Getting Serious Online: As Americans Gain Experience, They Pursue More Serious Activities - Lee Rainie

Internet users—veteran users especially—report that their use of email and the Web has changed the amount of time they spend watching TV, shopping in stores, and reading newspapers. One-quarter of all Internet users say that the Internet has decreased the time they spend watching television, with fully one-third (31%) of veterans saying this. Nearly one in five (18%) say Internet use has meant they spend less time shopping in stores, with 28% of Internet veterans and 29% of those who have bought something online saying this. The Internet has also prompted some users to spend less time reading newspapers; 14% say this, with 21% of Internet veterans reporting a decline in newspaper reading. However, Internet users, and veterans in particular, are active online surfers for news, so they might be simply switching time with the paper to time with the online version.

A gradual defection from TV will change in time: when TV becomes socialized, and is simply another sort of shared stream.

Can’t See The Web For The Apps: The Future Of TV Is Social

As usual the industry insiders can’t connect the dots that show how radical change is happening at the edge of their markets, and so underestimate the change that will obliterate them.

Today’s example: all the TV people pooh-poohing the webification of TV. And the author of the article, Jessica Vascellaro, plays along by couching the issue as ‘apps on TV’:

Jessica Vascellaro, Do People Really Want Apps on TVs?

One thing everyone agreed on was that it is going to take much longer for app-enabled televisions to reach mass adoption than industry insiders expect, with several executives noting that the number of consumers who actually activate the Internet functionality on TVs that have it is very small.

“A generation is going to have to stop watching TV” before it happens, Mr. Bullwinkle said.

It’s not ‘apps on TV’, it’s ‘TV on the Web’. And the reason that few users have taken advantage of the functionality currently embedded into TVs is that the apps are designed with stupid limitations and using bizarro world use cases.

Here’s what’s really going on, courtesy of the Pew folks:

The main news source for 18-29 year-olds is now the Internet, passing TV for the first time. And the shift is happening in all the age groups. TV is falling and the web is rising.

The streaming web will absorb TV-type communication media, and reanimate it. They don’t realize that the web is principally a social fabric, where people share through relationships. These TV insiders are thinking about it as just plumbing, with web integration being a matter of putting a few apps on the TV sets, which communicate to network-managed servers. Wrong metaphor. They may grudgingly accept that those apps allow people to watch TV socially, but they don’t get what that means.

Once they get scared enough to allow TV to be treated as content to go through externally owned and managed social tools, then we’ll see the social TV revolution.

We don’t have to wait for a generation to stop watching TV before the social TV revolution comes, but we may have to wait for this generation of TV executives to retire.

A September 2010 survey conducted in the UK for Intel found almost half (45%) of individuals use social networking services such as Twitter and Facebook to discuss a programme while it is being shown.

- Colin David, via Nic Brisbourne, The main use case for connected TVs has to be open access to content

Nic makes the case that people are already connecting through phones and laptops, so why do TVs have to become social?

Because someone will come up with a better user experience than he had on his Sony Bravia, and it won’t be on an internet connected TV. It will be on an iPad or a netbook, where the streaming TV show and the stream of friends’ comments will be artfully integrated.

TV shows will become just another sort of media that will be swept into the streaming vortex, just like blogs, news, and movies.

Steve Jobs Told Me So Says Jason Calacanis

Jason Calcanis says he spoke with Steve Jobs about the Facebook flare-up. Whether he did or not, what he posted in his email newsletter is dead-on:

via email

Anyway, here is what Steve Jobs is thinking during the keynote:

Now, certainly you’ve heard about Apple’s huge data center in North Carolina. You know, the one that reportedly cost one *billion* dollars. Experts say that Apple’s data center cost roughly double what Google and Facebook spent on similar facilities.

Apple’s massive, cash-generating successes have come from soup-to-nuts services like iTunes and the iPod, the App Store and the iPhone. It’s a logical conclusion that Apple would want to take on the social and search layers next.

PING is not music service; it’s a social network precursor.

Game Center is not a game matching service; it’s a social network precursor.

The largest and most-loved Apple product line—to the tune of over 275 million units sold—is the iPod. Their second biggest revenue success is the iPhone, of course. In order to use it, you need to put in a credit card.

Facebook and Twitter have users. Apple has customers.

The difference? Customers give you their credit card number.

Jason goes on to suggest that Jobs should acquire Twitter and Zygna: maybe so. He doesn’t mention Netflix, which I think is more central to his long term goal: the battle for the living room (see Social TV: The Future Of TV Is Social).

But it is clear that billions of iPod, iPhones, Mac, and iPads form an awfully large base of users to start with, if you are launching a new social network.

I remember trying to convince Adobe to roll out an instant messaging product in the late ’90s, since Adobe’s free player was on 98% of computers. They told me they didn’t want to be in that business.

Jobs clearly wants to be in the social network business, and with one giant step he has gotten pretty close to the front of the pack.

New Numbers Reveal: Cord Cutting Is Real -- Janko Roettgers

The business intelligence company reports that cable companies lost 711,000 subscribers, which represents the biggest quarterly loss in cable TV’s history. Six out of eight cable TV operators also reported their worst subscriber losses ever last quarter.

[…]

“the $100 cable bill is dead; the cable industry just doesn’t know it yet.” — Ryan Lawler

The Future Of TV Is Social

Once again, media watchers fail to connect the dots. In this case, the tectonic shifts underlying TV are missed while the details fill the discussion:

The Sofa Wars - Plenty to Watch Online, but Viewers Prefer to Pay for Cable

A New York Times/CBS News poll this month found that 88 percent of respondents paid for traditional TV service. Just 15 percent of those subscribers had considered replacing it with Internet video services like Hulu and YouTube.

Younger people, though, are more intrigued by the possibility: respondents under the age of 45 were significantly more likely than older ones to say they had considered replacing their pay TV service. The poll was conducted Aug. 3-5 with 847 respondents and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Even through the downturn, the number of people subscribing to pay TV continued to grow. Cable, satellite and fiber-optic providers added 677,000 customers in the first quarter of this year, according to the investment firm Sanford C. Bernstein.

The firm’s preliminary numbers for the second quarter, which is traditionally weak, show a slight drop in subscribers. Satellite providers and Verizon’s FiOS service have been stealing market share from cable.

The cable and satellite companies say that their customers are reluctant to pay more — the Comcast chief executive, Brian L. Roberts, described customers who paid only for video, without a bundle of other services, as “very price-sensitive” — but insist that cord-cutting has not been an especially disruptive trend.

To keep customers, especially the price-sensitive ones, the carriers are getting creative. They are trying to bring the living-room experience to every other screen in a customer’s home, including laptops and tablets. Last week Verizon became the latest carrier to announce plans for an app that puts live TV on the iPad, pushing out the walls of cable TV’s walled garden a bit.

[…]

lenty of people say they have foresworn cable for good. They are largely young adults who know their way around the Internet and have grown accustomed to watching video on computers and other devices.

The Times/CBS News survey found that people under the age of 45 were about four times as likely as those 45 and over to say Internet video services could effectively replace cable.

All the kvetching about whether a specific show is available on the pioneering tools today completely misses the point. The reason that the TV experience is going to move to the web is that the web is social: people want to discuss the football game with friends, share movies, and vote on who is the best dancer. And the younger folks more than older ones.

The race to provide the best social TV experience is on, and although Apple hasn’t really rolled out any strategically important social tools yet, I bet that their next generation iTunes in the cloud — based on the huge server farm called ‘The Orchard’ — will start to incorporate social features, along with an industry-changing capability to live stream recorded, and not too far down the pike, live TV.

This will be as transformative to TV as the iPod and iTunes were to the music business.

The natural unit for music is a song, not albums, as iTunes proved.

The natural unit of TV is the show, not a series, not a channel, and not a bundle of TV channels. This is what the networks and the cable companies are about to find out.

And the experience will be social, which is how people watch TV: talking, yelling at the screen, texting their friends about the last play, voting. The cable and network businesses have completely missed that revolution. Look to Apple to blow that open.

The Internet Will Save TV: Social TV

Instead of stealing viewers away, the social web is augmenting the experience of TV watching and making it much more social, leading to an uptick in viewing:

- Brian Stelter, Water-Cooler Effect: Internet Can Be TV’s Friend

Many television executives are crediting the Internet, in part, for the revival.

Blogs and social Web sites like Facebook and Twitter enable an online water-cooler conversation, encouraging people to split their time between the computer screen and the big-screen TV.

The Nielsen Company, which measures television viewership and Web traffic, noticed this month that one in seven people who were watching the Super Bowl and the Olympics opening ceremony were surfing the Web at the same time. [emphasis mine.]

“The Internet is our friend, not our enemy,” said Leslie Moonves, chief executive of the CBS Corporation, which broadcast both the Super Bowl and the Grammy Awards this year. “People want to be attached to each other.”

Seeking to capitalize on the online water-cooler effect, NBC showed the Golden Globes live on both coasts for the first time this year, and the network reportedly wants to do the same for the Emmy Awards this fall, so the entire country can watch (and chat online) simultaneously.

[…]

Media companies are starting to consider how to incorporate that water-cooler effect — and how to harness it for day-to-day TV shows, too. For the Olympics, NBC is promoting something called “You Be the Judge,” which lets viewers submit their own scores for figure skaters through a Web application and compare their scores to other viewers. The network’s Web site also features a gadget that tracks Twitter opinions about the Games.

Chloe Sladden, director of media partnerships for Twitter, said sites like Twitter let people feel plugged in to a real-time conversation.

“In the future, I can’t imagine a major event where the audience doesn’t become part of the story itself,” Ms. Sladden said.

Soon we will be seeing more TV where the premise of sociality is built-in to the experience: where it is expected that you will be online in parallel with watching a show. Social TV is here, and just in time to save TV.

I am looking forward to a more socilaized version of reading the paper, too.