Linear Broadcasting – Still Entertaining?

By Christophe Firth, Senior Principal, Media & Telecoms at Kearney

Netflix Direct may be a glimmer that linear programmed entertainment has a future

Two noteworthy statistics are that on average: 1) Humans makes 35,000 conscious decisions each day, and 2) SVOD users spend 7.4 minutes per viewing session deciding what to watch (Nielsen, US data). Assuming 5 sessions per week, that comes to over 80 days of an adult lifetime.

The former is just mind-boggling – even when you factor in that most of these decisions are as trivial as deciding which shoe to put on first or on which side of the laptop to place the coffee mug – and are another testament to the human brain, that unique miracle of evolution.

The latter suggests that, despite the hype, ultra-personalised, algorithm-driven content reco engines may not (yet) be a panacea for video entertainment. This is even more pronounced when you factor in that viewers in a mid-series binge will skew much lower on their decision times, suggesting that people entering their streaming services with an open mind are taking north of 10 minutes per session deciding what to hit play on.

Viewing indecision is by no means a new phenomenon. Even in the much more limited and clunky world of EPG-based broadcasting, people on average spend 23 minutes per day zapping through channels (Ericsson, US data). However, there is a widespread misconception that SVOD data science combined with a treasure trove of user behavioural information has made this redundant.

Linear Sushi

The smart people of Netflix are self-aware enough to recognise that their reco engine algorithms will only go so far to satisfy viewer needs. They also know that how people want to experience video is mood-based, and that it would therefore be a fallacy to pigeon-hole entertainment viewers as “linear” or “on-demand”.

Netflix Direct, which provides content from its SVOD library in a linear format to its subscribers, is a nod in that direction, providing you with a lean-back experience for – in their own words when announcing the launch – “when you’re not in the mood to decide”.

A few years ago, at the annual ContentAsia conference in Singapore, I remember one of the speakers make an analogy between watching video and going to a sushi restaurant. Sometimes you want to go in and pick individual dishes off the conveyor belt. But sometimes you’ve had a long day and just go for the set menu to remove the burden of choice (and – let’s say you are picking food to share with a companion – the risk of being judged for making a poor choice). You trust the experienced chef has curated a “linear” blend of nigiri and teriyaki and that works well together, perhaps even better than you could have chosen yourself, and in the process also opening your eyes to new flavours that you would not have considered (or, to again quote Netflix, when “you just want to be surprised by something new and different”).

Choice, mood and surprise

Coming back to the world of online video, a powerful reco engine initially looks like the perfect solution – an “advisory chef” that knows each person who walks its video restaurant and uses this knowledge to present a set of options that the guest should like. Yet as much as this sounds like the silver bullet, there are three psychology-related hurdles related to choice, mood and surprise.

Firstly, it does not remove the burden of selection from viewers – a burden that is only getting heavier with the proliferation of streaming services in the absence of integrated search. The “super-aggregators” needed to bundle and support navigation and recommendation across streaming services are still nascent, with limited API integration on xVOD services. This means that, for now, there is no single, personalised master-menu to be guided by.

Secondly, our moods vary. The type of content that we want to watch on a Friday night isn’t the same as on a Sunday afternoon. And not all Sunday afternoons are the same.

Thirdly, and perhaps most notably, in a world that increasingly enables and encourages control and planning, humans still love the element of surprise. The emotion experienced when flicking to a linear channel and catching the climax of your favourite movie is fundamentally different to that of choosing the same movie from a library, or even from a tailored recommendation list, and watching it end-to-end. It’s like when you hear your favourite song on the radio versus choosing it on Spotify.

Is the utopian experience really one where no browsing through content is needed, where with a single action the viewer is transported directly into the “perfect” moment-in-time content for them? Not necessarily, even if the technology existed. In the traditional broadcast world zapping through channels has for many always been a lean-back experience in itself, a therapeutic guilty pleasure without associated time commitment. Hunting through an SVOD library for something to start watching, keeping an eye on the clock, just isn’t the same.

So although the linear:on-demand ratio will continue to shift towards the latter, human psychology suggests that linear entertainment won’t die altogether.

Linear 2.0

What could future linear look like?

1. Profile-based and/or personalised linear channels. Netflix, for example, impressively divides its subs into 2000 “taste clusters” that could underpin customised linear curations. At an individual level, service providers could also create channels of linear streams from members’ self-selected watchlists, providing that third-party content rights can be worked through. At an extreme you could imagine a bouquet of personalised thematic linear channels (comedy, drama series, stand-up…), curated by an individualised recommendation engine, that a viewer could “zap” through – recreating that element of discovery and pleasant surprise

2. Free ad-based linear channels as a barker for SVOD subscriptions. Linear channels can be a content discovery tool for acquisition and retention, with certain ad-funded linear services provided in front of the paywall. If ad insertions are managed within the ad load tolerance that viewers typically have in linear broadcast, this could also open a new revenue stream.

3. Hybrid “choose-your-own-adventure”-type content. Netflix has already gone seriously into this format with the likes of Black Mirror and You vs. Wild, as well as in its children’s genres. Expect to see more of this across the streaming landscape, blending interactive lean-forward and lean-back experiences in both entertainment and edutainment. Taking it into the linear world provides a new angle, with potentially millions of viewers simultaneously experiencing the same content in a different way – that’s great conversation for the morning watercooler.

Linear battlegrounds

The lines for a fascinating new battleground are being drawn. Netflix is well-known to experiment with different UI/UX and business models and one of its strengths is its ability to test, adapt and then either boldly cancel or extend. That will include whether and how to take linear forward. We can also expect to see innovation in linear and integrated linear-VoD strategies from the likes of Disney, Warner Media and NCBU, who all have broadcasting in their DNA, as well as from local broadcasters that are looking to reinvent/reposition their linear broadcast channels while making meaningful inroads in online video.