Magid: Millenials Consume Media at more than Double Normal Rate
What?
The Research House Frank M. Magid Associates claimed at a conference that Millenials (those consumers aged 9-28) consume 20 hours worth of media in only 7 hours. What could this possibly mean? I'm only reading a report of a conference session and not seeing the report, but I'm a little stumped. This is one of those stats that seem accurate, but is more than a bit confusing.
OK, we know that this demo tends to flip among multiple TV stations, while listening to music, surfing the Web, SMSing, IMing and everything else. I suppose this stat could mean that we older demos would do these things non-concurrently, thereby taking much longer. But a song is a certain length (for example, I just downloaded The Clash's Bankrobber off iTunes; it's 4:35 of pure brilliance) and TV shows are as long as they are. There's no real way to watch a show faster (is there?).
There's also one other item tossed in here, though, that's interesting. Magid says "[this group] gets much of its information from word-of-mouth or from social networking sites on the Internet. That's interesting. Maybe the point is not that this group has some super ability to pack more than 60 minutes into an hour. Rather, they zoom across the medialandscape plucking only what they need. They do this in the most efficient way they can.
This is the real power of this group. They have mastered digital technologies. We know that, but that doesn't mean they know how to install Linux, delete their cookies and program the VCR (as the old joke goes). Rather, they have figured out a method of gathering and dispersing information, using these tools, in dynamic, fluid ways.
This is a bit of the idea behind an ISOBAR notion: continuous partial attention. This is a way of describing this experience. There is a laser-focus on the information gathering/dissemenation process. But it is a mistake to imagine that the attention truly rests on any particular data stream.
Whither marketers? The opportunity is to either think holistically about your campaing (have your message spread across multiple platforms) or pick a single platform and totally rule it.
The Research House Frank M. Magid Associates claimed at a conference that Millenials (those consumers aged 9-28) consume 20 hours worth of media in only 7 hours. What could this possibly mean? I'm only reading a report of a conference session and not seeing the report, but I'm a little stumped. This is one of those stats that seem accurate, but is more than a bit confusing.
OK, we know that this demo tends to flip among multiple TV stations, while listening to music, surfing the Web, SMSing, IMing and everything else. I suppose this stat could mean that we older demos would do these things non-concurrently, thereby taking much longer. But a song is a certain length (for example, I just downloaded The Clash's Bankrobber off iTunes; it's 4:35 of pure brilliance) and TV shows are as long as they are. There's no real way to watch a show faster (is there?).
There's also one other item tossed in here, though, that's interesting. Magid says "[this group] gets much of its information from word-of-mouth or from social networking sites on the Internet. That's interesting. Maybe the point is not that this group has some super ability to pack more than 60 minutes into an hour. Rather, they zoom across the medialandscape plucking only what they need. They do this in the most efficient way they can.
This is the real power of this group. They have mastered digital technologies. We know that, but that doesn't mean they know how to install Linux, delete their cookies and program the VCR (as the old joke goes). Rather, they have figured out a method of gathering and dispersing information, using these tools, in dynamic, fluid ways.
This is a bit of the idea behind an ISOBAR notion: continuous partial attention. This is a way of describing this experience. There is a laser-focus on the information gathering/dissemenation process. But it is a mistake to imagine that the attention truly rests on any particular data stream.
Whither marketers? The opportunity is to either think holistically about your campaing (have your message spread across multiple platforms) or pick a single platform and totally rule it.
posted by Gary Stein at 9:22 AM
2 Comments:
Great observation. I think that your citation of Magid ("[this group] gets much of its information from word-of-mouth") has everything to do with what we're doing right now: blogging. For the time being, perhaps this is the platform to "totally rule." Incidentally, there is a way to watch a show faster. Many DVRs today have a "Sports" feature (called so because its primary benefit comes during programming that is not dialogue-intensive, like sporting events) which, when activated, shows a program at an increased speed.
This is interesting. Maybe this is why I hate podcasts. The only thing that they are good for is when you are doing an activity that requires your eyes (ie running or driving your car, etc). They are just so slow. I hate anything (except now and again pure entertainment, and even then it has to be GOOD stuff) that I cannot skim/scan for the good stuff.
Post a Comment
<< Home