This morning I read an article from an ex colleague about how media and creative need to come back together to address new media realities. Nothing wrong in that except that they should have always been working together, new media realities or no. (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/brand-equity/collaboration-between-media-creative-necessary-to-envision-storytelling/articleshow/45036585.cms)
Whilst there is no doubt in my mind that the collaboration between creative and media is long overdue, what caught my attention in Hari’s article were some online video statistics. They were pretty impressive and making a strong case for longer duration films on social media. Indeed the biggest advantage of social media has been that as a media it offers almost anyone the chance to upload any video without paying for it. And if the content is good then viral plays it role and the video hits make up your reach.
So my
question is, will a person who pays maybe Rs 250 per month(around Rs 300 after
taxes etc) for 1GB download be willing to watch longer duration commercials on
social media?
I am at the
moment based in Dehradun and I meet youngsters at the management colleges or at
the gym. In my conversation with them, I know that they are very choosy about
what they do with their monthly online data plan. Whats app is big for them. So
is Facebook and to a certain extent Twitter. But you tube is way down their
priority list. And the reason is simple. Downloading a video is expensive. Even
videos on FB the first thing they check is the duration. And ads or commercials
are the last thing they want to check online. Long ones, I have my doubts.
What I am
saying is based on my observation and a few chats with some youngsters. And their video
watching habits, online. In fact yesterday I asked three four of them which ad
they have seen online. And most of them were blank about ads. One mentioned
about the Pepsi Kurkure Diwali ad but that was after some thinking. Ask them about
any videos, and they chirp up about some comedy videos or film clips or even
some sports action. But ads and that too long duration….?
To me the
point is not about whether we should put up long duration ads on social media,
but about who is watching them at the moment. My long shot is that it's the
upper middle class urban Indian who is at the moment enjoying these. But the cost
conscious middle and lower middle class smart phone owner is using his online
data mostly for entertainment and very sparingly for information. And in that
information list, watching an ad is way low in his priority. For him to watch
online ads is like paying to watch an ad. Definitely not long duration ads. The
ad needs to be really good, should have generated enough buzz and word of mouth
before maybe they will make an exception and watch it online.
As I said
this is my observation and intuition. I don't have any data to support it. But
before we go gaga about an opportunity to release long duration ads on social
media, let's pause and think about them from a viewer’s viewpoint. Does it have
the power to go viral? Does it have enough chatter value? Will it make the user,
for once forget about his download cost. And maybe do some research on the
same. What online video is being watched? What is the average data plan that a
consumer buys? How different is non metros online video watching habit from a
metro?
Guess, the
more the things change, the more they remain the same.
Whilst there is no doubt in my mind that the collaboration between creative and media is long overdue, what caught my attention in Hari’s article were some online video statistics. They were pretty impressive and making a strong case for longer duration films on social media. Indeed the biggest advantage of social media has been that as a media it offers almost anyone the chance to upload any video without paying for it. And if the content is good then viral plays it role and the video hits make up your reach.
But this
thinking is more from an advertisers viewpoint. Let's look at it from the
viewpoint of the user or the viewer. With TV at home he has a cable or a DTH connection.
He pays a certain fixed amount every month and then watches whatever channels he
has paid for unlimited.
On the
other hand a broadband or 3G subscriber pays for the data downloaded. Yes,
there are those unlimited schemes but once you download a certain amount your
speed gets reduced to a trickle. Certainly not conducive for online video. And
the cost of these schemes are not cheap, certainly not compared to cable.
