Just so you know, TV isn’t dead
Read the Ad Contrarian’s Rant about TV not being dead here.
I responded there, and will elaborate here:
The people saying TV is dead are as idiotic as the people saying TV is fine. This whole argument has me thinking about Clay Shirky‘s newspaper post from a little while ago. In it he says this when talking about the demise of newspapers:
“Round and round this goes, with the people committed to saving newspapers demanding to know “If the old model is broken, what will work in its place?” To which the answer is: Nothing. Nothing will work. There is no general model for newspapers to replace the one the internet just broke.”
It was Alan Wolk who linked to it and wondered if newspapers could be replaced with ad agencies. And that’s a sort of interesting question, because the system in ad agencies is predicated on living and breathing mass media. the system works better with healthy newspapers (media people can’t buy Craigslist.) We need TV to be healthy as well. So it seems good to have TV alive and kicking. On a personal note, I happen to hate reality TV shows, and like well-written shows. The lack of reality TV means I’m watching more of it.
And yet, there’s something wrong. As a proud Nielson family (I have one of those computers on the back of my TV that logs everything I watch), I can only give you anecdotal information.
We have basic cable, and rarely watch it. We watch most of the things we watch on the computer, which nobody counts, even though it could easily be counted with a simple login.
And yet, in the advertising industry, we rely on this macro ratings system whereby someone represents 30K-60K households. Then we trot out stats either for or against saying look! “This bolsters my argument.”
And the bigger question might be, “why are we looking at these stats?”
Are we nuts?
Digital will not replace TV, but then, the people who think it should are idiots. It’s not that black and white. In my opinion, the computer and the TV are on a collision course. At some point, my online watching life will collide with my watching TV life. Right now, they don’t, and thus Nielson is horribly inefficient at measuring it. When they do, the things we can do digitally, will morph into things we can do on TV. Because as long as the ‘channels/sites/players” aren’t filled with rotty reality TV, people will watch.
The course will be, as it always has been, dependent on the content. So, it’s sort of like digital in that way.
I ended my letter to TAC with this signoff. “Shit TV means more people will read your blog.