As the youngest members of the TV Generation turn 50 this year (and the oldest approach 70), it’s ironic that the press and much of the advertising industry still think of Adults 18-49 as the key demographic segment for evaluating television viewing.
Broad demographic segments, such as 18-49 and 25-54, were implemented for the buying and selling of commercial time in an era of single TV households and few viewing choices (most households had fewer than 10 channels). Adults 18-34 and 35-49 tended to watch the same primetime programs, as did parents and their kids. Many don’t remember that before people meters debuted in 1987, demographic data was only available from Nielsen 36 weeks of the year. It didn’t concern people back then because viewing patterns didn’t change much once the new season got underway. Even low-rated programs tended to last an entire season before being canceled. In short, it was a completely different television landscape and a very different video viewing world.
Yet there are a few reasons why these anachronistic age groupings, where sub-segments have significantly different video viewing habits from one another, continue be the foundation of audience analysis.
- The broadcast networks have been hesitant to provide upfront audience guarantees on narrower age segments. The feeling has always been that narrower groups, such as 18-34 or 25-49 are not as stable as broader demographics and therefore it’s more difficult to project future ratings performance. While this was the case 30 years ago, it is no longer true. The wide rating gaps in primetime programming in the age of Thursday night “Must See TV,” don’t really exist today. For example, season-to-date, only 2 rating points separate the #3 ranked scripted series from the #100 ranked show. It’s much easier to estimate future program performance for both returning and new series than it used to be.
- When I studied marketing and advertising in college, I was told that it was important to get consumers when they are younger and forming brand loyalties, which will stay with them the rest of their lives. Older consumers don’t switch brands as much. The over-50 crowd is significantly different today, and this is no longer really true (but people always remember what they were taught in college or when starting their careers.
- When I started working in this business, I was told that younger viewers are much more difficult to reach than older viewers, so targeting them is more important. You’ll get the older folks no matter what you do. With many more viewing options today, and a much more splintered video environment, this also is no longer the case.
- It is easier to get press coverage for a single demographic. Reporters jobs would be much more difficult if every time they wrote stories on network or program performance they had to cover five or six different demographic segments.
The TV Generation, those born between 1950 and 1969, are nothing like their parents were at the same age – they have more disposable income, they are more active, they are more likely to try new brands and products, and they often see retirement as a new beginning, rather than approaching the end. They, along with the generation that followed them, the Multi-Channel Generation (born between 1970 and 1989), are the key viewers of traditional linear television, and should be the main focus of many advertisers. They are also the last two generations that see commercials as normal and necessary rather than annoying and intrusive.
People in the same generation typically have similar collective experiences and demonstrate similarities in attitudes, as well as how they relate to both the world around them and media. Pre-2000, most people obtained access to the same media distribution system, same channels, same programs, and same media devices. When they watched specific television programs, they did so at the same time (if they were in the same time zone). This was true both within and across generations. Over the past decade, however, media access and viewing has become so splintered, once cohesive generations have several sub groups, depending on which media devices they own and which streaming services (if any) they subscribe to – everyone doesn’t get everything anymore. But how most people relate to media, programming, and commercials continue to be specific to that generation.
Here are some of the differences among generations in how they relate to video.
- The Pre-TV Generation (1924-1949)
- Grew up with radio, introduction of television, one TV per household, few channels, few choices, no remote control, no end-user technology.
- Families gathered around the console TV (as they had with radio).
- Portable small-screen TV was new technology.
- The heaviest TV viewers – first stop still the broadcast networks or cable networks that air off-network series.
- See advertising on TV as normal and necessary.
- The TV Generation (1950-1969)
- Grew up with one screen, few choices, three or four broadcast networks – could only watch something at the time the TV station aired it (kids looked forward to the annual showing of The Wizard of Oz).
- Most households only had one TV set, and families still watched TV together (in the 1970s, All in the Family was the #1 show among all age groups for five years in a row).
- Teens and young adults in early days of ad-supported cable.
- Remote control was new technology.
- Still heavy TV viewers of broadcast and cable television.
- See TV advertising as necessary to lower costs.
- The Multi-Channel Generation (1970-1989)
- First generation to grow up with remote control, cable, and more than three broadcast networks. First generation with widespread programming to kids outside of Saturday Morning.
- As more households get multiple TV sets, and channels start to expand, younger and older viewers start to watch different things.
- VCRs and the internet were new technology.
- The last cohesive generation, where almost everyone got almost everything. The VCR was the last universally purchased device for watching video.
- Traditional TV is still their first screen, but other screens continue to grow, and streaming has become commonplace.
- See TV advertising as a necessary evil.
- The Multi-Platform Generation (1990-2004)
- First generation to grow up with search engines, high-speed internet, social media, DVRs, on-demand, video streaming, and multimedia devices.
- First generation to grow up in the era of Peak TV – original scripted series no longer exclusive to broadcast networks.
- DVRs, smartphones, and multimedia devices were new technology.
- Content is more important than distribution system. They see little difference between broadcast, cable, or streaming.
- See TV advertising as intrusive and annoying – they are used to fast-forwarding through commercials via DVRs or streaming commercial-free tv.
- The Mobile Generation (2005- )
- Growing up watching what they want, when they want, where they want.
- TV/video is everywhere – see little distinction between broadcast, cable, SVOD, or YouTube. Content means everything, distribution source or screen means little.
Predicting what will affect this generation most, and how they will relate to the world or media, is not really possible right now. Anytime you try to predict what will happen 5 or 10 years down the road, you are constricted by current technology and historical perspective. New technology and innovation, as well as consumer trends and attitudes, are perpetually around the corner. When they appear, they fundamentally change current thinking, making predictions of yesterday obsolete. The virtually continuous change to the video environment we’ve seen over the past 20 years may finally be slowing, which could extend the time frame of this generation.
As more and more subscription video streaming services and media devices become available, disposable income, is going to be among the greatest indicators of media access and usage.Broad age groupings such as Adults 18-49 and 25-54 are no longer meaningful. Previous standard generations (such as Baby Boomers and Generation X) are not as cohesive in terms of media availability and usage as they once were. Subsequent generations are even less so. It is more important than ever to reassess how groups of consumers are evaluated, based on media dynamics.
Comments