January 30th, 2007
Bad News For The Business Of Online And Offline Video
According to a new poll by Harris Interactive, “73 percent of frequent YouTube users say they would visit the site less if it started including short video ads before every clip.” And…
Of the frequent YouTube users, 66 percent claim they are sacrificing other activities when on YouTube, including other websites (36 percent), time spent watching TV (32 percent), email and other online social networking (20 percent), work/homework (19 percent), playing video games (15 percent), watching DVDs (12 percent) and even spending time with friends and family in person (12 percent). (Emphasis mine)
Yeah, polls are polls, but man, if that’s even directionally correct, it doesn’t bode well for traditional TV or Google/YouTube. Perhaps YouTube’s rev share plan is designed to “bribe” that 73 percent into tolerating pre-roll ads — just the idea that they COULD get to share in the spoils, even if they never actually do. It’s just more evidence that the “user in control” is a double-edged sword — users drove the success of YouTube’s platform, but they see it now as THEIR platform, no Google’s to monetize.
As for traditional TV, if they promote a lot of clips on YouTube, maybe they can break even on time spent with their shows. Bottom line is it’s a zero sum game — there are only 24 hours in the day. Every winner creates a loser.
Powered by 
Design by 
You’re right. Polls are polls. Zefrank has a bumper banner ad at the end of his “shows” — hasn’t hurt. I’m sure his fans would put up w/ anything he adding up front. Also, ads themselves — the Dove video, that heavy-duty blender series, Tea Partay — that are among the most watched “content” on YouTube. This Sunday, more people will tune into the Superbowl to watch ads than watch the game. I don’t know where I’m heading with all this, but I think it had something to do with people actually enjoying some ads. Another possibility: “branded video” (i.e., custom media) that doesn’t suck flooding YouTube. Helpful how-tos, “Steve Jobs saying anything,” etc. By the way, doesn’t “paying people to watch ads” sound awfully 1.0?
Rex, you’re absolutely right — not all ads are percecived as bad — there is the other 27% in the survey who wouldn’t hold it against YouTube. And you’re right about the downside speculations. Net-net, it’s hard to imagine how this doesn’t have a downward pull of some kind.
A new Harris poll suggests that 73% of it’s users would visit less if a short 3sec preroll ad were placed at the start of each archived video. One way or another Google will monetize YouTube, but poll or not, as Scott Karp of Publishing 2.0 says, it’s a scary indication of possible public reaction.
85% of TV watchers also claim they are “unaffected” by TV advertising, which studies have proven time and time again is simply not true. The bottom line is that consumers are almost completely unaware of the consequences of advertising on their lives, from a consumer influence standpoint or a “tolerance” standpoint.
You’re right in that pre-roll isn’t a panacea for online video advertising though. I think what VideoEgg is doing will be much more effective (slim transparent banners which slide over the bottom of video and can be clicked to go full-screen).
Mike,
At some point we’re going to have to decide whether things have changed or they haven’t. Are consumers now really in control, or are they still just the same docile sheep of the mass media era? If it’s the former, then it would seem that conventional wisdom from the mass media era will apply less and less.
Yep, all I’m saying is that consumers have historically been quite wrong when asked to judge *anything* in their lives related to advertising.
e.g.
Q: “Do you buy Coke because of the advertising or the taste?”
Typical A: “The taste, of course.”
Correct A: “The taste is more or less equivalent to most other Colas but my collective unconscious has been so saturated with images of people drinking Coke and having fun throughout my live that I probably feel more comfortable buying it because of that.”
Q: “Do you pay attention to many ads during your daily routine?”
Typical A: “No, I tune them out.”
Correct A: “I don’t consciously seek them out, but there are thousands of them and I’m sure some end up sticking, whether I like it or not.”
Q: “Would you watch more TV if there were no ads?”
Typical A: “Of course! I HATE ads.”
Correct A: “Probably not. I’ve learned to tolerate the ads. They are a fact of life.”
Q: “Would you leave YouTube if they played pre-roll ads?”
Typical A: “Totally. Fuck ads, man!”
Correct A: “They’d make the experience a bit more annoying but if the content’s good, I’m still going to stick around.”
interesting blog
Frage beantwortet, wovon die User bezahlt werden sollen. Vielleicht sind ihm die $345.6 Millionen aus dem YouTube-Verkauf an Google zu viel und er möchte die Community daran beiteiligen. Werbeclips vor den Videos sollte er besser nicht gemeint haben immerhin würden das 73% der User ablehnen. Ebenfalls in Davos meldete sich Bill Gates zu Wort und ließ uns dabei an seiner Vision vom Fernsehen der Zukunft teilhaben (es ist anders als das jetzige Fernsehen). Natürlich denkt er dabei an eine Microsoft gestützte IPTV-Lösung in Verbindung