And so it came to
pass, that the evil giant, Google, brought upon it the wrath of the television
industry...
They did this by
suggesting that YouTube drives more sales than broadcast TV after commissioning some research (and we all know how accurate research is..)
That's somewhat
disingenuous. Of course a medium with a clickable response is theoretically both more
measurable and is likely to generate more direct sales response than one which
is far more subliminal and subtle (why is it that everyone blindly accepts Google metrics ?).
The old 'I know that
fifty per cent of my advertising spend works, I just don't know which fifty per
cent' comes to mind.
Video is emotional,
and so is ideal for building brands on broadcast TV. The cluttered, messy environment of Google
is not a good place to build brands.
In trying to variously be a
user generated video platform and broadcaster, YouTube has taken a decade to
find its feet at a massive cost. Netflix has come much further much more
quickly by being less arrogant and more focused.
The reality is that
YouTube is several businesses rolled into one. It's trying to be a social
platform, an online video platform, a broadcaster, a pay per view system and a
video advertising platform, plus much else beyond.
It took nearly a
decade to move away from an emphasis on point and click short form content and
still isn't sure what it's really doing. Except for everything.
It's not surprising
that broadcasters with their tight, well defined decades old business model
look on with disdain. YouTube is a cuckoo in the nest.
However, Google is
right that YouTube is probably under sampled against traditional TV, especially
outside the UK. TV provides very abstracted viewing figures based on very small samples, so it's difficult to gauge real accuracy. Also, engagement with traditional TV seems is likely to be much lower (putting the kettle on, going to the toilet, chatting, as opposed to a personal interaction with a PC or mobile screen).
But the TV companies
are also being disingenuous. They have been slow and conservative beyond belief
in their approach to an online strategy. The best they have managed is
simulcasting and in demand with endless ads. Oh, just like their broadcast
properties! You really can't teach an old dog new tricks.
In the meantime a
massive gap has appeared between what the traditional broadcast channels are doing and what YouTube is doing. Netflix, Amazon and Hulu are exploiting it, and there's room for
plenty of others.
In my view the ideal
TV business model of the future is in using YouTube and broadcast TV as an
audience building platform - the former using a teaser channel and the latter
using programme brands, and then running your own show with native ads and
sponsored content (you can also throw SATVOD
(subscription/advertising/transactional video in demand) into the mix).
Your service needs to be spread across hundreds of platforms and distribution outlets and at the core will be the ability to produce brilliant content. Brilliant content that is eight
seconds long, fifteen seconds long, thirty seconds long, two minutes long,
thirty minutes long - all at the same time.
If you can do this,
my fellow broadcast professional, you will live happily ever after and banish the nightmare of TV commissioners and YouTube profitability alike.