Ad Age hops on board the story we've been writing about for months now, about how perhaps by this time next year online streaming of TV shows will have the same commercials that run nationally on TV, at least within three days of when they aired on TV.
In fairness we were first tipped off by Turner research chief Jack Wakshlag last October. Wakshlag (and others) had been stumping for online measurement by Nielsen of TV shows. Specifically they wanted online viewing counted in the C3 measurement (commercial viewing live plus 3 days worth of DVR viewing) and I'd suggested no advertisers are going to care about that unless the online streaming included the same ads as on TV.
Mr. Wakshlag left a comment with a nice version of "Duh! I'm not an idiot, the videos will carry the same ads as aired on television for at least up to three days."
There are at least a few ramifications to this:
1.) more money: the networks will be able to monetize online viewing at TV rates and across many many more ads.
2.) there will be a lot more commercials in the online streams than the handful you get in a typical one hour show online today. Ad Age covers some of the concerns about that.
3.) the PR machine will be set in motion to decry DVRs an obsolete technology and how online is where it's at. OK, CBS research David Poltrack already has set that in motion. What Mr. Poltrack doesn't reveal however is his true motivation: "you can easily skip those ads on your DVRs, but you won't be able to online. Death to DVRs, long live online!"
I favor transparency a bit more than Mr. Poltrack, but for what it's worth, I don't blame him, and once the Nielsen online measurement is in place he's likely to get much more support for his rallying cry.
Sooner or later the New York Times will do a big write up on this.
Awesome… I hope Smallville benefits from this..
RE: “What Mr. Poltrack doesn’t reveal however is his true motivation: ‘you can easily skip those ads on your DVRs, but you won’t be able to online.’”
Sorry, Mr. Poltrack… there’s still the mute button and turning off the speakers while going out to get a sandwich and soda.
I think it’s ridiculous to think that you can effectively run the sames types of advertisements or commercials online as you do on network television but I assume they already know that the medium and audience is different. But it’s a positive step. Personally more 15 second advertisements seems to be a better bet or even banners running on the bottom of the screen.
Programming that has been designed specifically for the internet has much shorter content and much shorter segments yet is still effective. This not only has an impact on advertising, but how shows may ultimately be constructed for both television and online viewing.
But they cannot track that, Nightstar, so it does not matter. The exact same applies to traditional television.
thedemonhog,
I know…
I also appreciate you pointing that out on the off-chance I didn’t know (sincere thanks, no sarcasm implied). 
I guess I see it as my way of saying “have fun with the commercials, I’m getting a snack”. They don’t influence my buying habits (I decide what I want or need, when I want or need it, and buy it if I can) and most of the stuff being sold via commercials I can’t get where I live (fast food, for example… 120 miles as the crow flies to the nearest McDonalds, one way, and I can make a better burger in my kitchen anyway) or require a prescription for a medical condition I don’t have. So, for me, it’s a break from watching to get a few things done then go back to viewing.
I do think that, someday, though, there will be a way to track those sorts of things and the advertisers will want discounts based on a percentage of rascals like me who dare not to watch there masterpieces of commercialized art.
You forgot 4: The programs which already exists which can record streams of websites will expand from from a few to millions.
Honestly I would not mind seeing ads during online viewing so long as they do it to not annoy the viewer. Like up here in Canada, rogers on demand has two 30 spots for a half hour show, and for an hour long program, its like four or five 20 sec. spots. Which I honestly do not mind. Even online viewing for the big three networks do the same for online viewing. Now obviously this would not happen, but I am sure a lot more people would sit through commercials, for online, DVR, and on demand if we weren’t pummeled with ads every 5 minutes.
“their masterpieces” that is…
If there are too many commercials implanted in online streaming of TV shows the home viewers will think less of the value of streaming.
Sponsors like PBS 10 sec. tags are better than long spots while streamming…People will surf away……….from the show…
Guess what, people don’t like commercials while streamming….plan and simple, it interferes with product quality.
Actually if they start adding advertisements to streaming I will simply switch to another tab on my computer until they are over. I already open my laptop when the commercials come on anyway. I do hope the production companies rally around things that can stream to the TV, like Netflix. It already has the technology in place and I love it even with its current limited selection.
When a program on Hulu, that I watch has the same ads as a show on TV, I will stop watching that program.
I already dislike commercials so much, that sometimes when I’m surfing w/ the remote, I’ll watch a show until a commercial happens. Then I start surfing to find a program I don’t mind watching, until a commercial happens there. Then I move on again.
If the commercials for official online shows become too abhorrent many people will abandon the official feeds for “other outlets” without commercials.
I think you may have ADD, Atlee.
People will find away around this too. It’ll bring in big revenue a ways in, after the advertisers are convinced to pay up, then numbers will drop.
For people doing something else while the ads are showing on the online stream…that’s what people have been doing with TV for decades, isn’t it?
Online streaming can only be comparable with TV airing when it becomes an equally valuable model for advertising. And that means having as many commercials, simple as that.
Sounds fine to me. Hulu has been too generous. I would like to see my favorite shows, many of which are on the bubble have more revenue streams to count on.
As for people who complain about commercials: if there weren’t commercials there wouldn’t be any TV so deal with it and shut up.
I don’t like ads, but realistically this was going to happen soon. I don’t know the stats, but a show on the bubble might be renewed if they’re online viewing was a decent size, as the network will be getting the exact same money that they’d get for watching live.
Television isn’t charity. Producing content (TV shows, movies, books, music, art) costs money. Our parents and grandparents generally agreed to watch commercials in lieu of not having to pay cash for programs.
It’s clear that model is dead. It hasn’t been taken off life support yet because no one knows how to replace it. However, it’s dead. Broadcast networks will air shows less likely to be time-shifted, such as major sporting events and reality shows. Maybe crime procedurals too. Watching anything else will require advance cash money.
First I would welcome more on-line content so I can watch what I want, when I want. If it has commercials than that is better than not watching a show I like.
The issue is if there are too many commercials then some people will revert to software that captures the stream and rips out the commercials or just continue to download the pirated commercial free version of the show.
If they keep the commercial breaks short people will not bother. I know that it was a failure revenue-wise but when Fringe did the short commercials I stopped going to check my email, get a snack etc cause I kept taking too long and missing parts of the show.
If the broadcasters keep putting in 3-5 minute commercial breaks than pirating and commercial removing will continue.
The thing with offering tv online with commercials is that there are already tons of places offering tv shows with little to no commercials at all. Pirated shows are available online within an hour of when a tv show airs. This new model is only going to track people who know about Nielsen ratings and want to show the networks they like the show, and people who just don’t know any better.
If given the choice between watching a show with full commercials or none at all, most are going to choose none and head to sites that offer this. I know how the tv model works and that ad are how they make money, but if you are watching your tv online currently, you probably don’t care about that, you just want to see the show. If networks expect this model to work they need to look into spending a lot of time shutting down sites who offer pirated versions.
Why don’t they look into more demographic specific commercials then the same ones that air on tv. For example, if Hulu was a site where you could watch tv but had to sign up and provide your demographics (gender, age, location, interests), then you sell ads/commercials to target markets and you would be guaranteeing that your target market sees the ads and people would be seeing ads about stuff they actually like. The internet gives a lot more access to this information then television does.
I know a few websites which, for a small monthly fee, offer certain benefits which usually include the elimination of their ads.
Is there a chance this concept could be applied to online media streaming?
If online streaming becomes big, I’d pay (something) for ad-free videos & movies.