Author/media critic Michael Wolff says TV is prevailing because it refused to change when confronted with the digital challenge, he said. “Not bending is exactly the thing that has kept the industry in place, strong and in a competitive position.” Digital companies like Netflix and Facebook pose a threat, but not as digital media outlets, but as producers and distributors of TV, he says.
TVB FORWARD
TV Well-Placed To Survive Digital’s Attack
Broadcasters who have been wringing their hands about digital media for the past decade or two heard some encouraging and perhaps calming words at the TVB Forward Conference this morning.
They are not dinosaurs, after all.
That’s according to media critic Michael Wolff, who discussed his new book, Television Is the New Television in an on-stage Q&A with Wall Street Journal reporter Keach Hagey.
For the past 15 years, broadcasters and other purveyors of TV have been portrayed as dinosaurs certain to give way to the digital media “propagandized” as more evolved and better in every possible way, Wolff said.
“It is interesting, refreshing and totally unexpected that the dinosaurs are going to continue to roam the earth and rule,” he said.
TV is prevailing because it refused to change when confronted with the digital challenge, he said. “Not bending is exactly the thing that has kept the industry in place, strong and in a competitive position.”
BRAND CONNECTIONS
The old dinosaurs like CBS CEO Les Moonves had the right attitude, he said. “People like to watch TV so why should we do anything different?”
Meanwhile, digital has failed to deliver on its promise of a more efficient advertising platform, he said. As an advertising medium, it is like outdoor. Digital traffic “speeds by, it sees very little, it pays almost no attention, it doesn’t really care where it is. It is, finally, worth very little,” Wolff said.
“Digital media consists of this entirely undifferentiated audience — and audience that you trick to come to you, an audience that doesn’t care about you, an audience that actually doesn’t know who you are.”
And as a business, digital is like direct mail, he said. It’s OK, but it’s low margin and “you are not going to make a meaningful difference in the world and you are not going to have any fun.”
TV also has an advantage in that it is measured in a “conscientious way,” he said. By contrast, everything that digital media say about their traffic is “a lie. There is not one reliable number in the digital world, starting with the fact that fully one-third of the people that use digital media may not even be people.”
The challenge that TV faces is not digital, but that fact is “we are moving inexorably into a post-advertising world.”
But given that fact, TV is in better shape that than digital. TV now gets half of its revenue from non-advertising sources, while digital relies completely on it. “So, who’s in the stronger position?” he asked.
Digital companies like Netflix and Facebook pose a threat to the dinosaurs, but not as digital media outlets, but as producers and distributors of TV, he said.
“It is entirely unclear who is going to be the winner in the TV business,” he said. “But what seems entirely clear is that the game to win is the TV business.”
Read all of TVNewsCheck’s TVB Forward coverage here.
Comments (7)
Brian Bussey says:
September 17, 2015 at 3:57 pm
great book !
Gregg Palermo says:
September 17, 2015 at 4:09 pm
Old people like to watch TV. Apparently none of the people in this opinion piece have spent much time with 14 to 22-year-olds who are presently avoiding TV shows produced by the legacy companies. They watch clips on YouTube. They live on their phones. They stay in their rooms. They will be the wave that skips the TV habit the same way their older brethren skipped the newspaper habit. But if I wanted to sell books to worried people, it might help to preach there’s nothing to fear. Just keep whistling in the dark.
David Bisceglia says:
September 18, 2015 at 9:04 am
Deja vu. I heard a very similar version of this speech in 2006, at a newspaper conference. It got a standing ovation.
Jim Dodrill says:
September 18, 2015 at 9:36 am
Definitions and Perspectives. What is “TV”? If the general concept being used is….any video -then sure, “TV” will be around. Just like “print” will be around if you allow “print” to mean any form of written word (aka content)
Bruce Morrison says:
September 18, 2015 at 11:56 am
I think his book is entirely accurate. People do spend plenty of time on Phones and Computers and the capabilities those offer will only grow. Interacting with ads and brands and even noticing digital ads is something very few real consumers do unless they have aspirations to become a digital media blogger. There is nothing more stressful than when you are looking up something during your harried day, and an ad intrudes. Most don’t remember the ad, most skip the ads whenever possible and others are aggravated by the fact that someone just forced another ad on them at an inopportune time again. It’s great to know you placed an ad in front of someone who said they ate pizza in the past, if you are a pizza company, but if they ignore the ad, does it really matter? TV is still the only real place people still go to view at a time they are relaxed and understand that ads are possible. Young kids can watch shows on small screens, but most adults appreciate the larger screen for the viewing experience and the ability to do it with someone else and I think as kids grow up they will do the same. Digital has done an amazing snow job taking logical insights that are easy to believe and conveniently ignoring the reality of actual interactions.
David Bisceglia says:
September 18, 2015 at 12:37 pm
The best gauge of what works and what doesn’t is what advertisers consistently spend their money on. I don’t think they care about Mr. Wolff’s opinion, or mine, or anybody who might comment here. That concept is pretty difficult to argue with, unless you’re willing to argue that advertisers are consistently, year after year, are being duped and are too stupid to figure it out. So…..why have auto dealers and manufacturers so severely cut print and broadcast budgets and plowed more than half their advertising expenditures into digital? Maybe Mr. Wolff can convince them the digital folks are lying. If marketers across the board are spending more on digital media than they are on TV advertising (or any other form of advertising, in most cases), I’d say that they’re telling us something pretty clearly.
Bruce Morrison says:
September 18, 2015 at 2:11 pm
We believe advertisers are being duped. If we ask why do advertisers have to pay for “skipped” ads, we’re told because CPM’s would be through the roof if they only counted people who watch the whole ad. We ask ‘what about “bots”? Answer: we are still working that out or no one really knows. While one brand out of 10 might have some level of active engagement with a few real people that don’t have an agenda, and that’s the one the stories come out about, the others languish looking for digital nirvana, and the most anyone can say is that there was some percentage increase attributable to digital. Though think of the last time you saw the starting or ending number. Or, if you hear the starting or ending number, when was the last time anyone disclosed how much they spent to make it happen? Sorry, that’s still too embarrassing to tell… Most brands, especially those who really measure sales (Direct Response) have found that digital does not have the capacity to efficiently deliver the volume of buyers at a rate comparable to TV. I agree that every brand should have a facebook page for those that really love them, but driving people to that facebook page would be much more effective with TV than with more digital. Digital is so new, there is no consistency in any aspect other than search yet. People are only trying everything, looking for data they can use to keep their jobs because every conference is overly loaded with Digital “Guru’s saying the same version of nothing to wild applause, while TV has successfully built more brands than anything else. Not to mention the larger commissions possible because what advertiser can really tell you what something on the internet actually costs?? Ever seen these facts:
Only 8% of internet users account for 85% of clicks on display ads (and some of them aren’t even humans!). 8. About 50% of clicks on mobile ads are accidental.
The average person is served over 1,700 banner ads per month. Do you remember any?
These largely apply to almost any internet/mobile ad.