Slashdot Mirror
Your Online TV Watching Can Now Be Tracked Across Devices
itwbennett (1594911) writes A partnership between TV measurement company Nielsen and analytics provider Adobe, announced today, will let broadcasters see (in aggregate and anonymized) how people interact with digital video between devices — for example if you begin watching a show on Netflix on your laptop, then switch to a Roku set-top box to finish it. The information learned will help broadcasters decide what to charge advertisers, and deliver targeted ads to viewers. Broadcasters can use the new Nielsen Digital Content Ratings, as they're called, beginning early next year. Early users include ESPN, Sony Pictures Television, Turner Broadcasting and Viacom.
Now I'm even happier I cancelled Netflix.
Can they track how many times I tried to purchase the content legally before joining a swarm?
For some reason, people haven't cottoned on to the fact that HD content can be received over the air with an old pair of rabbit ears or a more modern $20 antenna.
Sure, it's not 500 channels, but how many of those 500 channels do you watch anyway? And how many of them are just dupes?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that anybody who works for an analytics agency or a spy agency has more less forfeited their right to privacy.
So start publishing their personal information on the internet, let these assholes know how it feels.
Assholes in marketing don't deserve any more privacy than they are willing to give us.
There's no way they'll either competently anonymize data, and no way they won't exploit the stuff which hasn't been cleaned up.
So the address of your kids school seems like a fair trade. And where your wife works. And your tax return. And your license plate.
Fuck you. Go die.
If I could delete 3 things from all existence they would be:
3: Professional sports
2: Fatties
1: Advertising
The amount of time and money the world wastes on these 3 useless things is extraordinary.
How can any of the data be trusted reliably anyway? Just anecdotally, I have 2 TiVo's that are never turned off. All day and all night long, there are (six between them) tuners on various channels. How does do the ratings companies filter though that? Same issue with just about any other cable box or DVR.
You don't have media companies constantly looking over your shoulder tracking which TV or device the content is played on and when.
Up till now, the TV Nielsens have been ruling the roost when it comes to how many people are watching something. Now with tracking added that includes online content on something of an equal basis, the real TV customers (the people who pay for ads) will know what the product (the viewers being shown advertising) is actually doing. This being Slashdot, people are no doubt running to the store to pay for a roll of tinfoil with a Bitcoin, but it's really not the Orwellian nightmare that you might expect. Imagine if there had been this richness of data for some shows like Firefly that were floundering in the TV ratings, yet were developing a following based on online views -- the audience was following the new episodes, but lagging the broadcast by a few months as they caught up.
I expect that many shows which got mishandled on broadcast yet had some redeeming value and a loyal (young, target demographic market) who aren't showing up on TV lists (because they don't own one) are going to now be more represented -- and that's going to lead to better programming for the people who like that. Perhaps the "sit in front of the TV" market will be eclipsed by the "sit in front of the tablet/smartphone" market as that becomes the way people consume television.
It might also clearly show what many of the cable providers keep denying but don't want to admit -- there's a tremendous market for (effectively) a la carte television that's being consumed right now. They can keep denying it, but it's going to be very hard for them to have leverage in deals with (especially) sports leagues when the Nielsen numbers show that it would be a great business decision to provide an app rather than going through cable to reach a larger audience who is young, hip and spends money.
As a cable-cutter who primarily gets video as OTA HDTV I for one was confused (for a second) by their use of the term "Digital Video".
What might have been better would be to call it "streaming video" or some such, to better indicate that the article is actually web-specific only.
Also, the "digital" part is pretty much redundant these days anyway, as there is no analog TV anymore (except maybe a few holdouts on cable), so pretty much all video is now digital. Saying "digital video" has basically become analogous to saying "electric TV".
The information learned will help broadcasters decide what to charge advertisers, and deliver targeted ads to viewers.
I've been streaming Netflix for years, and I've never seen an ad on it. What is this talking about?
for example if you begin watching a show on Netflix on your laptop, then switch to a Roku set-top box to finish it
I don't get this.
When I'm watching something I enjoy, either via OTA HD or Netflix, the last thing I'm going to do is "quick! switch to another device!"
Watching a film, documentary or "episode" is much more enjoyable watched in one sitting. If I have to switch to another device I will watch at a later time when my attention isn't split.
This splitting of attention ruins the experience.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Adobe's Analytics service, gained through its acquisition of Omniture, let it track how consumers view digital media across devices through digital cookies and mobile advertising IDs.
Ghostery, I love you.
With respect to 3, the same thing could probably be said about however you choose to spend your leisure time. Computer games, perhaps? With respect to 2, I'd say we'd be better-off eliminating assholes like you.
Now when I watch a thing, I'll get ads telling me to watch the thing I watched.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Never underestimate the powers of a manager who comes in and decides that the numbers should show X and that any numbers that don't need to be skewed until they do.
Some of their past tactics (such as the one taken against Futurama of moving the timeslot and then preempting the program until viewership numbers dropped) won't work in the new order of on-demand video, but they could take other actions. They could just not promote the show/new episodes. They could also delay releasing the new episodes until people lose interest.
I don't mind analytics in general, but don't assume that they will help rescue your favorite show by proving that there is a big following. Managers will just slice and dice the analytics until it "proves" that the show doesn't have a big enough viewership to continue.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
And for me it would be:
3. Video Games
2. Google Glass
1. Advertising
Your point?
Up till now, the TV Nielsens have been ruling the roost when it comes to how many people are watching something. Now with tracking added that includes online content on something of an equal basis, the real TV customers (the people who pay for ads) will know what the product (the viewers being shown advertising) is actually doing. This being Slashdot, people are no doubt running to the store to pay for a roll of tinfoil with a Bitcoin, but it's really not the Orwellian nightmare that you might expect. Imagine if there had been this richness of data for some shows like Firefly that were floundering in the TV ratings, yet were developing a following based on online views -- the audience was following the new episodes, but lagging the broadcast by a few months as they caught up.
I expect that many shows which got mishandled on broadcast yet had some redeeming value and a loyal (young, target demographic market) who aren't showing up on TV lists (because they don't own one) are going to now be more represented -- and that's going to lead to better programming for the people who like that. Perhaps the "sit in front of the TV" market will be eclipsed by the "sit in front of the tablet/smartphone" market as that becomes the way people consume television.
Which has been myself for many years now. Ever since I could build myself a DVR I've been the "I'll watch the show on MY schedule, not the networks" type of person. Netflix and such make it even easier to live that way.
My thoughts exactly. It's obvious that Netflix can track you across devices because you are signed into your account and profile. They've been able to do this since they started streaming videos. I don't see how this has anything to do with advertisements though, as Netflix is a pay service and does not show any ads.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I assume that by "cable companies" you really mean the TV side of broadband service providers. My ISP is Charter, a "cable company." I receive no TV reception from them, but they are really the only game in town for high speed internet service. I figure if people stop buying the TV from them, they'll just up the price of my internet service.http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/14/10/21/1613205/your-online-tv-watching-can-now-be-tracked-across-devices.
I disallow ads for a variety of reasons, numero uno is they are now one of the most popular vectors for malware. Two: They eat bandwidth. Three: I've already paid money to access the Interwebs. I will not pay again with my privacy. To this end, I block all ads, beacons, cookies, tracking, you name it. People are amazed at how much better their online experiences can be when your network and devices are set up to disallow ads and tracking. I refuse to even use a machine that has not been sanitized and set up the way I like it.
Using a proxy server is also a great addition to the above to prevent tracking and identity profiling. No one needs to know who I am or what else I watch. It's none of their business.
How embarrassing.
TPB isn't just cheaper than other services it's better. In fact that's the main thing. Advantages of TPB:
* No Ads during the show (though I have to concede that impossibly proportioned women do appear to want to date my testicles).
* Huge library including some obscure stuff you can't buy.
* Great search.
* All shows in one place.
* No DRM: watch on any device you like, laptop, phone, random set top box.
* No streaming bullshit. Works online or off, on a flakey connection or a good one.
* Variety of different resolutions and qualities allowing you to trade off quality and download speed.
* Great clients for managing multiple downloads.
* Really great options for viewing the media. MPlayer I love you.
* Timely: the shows are usually online very fast. No waiting years for it to arrive legally. Yes that still happens.
* No ausive region coding (see no DRM). Yes I own those discs legally. No I'm not going to pay to buy another DVD player just to satisfy some abusive jerkweeds who think I'm some sort of crook for having lived abroad.
* No net connection required to watch the shows once acquired.
And now:
* Doesn't creepily track you.
It's amazing how much better a service you get while sailing the seven seas and looting the merchentmen, arr, matey.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Even worse, it doesn't matter if 10,000,000 watch a show.
The Neilson numbers come in several forms. The ones you see daily are called "Live and Same Day" (L+SD), which counts views that watched the show live and within 24 hours of airing. Other numbers you can easily find are Live+3 days (L+3) and Live+7 (L+7).
But none of those numbers are actually used by anyone. That's why Neilson gives them out for free. No one's paying for that information, nor will they ever. And that's not where they make their money.
The real money is in the C3 number, or if you're CBS, you convinced advertisers to take C7 numbers. What are these? They're commercial ratings (for programming watched live to 3 days later). Basically you take the L3/L7 numbers, strip out the numbers while the program is showing, and you're left with just the numbers related to the advertising. And that's the number that makes Neilson money and the number stations pay money for. And yes, you skip ads on your DVR, which pull down those C3 numbers because it lowers the viewers for the advertising.
And that's because the largest source of income is advertising. Sure they get some through cable fees and Hulu and iTunes/Amazon/DVD etc. sales, but that's a tiny fraction of advertising.
CBS managed this season to convince advertisers to pay the C7 rate rather than C3, because well, it more accurately reflects today's lifestyle of people who record a show and watch it later in the week.
And that's all that matters. It doesn't matter if you can find 100,000,000 people to watch a show - if it's not reflected in those 100,000,000 people watching the ads.
It also brings up cord cutters who prefer to download their TV programming from torrents and such - as far as the industry is concerned, they don't care because those people don't add to advertising ratings.
Even under the new system - the new system just means that Neilson can more accurately measure their ratings, but if you're not watching the ads, it means jack squat to the producers.
So that super popular show people pirate? Guess what, the TV industry really doesn't care - you never were a "customer" and it doesn't matter if only 1M people watched it on TV while 100M people watched it off torrents - if those 1M people can't justify the ad rates and production costs, it's getting canned. The 100M other people? Too f'in bad - if it was that good, they should've watched it with ads.
If you ever wondered why worrying over TV piracy has subsided, that's one reason (who cares about pirates - they obviously don't care about their TV show), the other is they've found legal streaming to be even better. Because if they put a stream online to watch programming, they can make it such that you can't skip ads, and that's actually worth something - enough to pay for the effort of putting an online stream up. So you beat both DVR owners and appear as a hero for making a legal source available.
Bonus material - 2014-2015 TV season ad rates (30 second spot). This is what brings in the money.
http://variety.com/2014/tv/new...
You. Just. Wait.
Except the ratio between streamers and ad watchers is probably a hell of a lot closer to a constant, where the streamers are enforcing the ad watchers as a social norm. I watch walking dead on amazon, guy at work watches it a day earlier than me, in fact the time frame is a bonus for him, he always watches shit before I do, which watching live of course is an incentive to sit through commercials and I myself am a commercial for the walking dead.
Ironically isn't CBS the one that just launched the streaming service that you pay for, and still shows you ads?
Imagine if there had been this richness of data for some shows like Firefly that were floundering in the TV ratings, yet were developing a following based on online views
Firefly never had a chance. At the time, you could make pilots for 30 reality shows for the cost of a single Firefly episode. It would have had to pull Jeopardy-level ratings to survive.
We know you like watching TV, so we like to watch you like watching TV.
If I could delete 3 things from all existence they would be: blah, blah, blah.
Let me introduce you to the words "gainful employment." There are very few ways of earning a living that do not require advertising your product or service.
if you're not watching the ads, it means jack squat to the producers.
The producers of the show only care tiny bit about advertising, as they get their pay up front (a TV channel/network pays them to produce the content) and from various forms of direct sales (DVD, Hulu, Amazon, etc.). Because much of the value of a show has moved from the first-run airing, networks now partner with producers to produce the show, so that the network also gets a cut of the direct sales.
So, producers care a little bit about ratings and advertising, because if nobody is watching their show, they won't get any more money to make it, but as long as enough people watch in some form that puts money in the producer's pocket, the show will still get made.
If I pay for a streaming video service, the last thing I want is advertisements of any kind. If the service is free, the provider can insert a few (3-5 X 1.5 minutes) targeted advertisements per hour.
The only thing I know about Nielsen is that it's directly responsible for many of my series to be cancelled. Now the more they get into TV, the more networks realize that the people watching the ads are the same watching realities. And so, instead of rewarding good series they will reward those that sell more ads.
According to Nielsen the average person watches: 4 hours and 35 minutes of TV a day.
I *might* watch that much in a week. There just isn't that much worth watching most of the time. I guess I'm an outlier. I cannot fathom why anyone would give a crap about the latest Kardashian family hijinks.
What's really sad is people don't insist on ad free TV, or a 3rd party candidate...
That costs money. Watching advertising just costs time. If you have a lot of money you can trade money for time. If you don't have a lot of money you trade time for money. Simple fact is that most people either can not and/or will not pay what TV would cost if it were not ad supported. Furthermore it's unlikely to ever really be offered because there is too much money to be made with advertising.
People don't support third party candidates because the deck has been stacked by the two major parties to make it almost impossible for any third party candidate to get elected.
Do you do anything at all just because it is fun, despite its lack of utility? Professional sports is the exact same thing.
Do you like to laugh? Many of the world's greatest comedians have been fatties. Some of the world's best scientists, engineers, and philanthropists have been fatties too. I'd say they are worth our time.
Have you ever tried to run a profitable business? Advertising is a requirement for success. In fact, history has shown that effective advertising is more important that product quality for the long-term profitability of your business.
I am just trying to figure out if you are actually daft, or were just pretending to be so to troll.
I have 3 more for you:
1. Facebook
2. Twitter
3. Apple, Microsoft Haters
FYI. Ads pay for this site to remain available to us.
I realize that it is all about advertising, but where do these outrageous cable fees go? If it is all about advertising, why do cable providers charge substantial fees for channel packages? Clearly, you can show more adds if you let everyone with a cable watch it.
So it must be not that simple.
I don't hate video games, but I fucking loathe "gamers".
If I could delete 3 things from all existence they would be:
How about Flash? Isn't that how we ended up with "analytics provider Adobe"?
Exactly. Not just spam, but all advertising is a scam--and the businesses who pay for it are the victims.
I like most people, prefer my constitutionally guaranteed right to Privacy, and Freedom, to Slavery.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Netflix is a pay service and does not show any ads
So was cable when it first came out. They promised to never show ads; you were paying to not see ads. The money would go to the shows you watched instead of them needing ads. By switching to cable, you were supporting your shows. How well did that work out? Why is Netflix different?
I watch OTA broadcasts and torrents.
They cant track SHIT!
If you want me to lose weight, give me a steady supply of uppers. Otherwise, you're part of the problem and not the solution and you can fuck off.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I play video games, and I also fucking loathe "gamers".
I write sci-fi for metalheads
1. Disney 2. ESPN 3. Cuntcast
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I play video games, and I also fucking loathe "gamers".
Exactly this.
If I could delete 3 things from all existence they would be:
How about Flash? Isn't that how we ended up with "analytics provider Adobe"?
No, you can thank PDFs and Adobe Reader for that.
Flash is at least a useful tool.
I am curious how many people watch the commercials. Is there a Nielsen (not Neilson!) for those?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
But, I don't. No Netflix, no stinking Comcast TV either. /. though there might be a problem.
If they are tracking my on
If I could delete 3 things from all existence they would be:
3: Professional sports
2: Fatties
1: Advertising
The amount of time and money the world wastes on these 3 useless things is extraordinary.
And not war, disease, or poverty? I think you have your priorities mixed up.
If is frustrating to watch something in which you can't skip the ads. Thankfully they haven't caught on to being able to skip forward 5 minutes and rewind on crippled On Demand shows with my cable provider. If they cared, allowing fast forward would allow me to briefly see the commercials. I would propose having a banner up, whether built into the commercial or not, so when fast forwarding you'd see it during On Demand viewing.
Some ideas...
Allow people to pay to view early. (TV or online)
Allow people to pay to view without commercials. (TV or online) (Legend of Korra on Amazon for example vs. Nick.com with commercials)
Off-topic, but for theatrical release of movies, how about an option to pay $40 to watch it On Demand through one's cable provider? (8 hour rental)
Do what Adult Swim does. No popups during the show, although I do recall one time they had a banner/ad during Bleach for another show once. And keep the commercials short, like 3 minutes or so, with one break total. I don't want commercials every 5 or 7 minutes when I'm watching something. I'd like to get through 11 minutes of something without being interrupted. How much is a 30 commercial break worth after all? Granted, I tend to skip commercials if I'm paying attention. Hmmm. Do people not skip commercials due to doing things on their electronic devices?
I download TV
So no-one will track me
Burma Shave is old
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Is that the C numbers http://entertainment.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5856325&cid=48196881 was mentioning?
Meh. When Netflix starts showing ads, I'll just stop using it. No problem.
From my point of view, there are two problems. The biggest one isn't the ads themselves, but the tracking that is used with them. That needs to die a fast, painful death. The other problem, which is about the ads themselves, is that advertising is ubiquitous. When you can't even take a piss in many public restrooms without having to look at another damned ad, it's no mystery why people want to see advertising itself die.
people are no doubt running to the store to pay for a roll of tinfoil with a Bitcoin, but it's really not the Orwellian nightmare that you might expect.
Wait a second. You can't call people who object to tracking paranoid because the tracking is provably being done. Why do you think people who object to being spied on are somehow nutty for objecting to it?
No more paying for bundled crap I don't want. No more region restrictions. No more commercials. No more getting ripped off on digital downloads of boxsets that cost the same as physical media. No more DRM. No more spying by marketing droids. Get what I want when I want it. Have solved just about every problem and frustration.
Come home, flip the TV on and it's just like a TiVo experience with a heck of a lot more storage. Sure it's not easy to setup and sometimes an error occurs and I have to go fix it. But I can download anonymously a two hour movie in a few minutes and keep it if I like. I can let TV episodes pile up and binge watch. Stream about the home LAN & WAN to mobile devices, even sync'ing content for offline on the road use. Can setup parental controls via different media library, etc. Can pause a show on one device and pickup where I left off on another. Can go on vacation for a month and still have all my content up to date and waiting for me when I arrive. Use over the air digital antennas for local channel news, weather, etc. when I actually have time to watch live TV. The only thing missing is live sports but hey, I'm a Geek and I don't watch that stuff anyway. I might watch the Olympics but last time I was able to get a lot of Olympic coverage that didn't even air on TV!
Would I pay to have this? Most certainly as long as it was reasonable. I am already paying fees in the way of bandwidth and access. If the industry would get with the program and get a freaking clue I would gladly join the club. But I am doing things that are not possible with any other method and the experience is better than what the entertainment industry currently provides. They are getting closer but for every step they take forward they seem to take two steps back! Had an offer for ala carte on demand but its very limited. If Google Fiber came to my area, I would drop cable Internet in a heartbeat! I would lose the bandwidth cap in doing so and I would just VPN for more privacy from big brother Google.
Solution (1st Rule of hfrarg):
Ohvyg n ybj pbfg ybj cbjrerq zrqvn freire jvgu n ohgg gba bs fgbentr (10GO), cbjrerq ol BzavBF (Vyyhzbf -- BcraFbynevf Sbex) hfvat na YFV 8cbeg UON svezjner synfurq gb WOBQ. Fvk 2GO JQ Erq FNGN qevirf, mENVQ1 MSF. Gjb purnc 120TO FQQ'f sbe Y2NEP/MVY (abg ernyyl arrqrq ohg gur FFQ'f jrer ba fnyr). Hfvat MSF funer gur zrqvn fgbentr ivn ASF. Perngrq n Mbar/XIZ gb eha Hohagh Freire naq nyybpngr 3TO ENZ 30TO iUQ. Vafgnyyrq FnoAMOq, FvpxOrneq, PbhpuCbgngb, naq Cyrk Zrqvn Freire. Cnl n zbaguyl Hfrarg fhofpevcgvba.
Tnzr bs Guebarf naq ubhe nsgre vg nvef, Qbpgbe Jub 4 ubhef rneyl, Qbjagba Noorl n jubyr frnfba nurnq, inevbhf OOP fubjf gung jvyy arire nve va zl ertvba, Pnanqvna fubjf n frnfba nurnq, zbivrf gung eryrnfrq zbaguf nurnq birefrnf, rgp., rgp.
...with my CRT TV and converter box, plugged into an antenna.
Twice this year we've done the Nielsen week-long rating. Our TV viewing comprised 15 minutes of the noon news, and an hour of "Mr. Selfridge", "Downton Abbey" or "Call the Midwife" on PBS. I think they sent it to us again to see if we were lying. Nope. We don't have cable; we pay to have trash hauled out, so why pay to have it delivered?
"57 channels and Nuthin On."