Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Online Video Popularity Still Climbing

CowboyNeal posted more than 6 years ago | from the better-and-better dept.

The Internet 59

Ant writes "Macworld reports that people in the U.S. have steadily increased the amount of time they spend watching videos online, as Google's YouTube remains by far their preferred video site, according to a study. In July, almost 75 percent of U.S. Internet users watched videos online, up from 71.4 percent in March, according to comScore Networks. The monthly time spent watching videos went up to an average of 181 minutes per viewer in July from 145 minutes per viewer in March, according to comScore. In July, the average user watched 68 clips, up from 55 clips in March. Overall, almost 134 million U.S. Internet users watched a little over 9 billion video clips in July, up from 126.6 million people and a little over 7 billion clips in March."

cancel ×

59 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What the... (0, Redundant)

Z80xxc! (1111479) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598675)

I got a page saying "Error. Nothing to see here, please move along" when I clicked the link. Then I finally got here by clicking one of the tags and finding the article, then the link worked. What's that all about?

Re:What the... (1, Funny)

Himring (646324) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599191)

It's /. Just say something about soviet russia. It all falls into place after that....

Re:What the... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20600969)

In Soviet Russia, internet watches you.

Re:What the... (1)

homey of my owney (975234) | more than 6 years ago | (#20607079)

Just as an aside, but how can a first post be moded redundant?

For Example... (2, Funny)

Traegorn (856071) | more than 6 years ago | (#20607523)

In Soviet Russia, Website Videos You!

Who doesn't (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20598693)

We are all well past the "Internet Age" hype. Video killed the radio star? How about Internet killed the TV/Movie star.

Re:Who doesn't (4, Funny)

allaunjsilverfox2 (882195) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598721)

Actually it's Internet Killed the video star http://www.poptix.net/funny/videostar.swf [poptix.net] ;-)

Re:Who doesn't (3, Insightful)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599209)

Actually it's Internet Killed the video star http://www.poptix.net/funny/videostar.swf [poptix.net] ;-)

Not really true. MTV killed videos itself about 10 years ago when it decided to stop airing them,... replacing real music content with Beavis and Butt-Head, and crap pop culture reality shows,... The good news is, at least YouTube seems to have somewhat resurrected music videos! ;-)

Re:Who doesn't (1)

AnyoneEB (574727) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603147)

The good news is, at least YouTube seems to have somewhat resurrected music videos! ;-)

I am not sure exactly how meaningful that is. I have a friend who does not have an especially large personal music collection... and instead just searches YouTube for a music video of whatever song she wants to listen to and leaves it playing in the background.

Beavis and Butthead died 11 years ago... (1)

bgstratt (957198) | more than 6 years ago | (#20605073)

Beavis and Butthead died 11 years ago when that movie came out, MTV had to have committed suicide before that.

Re:Who doesn't (1)

FireFlie (850716) | more than 6 years ago | (#20606227)

At least Beavis and Butthead did include music videos. The shit they play today can't even be bothered to do that.

Re:Who doesn't (4, Funny)

slobarnuts (666254) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598753)

And apparently brought back the radio star. almost 2,000,000 new Rick Astley fans and counting.

Rick Astley Rocks (1)

gadlaw (562280) | more than 6 years ago | (#20602233)

He doesn't really 'rock' but I've always liked him. I'm rediscovering music videos at youtube, veoh and stage6.divx for music videos from around the world. Russian trance, jpop, cpop, kpop, European pop, 80's, 90's and just stuff I wouldn't have ever heard of. I'm learning guitar faster with lazyfret on youtube and there is also interesting anime and much more available. Who knew they even made videos any longer, who knew that Dolores O'Riordan from the Cranberries had a new album out and it sounds great. These services are reconnecting folks with the parts of culture they've disconnected from because of fragmentation and balkanization of interests combined with the lowest common denominator you find every cable network passing through so you get to where MTV and VH1 don't do music any longer. Long live Rick Astley!

Re:Who doesn't (2, Insightful)

vimh42 (981236) | more than 6 years ago | (#20604017)

Sounds about right. Though I don't think the TV/Movie star is dead quite yet. But perhaps some people get a little more entertainment out of something that is a little more real. Any idiot with a video camera can make a movie. And sometimes those idiots are quite entertaining.

Demand will be met (4, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598701)

When customers don't get what they want, they'll look for a way to get it. And when somebody provides what the customers want, they'll buy it.

How much simpler could it be?

I want to watch what I want to watch, when I want to watch it, and I'll pay up to a couple bucks a day to get it. I don't want to wait, and I don't want alot of hassle. What we're seeing is the end of an era - the era of broadcast television. Broadcast television will wane, and the quality of online video developed under alternative business models will improve. (We hope - most of the YouTube content is either pirate or just awful to watch)

But the ability is there, and the public networks aren't (so far) willing to adapt. So they'll die.

How much simpler could it be?

Demand will be met-Mayhem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20598941)

"When customers don't get what they want, they'll look for a way to get it. And when somebody provides what the customers want, they'll buy it."

I work for the Mafia, and my services are for hire. Who do you want whacked?

"I want to watch what I want to watch, when I want to watch it, and I'll pay up to a couple bucks a day to get it. "

Tivo loves you, man!

"But the ability is there, and the public networks aren't (so far) willing to adapt. So they'll die."

Yeah! Yeah! Don't get what you want. Everyone must die!

Re:Demand will be met (1)

norkakn (102380) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599021)

Yeah, I'm watching the AFL-CIO primary debates, and I'm glad that I didn't watch it live.

Any clue if the comedy central motherload thing makes money?

Re:Demand will be met (1)

beckerist (985855) | more than 6 years ago | (#20603969)

Not sure as far as the motherload thing specifically, but I do know that Stephen Colbert's "Green Screen Challenge [colboard.com] " (that used YouTube extensively) DID pull in some good ratings for the show. It especially hit home with the /.-esque crowd (and was certainly one of my more favorite sketches he has done!)
As ratings roughly equates to $$$, I'd say there's a very good chance!

Advertising will pay, and things are better. (1)

Erris (531066) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599077)

I want to watch what I want to watch, when I want to watch it, and I'll pay up to a couple bucks a day to get it.

You'll pay that couple of bucks a day, but not directly. Advertising budgets that used to go to broadcasters and printed material are now going to their online equivalents. You get to watch when you want and how you want and the actual artist gets their cut of advertising revenue the way Google does it. Others will do things the same way and everyone will win as things move closer to actual free market worth.

the quality of online video developed under alternative business models will improve. (We hope - most of the YouTube content is either pirate or just awful to watch)

"Awful" is a subjective opinion. What you don't like is something most other people prefer to what's being broadcast. If they did not have that preference, they would still be glued to the tube. Instead, they are taking pot luck from YouTube and being entertained with video picture quality far below ordinary.

Like you said, big median is screwed. The elimination of the last mile problem will really be their end as people actually get choices. Good riddance to corporate controlled news, endless crap sitcoms, laugh tracks, RIAA monopoly music and other shit that's been blasted through a tiny government approved and controlled channel. Most of it has been an embarrassing waste of a scarce public resource. There has been some great content that made it through the restrictions but it was all in spite of the system not because of it. Freedom is better.

Re:Demand will be met (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599101)

The low quality is one of the reasons I don't use YouTube and similar sites much. I still perfer downloading DVD quality video with bit torrent. The only thing something like YT is good for imo is a previw of the content.

I also like to download the content so it can't be taken away tomorrow because someone reported a copyright violation or thought the content wasn't appropiate or whatever. If I have a copy on my computer then I'm not subject to the whims of others.

When those problems are fixed I think the idea will work well for me. I'm keeping an eye on AppleTV. Eventually I think that, combined with YouTube and BitTorrent, will replace broadcast tv and cable/sat for me.

Re:Demand will be met (1)

Keeper Of Keys (928206) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600205)

The low quality is one of the reasons I don't use YouTube
http://stage6.divx.com/videos/ [divx.com]

Re:Demand will be met (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 6 years ago | (#20610881)

An improvement but I do think Flash is better for previewing the content and a download link would be helpful.

User generated content has an undeniable charm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20599781)

Check out TheHill88. Better that kids watch her than High School Musical 5.

Re:Demand will be met (4, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599983)

What we're seeing is the end of an era - the era of broadcast television.

Now, now. Don't be so quick. I agree we're in the early stages of transition, and in the next years we'll see lots of channels broadcast on the internet, but don't kill classic TV just yet.

You know they killed radio and cinema when TV was introduced, and killed cinema yet again with VHS. Then with DVD again (but ok.. VHS died :) ).

There are currently a billion or more folks world wide at 30+ who prefer the passive experience of cable/air TV (I'm not saying it's a bad thing either), and the market will continue to deliver to this market, if even for the sheer amount of investment in broadcast equipment they already have.

For the longest time I see content being broadcast on both classical TV and on demand. While in the next 5 years I expect the Internet on-demand/live streaming business will boom, I expect it won't be before 20-30 years that we see classic broadcast TV become a niche and disappear, if ever.

Re:Demand will be met (2, Interesting)

KGIII (973947) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600257)

Hey! I still have some of my VHS tapes! But on a serious note, I don't think we'll even begin to see television or even typical print media types "die" for a great long time because there are still too many places (in my country at least) where broadband rollouts have stimied the bean counters. Oddly that country is America but that's a story for another day.

Re:Demand will be met (1)

jumperboy (1054800) | more than 6 years ago | (#20601193)

But whose demands will be met?

There is a constant battle between the demands of the viewer and the demands of the provider. Switching the venue doesn't change a thing.

Sure, there is the brief period when the provider is wooing the viewer away from a rival. But once the transition is complete, things are subject to change in favor of the provider, who has the upper hand. There's no doubt that disruptive technologies deliver new benefits, but we've seen this before. I remember when cable was introduced in the US. One of the benefits was the vast improvement in signal quality, so that even local broadcast stations were easier to watch, if included (and in most cases, this was obligatory). But another major draw was the fact that many cable-only stations were commercial-free! And this was supposedly because direct payment by the viewer made advertising obsolete! Fast forward to the present, and you'll find the cable-only channels have the highest percentage of advertising, including endless popups that obscure the content you've paid to watch, but never the ads themselves. Am I getting what I paid for? Not anymore. It seems obvious that online media is poised and ready to follow the same course.

If you want to see how Internet can replace TV, (1)

Burz (138833) | more than 6 years ago | (#20612087)

...then try out Miro.

http://getmiro.org/ [getmiro.org]

I'll describe this FOSS program in terms Slashdotters will grok:
  * RSS feed reader - video feeds
  * with built-in video player (multi-format, based on the excellent VLC)
  * can do various protocols incl. bittorrent
  * The Guide has a catalog of tons of free feeds, organized by topic
  * You can add feeds without the Guide
  * Can handle subscriptions representing keyword search on sites like Youtube

So, as iTunes podcast is a kind of RSS reader, Miro is like iTunes podcast that adds a nice guide of general Internet content and Bittorrent distribution. Projects needing low-cost transport of high-quality video are encouraged to recommend Miro as their "torrent viewer". That, and the Guide has a growing catalog of some beautiful HD video feeds (under the 'HD' section).

They recently changed the name from "Democracy Player" and the software maturity is what I would call v0.99 late beta or RC1.

Online video site business model. (4, Insightful)

Silverlancer (786390) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598727)

1. Get lots of venture capital, somehow.

2. Declare the site beta.

3. Allow people to upload videos as high as 18 megabits per second. [divx.com]

4. Wonder where all the venture capital went.

Someone is going to make money at this. (1)

Erris (531066) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599123)

Eyeballs == Advertising $

You can slip the product placement in wherever you like, just like they do now. You can put on banner ads, just like you do now. All of the conventional forms of advertising work. The biggest difference is that bandwith is much much cheaper than broadcast and physical media. If you P2P it out, your cost will be that much lower. If that does not add up to profit, I'm not sure what will.

Maybe no one is making money (1)

philpalm (952191) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600063)

Because now security cameras are being broadcast over the internet so that people can see that their home are still safe and sound. Not everything involves money, peace of mind: priceless.

Re:Online video site business model. (2, Insightful)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600019)

5. ???

6. Profit

(oh wait)

You gotta see Tourette's Guy! (1)

brxndxn (461473) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598787)

OMG.. someone please post the Tourette's Guy videos!

"I hope this is the Puff Daddy version and not that Sting piece of SHIT!!!..." pause.. "AWWW FUCK!!!"

Re:You gotta see Tourette's Guy! (1)

deftcoder (1090261) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598865)

"Yes, I bought your Colgate toothpaste, the one with tartar control, and it made me feel... LIKE A PIECE OF SHIT!"

R.I.P. Tourettes Guy

lol (0, Redundant)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598895)

I, for one, welcome our old eye cancer giving overlords!

Deafening silence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20598899)

while Netcraft doesn't confirm this.

Broadband (4, Interesting)

Mike610544 (578872) | more than 6 years ago | (#20598909)

It would be interesting to see how much of this is due to the (partial?) death of dial-up internet access. Is the rate of increase consistent with dialup->DSL/cable conversions? Even within the "broadband" realm, I'm much more likely to click a video link now that my DSL is 3 Mb compared to when it was 760Kb.

Broadband-Short life. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20599013)

"It would be interesting to see how much of this is due to the (partial?) death of dial-up internet access. "

Pfft! Partial death indeed. Broadband will always be paid for from discretionary income. As that decreases, so will people either stay with dial-up or drop broadband and move to dial-up. Guess who's economy is in trouble?

It's true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20598937)

Because it's a slashdot reader's friday night!

*rimshot*

el oh el (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20598951)

more like *rimjob*

Upload vs. Download stats (4, Informative)

sufijazz (889247) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599017)

While Comcast's recent actions [slashdot.org] threaten to stifle innovation [techdirt.com] in this space, Netflix and Amazon Unbox will eventually win. Not to mention YouTube. What is interesting is that related industries such as video search engines [blinkx.com] and content producers like this [nytimes.com] will flourish.

I'd like to see some statistics on how many people upload videos vs. how many download/watch them.

Re:Upload vs. Download stats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20599403)

Get a clue. Netflix and Unbox hate net neutrality. They want concast to throttle bit-torrent, and the want to pay comcast to make sure their bits get through, and pass the cost to the consumer.

Re:Upload vs. Download stats (1)

trawg (308495) | more than 6 years ago | (#20602509)

Surely youtube.com is only "winning" because people are putting up copyrighted content faster than the copyright owners can file DMCA requests to have it taken down?

I might be alone here, but I watch jack shit on youtube that's not someone else's copyrighted content that someone else has uploaded (except for the extremely rare uploaded home video of some idiot hurting themselves, which probably accounts for less than 2% of my youtube time).

Re:Upload vs. Download stats (1)

u-235-sentinel (594077) | more than 6 years ago | (#20602989)

While Comcast's recent actions threaten to stifle innovation in this space, Netflix and Amazon Unbox will eventually win. Not to mention YouTube. What is interesting is that related industries such as video search engines and content producers like this will flourish.

I'd like to see some statistics on how many people upload videos vs. how many download/watch them.


I appreciate someone recognizing how serious this is becoming. While not a problem such as world hunger or wars, it's not like this is a non issue either.

I wouldn't mind seeing some statistics myself. I'll look around and post it on my blog should I find any. Companies like Comcast essentially harm our progress while other countries are moving ahead of America. This is why I've been focusing my blog [blogspot.com] more towards those issues instead of always posting about Comcast's lunacy and arrogance. Here in West Jordan we're making progress with bringing Utopia to the masses. The City Council and Mayor I've learned are big impediments and don't understand why services like Utopia are needed for our economic growth. Pity, and I was getting to like them. We're looking to go with a petition and perhaps force the issue with a ballot vote if it comes down to it. Hell, maybe even replace them. It may come down to that.

It's interesting to see just how big online video and other multimedia services are getting. And that scares the crap out of companies like Comcast.

Like the study that showed men like hot women... (2, Funny)

GigaHurtsMyRobot (1143329) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599321)

In other equally shocking news... The majority of online videos are pornography, fake web cam advertisements for pornography, and videos of people getting hit in the balls. The sky is still blue, and so are my balls.

This was news, several years ago... (2, Insightful)

adona1 (1078711) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599385)

At what point will people stop reporting that "more people are doing X and Y on the internet"? Yes, lots of people do things on the internet. It will grow as more people get online and connections get faster. It isn't really very interesting.

Looking at websites? Check.
Downloading music? Check.
Social networks online? Check.
Watching videos? Check.

Can we just presume that more people are doing whatever next comes along, and not keep reporting on it?

Welcome to Slashdot (1)

zanaxagoras (1116047) | more than 6 years ago | (#20610051)

At what point will people stop reporting that "more people are doing X and Y on the internet"?
If you actually have to ask that question, I have to then question why you read Slashdot, let alone post to it.

Re:Welcome to Slashdot (1)

adona1 (1078711) | more than 6 years ago | (#20611853)

Touche. However, most of the people on Slashdot would already know this stuff, seeing as we tend to be doing this stuff long before it gets reported in computer magazines. Hence, posting the stories here is somewhat obvious, akin to telling a stab victim that he might die if he doesn't get medical attention :)

Greatest fun is ahead of us (3, Interesting)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599599)

Only recently have content-producing companies, and TV channels started to offer their video content on-line (sometimes for free).

Only weeks ago was Flash with MPEG4+AAC beta announced. And only days ago was Silverlight 1.0 with WMV support announced.

I expect in the next 5 years we'll see a huge surge in online video as video content producers scramble to take a foot in this brand new market.

And I actually expect online video will outdo bittorrent traffic, since a large part of bittorent traffic now is actually various TV series and movies, things that will be legally available for streaming in the near future.

The big question mark is: what do ISP-s do about it. They can filter and slow down bittorrent traffic since the popular opinion is it consists mostly of illegal content (and it's mostly, though not entirely correct). They'll have a quite unique problem doing so with streaming media (and you can wrap streaming in HTTP traffic on port 80 too) when official distributors start streaming DVD or HD quality content as the rule, rather than the exception.

Re:Greatest fun is ahead of us (1)

jibjibjib (889679) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600987)

The obvious solution for ISPs is a transparent caching proxy, so they only need to transfer the videos over their upstream connection once.

ISP-level BitTorrent proxy (1)

harmonica (29841) | more than 6 years ago | (#20605215)

Some BitTorrent caching at the ISP level is already taking place: http://bramcohen.livejournal.com/29886.html [livejournal.com] ("Third"...)

Re:Greatest fun is ahead of us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20604383)

Mobile video is set to take off in a big way. The one device that always stays on us all the time is the mobile phone and it is becoming a hot bed for content delivery. I work for a start-up called Veveo whose product vTap released recently. vTap lets you view any video online (think youtube, myspace, google video, msn video, dailymotion, aol video and a zillion more) on your phone. Available for iPhone and Windows mobile. http://blog.prashanthellina.com/2007/09/11/vtap-launched/ [prashanthellina.com]

Yes, but.... (1)

Z0mb1eman (629653) | more than 6 years ago | (#20599647)

...these videos probably amount for 90% of that time:

http://www.clutterme.com/internetpeople [clutterme.com]

(not really a shameless plug since that page has nothing to do with my site)

what crazy is the lack of video quality on youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20599747)

It shows that namebrand really does matter more than the video quality.

Some video site keep both FLV1 and FLV2 quality available to send based on the visitor's browser capabilities.

But youtube doesn't even bother and stores only FLV1.

You'd think after several years of high motion video on PCs we'd demand more than a 320x240 quarter-VGA box.

mandatory (0, Redundant)

Kuj0317 (856656) | more than 6 years ago | (#20600229)

in soviet russia, internet watches you wait....

Of course! People prefer freedom to propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20601459)

Why would anybody prefer to watch what a big moloch with non-transparant choosing of content presents to you? Instead of the LIFE expressed by the multitude?

Comscore - the spyware company (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20602007)


don't forget these "stats" come from Comscore [google.com] who are the definition of a spyware company [benedelman.org] (they have tried rebranding as researchware , lol yeah right), any anti-virus worth its salt and every single anti-spyware app on the market would remove it and as most people (average joe) have them how can these stats be even trusted ?
perhaps they should say
every person infected with Comscore who is not running an antivirus or anti-spyware and running Windows....

Online Video: Nothing Special (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603027)

I dont understand what is so special about YouToube, Google Video, etc. The only interesting pieces of video from these sites are illegal and disappear in a few days after they are posted. ALL LEGAL STUF POSTED IS USELESS JUNK.

Software pirate mentality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20603301)

Software pirates think that a piece of software is worth collecting not because it is useful but because getting it legally would cost a lot of money. The more expensive the more desirable, usefulness for the collectors is irrelevant; they gather software for collecting, not for using. Free software, no matter how useful, is not worth collecting because it is legally free. The same goes for youtoube, only illegal stuff is worth watching.

75 (1)

sh3l1 (981741) | more than 6 years ago | (#20613059)

almost 75 percent of U.S. Internet users watched videos online, up from 71.4 percent in March
71.4% is almost 75% this article shows very little change
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>