Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Only 39 Percent of Viewers Choose Live TV As Their Default Option, Says Study (deadline.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the channel-surfing dept.

According to a new study by Hub Entertainment Research, viewers are increasingly defaulting to on-demand sources like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Hulu instead of live TV. The study found that only 39% of viewers tune into live programming from a traditional pay-TV provider, down from 47% last year. On-demand sources, collectively, were the first choice for 48% of viewers. Deadline reports: For viewers aged 18-34, the pattern is more stark -- only about a quarter (26%) of the demo lists live TV as a default, compared with 35% a year ago. One clear influence on consumer behavior is the increase in TV sources -- the average person has 4.5 distinct sources to choose from (including linear TV, DVR, VOD, Netflix, etc.). That number is up from 3.7 in 2014. Among viewers 18-34, the number is higher, at 5.1 sources -- plus, Hub found that fully 50% of 18-34-year-olds subscribe to at least two of the "big three" SVOD services, Netflix, Amazon or Hulu. Even older generations accustomed to the "clicker" have turned away from live TV as a default. About 56% of viewers 55 and older listed live as their first choice, but that's down from 66% a year ago.

12 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Commercials by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Excessive advertising, they did magazines in, now so too TV. The world-wide-web is next.

    1. Re:Commercials by jwhyche · · Score: 3

      This is truth. I don't mind ads. Some ads I even like to see. I don't even mind a certain level of targeting. I would much rather see ads about computer hardware than ads about vaginal cream.

      I draw the damn line when the ad is a video that auto plays, that I can cut the fuck off, and chases me down the damn screen.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    2. Re:Commercials by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Same. The Reader View trick seems to work against many of them though.

      View a page, adblocker notice pops up being annoying as shit. Reload page, press F9 ( Firefox ) and the page is loaded into Reader View.
      Content becomes readable, no ads. No blocking notice. YMMV, doesn't work on all sites.

      Those that it doesn't work on, I simply skip.

      Those sites that are known for blocking I skip completely by default.

    3. Re:Commercials by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No lie there.

      Once advertisements in magazines exceeded the number of articles or information I wanted to read, I ceased all of my subscriptions. ( years ago mind you )

      I've actually blocked entire TV networks ( I'm looking at you FX ) because of their advertising methods. Early in the show, the ratio of show to commercials favors the show. However, the longer the show runs, the less you get to see in one segment before the next set of commercials ( which, maddeningly, are the same GD commercials over and Over and OVER again ) breaks in. By the end of the show, you're lucky to get 5-7 minutes of show without a commercial break.

      Fuck that. Program it out.

      You're right though. We're seeing the same shit happen with the net and excessive advertising will be its demise.

    4. Re:Commercials by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Ads in magazines I never had a problem with. Byte, Computer Shopper, and Personal Computer World were about 70-90% ads, and it was fine, because the magazines were also massively thick reflecting the fact that the ads didn't mean less content, and it wasn't as if the ads were interrupting your reading.

      TV on the other hand, hell even 25% ads is a problem because those ads are shortening the content and interrupting the content. If a TV show that runs for 60 minutes is barely over 40 minutes long because the network needs to ensure there's more than 15 minutes available for advertising, it's a problem.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. I've been using Tivo since 2000 by SensitiveMale · · Score: 5, Informative

    FF, rewinding, and saving programs are necessary. Watching a 60 minute show in 40 minutes makes a huge difference. Skipping over a boring segment and saving another 10 to 20 minutes saves even more time.

    Oh, and pausing at boobs on TV. That's killer.

    1. Re:I've been using Tivo since 2000 by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"I've been using Tivo since 2000. FF, rewinding, and saving programs are necessary. "

      Me too. Been doing it since the first TiVo came out. I can't stand commercials and the lack of control. I also can't imagine watching any other way. It is even MORE convenient that streaming because it doesn't require a live Internet connection to play it, all actions are instant and smooth, I can even look frame-by-frame, and it starts at full res (no "ramping up and down" depending on bandwidth or checking). Plus the remote is far more functional, and I can do "slow-mo" and "speed watching". And things I planned to watch months from now that I have recorded don't just "disappear" because it isn't carried anymore.

      I find it amusing the summary calls watching cable or over the air "live TV", which it is not... as if DVR's don't exist.

    2. Re:I've been using Tivo since 2000 by antdude · · Score: 2

      Only boobs? What about other stuff? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  3. Tech changed by darkain · · Score: 2

    A large part of this is due to the fact that the switch over to ATSC, there was a lot of confusion. Most people think that OTA TV doesn't even exist anymore now that analog TV is gone. My peers, even tech ones, are shocked to find out that I have a network attached ATSC tuner for my house and can stream live TV on every device in my house from it.

  4. Re:I am God's gift to you rotten bastards... apk by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    Damn! I guess he told us. I don't even think I've reached that level of jackassery.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  5. I don't always watch TV but when I do... by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    Even when I do watch TV it is very rarely live. Usually I watch off my DVR, after the fact so I can FF thru the commercials.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  6. Live TV picture quality is too bad to watch it... by c120plus · · Score: 2

    Have you tried really watching a complete show on a traditional US broadcast channel lately? It's not only the ad breaks, there's a terror of logos and banners running over the content. This is fine if you have the TV blaring in the background while you play with your iPad, but useless if you really want to watch the show. Netflix has none of that, is cheap and has decent programming. No wonder that people prefer to watch that instead of broadcast TV, at least for anything that's not a live event.