Y!CA Video Evolution Research


Published on

Yahoo! Canada's Video Evolu

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 1914, movie theatres only. 50 years ahead, big change was TV – video in your home, for the family. Family-uniting goggle box. Shared experience10 years ago, video had changed again; cinema and TV, but DVDs as well. I even had videocassettes myself, and we’d go to Blockbuster on Friday night to find a video or DVD to watch. Fast forward to today, and it’s a very different landscape again. Still cinema, TV (but no Blockbuster), but the TV is now one of many screens in the house. PVR ownership is on the rise, allowing more video on-demand. And of course we now have a second (and third and fourth) screen, with computers, laptops, tablets and mobile phones becoming outlets for video content, and Netflix, Hulu, iPlayer, YouTube and many others providing video content through these screens. And it’s changed behaviours again – TV no longer the only screen; video no longer just full-length shows or films with an appointment to view. More deeply integrated into daily media consumption. 91% of Canadian internet users (69% of Canadians).Yet IAB Canada report on ad spending showed online video ads getting just 2% of all online ad revenues in 2010.Hence hugely important, want to understand the role of online video, demystify it.
  • First thing to understand is how growth of online video is affecting other media. Last 5 years, time spent online grown by 39%; and of course the amount of time they spend with video online has increased by much more than that – YouTube alone has seen a doubling of consumers’ time spent on it. TV time spent grown over the same period. More multitasking – simultaneous consumption of media channels; arguably TV has become more background, although not conclusively so. Hence, online is not growing at the expense of TV; online video is complementary to TV.
  • Existing research shows that online video and TV are complementary for brands as well – campaigns that run both on TV and against online video perform significantly better than those running on TV alone.
  • So having set the scene, this is the landscape into which we wanted to delve in more detail, and really understand it in more depth. In-depth discussion of perceptions and use of video in all its forms, roles it plays in their lives, and delving into more detail about the different kinds of online video that they consume, or don’t consume. Quant survey using a detailed questionnaire, including some conjointchoice analysis to understand the trade-offs for viewers when it comes to advertising around video.
  • 9 out of 10 internet users watches video online at least once a month – so there isn’t a particular “video audience”. According to comScore, viewers are watching 1700 minutes of online video a month; that’s 28 hours or so. That seems somewhat higher than we might expect, but it’s indicative of how important it is as a channel.
  • Our research inherently focuses on those people who are more actively engaged with watching video (ie can recall watching); CS data picks up *actual* behaviour rather than recalled or intended behaviour. According to our data, about 60% of internet users watch (and can recall watching) online video in an average month, and it’s this group that we’ve focused on.
  • Started out by coming back to this question of the role that different channels and outlets play for consumers. From the qualitative discussions we got a huge amount of detail and insight into how people watch video content on different devices, and the ways in which they use it – for relaxation, for background noise, for enjoyment, for learning, for entertainment, for communication.
  • Synthesising all of that discussion and insight, we came to some clear understanding of how TV and online video really complement each other in consumers’ lives. We found that TV’s still the primary video channel for most people; the first place they turn for video content – it’s the easiest video outlet (one button to switch on, multiple channels to fit your every mood and whim). It’s the most convenient – it’s right there in the middle of the living room; you just have to sit down and let it entertain you. And it’s the most sociable, with family or friends sat watching key moments with you. We found that people often use it for background noise (get home to an empty house, turn the TV on), but also for entertainment, education, and enjoyment, with an appointment to view. In contrast, we discovered that online is still a secondary video channel for most consumers. Watching films or TV programmes on a PC or laptop just isn’t as convenient as on TV; it requires more effort to find what to watch, and it still doesn’t feel quite as natural to watch this kind of content on a laptop or PC as it does on the TV – the living room’s not shaped around these devices quite as much (yet). Also found that video viewing on a PC or laptop is generally more active consumption than through TV – looking for what to watch, in a particular genre, style etc, or to catch up on episodes of a TV series. And it’s usually more personal viewing, by the nature of the screen itself. TV central to living room, etc. “Online video” covers a huge range of content, though, and within this audience – and this channel – we can further break down different formats.
  • The first division is between long-form and short-form video. Long-form is generally full TV shows or films. Our data suggest about 1 in 4 online Canadians [40% of our research respondents watch video of this form online at least once a week] – through channels such as Netflix, iTunes, or Rogers On-Demand Online. It’s still a minority channel, then, partly for the reasons I just mentioned, but surely destined to grow in importance. Short-form video is clips of up to 10 minutes or so; for our purposes we’ve included premium, professionally-produced, TV quality (shortcast?) content and user-generated videos. It’s this that we normally think of when we consider ‘online video’: music videos, news reports, movie trailers, home videos, how-to guides, funny clips and myriad other types. And this accounts for the vastmajority of video being watched online in Canada – and the majority of viewers – and it’s this that we’ve really focussed on in more detail in the rest of the research.
  • Having understood these distinctions, we were then able to delve in much more detail into how people use these different kinds of video.
  • And what we found is that for many Canadian internet users, online short-form video is an important medium. 3/4 say that when they’re looking to learn something online (a recipe, DIY etc), they prefer to do it by - it’s easier to learn through a video than by reading about it. For 2/3, a text story or article (news, sports, finance, entertainment, blog post) that has a video clip within it provides a better experience – more engaging, more informative, more entertaining etc – than one without. 60% have clicked on video within a text article in the last month. While consumers may not always be the best predictors of the future, it’s interesting to note that half think the web experience is going to move away from text and audio to a more video-based format. 51% believe that within five years’ time, video will be more important than audio and text online. 41% use short-form online video to keep up with news and sports highlights, because they’re too time-pressed to watch full-length TV programmes.
  • So we obviously wanted to know which devices people use; increasing focus on the multi-screen household, and this picture of the family sat in the living room each watching a different screen. Among video users who have a laptop or desktop, more than 8 out of 10 watch video through them; ¾ of those with an internet-connected tablet use it to watch video – it is well setup for it – and half of those with a games console connected to the internet do so. More important are the numbers in green – as a proportion of all online video users, laptops account for a touch more video viewing than desktop computers. I would guess that a lot of this comes down to convenience at home – who wants to watch videos in the other room if everyone else is sat in the living room? And also work computers come into play. Tablets are still a small part of the market; while people who have them are converts, they’re still in the minority. Smartphones, too, don’t yet account for a huge proportion of video viewers – data plans in Canada are still not as transparent as they could be, and not all devices cope very well with all kinds of online video (egiPhones with flash video). Interesting point that according to PMB, desktop PCs outnumber laptops about 3:2 among the Canadian online population. When we look at people who’ve watched a TV show online, though, the ratio comes closer to parity; the total # of computers also rises. In fact, people with laptops are more likely to watch long-form video online, according to the same source. 80% of those with a ‘net enabled desktop use their laptop for short-form video; similar proportion for the reverse overlap. About 85% of those who own tablets use a laptop for video; similar % for desktop. => LOTS of channel overlap. Daily viewers of online video are, unsurprisingly, more likely than average to use any of these devices to consume video. Women are slightly less likely to use any particular device – suggesting less overlap of devices. In other words, they’re more likely to use one main device for video.
  • So that’s the how; we also wanted to understand the *when* for consuming short-form video. What times of dayRed line is TV – unsurprisingly, it’s highest in the evening, early and later, and generally pretty low through the rest of the day. Working people. There are 2 interesting points about the short-form video line; firstly, the highest point is still in the evening – there’s a big overlap between TV and short-form video. In fact, nearly half of people who watch TV in the early evening say they also watch sfv at the same time of day. Secondly, that it’s significantly higher during the day – people are twice as likely to watch online sfv in the morning or afternoon as TV. We know this ourselves; it’s much easier to get online during the day at work than it is to find a TV. And it’s also become integrated into people’s routines – PFM UK research suggested that people will watch short online videos in the afternoon as a pickmeup; or in the morning to catch up on the sport from last night. And so we explored in more detail by genre; I’ve included 3 here. For example, we saw that PPC of news, sports etc is the highest form of video in the morning, fitting that pattern of catching up on sports from last night, or a quick roundup of the news, before settling down to work. Audience trends: Women pretty much follow the trend (although are slightly more likely across the board to say they don’t watch a particular genre). QC similarly; Tablet users are more likely to watch while commuting on a mobile device. Daily viewers – biggest pattern is being less likely to watch in the evenings – TV and short-form video.
  • In terms of what they’re watching, probably the key learning is that there’s a multitude of different topics, with subjects as broad as the internet itself. And most consumers watch a variety of different videos (only 1 in 10 just consumes one kind of sfv). Here we captured the main genres: Movie clips/ trailers are most popular; Music videos next most watched, both watched by over half of video consumers. News/ current affairs is 3rd. Unsurprisingly – as ever – daily viewers of short-form video are more likely than average to watch ANY of these, but particularly spiking on science/ tech, video game, TV shows (incl docs), sports and movie clips. Women are generally v much average in this – up in some genres, down in others, but in particular we see that they’re much more likely to watch fashion, celeb, and cooking clips; much less likely to watch sports, science/ tech etc. Tablet owners – up in movies, ads, travel, beauty. QC is quite nuanced – up in docs, music; down in sports, news and movies.
  • We condensed that extensive list of genres of short-form video content into 9 key groups using factor analysis. It’s basically a fancy way of saying we used stats to summarise those genres, and this is how it came out. 3/4 video viewers have watched a professional entertainment clip in the last 4 weeks; that’s movie clips or trailers, music videos and TV clips. (It’s all ppc, too)66% have watched a video from what we’ve called ‘humour’; this is a real mixture of professional and ugc content, including ‘funniest home video’, ‘animal tricks’ and standup clips – it also includes ads/ commercials, interestingly. Informational is things like documentary clips, animals, nature, science; then we have news, current affairs and weather. Male entertainment skews male; lifestyle/ celeb/ ent/ health/ wellness skews female. 4 out of 10 video consumers watch video clips of how to bake, build, repair etc., and they’re also more likely to be female. Below these we have a couple of less viewed genres, including Family (parenting skills and cartoons for kids, 12%) and Personal Development (inspirational, spiritual, professional development etc 19%). Women: more likely to watch lifestyle (57%), how-to; much less keen on male entertainment. QC: actually fairly average. Tablet: up on professional entertainment (it’s all about the production value!). Daily: up on all of them, but particularly male ent (they’re mostly male!) and informational stuff.
  • I’ve mentioned user-generated content (UGC) and professionally produced video a few times, and we discovered in the course of the research that this really is an important divide when seeking to understand how Canadians watch video online. What we found was that they really are very distinct, in how people consume them, how they fit into the media day, and so on. User-generated video is probably what we think of most often when describing short-form online video – it’s the homemade clips that people upload, of their friends doing silly things, pets being cute and so on; the kind of video that’s been typified by YouTube. Professionally-produced video is, broadly, the opposite – it’s TV-quality video in that same short format, such as news clips, sports highlights, entertainment round-ups and so on. It includes TV clips and made-for-web original content. We asked our research respondents what mixture of ugc and professional video they watch online, and this is what we saw. For starters, only about 1 in 10 watches only one sort or the other – most people watch a mixture of both kinds of short-form video online. Even those people who prefer UGC will watch at least some professional short-form video online; and those who prefer to watch PPC still watch homemade video occasionally. 22% of video viewers watch about equal amounts of both kinds of video; 30% prefer watching PPC. They’re very similar to other viewers in a lot of ways – they watch just as much video, they use the internet as frequently, and they do still watch some homemade video. But they are much heavier consumers of news and sports online – they check the news more frequently, they read sports pieces more often as well. And the key point is that video is an integral part of this consumption. So they’ll read an article about the main action from last night’s hockey games, and they’ll watch a 3-minute roundup of the key talking points as well. Or they’ll see a story about Syria that also has a video clip in it, and consume both the text and the video, as part of the same session. In fact, as we saw earlier, 2/3 of video viewers think video adds to a text-article experience. So what we’re seeing is that they’re not necessarily different demographically, they’re just different in what they want from the web, and specifically from video. Among our key audiences, the pattern is the same. QC are *slightly* more likely to consume more ugc; tablet owners lean slightly more towards ppc, but that’s about it.
  • We really delved into this in more detail in the qualitative deep dive discussions; and in the quantitative part we explored what feelings and needs people associate with each kind of video. We asked them about each of these feelings, and how they associate them with TV, professional short-form video and user-generated video. The first thing to see from the graph is that all 3 types of video are clearly distinct from one another, answering different needs. TV is about being relaxed, absorbed, engrossed – as we saw earlier, it’s that more passive process. PPC is more associated with things around learning, being interested, intrigued, curious, inspired and so on. UGC is more about fun, playful things, being surprised, fascinated and so on. It’s a really vivid demonstration that these are different formats and play different roles in people’s lives.
  • Bringing that together, and the really detailed discussions from the qualitative work, we saw some key themes. As previously mentioned, TV is more of a passive activity; online video is more active, more about searching.The divide of ugc/ ppc really breaks down to what they’re searching for – what they want to find. UGC: much more about entertainment, cheering me up, making me laugh, delighting me. But it’s also seen as trying to find the gems in the muck: a lot of searching through not-very good clips in order to find that one video that really makes you laugh. PPC: more akin to the TV experience – the clips are much more professional looking, and providing a reliable, quality experience. It’s an authoritative source, catching up on news/ sports/ celeb news. (Thinking about an analogy, reading a newspaper or a magazine is more like watching a professional video clip. Watching UGC is more like flicking through blogs – they both are important outlets, but serve different purposes.)The one interesting crossover we saw was in how-to videos – how to cook, hang a shelf, knit and so on. On the one hand, people want the production quality and reliability of a professionally-produced video; on the other they like seeing ‘people like me’ doing things. We understand this difference; but it does also affect how people find videos, what they think of them and so on.
  • The final theme we explored in how consumers use online video is discovery – how they find what to watch. As we’ve covered, online video is by its nature something that requires more discovery than TV, and there are all sorts of sources that people use to find videos. Top of the list is finding videos from friends, and 56% of people find the videos they watch from recommendations or links on Facebook or by email. YouTube, unsurprisingly, is also an important source; 44% of viewers go to YouTube to find videos to watch, and actually people are more likely to go to YouTube and search than to just go to a search engine. But if those two sources are broadly grouped as “shared” and “searched”, browsing is the other key way of finding video. Increasingly, video is interchangeable with text in answering consumers’ needs – be it for light entertainment for 5 minutes at work, or a quick round-up of sports, or advice on how to apply makeup. As with text articles, browsing is a key discovery tool – and people go to their favourite sites happy to consume whatever text or video content is suggested to them. And the importance of these sources differs depending on the kind of video that someone’s looking for.
  • Combining the last two points, we also saw that how people discover video changes depending on what kind of video they’re consuming. So people who watch more UGC are more likely to use Facebook as a discovery tool; it fits with their online behaviours, and the kinds of video they like to watch – around entertain me, make me laugh, help me find the one great clip of a cat playing guitar. Similarly, they’re much more likely to use YouTube to find the videos they watch. (and it’s worth a sidenote here that YouTube is still pretty much associated with UGC; 48hrs uploaded every minute). On the other hand, people who watch more Professional video find online video most through browsing. In particular, they are about twice as likely to watch videos that they find on their favourite news, sports and content sites. Again, it’s this point about going to a trustworthy site for news, sports, lifestyle content, and then reading the articles and watching the videos they find there. So for a sports roundup they’re happy to read the articles and watch a clip showing the highlights. 60% have clicked on video within a text article in the last month. And it’s worth pointing out here that trust does play an important role – consumers are worried about the idea of malware with their videos, and they want to watch videos that are worth watching (production quality, subject matter etc). A good curator is important here: particularly for professionally-produced video we see that it’s about going to a site that’s a reliable source of content, and once you’re there, reading the articles, watching the videos etc.
  • We wanted to find out about what people think of short-form video series. I wasn’t too sure at first what we’d hear back – some people do say that series don’t work quite as well online as they do on TV. But actually what we saw was that consumers *do* see the point in them, and do specifically look for them. On TV, we know that a series is about consistency – it could be a consistent set of characters in a story arc, or a particular theme and presenter for a home renovation show. Whatever it is, you know when you start watching it what you’ll be getting. And people watching video on the internet value the same things. To some extent, there was a suggestion that because the internet is so big, and there’s so much content, series help to provide that reassurance that it’s a reliable video, with a decent production quality. Particularly in UGC, we saw that viewers really value that – if they find a UGC video they like, that has a good production quality, they’ll often see if it’s part of a series. But also in professional content we see that series have huge value – our own video data for Y!CA shows that videos that are part of a series do have significantly more viewers than those that are unattached clips. Tablet owners and daily viewers are more likely to have watched video series; and they’re more positive about them as well. Quebecers and women are less likely to recall using series, but are still interested in the concept. Those viewing mostly user generated video are more likely to say they have an interest in series (77% vs. 70% PP).
  • Brings us to the end of the first part of the research – really about online as a video channel for consumers. Video evolving, has been for last century. As TV is to cinema, so online is to TV. Majority of online video is those bite-sized chunks of short-form: it’s changing viewing from an appointment to view, to something that fits throughout the day, as part of people’s daily media consumption. UGC is probably main thing we think of; consumers use it for entertainment, pass the time, cheer themselves up. But PPC is equally important, and brings the values of TV content – production quality, reliability, etc – to the web. It fills that gap between full-length TV programming and homemade videos; It provides more for learning, catching up with news, sports, entertainment and so on. 4 out of 10 consumers rely on this short-form premium video as a way of keeping up to date with news and sports instead of watching full-length TV content. Videos are found through a mixture of sharing, searching and browsing; with sharing being more important for UGC, while those watching more PPC find most of their videos through browsing. Again, it’s this idea that video has become just another form of content consumed in-line on their favourite trusted websites.
  • So that was the main body of the research, understanding how consumers use online as a video channel. We also wanted to understand the implications for brands, and for marketers. We know that video’s an important ad format (higher ctr, engagement) – can outperform TV on some metrics. But as we’ve seen, it’s a potential minefield in terms of fit, response and so on.
  • Typical mixed response on ads from consumers. Saw this in our research as well. Qualitatively, the main source of frustration/ antipathy towards ads in online video is the feeling that “on TV I can just skip through the ads, so why can’t I online?”.
  • But interestingly, when we asked people in the quant work, they made it clear that they do see the value of ads on video – at least in theory, and in the right circumstances.
  • Given that in principle they accept the role of ads around online video, we then delved in more detail into what those circumstances are. When asked about ads around short-form video, people basically go for those formats that they feel are least intrusive. It’s not a surprise, it’s what consumers always say. But on this basis, post-roll ads are something they’d appreciate. More realistically, product placement, branded environments and sponsor title cards are what that they feel are most acceptable. Pre-roll ads are pretty much the norm; it’s notable that actually opinions are pretty much matched on this – the same number think it’s acceptable as think it’s unacceptable. Mid-roll and overlay are less suitable. Focusing just on pre-roll ads, average maximum length that consumers think is acceptable on UGC is 13.5s (2/3 of consumers think that pre-roll ads before UGC should be 10s or less in length; only 14% think a pre-roll ad should be 30s or longer.) For PPC, those figures are different; 28% think ads of 30s or longer are acceptable; and the average acceptable limit is 20s. Not that far off the 22s seen in the UK, incidentally. It’s interesting and important to note, at this point, that among those who watch PPC more, there is slightly more acceptance of all ad formats except branded environments (51% vs 58%). In particular, they’re significantly more open to pre-roll ads than ugc viewers. QC users are less positive about all formats except overlays. Which perhaps follows to some extent from their slight shift towards ugc compared to the norm. Women are slightly more accepting of all ad units, interestingly, except mid-roll ads. Tablet users are keener than average on product placement and a sponsored video, and slightly more accepting of mid-roll ads. Daily viewers are slightly keener on a branded environment or overlay.
  • As we’ve seen, consumers aren’t always very good at talking about ads in real-world situations, so this is where we pulled out a few research geek treats. In this case we used a conjoint choice exercise to present respondents with a series of different options for advertising around video, and asked them to choose which they preferred. The first thing we were able to ascertain was what are the important factors affecting how they perceive video ads. And these are the results. Most importantly, consumers want to feel that they’re in control of the ad experience – as typified here by wanting the ability to close or skip the ad. Ad format – pre-roll, title card etc. Type – UGC or PPCLength of video is important – understandably, consumers would prefer not to sit through a 1-minute pre-roll for a 1 minute video; it’s about the trade-off, really.
  • Going back to the top three, that ‘ability to close/ skip the ad’. While it sounds like just the same kind of complaining we always hear, it does make sense. Throughout this research, we’ve been talking about how online video is a different medium from TV – one that’s *lean forwards* rather than sit back; that’s more active than passive, and so on. What we saw from the qual and the quant research was that consumers really feel the jarring difference when they go from leaning forward to sitting back for 30s of TV creative. It’s similar to the ‘advertising by mindset’ or ‘context matters’ research of a couple of years ago. It doesn’t work for them; and while skippable ads are not necessarily the answer, there are definitely lessons there for making more creatively stimulating and interactive video ads. The next couple of variables are perhaps the most important for us and for marketers – about the type of video and the format of the advertising.
  • What we’ve seen so far is that PPC and UGC are very different formats for consumers, in what they offer, how they are found, watched and so on. And we heard throughout the research (qual and quant) that this difference stretches as far as advertising. There is a deeply felt belief that advertising is more suitable on PPC than UGC – whereas the perception is that UGC is just ordinary people and cost nothing to make, TV quality clips do have a cost associated with them, and so it’s understandable that they might have ads around them. Value exchange; also tied to the kinds of sites on which the video appears – premium news, entertainment, lifestyle sites people are more accepting of ads in general. And in fact, if they had to watch an ad before a video, by a ratio of 2:1, Canadians would prefer that the video was professional, TV-quality than user-generated. That said, if ads have to appear on either kind of video, there are formats that are more suited to each. (While only 25% of users agree that videos with ads are of better quality than those without (and 24% disagree), there’s a widespread feeling that advertising is more suitable on ppc than ugc. )
  • UGC: ads not seen as suitable; pre-roll in particular is regarded as the most egregious. I guess to some extent with UGC it’s not always easy to tell what the video will be like; having to watch a pre-roll ad before even being able to see if the video is worth watching is too much to take. To that end, while – again – ads around UGC are seen as being intrusive, overlay ads and branded environments are the most suitable, or the best of a bad bunch. For professional video, pre-roll ads are mostly accepted – they’re pretty much the norm. But we found that consumers actually prefer sponsor title cards (this series brought to you by...) and branded environments. This probably reflects to some extent how they navigate video – and it gives that consistent messaging and signposting around both the brand and the video series. Overlays are inappropriate – there’s a feeling that they look low-rent, and the ads should reflect the TV-quality of the professional video clip. And pre-roll isn’t necessarily anathema, either; it seems that on average consumers think a pre-roll ad before a PPC clip should be about 20s (actually very close to the UK’s 22s) – 15s ads performed much better than 30s for acceptability. UGC: 30s/15s preroll 12%/17%; Overlay 25%; Branded env 23%; Title card 22%PPC: 30s preroll 11%; 15s 23%; Overlay 18%; Title card 24%; Branded env 24%
  • We know that online video is a key channel – generates higher engagement and response than other online display formats. And it complements TV campaigns – they perform better if supplemented with online video creative. But we saw that just as people consume video differently online from on TV, so their expectations of ads in each medium are different. TV ads are well suited to TV, but online, people are more active in their consumption, and they expect ads to fit with this behaviour. For a variety of reasons, ppc is seen as a better fit for marketing than UGC. Primarily, there’s a level of quality of production and of reliability that consumers are more happy to see funded by ads, while for UGC there’s a perception that the videos are low-quality, cost nothing to make, and hence don’t need to – and can’t justify - impose ads on viewers. In addition, though, we saw that consumers’ video habits see them consuming that professionally produced video more on premium content sites – their preferred news, sports, entertainment sites etc – where they already have a level of trust that it’ll provide relevant content, of high quality, and where they’re already more accepting of advertising to fund the content. In terms of specific formats, pre-roll on PPC are mostly accepted, consumers used to them. Max preferred length 20s. But we found that consumers are more responsive to formats like sponsor title cards and branded environments – both for being relatively less intrusive, but also because they fit with the way viewers find and watch this kind of video. They tend to go to the same preferred places to watch news videos, for example, or sports clips; they value series for watching video – that idea of consistency and knowing what to expect - so a consistent message from a brand (across the series) reflects and provides for that consistency.
  • Started out with title Video Evolution. Thought I’d return to it with this quote. We know that online video is growing as a channel, and spending more time. And it has implications for their entire media consumption across channels. Saw that TV still has a central role to play, but it has shifted slightly – multi-tasking, simultaneous consumption. It also has implications in how people use the internet. What we saw throughout the research was that consumers are moving towards becoming format-agnostic. Particularly in the area of premium content – be it news reports, lifestyle magazine content, sports roundups and analysis, how-to guides – people are equally happy consuming video as they are text. In fact, for many of these activities, video offers a better solution (eg how-to), and consumers’ internet behaviour is changing to take this into account. As the majority of our respondents said themselves, in 5 years’ time they expect video to be more important online for them than text or audio content. And as marketers and publishers, that means it’s going to be even more important for us. Hope that this has been interesting, if you have any questions... AYC, etc.
  • Y!CA Video Evolution Research

    1. 1.  A brief history of video 100 10 years years ago ago 50 years Tod ago ay
    2. 2.  Changing media habits Average time spent per day with each medium by Canadians (% change 2006-2011) +39 % +4 - - % 15 Radio 22 Print Online TV % %Source: GroupM data, 2006-2011
    3. 3.  The power of online video for brands
    4. 4.  Our research Online discussion board over 4 days with 22 participants, exploring video across screens In-depth survey of 1,225 Canadian online video users, in English and French
    5. 5. Source: comScore, 2012
    6. 6.  The role of online video “My girlfriend and I watch TV mostly to relax, to get“From a personal use / recreation away from things”level I love YouTube - sometimes “my niece and nephews send me “I love to cook so maybe Ill bejust for entertainment” looking for something new and links for funny animal videos, or of“I‟m using YouTube at this a few tutorials for a also them skateboarding etc” will watch “I‟m trying to learn to play the different technique”very moment to “Then peruse Facebookguitar so I find that YouTube is a good wherelisten/watch music videos“ hockey updates and for that”always find time daily to I find my source “I news clips” look at the latest YouTube video, which is usually “I watch a lot of Discovery shows referred to me by a friend with my son as I think hes going “When I get home, the computer is on on Facebook” to be an avid hunter and in the kitchen and through that I can fisherman when he grows up” watch or just listen to the news and “Sometimes on my breaks at work I will emails that came in” check any check out sites for recipes for dinner for “I have watched a few full ideas and preparation” length shows online. Usually “I have watched an episode here and there on Netflix- when only if Ive missed an episode there is absolutely nothing on “I only really watch that I really of something videos TV. I dont do it very often online for liketo see. ”videos wanted how to though.” on cooking and stuff.”
    7. 7.  Video, online and offline  The primary video channel for most consumers  More passive consumption  Watching with family or friends  Still a secondary channel for most consumers  More active consumption  Generally more personal viewing
    8. 8.  Video, online  Long-form video, such as TV shows, films etc  Short video clips: up to 10 minutes long Professio User nally generat produced ed
    9. 9. Video As aConsumer Channel
    10. 10.  Attitudes to online video 72 “It‟s easier to learn by watching a video % online.” “I rely more on short online video for news or sports highlights, instead of watching 41 full-length TV programming.”
    11. 11.  How viewers watch short-form video % of all who own each device 84% 84% 65% 74% 50% Laptop Desktop Smartpho Tablet Game ne Console 62% 55% 27% 14% 12% % of total online video viewers
    12. 12.  ...and when“ Often throughout fromday I will the “Ithe eveningmostly in ” watch TV watch news clips ” BBC or CBC and sports highlights 49% “Mostly in the afternoon, I go or looking for something Ive seen 38% heard on the news, or investigate a new recipe or cooking technique on ” TV the food network Short form online video (net) Humour, lifestyle, ent. „funny UGC stuff‟ News, sports, current affairs Early On my In the At In the Early Later morning mobile morning lunchtime afternoon evening evening (before while work/ commuting school)
    13. 13.  What‟s on? Genres of short-form online video watched in the last monthSource: QB4; text size indicates relative
    14. 14.  What‟s on? Professional entertainment 77 clips % 66 Humour % Informational 55 % News clips 52 % Male 45 entertainment % Lifestyle 45 % How-to 39 %
    15. 15. The balance of professional and homemade video WATCH PROFESSIONALLY 96% PRODUCED VIDEOHeaviest viewers of premium video are... A bit more educated, slightly more male Significantly heavier consumers of news & sports news online WATCH More likely to use online video 97 USER to catch up with news and sports % GENERATED UGC Heaviest viewers of CONTENT are...  A bit younger, on average  Slightly heavier users of social tools  More likely to say online
    16. 16.  Online video, professional and homemade  Seen as more reliable, high- quality; providing the TV Professionally experience in a convenient produced online form  Generally about being informed and staying up to date  How-to videos, both professional and user generated  Long-form  More about entertainment video, such as value – music, funny things User generated Short video TV shows, films make me laugh etc content to clips etc.  Still seen as YouTube‟s domain  Short video clips: up to 10 minutes long
    17. 17.  Finding what to watch SHARED FROM FRIENDS 56% Facebo ok 38% Email link 32% ON SPECIFIC 53% SITES YouTube or similar site 44% Specific favoured site 19% THROUGH 47% BROWSING Stumble upon while 32% Visit news, browsing sports or other site 21% A portal 11% A SEARCH 23% ENGINE
    18. 18. Finding what to watch Facebo 41% ok 31% ON SPECIFIC 60% SITES 47% YouTube or 52% similar site 37% THROUGH 45% BROWSING 57% Stumble upon while 32% browsing 36% Visit news, sports or 16% other site 30% 9% A portal 15% User generated Professionally generated content content
    19. 19.  Online as a video channel  Video continues to evolve; online is just the latest addition to the video ecosystem, and it‟s one that‟s increasingly important.  Online video consumption is driven predominantly by short-form videos, most easily typified as user-uploaded clips of pets falling asleep, people doing stupid things and recorded TV footage.  But for consumers there is a space between this user-generated video and long-form content such as TV shows, for premium short-form video that provides TV-quality production with the convenience of UGC.  This professionally-produced video fulfils different needs for viewers from UGC, and is consumed in a different way.  Discovery, too, differs depending on the type of video; but a trustworthy curator plays a key role in finding any video. Series are also useful to provide reassurance of content and production consistency.
    20. 20. Video As a BrandChannel
    21. 21.  The contradiction of (video) advertising “ I find advertisements on short form videos very ” annoying; I just want to watch what I have searched “ for. I realize that advertising is ” important, but I dont think they should force it on you. “There wasthevery funny Expedia ad before a start of video. It left a positive impression on me about Expedia and helped me ” enjoy the video a bit more, as the ad put me in a good mood. “ The pre-roll ad was for the new NHL ” Playstation. It looked interesting so I went and rented it. Lots of fun!
    22. 22.  Just the facts 66 “Ads on online video are at least as acceptable as % on TV” 58 “Ads are necessary to help websites pay for content.”
    23. 23.  The factors that affect video ad receptivity Most important… Control of the 32 x ad % Advertising 21 format % Type of video 20% 15 Length of video % 12 Ad relevance …to least % important
    24. 24.  The factors that affect video ad receptivity Control of the 32 x ad % Advertising 21 format % Type of video 20% 15 Length of video % 12 Ad relevance %
    25. 25.  The factors that affect video ad receptivity Advertising format Type of video 68 of viewers would prefer to watch an ad-supported professional video clip than an ad- % “I kind of expect advertising from supported homemade video clip professionally produced videos but [homemade clips] should not have it”
    26. 26.  Preferred video formats Advertising format Type of video User-generated content  Overlays and branded environment seen as least bad forms of ads.  Pre-roll regarded as least appropriate ad format. Professionally-produced video  Most engaging units are title cards and branded environments.  Overlays are inappropriate.  Pre-roll can be suitable, if it‟s not too long.
    27. 27.  Bringing it togethershows the effectiveness of online Existing research already – video ad strategy video as a marketing channel, and its importance will continue to grow. But as online video is a very different medium from TV, so expectations of - and engagement with – video advertising are very different online. ...and even within short-form online vide, expectations of advertising can be radically different. For consumers, professionally-produced video provides a natural fit for marketing; but ads around user-generated content are much less acceptable.  Series sponsor title cards and branded environments fit with how people watch professional video online, and generate the most engagement; pre-roll can be engaging, if it provides the
    28. 28. Bringing it together – video ad strategy “Internet users are evolving into internet viewers” Nick Drew Research Manager Yahoo! Canada ndrew@yahoo-inc.com advertising.yahoo.