The newsletter criticizes the validity of the average 5:09
hours by guessing what an actual distribution of time spent on digital by
percentile. For people who actually go online, it is 7 hours; for top 20
percentile, it is 14 hours per day; for top 7%, it is 20 hours per day. 20
hours per day seem high.
Let us run the same kind estimate for the TV viewing average
of 3 hours. For people who actually watch TV, 4.2 hours; for top 20 percentile,
it is 8.4 hours; for top 7%, it is 12 hours per day. 12 hours still seem high.
Neilson’s people meter only allows 1 TV viewing at once. So how can top 20
percentile people watch more than 8.4 hours of TV everyday? If you sleep for 8
hours everyday, you must be staying home watching TV a lot when awake and not
at work.
If we just assume that people spend use 1.5 digital devices
concurrently, it will bring the 5:09 hours figures down to 3:33 hours. This
revised number is right inline with the TV viewership. If we assume people
don’t do anything else, it must suggest that everyone who is watching TV is
always surfing online as well. Since Neilson’s 3-hour average already suggests
that people do not do anything else in their leisure time watching TV. Hence
people must be watching TV and surfing the web at the same time.
Both numbers are unrealistic. The problem with TV and online
digital time is that they define the possible maximum. It is only a proxy on
guessing if people are paying attention to any media channel. The fact that TV
is on or an Internet request goes out and comes back does not represent the
fact that people are actually paying attention. Hence, these numbers are all
just best effort proxies. They cannot be used to be exact numbers. They can be
used to find trends like seeing if people are watching more TV over time or
not. However, you cannot compare if people are watching more TV or spending
more time online. Both numbers are not accurate measures and they use different
assumptions.
No comments:
Post a Comment