Posted by truecreek on March 28, 2009 under More Dam News | 
Adult Americans spend an average of more than eight hours a day in front of screens — televisions, computer monitors, cellphones or other devices, according to a new study.
The study also found that live television in the home continues to attract the greatest amount of viewing time with the average American spending slightly more than five hours a day in front of the tube.
The figure drops to 210 minutes a day of average TV viewing time among 18-24 year olds but rises to 420 minutes a day among those aged 65 and older.
The “Video Consumer Mapping” study was conducted by Ball State University’s Center for Media Design (CMD) and Sequent Partners for the Nielsen-funded Council for Research Excellence (CRE).
For the year-long study, observers recorded the exposure of 350 subjects to four categories of screens: traditional television, computers, mobile devices and other screens such as store displays, movie screens and even GPS navigation units.
The study found the average amount of screen time for all age groups was “strikingly similar” at more than eight-and-a-half hours although the type of devices and duration used by the respective groups throughout the day varied.
It found that people aged 45 to 54 averaged the most daily screen time at just over nine-and-a-half hours.
The study did not include anyone under the age of 18.
Among other finds:
– computer video consumption tends to be quite small with an average time of just over two minutes a day.
– Adults spend an average of 6.5 minutes a day with videogame consoles with the number rising to 26 minutes a day among those aged 18-24
– Adults spend an average 142 minutes a day in front of computer screens
– Adults spend an average 20 minutes a day engaged with mobile devices with the highest usage — 43 minutes a day — among the 18-24 age group
“What differentiates this study from all other attempts to measure video exposure at the consumer level is its scale, the range of media covered and the fact that it is focused on consumers first and the media second,” said Mike Bloxham, director of insight and research for Ball State’s CMD.
“It’s not a study about TV or the Web or any other medium — it’s about how, where, how often and for how long consumers are exposed to all media.”
Posted by truecreek on March 27, 2009 under More Dam News |
Well, it’s in. TV watching is still KING, by a long shot.
By Gary Levin, USA TODAY
Despite the quick spread of video to computers, cellphones and iPods, their use is more hype than reality, and TV watching hasn’t suffered.
Those are among the findings of a new $3.5 million study out today from the Council for Research Excellence, a group of top media researchers, funded by Nielsen. The study confirms similar findings in earlier reports but uses a more statistically reliable method of observation in which researchers followed 476 people for two 14-hour days and recorded all of their media usage and daily activities.
“If you ask people how much time they spent online yesterday, they’re going to give you a wrong answer; they don’t remember,” says Steve Sternberg, chief analyst at Magna Global, a major ad firm, and a member of the Council. “The idea of doing a study where you actually observe the user and keep track of all the media they’re using is compelling.”
The research, conducted in five cities last year by a team from Ball State University, showed adults ages 45 to 54 were the heaviest users of all electronic media, spending an average of 9.5 hours a day. All other adults spent about 8.5 hours on a combination of TV, computers, mobile devices and other screens.
That same crowd of Baby Boomers also spent more time on e-mail, instant messaging and DVR playback than other age groups.
But while 43% of TV viewers in the study watched some form of online video, they spent only a few minutes a day doing so.
Adults 65 and older spent seven hours a day watching live TV, by far the highest amount for any age group, though they were far less likely to use computers or cellphones. That TV usage is double the time spent by the youngest adults, ages 18 to 24, who conversely were the heaviest users of online video, cellphones, console video games and computer software.
Yet even that younger crowd spent just 5.5 minutes a day watching computer video.
Michael Bloxham, a Ball State researcher, says that since the study was conducted last spring and fall, “you might slowly be seeing growth in online video,” especially after sites such as Hulu began aggressive promotional campaigns. BlackBerrys, iPhones, DVRs and social-networking sites also have increased in popularity.
Those under 55 spent 27% of their time with media multitasking, researchers found, though TV was more frequently viewed by itself than computers. Adults were exposed to about 72 minutes of advertising a day across all media.
Posted by truecreek on March 26, 2009 under Opinions. Everyone has them. |
I love newspaper. Always have. It’s just a wonderful creative medium that allows clients to not only project their brand image in a tasteful manner, but it allows for the communication of additional points of importance without destroying the creative at hand. It’s artwork. And it can really work for the client. Martin’s Mike Hughes thinks the same.
By Mike Hughes
It’s time the advertising industry did something important.
For our own self-interest — and for the common good — we need to start paying attention to newspapers again.
To begin with, it would be good for our business. For our own selfish reasons, we need a medium that targets the well-informed. We need a medium that lets us tell our whole story — and not just the 30-second version. With each passing month, we need more media that target people where they live. We need more media that let marketers build a brand and ask for the business. We need more media that let writers, art directors, photographers and illustrators practice their crafts.
We need a medium with the immediacy and importance of newspapers. Lee Clow says, “Newspaper is a special medium. It’s urgent, not yesterday or tomorrow but today. Sitting with a newspaper and a cup of coffee in the morning will always be one of the most intimate media experiences there is.”
Online or in print, we need newspapers. There are no substitutes. Magazines, TV channels and websites don’t do the same things. Not even close.
Our industry needs newspapers — but just as important, so does humankind. The world needs the kind of journalism practiced by newspapers when they’re at their best. The local investigative pieces. The foreign correspondence. The war reporting. Without them, news goes unreported. Viewpoints are narrowed. Governments can run amok.
That kind of reporting is expensive, and right now no one knows how it will get paid for in the coming years. With newspapers cutting costs every day, who will pay to man a substantial bureau in Baghdad? Who will spend the money to report the atrocities in Africa? Who will find the resources to blow the whistle on the next Watergate?
Even at their best, magazines, TV channels and websites don’t come close to giving us that kind of reporting.
Of course, humankind’s problem isn’t necessarily the advertising industry’s problem. If online and print newspapers weren’t proven effective, no one would say our industry needs to address this important problem.
But decades worth of evidence — including evidence gathered in 2009 — points to the uncommon efficacy of newspaper advertising. You know how excited our industry gets about the Super Bowl? Well, every single day of the year, more American adults read a printed newspaper than watch the big game once a year. And in 22 of the top 25 markets, the local-newspaper site is the No. 1 local site in town. And the newspaper-website audience has grown 80% in the past five years.
So why aren’t we creating more newspaper advertising? Part of the answer is undoubtedly fashion. Twenty-five years ago, an advertising campaign usually meant “TV and some print. Maybe radio.” That was the fashion then. Say “campaign” to ad people today, and their minds leap to “TV and digital.” We say we’re media-agnostic, but our behavior often says something else entirely. How many agencies aren’t selling newspaper advertising to their clients as hard as they should? How many advertisers are overlooking the medium that still has unsurpassed credibility with its audience? It’s time for a wake-up call.
No less an authority than Jeff Goodby reminds us that far from being out-of-fashion, a good newspaper ad is actual art. “The art is the part that gets people to look. Show outrageous things that don’t belong there. Shock people with a new logic,” he says. “If we all do this, it will become very difficult to find which newspaper page we want to wrap the fish in.
“I will like that day.”
Let me be clear here. I don’t think the newspaper industry is going to die anytime soon. With some well-publicized exceptions, most papers are surviving the economy’s near collapse. They might be holding on by their fingernails, but at least they’re holding on.
But if the newspaper business is going to give us the content our industry feeds on — and if it’s going to give us the journalism the world needs — newspapers need to be robust.
If we don’t give them a fair shot at our budgets, they might never be healthy enough to do the job we want them to do.
And we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves.
Posted by truecreek on March 24, 2009 under More Dam News |
eMarketer
Worldwide communication in the future will be done through mobile devices.
According to TNS Global, 74% of the world’s digital messages were sent through a mobile device in January 2009, a 15% increase over the previous year.
In emerging markets, the trend is even more dramatic; nine out of 10 messages are sent via mobile.
Some of the growth can be attributed to mobile instant messaging. Thirteen percent of all mobile subscribers used the feature, but 41% of smartphone users did so.
Other increases in mobile usage can be attributed to the abandonment of fixed-line telephones.
“As mobile devices slowly take away usage share from fixed services in developed markets, in emerging markets consumers are more likely to by-pass fixed communications altogether and go straight to mobiles,” said Sam Curtis of TNS.
As for developed countries, the PC e-mail remains the most popular message method, but its use is waning.
In Japan, 40 out of 100 e-mails sent are from a mobile device. In North America, 69% of those using e-mail on their mobile phone use it daily, high compared with 43% worldwide.
The trend will increase, TNS says, as smartphones such as the popular iPhone enter the marketplace and gain share.
