
Is media consumption zero sum? - dangoldin
http://dangoldin.com/2015/10/04/is-media-consumption-zero-sum/
======
phkahler
If you forget about how many "service" a person is subscribed too, you realize
that they are ultimately limited by TIME. In that sense, every human activity
is part of a zero sum game except in circumstances where two can be done at
once - like running while listening to iTunes. The market for human-hours is
finite. I've wondered if GDP could be increased by reducing work hours, it
would free up more time for consumption!

~~~
toomuchtodo
> I've wondered if GDP could be increased by reducing work hours, it would
> free up more time for consumption!

Ugh. To heck with GDP, start measuring the happiness of your citizens and
doing whatever you can to give everybody a great quality of life.

~~~
Retra
There's probably a good correlation between the two. Either way, you run the
risk of burning through resources that have long-term value.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Very important that we finish up with the self-driving electric cars & 100%
renewables first. Then we can move on to automating everything else.

------
exelius
I've always believed that media consumption is zero sum; or at least has been
for a few decades.

The reason is simple: we only have so much time in the day. Media consumption
takes up a _huge_ part of that. And while an individual's level of media
consumption may rise or fall, it's relatively consistent across a large number
of people.

I have a hunch the author is stumbling onto the problem of media
_measurement_. Basically, as more forms of media are available, we tend to
consume more of them at the same time. For example, in the 80s I may have
watched TV while reading the newspaper. As we have added more types of media
in the form of mobile, video and games, we just add more potential "double
counting" (or even triple counting!) scenarios. Also, many of these usage
measures tend to be self-reported; and the more dimensions you have in a self-
reporting questionnaire the less accurate the results are likely to be when
you add them up (rounding error, poor recall of actual times leading to
"proportional" times, etc).

Media measurement is hard. We still haven't figured it out for online
advertising, which should arguably be easier than other types of media since
we have better mechanisms for measuring things automatically.

Things are moving towards the long tail though, so I do expect to see a
continued growth in the variety of media available. But if you want to see a
"zero sum" media in action, just consider that the average ratings for
"Seinfeld" were 21 million viewers per episode. 20 years later, the most
popular show on TV was "Sunday Night Football" with an average of only 13
million viewers. TV ratings have actually been on a steady decline since the
1950s [1]. So if you give people more options, they will watch them -- at the
expense of other forms of media. That's a zero-sum market in my book.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_watched_televisio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_watched_television_broadcasts#Most_watched_series_per_year)

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _For example, in the 80s I may have watched TV while reading the newspaper.
> As we have added more types of media in the form of mobile, video and games,
> we just add more potential "double counting" (or even triple counting!)
> scenarios._

Exactly. I sometimes find myself watching a TV series while simultaneously
reading and commenting on HN, while simultaneously playing a slow-paced
videogame, while simultaneously browsing Facebook and holding several
conversations on it. I often try to bundle media that don't overlap
cognitively together, like series episode + HN, in order to save time.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
It's zero sum _at best_. The TV may be on, but if I'm on HN, either HN or the
TV has my attention - I'm not really "doing both".

But it may be even less than zero sum, because I may decide to turn it all off
and go take a walk (and not look at my phone while I'm walking).

------
vitd
Personally, I think my media consumption has been increasing. I stopped
listening to commercial radio over a decade ago because the ads were too
annoying and frequent. I stopped watching live TV for the same reason and
started using the DVR to record everything.

But now we have ad-free internet radio, and subscription services like
Netflix, and HBO, and the content has improved considerably. I'm almost
filling up my DVR for the first time in 10 years because there's enough good
stuff to watch and so few annoying distractions while watching it!

I think the lesson is clear - make high quality content people want and don't
constantly interrupt it with annoyances and you'll increase viewership.

~~~
dangoldin
I agree that high quality content makes it more enjoyable but do you think
part of that has also been more time to enjoy the new content?

------
Chefkoochooloo
Indeed, people turning to our phones and laptops for media consumption, like
Hulu or Netflix. We used to use our time to watch television, but we are now
using YouTube instead. We have easy access to technologies so we don't switch
platforms. It is a big shift.

------
rokhayakebe
On a DNA level. I am not a scientist but if DNA is a storage of information,
then it seems living things are nothing but data input and output. Absorbing
information is truly so deep in the way we are, you can say it on a dna level.
We may just be responding to what makes us us.

