Commentary Major Sports Pulls Big Streaming Signups: Can Other Genres Do That?

 

Commentary

Major Sports Pulls Big Streaming Signups: Can Other Genres Do That?

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, 7 hours ago

We now know what drives huge, short-term subscription sign-ups that premium streaming platforms continue to seek: Special one-time sports events that come around perhaps once a year -- or once every four years.

NBCU's Peacock posted strong results for the Paris Olympics, adding 2.8 million subscription signups over a seven-day period of the two-week event.

Better still, an AFC Wild Card playoff football game rocketed up with three million new subscribers in January over a three-day weekend period. It was the first ever exclusive NFL playoff game to appear on a premium streaming service. 

Back then, it was the biggest measured streaming signup moment, according to Antenna -- a research company covering the subscription marketplace.

Peacock had enormous growth compared to its competitors. It commanded a 16% share of all premium streaming additions over the prior 12 months.

In July 2024, Peacock drew 29% share of all gross additions in the category.

The Super Bowl -- which shares airing duties between CBS and Paramount -- pulled in 3.4 million new subscriber signups for Paramount+.

The Paris games bested new signup results of 5.6 times those of the previous eight weeks, according to Antenna, a subscription reach company. 

While all this is good news, we know what the next concern is: what of the millions who stick around for the long term -- or for six months or so -- to be loyal fans of that service? 

Antenna found 29% of the AFC Wild Card signup group had canceled their subscription, which means that 71% remained subscribed. It was slightly lower -- on a percentage basis -- for the Super Bowl for Paramount+: 68%, or 2.3 million, stayed with the service.

Peacock’s one-month survival rate across all 2023 signups was 78%.

Going forward, the bigger question for other premium streamers looking to move up the ladder is what special live programming -- sports or otherwise -- can they use to add on millions of subscribers in a couple of days?

Is there a new path for growth that can do that in a more mature marketplace when the competition continues to be fierce?

hispanics

How YouTube, Bounty, Sony Are Winning Hispanic Hearts

• by Sarah Mahoney  @mahoney_sarah, 7 hours ago

 

Companies winning with Hispanic consumers come from diverse industries, with YouTube, Bounty, Sony, Google and Dove ranking highest. New research from Collage Group finds that these brands dominate through their ability to connect with consumers by drawing on their strong sense of cultural duality, positivity, engagement and desire to blaze new trails.

The research looked at more than 800 brands and found those that scored best do so by tapping into the cultural duality of today’s Hispanics, blending traditional heritage with modern cultural influences, like contemporary music and fashion. They also embrace cultural specificity, prioritizing the needs of Spanish speakers, bringing friends and family together, and helping them explore their roots.

“Cultural duality is all about appreciating your heritage and traditions and modern mainstream U.S. culture,” writes Jack Mackinnon, senior director of cultural insights at Collage. “Most Hispanics in the U.S. are also bicultural, meaning they speak both Spanish and English and feel connected to their family’s culture of origin and U.S. culture. It’s also important to note that the vast majority of Hispanics are born in the U.S., so this isn’t an immigration story directly. It’s an immigration-influenced story.”

Ziploc, Colgate, Band-Aid, Nike and Amazon also make Collage’s Top 10 Hispanic brands.

Collage specializes in measuring cultural fluency by measuring six components of people’s sentiments, including positive memories of the brand, values, trust and advocacy. It released the data as many brands gear up for National Hispanic Heritage Month, observed from Sept. 15 through Oct. 15.

Collage notes that the brands that resonate best are devoted to Hispanic audiences all year. In a more detailed case study of Sony, ranked No. 3, the market research company points out multiple ways the brand tells Hispanic-themed stories in many ways. The company offers year-round support through partnerships, internal efforts, and inclusive Spanish language initiatives.

That includes releasing family-friendly movies that span decades, for instance, which help build cozy bonds with family-oriented Hispanics. Among Hispanic respondents, 39% say they are likelier to watch a show or movie if the whole family can enjoy it, versus 30% of the general population.

Sony is especially connected to Gen Z. “Younger Hispanics tend to be more engaged in media consumption – particularly music,” Sudipti Kumar, director of multicultural insights, tells Marketing Daily via email. “Brands engaging with musicians that are relevant to them.” She points to Sony’s partnership with Mexican rapper Peso Pluma as an example.

Among Hispanic audiences of all ages, 87% say they like or love Sony, versus 57% of the general audience. And 45% of respondents describe the brand as being on the rise.

The U.S. Census reports that at 65.2 million, Hispanic consumers represent the nation’s largest ethnic or racial minority, at 19.5%of the total population. A total of 13 states now contain more than one million Hispanic consumers, with a median age of 31.

Commentary

Exiting Late-Night Talk Shows? Young TV Brands Have Options

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, August 14, 2024

The clock seems to be ticking for NBC’s “The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon,” CBS’ “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

Changes in network late-night TV are coming. But don’t count on the same remedy for scripted and unscripted programming on live, linear TV prime-time moving to streaming platforms.

Now it seems that live -- or near-live weekday -- comedy-infused, late-night network talk-show programming might have been somewhat immune from being de-emphasized in the growing world of connected TV (CTV) content, where on-demand programming is everything.

Late-night network talk-show programming doesn’t have to be all that -- but still mostly relevant on a daily news timely basis, via hosts' comedic spin on politics and current news stories.

Jimmy Kimmel, host of  “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” sums this up on the recent Politickin' podcast:

“I don’t know if there will be any late-night television shows on network TV in ten years. Maybe there’ll be one, but there won’t be a lot of them. There’s a lot to watch and now people can watch anything at any time. They’ve got all these streaming services.”

This comes as Kimmel just signed a new three-year deal.

Although viewership of late-night talk shows has slowly receded, they have been helped by digital video online exposure of hosts’ monologues appearing on YouTube, Facebook and other digital destinations.

At the same time, many fringe broadcast late-night shows have disappeared. CBS’ “The Late Late Show with James Corden," NBC’s “Last Call with Carson Daly” and "A Little Late with Lilly Singh” have also gone away.

Cable TV late-night talk shows that have ended include “Full Frontal with Samantha Bee” (in 2022) and “Conan” (in 2021), both on TBS.

It’s not as if these shows -- and hosts -- haven't had a great run. 

Kimmel has been doing it for 21 years. Jay Leno on “Tonight” had a 17-year stint. David Letterman on “The Late Show” had a 22-year run with 11 years on NBC’s “Late Night.” 

Conan O’Brien appeared for 16 years on “Late Night With Conan O’Brian, and a brief four-month run on “Tonight” in 2009 and 2010. On TBS, “Conan” lasted for 11 years.

Johnny Carson remains the longtime champ on “The Tonight Show” -- with a run of 30 years. 

In some ways the internet may be keeping some of these remaining shows around -- perhaps longer than they should have been, at least from a marketing perspective. But there is also a downside.

Kimmel said: “Maybe more significantly, the fact that people are easily able to watch your monologue online the next day, it really cancels out the need to watch it when it’s on the air... Once people stop watching it when it’s on the air, networks are going to stop paying for it to be made.”

So figuring out that networks have already done the advertising math, why keep them around now?

In the recent past, those late-night shows were a way to attract younger-skewing advertisers to network TV -- which helps when the median age for broadcast TV is well above 60 years. 

Who really wants to give that up? Of course, nowadays, young media users have much more diverse digital platforms to get their comedy and entertainment.

And perhaps more trouble down the road -- they may not even want to listen to anyone’s current news comic monologue spin as well

Something t share with your local-direct client. Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

How Retailers Can Keep Consumers Spending Online and In-Store

• by Emily Cross , Yesterday

Traditionally a slower season for retailers, this summer's sports-fueled extravaganza created by the Olympics and soon-to-begin Paralympic games has super-charged the retail landscape. A recent report from Visualsoft revealed that sales in the sports, outdoors and recreation sector has experienced a 49% surge in average revenue compared to 2023 and a 63% rise in average order numbers.

This suggests that the retailers who capitalise on this momentum have the chance to truly go for gold. The best way of doing this is to adapt to the ever-evolving consumer behaviors and technological advancements to find ways of building meaningful consumer relationships that encourage participation and engagement both in-store and online.

Amplify the ‘ROBO’ effect

One of the first things that retailers looking to promote spending online and in-store can do is to amplify the "ROBO" effect (research online, buy offline). Put simply, it’s the behavior of shoppers who research products online and then subsequently make their final purchase in-store. A recent survey by eMarketer has highlighted that nearly a quarter of shoppers engage in this behavior when making a store purchase.

Brands and retailers need to consider this purchase behavior and explore the potential and capabilities surrounding geo-targeting and incentivizing shoppers to visit nearby stores through promotions and exclusive in-store offers. This practice catalyses omnichannel initiatives by creating synergies between digital and physical environments.

Leverage AR/VR advancements

With synergy in mind, immersive experiences enabled through AR/VR create a true integration of online and offline shopping, allowing consumers to visualize products in real-world settings before making a purchase. According to a Harvard Business Review study, customers who use AR spent 20.7% more time on their app, viewed 1.28 times more products, and their likelihood of making a purchase was 19.8% higher during the session than those who did not use AR. It’s clear that the new frontier of retail media will be showcasing these interactive experiences to drive online and offline traffic -- redesigning the way we shop.

Harness first-party data

Retailers have been harnessing first-party data sourced from loyalty card usage to enhance omnichannel strategy and help close the measurement and attribution loop between online advertising and in-store sales. First-party data allows for the synchronization of marketing activations across multiple channels, which not only creates a seamless and completely unique consumer experience, but also embodies a tailored strategy based solely on the individual’s shopping behaviors.

Retailers and brands need to give customers a reason to visit stores and shop online all year around, and embracing technological advancements and shifts in consumer behavior is key to this. In keeping with the times, brands and retailers can maintain a competitive edge and cultivate deeper connections with their customers in a time where it matters most.

Adopting these rules can help retailers score in the summer and beyond and get match fit for the approaching golden quarter when there is even more to play for.

Commentary

When Does Your Brand Need a Refresh? How To Do It Right

• by Brynn Sandy , 7 hours ago

Changing a brand identity isn’t something to take lightly. It can be costly, especially given a company’s size and branding opportunities, and warrants real thought and precision. But a well-executed refresh can breathe new life into a company, especially when there is a strategic reason behind it. Here are five situations that often call for a brand refresh:

Leadership shakeup. New leadership often signals a new direction. A rebrand can instill confidence in an organization as it helps establish a clear identity and goal for the existing team.

Market disruption. Disruption is inevitable in business — whether from black swan events, economic headwinds, regulatory pressures, new competitors, changing customer habits, or internal miscues. A brand refresh can help you reposition yourself in the market, regain lost attention and even spur a comeback.

Shifting target audience. When your brand expands into a new market segment or geographic region, you might need to adapt to resonate with this new audience. A brand refresh can help you communicate your value proposition in a way that’s relevant and engaging to them.

Evolving products, services and opportunities. A brand refresh timed to an evolution in your products, services and brand opportunities allows you to showcase your expanded capabilities and attract new customers who may not have been familiar with your core offerings. Jump on big and small moments to inform your refresh.

Modernization. Outdated visuals, messaging and communication can detract from brand messaging. This could mean introducing a new logo or modernizing graphics, fonts and colors to stay relevant in the current market. A facelift can rejuvenate your brand without a complete overhaul.

The Refresh Playbook

Once you’ve decided to rebrand, it’s important to avoid common mistakes. For example, in 2009, Tropicana revamped its packaging design, but failed to understand consumers’ deep emotional bond with its classic branding. Gap revised its logo despite no clear driver (as listed above), and the move left its consumers confused and unhappy. Both quickly reverted to their old branding to stave off further backlash.

Don’t follow in their footsteps. Here’s how to succeed:

1. Stay true to who you are: Don’t alienate existing customers by changing your brand so drastically they don’t recognize it. Maintain core characteristics and values that represent your brand’s essence. Remember who you are.

2. See it through: Don’t just conduct a rebranding exercise and shelve it -- or worse, make major changes without proper planning. A successful refresh requires executive buy-in, commitment and a clear strategy for implementation. 

3. Maintain connection: If you’re going to change the status quo, get everyone on board. Train your team on the new brand positioning and address employee concerns. Executing a refresh seamlessly involves a company-wide shift in mentality.

The Takeaway

Any company can refresh its brand to stay relevant and competitive. It’s about reviving your image, messaging and offerings to resonate with today’s market. But remember, a refresh should be strategic, not impulsive. Done right, it can propel your brand to new heights.

 

Nielsen: 'Total TV' Sets Another Record: 41.4% Share in July

• by Wayne Friedman , 11 hours ago

Although it only accounted for three days of Nielsen’s now regular monthly "Total TV" and streaming share measurement, the Paris Olympics pushed up viewing results significantly over the June (2.5%) period and the year-earlier July 2023 period (3.5%).

Nielsen’s Total TV "Snapshot" measures total day viewing for persons two years of age and up, calculating Nielsen’s national TV panel plus streaming video ratings.

As a result, streaming TV scored another 40%-plus share in July, at 41.4% (vs. 40.3% in June), posting another record share level. July is now consistently a strong month for streaming TV.

NBCU-owned streaming service Peacock made sharp gains -- up 33% to a 1.5% share, for its best result ever, largely attributable to the Paris Olympics.

Two other streamers also posted notable rises: Amazon Prime Video up 12% from June (to a 3.4% share) and The Roku Channel adding 10% (to a 1.6% share).

Streaming video leader YouTube, in terms of viewing share, became the first streaming platform to exceed a 10% share in July (10.4%) -- up 7% from June. Second-place Netflix remained steady, with an 8.4% share from June.

The strongest streaming programming in July was Max’s “House of the Dragon” with 4.7 billion viewing minutes. In second place was Disney+ with “Bluey”, at 4.3 billion viewing minutes. Disney+ landed at a 2.1% share (vs. 2.0% in June), while Max remained steady at a 1.4% share.

The Paris Olympics on NBC Television Network lifted its viewing, but overall broadcast viewing dipped from month-to-month 20.3% in July versus 20.5% in June. Broadcast viewing was up 5% versus a year ago in July, when it had a 20.0% share.

 

Commentary

The Hometown Team: Local Media Outranks Larger News Organizations On Trust

• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, Yesterday

The most trusted news source in the U.S. isn’t one of the major newspapers or networks. It's local media, according to a new study by Resonate.

The big news brands don’t even come close:  

Local media — 40% 

CNN — 25% 

Fox — 20% 

MSNBC — 17% 

YouTube — 16%

The New York Times — 15% 

NPR — 12% 

Facebook — 12% 

The Washington Post — 11% 

USA Today — 10% 

The Wall Street Journal — 10%

X/Twitter — 8% 

Instagram — 7%

Reddit — 5%

OAN — 4% 

HLN — 1%

Breitbart — 1% 

In theory, this should be encouraging to journalists in small towns that verge on being news deserts.

But it is no guarantee of financial stability or continuing ability to deliver news. 

Resonate argues that the shift in trust could have major consequences for publishers fighting to maintain readership and advertising revenue. One key finding is that YouTube beats The New York Times and The Washington Post, Resonate says. 

Does this signal a lack of concern with issues? 

That depends on your perspective — only 12% of consumers are inclined to shop with brands that support Ukraine, down from 15% in April. And a mere 6.4% will go with firms that support Palestine, versus 7.7% in April. 

But 28% say there are no causes a brand might support that would make them want to shop with it. And, 43% add they wouldn’t be less inclined to purchase just because the brand supported a particular cause. 

You may have questions about the methodology. Resonate says the report is based on a continuing survey of 230 million U.S. adults.  

On another front, 65% of consumers are moderately or extremely concerned about the economy. Only 15% believe it will improve in six months or less. The other 85% feel it will take seven months or that things will never recover to where they were. 

Roughly 38% blame this on government spending, and a similar percentage assign responsibility to Joe Biden. 

 

 

Gen Z Drawn to Traditional News Media as Election Approaches

• by Ray Schultz , Yesterday

Gen Z has more faith in traditional news media than other generations, judging by Comscore’s new study, “Will Gen Z Turn Out To Vote in 2024?”

While the narrative shows that “many in this cohort rely on TikTok videos and influencer-narrated articles to get news, the year over year data from 2023 to 2024 also confirms increasing numbers consuming traditional news media as well,” the study reports.

In the Phoenix TV market, 66.9% of Gen Z tunes in to cable networks for news, compared to an overall average of 65.1%. In contrast, 64.7% of those in the 65+ cohort turns to cable news. 

In the Orlando market, 69.8% of Gen Z believes in cable networks, versus 68.9% overall and 67.7% of boomers. 

The study notes that “an increasing body of evidence suggests that many in the Gen Z cohort are aware that social media is rife with disinformation and understand the value of mainstream media as a trusted source when processing information to distinguish fact from falsehood.” 

Gen Z’s consumption of Top 50 general news grew by 4% in February, and its share of the total audience by 3%, compared to the same period in 2023. 

One danger sign for Democrats is the fact that Gen Z participation surged during the Kansas Value Them referendum in 2022, which appeared on the primary ballot in August, but the group wasn’t as active in the general election that fall. The anti-abortion amendment was defeated. 

However, the report concludes that “those seeking to reach and persuade prospective Gen Z voters during the 2024 election cycle ought to take heed and seriously consider reliable news as a key platform for their outreach and messaging efforts, because, that outreach can benefit from the aura of reliability placed in responsible news organizations by their audiences.”

 

 

Nielsen Adding 'Big Data' To Local Market Ratings in January

• by Wayne Friedman , Yesterday

Looking to provide deeper insights into into consumer TV viewing data, Nielsen’s local TV ratings will add "big data" from set-top boxes and smart TV platforms and services to its local viewer panels starting in January 2025.

Legacy TV viewing fragmentation has hit all platforms in recent years, including national and local broadcast and cable TV.  This has led to unstable measurement, especially for small over-the-air local market panel sizes. 

Nielsen says its existing "panel-only" local TV data measure will still be available only for research and analysis.

In April, a  preview of Nielsen's national TV measurement "Big Data + Panel" service -- a combination of Nielsen's existing panel data plus data from streamers/pay TV distributors -- showed a slight overall 4% to 5% increase in TV-video usage.

Big data integrations-- for Nielsen's national "Big Data + Panel service -- come from Comcast Corp., Roku, Vizio, Dish Network, and DirectTV.

The "Big Data" measurement piece from those platforms will cover more than 45 million households and more than 75 million devices. 

In April, Nielsen expected this Big Data + panel measure to get accreditation from the Media Rating Council by September

 

Commentary from MediaVillage

The Golden Goose is Dying: How the Shift Away from Traditional Media Is Undermining Long-Term Business Success Jack Myers Publish date August 13, 2024 (ET) Channel The Myers Report The advertising industry is undergoing a seismic shift, one that some experts argue could have dire consequences for both the industry and the broader economy. As brands increasingly reallocate their marketing budgets away from traditional media -- such as broadcast and cable TV networks, local live news, and branded high-quality content across all media -- toward programmatically bought digital media, social media platforms, and retail media networks, they may be "killing the goose that laid the golden eggs." This metaphor captures the short-sighted nature of chasing immediate gains at the expense of long-term sustainability and value creation. The Current Landscape: A Shift Toward Digital and Programmatic Advertising dollars are increasingly flowing toward data-driven digital platforms, walled gardens like Meta (Facebook, Instagram), Google, and TikTok, and emerging retail media networks such as those operated by Amazon, Walmart, and other major retailers. According to eMarketer, U.S. retail media ad spending is projected to reach almost $60 billion in 2024. Meanwhile, linear television, which once dominated media spending, is experiencing a continuing decline in ad revenue. This shift is driven by several factors, including the allure of "so-called" precision targeting and the promise of measurable outcomes that digital and programmatic media offer. Marketers are drawn to the promise of reaching the right audience at the right time with the right message, all while optimizing cost efficiency. However, this focus on data and "cheap reach" overlooks the value of brand building and the role of high-quality content in creating lasting consumer relationships. The Cost of Chasing Cheap Reach The growing dependence on programmatic buying and data-driven media is a double-edged sword. While it offers the promise of efficiency, it also carries significant risks. Programmatic media is notorious for issues related to ad fraud, brand safety, and lack of transparency. According to a report by the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), ad fraud cost advertisers as much as $100 billion in 2023. The relentless pursuit of cheap reach through programmatic and open-net spending often results in ads being placed in low-quality environments, which can dilute brand equity. As Bob Hoffman, author of BadMen: How Advertising Went from A Minor Annoyance to A Major Menace, argues, "The obsession with efficiency has led us to place ads in some of the least trustworthy, least engaging, and most fraudulent environments imaginable." Retail Media: The New Kid on the Block The rapid escalation of retail media spending is a case in point. Retail media networks, while traditionally offering proximity to the point of sale and access to valuable shopper data, remain largely unproven as a performance-based vehicle for media investments beyond traditional below-the-line sales promotion. These networks have expanded their business models by selling data to third parties and integrating shopper data into programmatic packages that have little if any measurable value. According to a study by McKinsey, while 70% of marketers plan to increase their retail media spending, only 23% believe that these investments currently drive significant business outcomes. This over-reliance on untested and unproven media channels at the expense of established ones could be a costly mistake. As marketers continue to chase the latest trends, they risk neglecting the foundational elements of brand building and long-term growth. The Decline of Broadcast and Cable Television: A Loss of Value The shift away from traditional media is having a profound impact on the broadcast and cable television industry. Networks that once commanded premium ad rates due to their ability to deliver large, engaged audiences are now struggling to compete with digital platforms for ad dollars. According to the Video Advertising Bureau (VAB), ad spending on linear TV in the U.S. fell by 15% in 2023, with continuing declines in 2024 and expected in the coming years. While networks have launched streaming platforms, they along with Netflix, Amazon, Apple and others have expanded the production of long-form video programming, the decline in overall linear video ad revenue will lead to an inevitable reduction in the production of high-quality entertainment branded content that have value for building marketing equity, which has historically been funded by broadcast and cable networks. As these networks lose financial resources, with sports the notable exception, the quality and diversity of content available to viewers are likely to diminish. This, in turn, will lead to a decline in viewership and further erosion of the value of traditional media. The recent decision by the NBA to shift rights from Warner Bros. Discovery's TNT to Amazon reflects this reality. Expert Opinions: The Case for Investing in Quality Content Many experts argue that the current trend of shifting budgets away from traditional media is short-sighted and ultimately detrimental to long-term business success. Byron Sharp, professor of marketing science and author of How Brands Grow, emphasizes the importance of reach and the role of mass media in brand building. "Brands grow by reaching all buyers of the category, and they do that best by advertising on mass media," says Sharp. "By shifting budgets away from television, marketers risk losing the broad reach and brand-building power that TV provides." Similarly, Karen Nelson-Field, founder of Amplified Intelligence, highlights the importance of attention in advertising effectiveness. Her research shows that ads placed in high-quality content environments, such as network television, generate significantly higher levels of attention than those placed in digital and social media environments. The Tao of Leadership: Insights from Jack Myers In my upcoming book, The Tao of Leadership, I offer a compelling critique of the current state of the advertising industry. Drawing on Taoist principles, I argue that the relentless pursuit of short-term gains at the expense of long-term value creation is unsustainable. "In the age of AI and machine intelligence, we must balance innovation with stability, ensuring that we do not sacrifice the foundational elements of our industry in the pursuit of the next big thing," I write. I also emphasize the importance of investing in high-quality content and the role of traditional media in fostering creativity and cultural engagement. "Television, both broadcast and cable, has been the bedrock of our shared cultural experience. By undermining its value, we risk losing not just an industry, but a vital part of our society." A Call for Balance The shift away from traditional media toward digital and programmatic channels is understandable, given the allure of data-driven decision-making and cost efficiency. However, as the saying goes, "you get what you pay for." By prioritizing cheap reach and unproven media channels, marketers risk undermining the long-term health of their brands and the broader media ecosystem. It's time for advertisers to reconsider their strategies and recognize the value of investing in high-quality content and mass media. The path to sustainable success lies in balancing innovation with stability, ensuring that we do not sacrifice the golden goose in the pursuit of short-term gains. Investing in the future of media means investing in the content, platforms, and channels that have proven their value over time. Only by doing so can we ensure that the advertising industry continues to thrive in the years to come.

 

Commentary

The Olympics Are Finished -- But We'll Always Have Paris!

• by Gord Hotchkiss , Featured Contributor, over 1 hour ago

I have to confess: The Olympics sucked me in again.

Prior to the kickoff in Paris, I was unusually ambivalent about the Olympics. Given the debacle that was the spectator-less Tokyo Olympics, it was like the world had agreed not to expect too much from these games. Were the Olympics still relevant? Do we need them anymore?

I caught the opening ceremonies and was still skeptical. It was very Parisienne – absolutely breathtaking, with a healthy dose of “WTF.” Still, I was withholding judgement.

But by day three, I was hooked. I had signed up for the daily Olympic news feed. I was watching Canada’s medal count. I was embarrassed – along with the rest of the nation - by our women’s soccer team’s drone spying scandal. I became an instant expert in all those obscure sports that pique our interest on a quadrennial cycle. I could go on at length about the nuances of speed climbing, slalom canoe or B-Boy breaking.

The Olympics had done it again. Paris did not disappoint.

So, this last Sunday night, I watched the closing ceremony with all the feels you get when you have to say goodbye to those new friends you made as you board the bus taking you home from summer camp. Into this bittersweet reverie of video flashbacks and commentators gushing about this international kumbaya moment, my wife had the nerve to kill my vibe by commenting that “there must be a better use for all the billions this game cost.”

It's hard to argue against that. The estimated total cost of the games was 9 billion euros, or almost $10 billion U.S. You don’t need to be particularly jaded to realize that the Olympics are really a spectacle for rich nations. Sure, any nation can send a team, but if you combine the 40 smallest teams - coming from places like the Sudan, Chad, Namibia, Lesotho and Belize -- you’d have a total of 120 athletes. That would be about the same size as the Olympic team from Denmark, the 25th largest team that attended.

The Olympics are supposed to offer an opportunity to those of all nations, but the bigger your GDP (gross domestic product) the more likely you are to end up with a medal around your neck.

So, I come back to the question: Do we still need the Olympics, if only to break the relentless downward spiral of our horrific news cycle for 16 brief days?

Before we get too gooey about the symbolism of the Olympics, we should take a look back at its history.

Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who revived the modern Olympics, did so because he was fascinated by the culture and ideals of ancient Greece. The original Olympic Games were essentially a chance for city states to “one-up” their rivals. A temporary truce was in place during the games but behind the athletic competitions, there was a flurry of alliances and back-room deals being made to gain advantages when Greece went back to its warlike ways after the games.

The idea that the modern games are a symbol of equality and fraternity was -- at best – tangential to Coubertin’s original plan. He wanted to encourage amateur competition and athletic prowess because he believed better athletes made better soldiers. The Games were also an attempt to keep amateur sports in the hands of the upper classes, out of the grimy grips of the working class.

Let’s also not forget that women were not allowed to participate in the games until the second Olympiad -- the original Paris Olympics in 1900. There were five female athletes and almost 1,000 men participating. And even then, Coubertin was not in favor of it. He later said women competing in sports was “impractical, uninteresting, unaesthetic, and we are not afraid to add: incorrect.”

Even the much-commented-on Olympic tradition of athletes at the Opening Ceremonies coming in divided by nation, but at the closing, all athletes coming in as one, without national divides, was never part of the original plan. That was added by the Aussies in the 1956 Melbourne Games, which would be called the “Friendly Games.” It was put forward by John Ian Wing, an Australian teenager who wrote an anonymous letter to the IOC suggesting the idea. He didn’t put his name on it because he was afraid of the backlash his family (who were Chinese) might receive.

 Let’s get back to today. Paris excelled at pulling off a delicate balancing act. The hope to make these the “Games wide open” was realized at the opening ceremonies, the marathons and the men’s and women’s road races. In the case of the latter, over a million spectators lined the streets of Paris.

The organizing committee managed to balance the French flair for spectacle with a tastefulness that was generally successful. They gave the modern Olympics at least four more years of life.

It remains to be seen whether the inevitable bombast that comes when the Games move to Los Angeles in 2028 will continue the trend -- or put the final nail in the coffin.

 

Q2 U.S. Streaming Consumer Spending Soars 27%

• by Wayne Friedman , 2 hours ago

U.S. streaming video subscription spending continues to rise, up 27% in the second quarter versus a year ago to around $11 billion, according to DEG (Digital Entertainment Group) -- now commanding almost a third of all U.S. consumer video spending.

The sharp gains for streaming video are coming at the expense of other entertainment consumer spending, says Brian Wieser, media analyst of Madison and Wall. 

“In general, we continue to observe that streaming services are growing at a healthy clip, generally passing rising costs along to consumers, who in turn limit their spending at theaters and reduce their spending on traditional pay TV services.”

Wieser estimates total consumer video entertainment spending -- pay TV, streaming, theatrical, and physical media -- grew 1.2% to $37 billion in the U.S. Estimates here come from sources including Madison and Wall, company reports, DEG (Digital Entertainment Group), and IMdb’s Box Office Mojo.

Streaming consumer video spending now comprises around 30% share of all video spend -- up from 24% a year ago.

Legacy pay TV -- including virtual pay TV services like YouTube TV, Hulu+Live TV and others -- fell in the second-quarter period 4.5% to around $24 billion. This largely came from continued cord-cutting of subscribers -- now at about 71 million households and near a penetration rate of less than 50% of total U.S. homes.

This all has consequences for national TV and video advertisers. With traditional pay TV losing consumers and subscribers shifting to lower ad loads on streaming platforms, brands need to find alternatives. 

“[It] renders alternatives -- for example, digital platforms --as relatively more appealing despite the various downsides associated with those providers of advertising inventory.”

Commentary Beyond The Screen: How Audio Ads Can Add to Your Brand's Success

 

Commentary

Beyond The Screen: How Audio Ads Can Add to Your Brand's Success

• by Teresa Elliott , August 9, 2024

In a world with increasing screen fatigue, how can brands make a lasting impression? Audio listening is at an all-time high, with 98 million Americans spending 21% of their time engaging daily -- that’s over four hours!

Marketers allocate only 4.5% of total advertising spend in the U.S. toward audio today. It’s time for brands to raise the volume to reach consumers. As brands innovate, audio advertising stands out for creating lasting connections through podcasts, streaming music and radio, potentially unlocking brand success.

The Underrated Power of Audio

Audio advertising connects brands and consumers when visuals cannot. It’s a powerful storytelling canvas. The clink of a glass, the roar of an engine, the patter of raindrops: Audio can capture attention and evoke emotion instantly -- and with lower production costs and lead times.

There’s a major opportunity with audio for creative messaging during listeners’ “me time” and co-listening moments. Brands can convey contextual messaging with minimal lift.

Brands can engage listeners when they’re disconnected from the rest of the world, but tuned in with their ears. Whether they’re streaming music or scripted content, listeners are receptive and likely to react. During co-listening moments, brands can leverage messages that reach listeners who are connecting to cultural content through radio and podcasts.

Audio's power to foster human connection elevates brand endorsements and storytelling. When a popular podcast or radio host endorses a product, it feels like a trusted friend's recommendation versus a traditional ad. According to a recent study, podcasts drove the highest attentive-seconds-per-thousand impressions compared to other digital, social and TV benchmarks. Listener can’t turn off their ears.

Crafting Captivating and Personal Audio Ads

Audio offers a personal, captivating experience. Americans spend over four hours daily with audio, with nearly 70% on radio, 20% on podcasts, and the rest on streaming audio and satellite radio.

To craft compelling audio ads, brands must know their target audience, goals, and key message. Choosing the right platforms and channels for engaging brand storytelling is crucial. This blend of art and science ensures the message resonates. Will it spark emotions? That’s the first question brand marketers should ask.

The Role of Sound Effects

Sound effects can paint a picture in listeners’ minds. Using ASMR (autonomous sensory meridian response), featuring soothing sounds like whispering and tapping, is one effective approach. KFC and Michelob Ultra have successfully used ASMR to create memorable, immersive audio experiences. Knowing when and how to leverage such effects is imperative.

• Understand your audience: Know your audience and strategize to capture attention in a way that complements, or cuts through, the surrounding content.
• Consider the senses: Imagine sounds like a cold drink being poured, sneakers squeaking on a basketball court, or musical cues -- these can evoke strong sensory responses.
• Focus on triggers: Whispering, tapping, and crinkling can nestle into the human brain, enhancing an ad's effectiveness.

That’s a Wrap

By leveraging the power of audio, brands can foster deep connections, build their voice, and drive success beyond the screen.

This post was previously published in an earlier edition of Marketing Insider.