Connecting the dots with the Condor



This all may seem a bit random at first, but to me it is nonetheless a connected conversation. Stick with me, and let me know what you think.

First, there's Hulu's Superbowl spot ... my favourite ad from the big game by a mile.


The irony is fantastic: A Superbowl spot that takes the piss out of TV viewers and TV. It demonstrates the power of TV whilst pointing out its inextricably linked weaknesses. On screen, it shows people as being stupid couch potatoes whilst actually telling people that they're smarter that all that. And the spot is funny as hell, to the point of my having some serious doubts about whether or not Alek Baldwin is truly human. Now, if we could just fcuking get Hulu outside the States, but that's a story for another day ...

Second, a blog post and subsequent conversation over on Asi Sharabi's blog, where I've left the longest reply I've ever written. The debate/conversation is worth checking out. Here's a snippet of what I wrote:

See, here’s the thing: People use digital channels as much as TV, yet your everyday ad agency or marketing director spends a shitload less time thinking about it and a fraction of the budget on it. In the UK, I think it was something like 22% of the total media spend was on TV and 12% spent online (in this case, I believe it was only looking at the web). Yet, the same number of people use the web as watch TV. And they spend more time on the web than watching TV. And the figures are more dramatic the younger you go. I’m not trying to make this all about cash, but advertising is a business, and money talks.

Third, a short article on today's NYTimes explaining Why Television Still Shines in a World of Screens.

In the quarter ended Sept. 30, the typical American watched 142 hours of television monthly, up about five hours from the same quarter the previous year. Internet use averaged more than 27 hours monthly, an increase of an hour and a half, according to Nielsen.

I'd love to see the monthly figures broken down by age group. For anyone under the age of thirty, spending 27 hours/month online seems ridiculously low. That's less than an hour per day, and that's impossible.

The economy is certainly playing a role here, too. As people become more and more concerned about the crunch, the idea of staying in and watching TV is bound to have a greater appeal.

The video mode has been reinforced by the rise of YouTube. In December, almost 100 million viewers in the United States watched 5.9 billion YouTube videos, according to comScore. Tellingly, YouTube has not cannibalized TV viewership — it has instead carved out another chunk of our leisure time for video on a screen.

Anyone care to reconcile the comScore numbers with Nielsen?

You now hear talk in the advertising trade of our “three screens”: television, the Internet and mobile devices. When I asked representatives of major ad agencies about how they chose the optimal mix of media for clients, I was led back, again and again, to television. That’s not just because it remains the one place where an advertiser can gather a truly mass audience for a single commercial message, but also because it provides what advertisers call an “immersive experience.”

Imagine that: Now we're being told that TV is more immersive than the internet. What a joke! I don't know what "advertising trade" people Randall Stross spoke with, but I'd imagine they're the same type of "trade people" who produce this garbage for Aviva or the new GE "NOW" TV spot.


Three things. Seemingly disconnected. But all pretty connected, if you ask me. Do you think this post has anything do do with the fact that I'm watching Three Days of the Condor as I read the NYTimes and write this post? A case of Sunday sleuthing or something?

"I don't remember yesterday. Today it rained."