Comments on: Online Video Increase Driven by Writer’s Strike?

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:05:10 +0000

It makes sense that they tag the press releases with something catchy, but I figure it should at least make sense.

“Online video viewing up, yet again, same sites in the list as last time, in about the same order” isn’t going to grab anyone.

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:26:07 +0000

Comscore is basically just counting all the video watching and benchmarking growth. “Reruns” don’t yet have any meaning on the Internet.

Essentially, online video consumption is up — a trend we expect to continue for a long while to come. Bill correctly derided comScore for attributing the growth to the writer’s strike — for the December period they were measuring, there was not yet much “strike impact” in terms of new episodes.

There will be continued growth in online video consumption well after the strike is resolved. We expect some kind of headline from comScore that goes “Online growth continues as viewers spurn traditional tv after the strike”. We don’t expect any such spurning, but we do expect the press release nonetheless!

By: Jon V

Jon V — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:04:25 +0000

I’m not sure of what ‘fresh content’ you speak. My understanding is that writers (and now I assume, actors) want a piece of the advertising money associated with TV shows that are then shown on network-owned websites. That makes sense.

If we’re talking about ‘other’ forms of ‘webertainment’ like YouTube or MyTube or His/Her/ItsTube, I guess those will increasingly draw people away from their TVs, but only to the point of saturation. And of course, networks can always advertise their replays on those sites and drag viewers back to their (the networks) website, at which point the new WGA/SAG contracts internet revenue stipulations kick in anyway.

Is comScore including reruns of TV shows on network websites as fresh? Do they monitor the Nielsen internet ratings? Does Nielsen monitor comScore ratings?

Is anyone else out there as dizzy as I just got???

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:02:28 +0000

So, instead of “lazy” PR, perhaps I should have written “standard operating procedure” PR!

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:52:16 +0000

lazy PR is when you don't actually make stuff up to get attention. I don't consider this lazy. Dissemation of bad info in order to get attention is why PR flacks GET PAID! I don't know that that release merits anyone getting a bonus, but...hardly lazy. BTW, for online video #s junkies, Chris Albrecht of NewTeevee.com did some nice analysis of "web shows" viewing numbers.