Video vs. Static

There are two interesting articles from e-Marketer to cite for this topic:
Video More Effective Than Rich Media, 9/10/07.
http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?id=1005349
TV Consumes Half of All Leisure Time, 7/9/07.
http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?id=1005118&src=article1_newsltr

The cumulative message from both articles certainly puts yet another fork in the long-term viability of newspaper media. But, it also implies that any content that requires any work of any kind (reading or interpreting) is simply not as desirable as video.

One of the most telling stats from the former article: “Individuals ages 15 to 19 read for an average of 0.1 hours (seven minutes) per weekend day and spent one hour playing games or using a computer for leisure.” US Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics' "American Time Use Survey." Somewhat amazing that this group spends one-tenth as much time a weekend reading anything as playing video games. And, 50% of leisure time is spent watching the tube.

The other (September 10) article implies that online video ads generate better recall among viewers than other forms of Rich Media. This means even full motion ads with words and graphics can’t hang with video. This is consistent with some Liquidus’ observations related to automotive advertisers who claim their online vehicle listings with video get three to four times the click rate of static vehicle listings (just words and photos). Both articles are selling points for products like Liquidus VideoLink (for online) and the Liquidus Video On Demand platform for digital cable television.

September, 2007 | Permalink
Categories: Internet New Technology

Add to del.icio.us     Digg this!     StumbleUpon     Reddit it

Return to Liquidus Blog