, in particular, have a harder time attracting ad dollars because advertisers remain wary of their ads appearing next to controversial topics.”

Nevertheless, when it comes to both content and opportunities for revenue, the platform’s versatility means you don’t have to deploy a cookie-cutter model to be successful on it. There’s scope for variety, experimentation and avoiding the “one size fits all” approach, which you sometimes encounter on other platforms.  

3. YouTube effectively reaches younger audiences

Reaching a youth audience has long been the Holy Grail for many brands and media companies. For publishers interested in reaching Millennials, Gen Z, and even Generation Alpha (a cohort born in the past decade), YouTube should feature prominently in their plans. 

New data from the Pew Research Center demonstrates how YouTube usage is virtually ubiquitous among American teenagers. Teenage boys are more likely to say they use YouTube than teenage girls. However, in terms of those who have tried the service, there’s actually surprisingly little variance across a wide range of different indices. 

Moreover, when looking at teens overall, Pew’s “Teens, Social Media and Technology 2022” report discovered that nearly one in five (19%) say they use YouTube almost constantly. That puts it ahead of both TikTok (16%) and Snapchat (15%). Collectively, around three-quarters of U.S. teens (77%) visit YouTube on a daily basis, some way in front of its rivals. 

Roll credits

This isn’t a piece extolling another “pivot to video.” We’ve been there. We know how that worked out. Instead, it is a recommendation to take a look at YouTube and whether you are using it as effectively, and comprehensively, as you could. 

Of course, the platform is not without its challenges. Its recommendation engine can drive viewers away from your channel to other creators. Publishers might prefer to keep traffic (and its associated ad revenue) on their own properties. And last year The Information argued that programmatic ad sales were also hurting midsize publishers. Companies like BuzzFeed and Vice receive less money via YouTube’s revenue share arrangements than if they sold the spots directly, they said. Nonetheless, despite these real considerations, YouTube’s size, versatility, and reach with younger audiences are all major plus points.

Press Gazette has outlined how the biggest publishers on YouTube—in terms of subscribers and all-time views—are typically broadcasters. Many of these providers will post copies of reports, bulletins and shows, or offer a livestream, on the platform. But that doesn’t mean non-broadcasters can’t punch through. Press Gazette’s research also shows how Vox has broken the paradigm with a distinctive approach to high-quality (and often quite evergreen) video. 

Vox, along with Vice News and Insider, have also achieved success on the platform despite publishing considerably fewer videos than many of their more broadcast-led peers. This makes it clear that this isn’t just about volume of content.

In a separate discussion with video leads at UK newspapers, The Sun and The Guardian, they also posited how a clear voice, a willingness to experiment and “building trust with the casual audience,” are all potential ingredients for YouTube success. 

Thus far, tapping into YouTube’s potential isn’t something that many non-broadcast publishers have done well. Yet. 

But, if publishers are able to look beyond platforms like Twitter, Instagram and TikTok (channels that either fall into the media’s longstanding issue with “shiny object syndrome” or spaces that might also seem more natural hubs for their content), then that might change in the not-too-distant future. 

Certainly based on its audience, reach and breadth of content you can post, there’s an argument to be made that YouTube merits more of many publishers’ time and resources than it currently enjoys. If you want to ride the next digital wave, this trusty steed may not be a bad one to back. 

Featured Post | Innovation | Perspectives

Streaming is for everyone: three strategic considerations

2022 already has been a dramatic year for streaming. Even if you’re not trying to keep up with day-to-day industry developments, you’re probably aware that CNN+ launched and died, Netflix announced plans to launch an ad-supported tier, and IMDb TV was renamed “Freevee.” These rapid developments may seem daunting for many potential streaming players, considering that the ground will shift again soon.

But here’s the good news about these rapid changes: While the “Streaming Wars” narrative — referring primarily to competition among media giants’ SVOD strategies — remains the focus of many in the business and trade press, the reality is that there are wide-open opportunities for a variety of players. Whether it’s a paid app, a YouTube channel, or a free channel on a FAST service, streaming is definitely not confined to the players locked in the so-called streaming wars. Streaming is for everyone.

We’re just getting started

SVOD, AVOD, FAST, OTT, and CTV are not only competing, overlapping, and complementary acronyms — they represent multiple potential business models as well as multiple avenues to reach audiences looking for entertainment, news, and sports. Across devices, services, and platforms, there are more opportunities than ever before to develop content, products and business models contributing to the next evolution of the streaming industry.

Media players and startups — large and small — can compete and win the loyalty and trust of consumers. By the end of 2022, we will see new players on the streaming scene — growing, thriving, and innovating to capture audience attention and significant revenue opportunities.

Find your place in streaming

The fact is, it remains early days for streaming viewership, and we need bold players to bring expertise and creativity to the space. So let’s set aside the winners-take-most Streaming Wars narrative and consider these factors:

1. Focus on the right video strategy for your audience.

In the streaming space, many strategies and tactics are still in an experimental stage, so don’t assume that your traditional competitor’s widely-publicized strategy is going to work. And definitely do not copy their strategy without significant research and diligence, because you may find that your competitor doesn’t have a clue — and won’t provide significant competition at all in the streaming space. For instance, it may be that launching a solid AVOD or FAST strategy will give you much of the data you need to make a decision about an SVOD strategy.

2. It’s easier and less expensive than you think to get started.

There are new technologies and new tech companies that can support a variety of streaming strategies. Generally speaking, these options are less expensive, more standardized and faster to implement than many broadcast technologies. Additionally, trusted brands will be in a good place to negotiate with these vendors.

3. Creativity and innovation are badly needed in the streaming space.

Think about how hard it is — still — to navigate streaming interfaces. This space needs to improve the consumer experience, ASAP. With so many major media brands in flux, those who are focused on making streaming a great consumer experience have an incredible chance to jump in and create a successful strategy.

Focus on the consumer to improve what’s ahead

The complexity of the streaming landscape is enough to confound savvy media veterans and newcomers alike. But this complexity should not prevent most media players from crafting or revamping their streaming strategy – now. It’s a wide-open field for trusted brands and innovators, especially those who create content, products and services with viewers at the center. We all have a lot to learn from rapidly shifting consumer habits and preferences, and the timing has never been better to start learning.

About the author

Christy Tanner, President of Tanner Media LLC, is former EVP & GM of CBS Interactive, where she built CBS News Digital/CBSN into the #1 streaming news service, with more than 1 billion streams in 2020 and 2021.

Industry-Research

Publishers’ video focus among major shifts for 2022

Instagram is hot but YouTube is not. Publishers around the world are shifting focus this year, according to a recent survey of 30 publishers from 17 countries. The Publishing Trends Report 2022 by Echobox offers insight into publisher’s evolving priorities as they move out of pandemic crisis mode into the new normal.

Respondents indicated that they are most focused on increasing web traffic, utilizing new content formats, and embracing automation. They also share a keen interest in capturing the attention of the all-important youth demographic.

The survey included participants from the following countries: Argentina, Bulgaria, Ecuador, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, United Kingdom, United States, and Uruguay. This year, the authors of the report concentrated on data received from decision-makers and social media specialists. News outlets comprised over 50% of the sample.

Publishers’ top priorities for 2022:

  • Increase traffic (73%)
  • Grow social media followers & engagement (57%)
  • Improve quality of published content (50%)

The release of free digital information during the pandemic led to a surge in traffic for online publishers, which – perhaps paradoxically – lead to more paid subscribers. The resulting increase in digital subscriptions even helped offset the longtime decline of print subscriptions. Respondents’ strong interest in increasing web traffic reflects reduced reliance on print revenue, while publishers continue to hone an ideal balance between paywalled and unrestricted content.

Which activities are most important to publishers in 2022?

  • Video content 63%
  • New social media platforms 43%
  • Newsletters 43%
  • Finding new audiences 40%

Authors of the study link the appeal of video to declining costs of production, the popularity of short-form content across social media platforms, and video’s effectiveness in engaging audiences.

Although only 43% of respondents listed newsletters as a top priority in 2022, 64% of respondents indicated plans to either start producing newsletters, or increase the number of newsletters they offer. This reflects the focus on turning general web traffic into subscribers.

The most important platforms for publishers in 2022 are:

  • Instagram 83%
  • Facebook 37%
  • Twitter 23%
  • TikTok 20%
  • LinkedIn 13%
  • YouTube 3%

The surge of publishers’ interest in Instagram also points to their desire to expand their audience in the 18-24 range, as they look to the future.  Pew Research Center data indicates that 76% of 18–24-year-olds use Instagram, and it remains among the most downloaded apps. Another draw is that Instagram is less publisher-saturated than Facebook.

Why the lukewarm interest in TikTok if younger audiences are so crucial? Survey authors attribute this to the relative newness of the platform. They found that publishers have not had time to refine their strategy to generate traffic via TikTok. Also, fewer young people use TikTok for news content than Instagram, which makes the platform less of a priority for news organizations.

A big change between the 2021 and 2022 survey results was declining interest in YouTube. In 2021, 52% of respondents believed YouTube to be of increased importance. However, in 2022 that percentage fell to just 3%. This would seem to contradict publisher’s strong stated interest in video this year. However, authors suggest that the drop may be due to publishers tailoring video content towards Instagram and other platforms which require formats and dimensions that don’t transfer easily to YouTube. Those interested in producing longer, larger format videos may be using third party vendors or in-house production, bypassing YouTube.

While Instagram is attracting a surge of attention from publishers in 2022, due in part to being less saturated with publisher content than Facebook, Facebook remains a mainstay platform for publishers. In 2021, 40% of publishers surveyed by Echobox stated that “staying ahead of Facebook algorithm changes” was a priority. This points to publishers’ awareness of the continued importance of Facebook referral traffic.

The growing Importance of AI

  • 74% consider AI important or very important in 2022
  • 67% believe AI will be more significant to their organization in 2022 than in 2021
  • Use and implementation of AI is increasing in emerging markets, not just large-scale publishers
  • Emerging markets are focusing AI efforts on automation of paywalls and subscriptions

In the 2021 survey, 1 in 3 companies cited lack of time as a major concern. The potential for AI to alleviate pressure and free up time can help publishers focus on a top priority cited in 2022 survey results: creating quality content.

Featured Post | Perspectives

Stay the course

Netflix’s earnings report last week sent a chill across nearly every company with a business model tied to a direct-to-consumer relationship. There are real concerns about the global economy and speculation about whether the  massive increase in streaming viewing habits seen during the pandemic will prove to be enduring. However, I wonder whether the insights gleaned from the Netflix situation are unique to Netflix and not a strong indicator for other media companies, most of which are just starting their streaming ventures.

First, let’s acknowledge the macroeconomy. Inflation registering over 8% will impact nearly every consumer market; this is especially true if inflation leads to higher interest rates and the dreaded “R” word. Unfortunately, this will be an ever-intensifying concern.

There has been a great awakening around the globe after two years of Covid, during which we had requirements and excuses to stay home and avoid socializing. There were countless stories in the trade and mainstream press as we witnessed streaming viewership’s outsized growth about isolation’s impact on our insatiable appetite for entertainment – escape. And binge-watching – which was already a trend after Netflix tossed a hand grenade into the linear schedule – only escalated during this period.

Certainly, Netflix finds itself with real competition for digital share of wallet for the first time in its history. Storied media companies have rolled out exclusive offerings that feature everything from hit television programs to blockbuster movie franchises: Batman, Star Trek, Yellowstone, Avengers from HBO Max, Paramount+, Peacock, Disney+, respectively. Many have regained rights to classic television hits that are endlessly bingeworthy.  Meanwhile, Netflix has increased its price, nearly doubling its monthly cost ($15.49 from $7.99 when it first launched) while cracking down on password-sharing as it, impressively, has saturated the market.

But while Netflix may have led the way in streaming, it may not be the best proxy for the subscription market opportunity. The company faces its own issues with stagnating growth and should not be mistaken for marketplace indicators. 

What is really happening

DCN’s 2021 research into the value of direct, trusted consumer relationships, brands as proxies for this trust, the needs and behaviors of Gen Z vs Gen Y, and the subscription market point to this lesson: Ignore Netflix and stay the course.

Most important are the lessons coming from studying the “next” generation. Consumer behavior is radically different in a world where payment and immediate gratification are merely a double tap of the thumb and face scan away on a mobile device. Paying for access to your favorite news or entertainment product, whether podcast, app or website, is no longer a foreign concept after hitting a “paywall.” Rather, it is little more than a friendly nudge along the way associating value with the products you love.

The number of people willing to pay for access to news and entertainment is increasing. In fact, Netflix’s greatest legacy for the market as a whole may have been leading the horse to the water. Netflix also worked with premium providers and helped build an appetite for great content and normalized paying for it.

What publishers seek

Now, distribution platforms from Apple to Google to Facebook are being pushed to finally act as true partners in driving subscription revenues and monetization for premium publishers. At times this nudge has had to come from regulatory threats in an effort to create more balanced bargaining power.

But what are publishers seeking? Publishers expect traffic to their owned and operated platforms and true ownership over the customer journey including the underlying transaction and customer data.

Publishers also want to take back control over the pricing, bundling, and messaging for their services from the distribution platforms. This allows a trusted publisher to extract and retain more subscription revenues by controlling their highly-valued brands and, importantly, the customer data from before, during, and after their subscription relationship. 

Putting things in perspective

For decades, the vast majority of digital content was available for free.

Meanwhile, Netflix built its business on spending (many would say excessively) on licensing and creating content. It helped rebuild the consumer appetite for quality content and experiences worth paying for. However, when we consider the implications of the company’s recent subscriber losses, we should not be so quick to predict a ripple effect across subscription-based businesses as a whole.

While a couple of news publishers, and a handful of other streamers count their subscribers in the tens of millions, the reality is that most publishers count theirs in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Thus, the basis for comparison with Netflix’s 220 million subscribers is specious at best. That’s like comparing a slowdown in Coca-Cola’s beverage sales to my kids’ driveway lemonade stand.

And the behavior of younger consumers points to a healthy appetite for great content and a willingness to pay for it. Now is not the time to panic, pivot, or radically shift your subscription strategy in Netflix’s wake. Instead, trust in the value of quality content well-delivered in trustworthy settings and know that audiences will be right there with you.

Industry-Research

How video streaming services innovate and stay competitive

Streaming is popular but competition is fierce. It seems like every major network and media company has launched a streaming service.

Last week, Netflix released its 4Q 2021 earnings. The company closed the year with 221.8 million subscribers. However, Netflix fell short of its Q4 new subscriber forecast. Pivotal Research Group analyst Jeff Wlodarczak comments that streaming services are adjusting to the new norm of subscription growth compared to the accelerated sign-ups witnessed during 2020’s lockdown. Wlodarczak believes, “Streaming is not over; it is the future.”

A number of industry analysts have identified strategies and offer insight into the streaming marketplace’s next steps.

International growth

MarketWatch points to global programming investment as a top priority for streaming services. And the investment in content only bears this out.  

  • Netflix’s hit series from South Korea, Squid Game, is one of many international success stories and a clear winner for the platform. Expect more foreign-language series to be developed as Netflix turns international growth, especially in Asia, India and Latin America.
  • Amazon’s Prime Video will offer more programming in India’s Hindi, Tamil, and Telugu languages. It’s India service registered tripled its viewing hours over the past two years there.
  • Apple TV+ will debut its first Russian-language show, the thriller “Container,” in the spring.
  • Disney+ plans 50 Asian originals by 2023, as it expands to South Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.
  • HBO Max debuts in Europe in early 2022.
  • Paramount+ also debuts in South Korea and Western Europe.
  • Peacock expanded to Europe (on Sky platforms), with more than 50 Spanish-language projects with Telemundo.

Mix and matching viewing strategies

While Linear TV marathons introduced us to binge viewing, Netflix’s flexible nature made it an everyday behavior. TheRinger identifies the different episode distribution strategies to keep viewers engaged and coming back to view more. As noted with Netflix, flexibility is essential and a reminder that different approaches offer different results. A buzz-worthy binge (all episodes released at once) can be great PR for a new series release. Additionally, a scheduled infusion of new episodes can draws viewers back week after week. 

Apple TV+ offers a “demi-binge” strategy, debuting with a batch of three episodes, then airing the remaining seven one at a time.

WarnerMedia’s HBO Max uses a hybrid approach, breaking up seasons into packs of two or three episodes released over several weeks.

Interestingly, Peacock’s promotes binging but at higher pricing for specific series. Seasons 1 and 2 of The Office are available at the lowest-priced monthly subscription price of $4.99 a month. To unlock every episode, extended cuts, never-before-seen-footage, and watch commercial-free, consumers pay $9.99 — the highest tier.  

Amazon’s The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel will switch from releasing all eight episodes at once to two a week for four weeks. Fear not, the binging release strategy is far from over. Rather, this is simply different viewing models in play. And they are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Merger, acquisitions, and differentiation

As Netflix invests in gaming, Amazon looks to its NFL and Thursday Night Football. Both are clear points of differentiation. Other services look to corporate and sibling-studio deals to offer HBO Max, Peacock, and Paramount+ access to new movies releases 45 days after they open in theaters.

CNBC Tech Reporter Alex Sherman points to the significance of mergers. He believes that Paramount+ and Peacock won’t last as standalone streaming services, and a merger is likely in their future. 

Discovery Inc.’s acquisition of WarnerMedia (expected to be complete in mid-2022) will combine the streaming platform of Discovery+ and HBO Max. Combined, they will have approximately 100 million subscribers.

Streaming platforms are making significant investments in new and innovative content and unique deal-making to differentiate themselves from competitors. They need to keep their customers consistently engaged, especially as consumers begin to reevaluate their multiple subscriptions to access the content they want to watch.

©2023 Digital Content Next. All Rights Reserved.