Showing posts with label NBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NBC. Show all posts
Monday, September 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
@Why_Arent_You_Protecting_Your_Brand_On_Twitter: um hai?
Mad Men were on Twitter. Then they weren’t, and our industry scoffed at AMC for not acknowledging great brand ambassadors. Now they’re back, and I’m wondering: Why are entertainment brands still overlooking Twitter?
Social media profiles are the new URLs—if you don’t snatch up your name, someone else will. We’ve already mentioned that NBC has done a great job with the character blogs on The Office, but they shouldn’t have let Dwight or Michael’s Twitter profiles get ninja’d. Or Gossip Girl—that show revolves around text updates! Wouldn’t it make sense to grab @BlairWaldorf and @SerenaVanDW before someone else did and the brand was out of your hands?
What fictional characters would you follow on Twitter?
Social media profiles are the new URLs—if you don’t snatch up your name, someone else will. We’ve already mentioned that NBC has done a great job with the character blogs on The Office, but they shouldn’t have let Dwight or Michael’s Twitter profiles get ninja’d. Or Gossip Girl—that show revolves around text updates! Wouldn’t it make sense to grab @BlairWaldorf and @SerenaVanDW before someone else did and the brand was out of your hands?
What fictional characters would you follow on Twitter?
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Olympics 2014: Brought to you on ESPN?
Didn’t I just post about how NBC has made itself synonymous with the Olympics? Their contract runs out in 2012, and the bidding for the 2014 and 2016 games are coming up. The news today is that ABC-owned ESPN is interested in bidding for the games, along with Fox. I wanted to compare NBC and ESPN to see how this move could affect the games:
Affiliates. In addition to ABC and ESPN, certain live events could run on ABC Family, the way NBC is making use of USA and MSNBC for additional live coverage. It could be an epic opportunity for the Disney Channel to run more Olympic-themed content for a new generation of fans.
Live broadcasting. NBC lucked out in persuading Beijing to schedule swimming and gymnastics in the morning to ensure the best events were broadcast live, but many other key events like track and field were delayed. ESPN scoffs at NBC’s tendency to save the playback for primetime and promises live broadcasts all the time. But even in this age of mobile alerts, when immediate results are only a Google away, viewers are still tuning into the games at their highest rates in years. Besides, NBC is already live streaming many events successfully, and will no doubt have even better live online coverage in six years.
Visibility. Having the Olympics on network TV in primetime ensures the potential for wide reach. Everyone assumes that the cable penetration by 2016 will be as high as Yelena Isinbayeva’s pole vault, but John Rash noted that in 2008 in Minneapolis, it’s only about 75%. Another thing: Olympic viewership, though up among males this year, generally skews female. Would Olympic sponsors like Johnson & Johnson trust that their female target will flip to ESPN in droves?
Publicity. NBC’s reach matters more than just during the games, too. Olympic promos (like that logo integration I was talking about) hit viewers in the months leading up to the game. The early hype of the #1 Today Show drives conversation and interest in the games more than Good Morning America or Sports Center ever could.
Nostalgia. For die-hard fans of “normal” sports like the MLB, it wouldn’t matter who was announcing, we would still tune in to see our Twins kill the A’s 13-2. But for the (female, not necessarily sports fan) demographic who tunes into the Olympics, the personality of the Olympic broadcasters is part of the experience. Would the post-gold-medal interviews be as good if hosted by anyone but Bob Costas? What will our morning coffee be if it can’t be enjoyed while Al Roker gives the weather live from Sochi, Russia? It all comes down to the fact that the Olympic audience matches the NBC audience better than the ESPN audience.
The I.O.C. would be making a mistake if they went with ESPN, even if they scraped a few million dollars more out of the deal. NBC has done exceptionally well with the Olympic games, driving their popularity through the roof this summer. If Michael Phelps’s 8th gold had been on ESPN, and 25% fewer people had been watching, would he still be receiving the insane amount of media coverage he’s getting now? Would the viewership even be that high without NBC’s pre-race PR? To keep interest at its peak, the I.O.C. needs to maximize their publicity, and the best way is through a network.
Now pass me the chips and dip and let’s watch some obscure sport we’ll never think of again until 2012!
UPDATE: After reading this AdAge article, I'm quite sure NBC won't be in a hurry to drop the Olympics in 2014. All together now: WHEW.
Affiliates. In addition to ABC and ESPN, certain live events could run on ABC Family, the way NBC is making use of USA and MSNBC for additional live coverage. It could be an epic opportunity for the Disney Channel to run more Olympic-themed content for a new generation of fans.
Live broadcasting. NBC lucked out in persuading Beijing to schedule swimming and gymnastics in the morning to ensure the best events were broadcast live, but many other key events like track and field were delayed. ESPN scoffs at NBC’s tendency to save the playback for primetime and promises live broadcasts all the time. But even in this age of mobile alerts, when immediate results are only a Google away, viewers are still tuning into the games at their highest rates in years. Besides, NBC is already live streaming many events successfully, and will no doubt have even better live online coverage in six years.
Visibility. Having the Olympics on network TV in primetime ensures the potential for wide reach. Everyone assumes that the cable penetration by 2016 will be as high as Yelena Isinbayeva’s pole vault, but John Rash noted that in 2008 in Minneapolis, it’s only about 75%. Another thing: Olympic viewership, though up among males this year, generally skews female. Would Olympic sponsors like Johnson & Johnson trust that their female target will flip to ESPN in droves?
Publicity. NBC’s reach matters more than just during the games, too. Olympic promos (like that logo integration I was talking about) hit viewers in the months leading up to the game. The early hype of the #1 Today Show drives conversation and interest in the games more than Good Morning America or Sports Center ever could.
Nostalgia. For die-hard fans of “normal” sports like the MLB, it wouldn’t matter who was announcing, we would still tune in to see our Twins kill the A’s 13-2. But for the (female, not necessarily sports fan) demographic who tunes into the Olympics, the personality of the Olympic broadcasters is part of the experience. Would the post-gold-medal interviews be as good if hosted by anyone but Bob Costas? What will our morning coffee be if it can’t be enjoyed while Al Roker gives the weather live from Sochi, Russia? It all comes down to the fact that the Olympic audience matches the NBC audience better than the ESPN audience.
The I.O.C. would be making a mistake if they went with ESPN, even if they scraped a few million dollars more out of the deal. NBC has done exceptionally well with the Olympic games, driving their popularity through the roof this summer. If Michael Phelps’s 8th gold had been on ESPN, and 25% fewer people had been watching, would he still be receiving the insane amount of media coverage he’s getting now? Would the viewership even be that high without NBC’s pre-race PR? To keep interest at its peak, the I.O.C. needs to maximize their publicity, and the best way is through a network.
Now pass me the chips and dip and let’s watch some obscure sport we’ll never think of again until 2012!
UPDATE: After reading this AdAge article, I'm quite sure NBC won't be in a hurry to drop the Olympics in 2014. All together now: WHEW.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
The Athletes Are Headed to Beijing, But We're Heading to NBC
In yesterday's Rash Report, John Rash remarked that this week, "ABC, the 'Olympic Network' during the Jim McKay days of the '70s and '80s, will yield to NBC, this generation's Olympic network." It got me thinking about how wonderfully NBC has branded their coverage of the Olympics. I know that I won't think twice about which channel to flip to on Friday night when Erin and I (and probably some of our other Yaybies) will settle in on the couch for the opening ceremonies. Here are my thoughts on NBC's successful branding of their station as the home for the Olympics:
1. Logo integration. The peacock frequently appears with the gleaming Olympic rings underneath, even in years without the games. Although it does lend itself to some pretty fantastic "peaCock Rings" puns...
2. SEO/SEM. Google "Olympics," and check out the top paid search result and the second- or third-highest natural search result. (They're not doing so well for natural results on more specific terms like "Beijing Olympics" or "2008 Olympics" though.) Their dedicated website, NBCOlympics.com, provides in-depth profiles, 24-hour updates, and some streaming coverage.
3. Today show coverage. Matt Lauer, Al Roker, and the other personalities that embody the NBC brand have been prepping us for the games all summer. Who doesn't love seeing Matt Lauer and Michael Phelps in skin-tight bodysuits, anyway?
It's a no-brainer which channel to turn to on Friday night for my Beijing fix. The question is--will the ratings be high enough to make NBC's extensive investments in branding and rights to the coverage worthwhile?
UPDATE: The #1 Google search trend today (August 8) is "nbc beijing 2008 olympic games." Case in point!
1. Logo integration. The peacock frequently appears with the gleaming Olympic rings underneath, even in years without the games. Although it does lend itself to some pretty fantastic "peaCock Rings" puns...2. SEO/SEM. Google "Olympics," and check out the top paid search result and the second- or third-highest natural search result. (They're not doing so well for natural results on more specific terms like "Beijing Olympics" or "2008 Olympics" though.) Their dedicated website, NBCOlympics.com, provides in-depth profiles, 24-hour updates, and some streaming coverage.
3. Today show coverage. Matt Lauer, Al Roker, and the other personalities that embody the NBC brand have been prepping us for the games all summer. Who doesn't love seeing Matt Lauer and Michael Phelps in skin-tight bodysuits, anyway?
It's a no-brainer which channel to turn to on Friday night for my Beijing fix. The question is--will the ratings be high enough to make NBC's extensive investments in branding and rights to the coverage worthwhile?
UPDATE: The #1 Google search trend today (August 8) is "nbc beijing 2008 olympic games." Case in point!
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
$3 Million for a Super Bowl Spot: A Super Value?
The announcement that NBC will start Super Bowl :30 spots at $3 million was all over the ad world today. Let's think about what advertisers are getting for that $3 million...
• In 2008, 97.4 million people tuned in at some point to watch the Super Bowl.
• Assuming the recession continues, consumers are going to be looking for cheap entertainment options. Televised NFL games fit this perfectly. Next year's numbers should be even bigger.
• Those kind of numbers make the Super Bowl one of the last remaining "mass media" TV events. Brands with diverse, wide-ranging targets, like Coca-Cola, Fed Ex, and Anheuser-Busch, should jump at the chance to hit that kind of cross-section of America. With a low estimate of about 50% of Super Bowl viewers falling within the targets for these dominant brands, that's about $60 CPM. A little on the high side, but definitely competitive.
• And what else does the brand get for their $3 million? For brands that do the Super Bowl right--brands that create funny or novel or charming :30 stories--YouTube hits, Monday morning watercooler discussions, and Top 10 lists across the Internet and USA Today. True, the online stats for last year's commercials aren't mind-blowing--one version of Pepsi's Justin Timberlake ad has a modest 2.4 million YouTube hits--but that doesn't include replays on the Pepsi site.
The added value of Super Bowl ads is what comes after the big game. If marketers get more interactive and more integrated and use the Super Bowl to launch microsites, or if they create a hilarious ad that get passed around the Internet, they're getting at least their $3 million worth of exposure. So right on, NBC, for analyzing the trends and making the most of this epic opportunity.
• In 2008, 97.4 million people tuned in at some point to watch the Super Bowl.
• Assuming the recession continues, consumers are going to be looking for cheap entertainment options. Televised NFL games fit this perfectly. Next year's numbers should be even bigger.
• Those kind of numbers make the Super Bowl one of the last remaining "mass media" TV events. Brands with diverse, wide-ranging targets, like Coca-Cola, Fed Ex, and Anheuser-Busch, should jump at the chance to hit that kind of cross-section of America. With a low estimate of about 50% of Super Bowl viewers falling within the targets for these dominant brands, that's about $60 CPM. A little on the high side, but definitely competitive.
• And what else does the brand get for their $3 million? For brands that do the Super Bowl right--brands that create funny or novel or charming :30 stories--YouTube hits, Monday morning watercooler discussions, and Top 10 lists across the Internet and USA Today. True, the online stats for last year's commercials aren't mind-blowing--one version of Pepsi's Justin Timberlake ad has a modest 2.4 million YouTube hits--but that doesn't include replays on the Pepsi site.
The added value of Super Bowl ads is what comes after the big game. If marketers get more interactive and more integrated and use the Super Bowl to launch microsites, or if they create a hilarious ad that get passed around the Internet, they're getting at least their $3 million worth of exposure. So right on, NBC, for analyzing the trends and making the most of this epic opportunity.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Poor Poor NBC
I am greatly amused by the RSS feeds on my iGoogle page. Someone on NBC's legal team has been screwing up left and right. First, the big secret was announced that Scrubs was not actually ending its run this season, but rather moving to ABC from NBC for at least 18 more episodes. After this announcement NBC came out swinging with protests claiming that ABC was violating terms and blah blah blah.
Then... a few weeks ago it was announced that the rights to Project Runway went up for sale and Bravo (owned by NBC) didn't really jump in the bid on keeping the series. So, now Lifetime owns it. Once again NBC threw a hissy fit and sued, with no real grounds.
All I have to say is, quit being a whiny little bitch and hang on to your successful series because these RSS feeds do not exactly scream "NBC is awesome; we have GREAT brand health and care about our viewers and our series!!!!". Bad PR move, methinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
