May » 2010 » GfK TechTalk

The Green Technology Revolution

Smartphone technology paves the way for the market to adopt greener approaches. Encouraging greater use of mobile services helps to limit the need for multiple devices, extend the product lifecycle and offer consumers more ways of being green.

“Technology companies can never be green”. A casual comment dropped into conversation when discussing the idea of ‘green technology’. Of course, ‘green technology’ already exists in the form of multi-million pound, global scale projects that help reclaim water, produce renewable energy and generally help meet global climate change targets. Green technology, as it stands, does not mean the ‘greening’ of technology.

Making technology a little greener would mean creating a shift in the way that technology products – consumer ones that is – are used and consumed. My argument is that the first steps to any greening of the consumer technology space would be lengthening the product lifecycle. Today, the very nature of the market tells a tale of rapid uptake and obsoleteness; parts break or newer, quicker, more innovative versions come along leaving many devices left for good old Mr. Landfill. Looking at the wider consumer landscape, which is successfully adopting greener behaviour, it seems like the right time for technology to adapt.

Recent data from a GfK NOP Technology survey amongst a representative sample of UK adults* which asked about attitudes towards everyday technology products like MP3s, PCs and mobile phones revealed that obsoleteness is not a desirable feature. When it comes to mobile phones specifically, more than half (56%) say that they are more interested in keeping their device for longer. This offers an opportunity for the rapidly growing mobile services industry. More on this later.

The finding is reflective of wider concerns about the environment and suggests a growing demand for a greener technology market. In particular, 41% of consumers want to know more about what their mobile phone brand or network is doing to be more green in order to help make decisions about future purchases. Consumers now have more choices than ever before to help ‘being green’ more easy, but whether technology products can add to the offering remains to be seen.

Enter the smartphone, which according to Gartner, Inc saw sales growth of 48.7% across the global market in the first quarter of 2010. Smartphones bring mobile services to the lives of consumers which Mobile Marketer estimate will be worth $1 trillion by 2013. Services available through smartphone technology are already a valuable commodity for global technology companies including Apple, Microsoft, Google and Nokia who, despite raging patent war,s are rolling apps, music, messaging, maps and other everyday ‘services’ the mass market might desire over 3G and wireless networks.

The benefits of mobile services extend beyond helping consumers rely more on their mobile phones. In particular, our research reveals that 40% of consumers are more interested in updating the services they use on their mobile phone than the device itself. This figure is not only music to the ears of software developers, network providers and mobile manufacturers who are diversifying into this services market, but also to consumers looking for more ways of being green. Services can extend the product lifecycle through satisfying a wide variety of consumer needs when it comes to technology. They can be updated and replaced regularly and help transform mobile devices into a highly personalised experience. Not only this, but due to the way that they bring a variety of functions together, e.g. camera, music player, clock, etc, they reduce the need for multiple technology devices. All of which contributes a ’greener’ technology market.

However, mobile services can not only help limit environmental impact of products, they also encourage and enable greener consumer behaviour and offer more choices for a greener lifestyle. Nokia, the world’s leading mobile manufacturer, is helping demonstrate how. Kirsi Sormunen, Vice President of Nokia Environmental Affairs, says that the company is continuously looking at “new ways in which mobile technology can contribute to sustainable development,” as well as “ inviting consumers to the journey towards sustainability.” To support this they have created a series of videos demonstrating and hinting at ways that using a mobile phone with internet access is yet another way of ‘being green’.

The videos show mobile phones helping us to help the environment through reducing travel, browsing the internet and carrying an all-in-one device. Nokia is not new to the move to making technology more green. The company came top in Greenpeace’s guide to consumer electronics earlier in the year. Their progression from making the manufacture of handsets more green to making the relationship between consumers and their devices more green, is an encouraging move for the technology market.

With the rapid uptake of smartphones, according to Gartner Inc figures, 54.3 million units globally are already helping people use their mobile phones to access the internet and services, limiting the need for multiple and separate devices. A green revolution in consumer technology has already begun, particularly where consumers want to keep their mobile devices for longer. Despite the global giants of Google and Apple being the pioneers of smartphone technology, it is companies like Nokia who have already realised the environmental benefits of mobile services who are paving the way for the greening of technology.

6 Music – Does the principle matter enough?

The future of 6 Music may be decided later this month; a recent survey suggests that keeping the station alive should form part of the BBC’s duty, regardless of whether recent publicity has engaged a sufficiently large enough audience to justify its existence to the number crunchers.

Over the last few months BBC 6 Music has successfully managed to do something it previously had not been notable for; namely commanding a significant share of radio listeners and attracting correspondingly high levels of media and public interest. (According to recently released RAJAR figures* the digital station was up 47% on the previous quarter and 50% on the year, bringing it to a total of 1.02m listeners in Q1 2010.)

The catalyst for this growth certainly appears to be the leak back in February that the BBC was considering shutting the station down, officially confirmed by a Mark Thompson announcement in March; a move which has resulted in public outcry, a protest outside Broadcasting House, with another planned for 22 May and huge media publicity.

As an aside, given that the news broke with only a month of the first quarter to go, one could argue that 6 Music’s listening figures might actually be higher than RAJAR (who calculate an average across the quarter) have reported. If the leaked closure of the station is indeed the catalyst to huge growth, it will be interesting to see what the figures look like in Q2 – can we expect the ‘save the station’ campaign to drive the station’s listenership up to as high as 1.5 million, perhaps?

Either way, the corporation has certainly achieved the recommendation of the BBC Trust that 6 Music should increase its profile (albeit accidentally.) In many ways, this whole episode has been similar to a parent dealing with a stubborn child who refuses to eat its dinner; people only became interested in the station when it was threatened to be taken away.

While only a small number of people actually listened to 6 Music before, it seems what has really captured public interest is the principle behind the announcement, which is felt to run counter to the BBC’s remit. Indeed, a number of campaigns to save 6 Music are championing the station’s minority status as a clear justification why it should keep running. As, BBC Radio 5 Live presenter Chris Addison was quoted as saying: “6 Music serves a minority interest, does it? Then it’s heartland BBC.*”

Recent data from a GfK NOP Technology survey amongst a representative sample of UK residents with internet access further supports this case.

The survey revealed that the majority of UK adults were not specifically concerned about the closure of 6 Music (or the Asian network, another threatened station); with only around a fifth (18%) stating they had any direct interest in the closure. This is not entirely surprising, given that 6 Music is very much a niche station (in comparison, Radio 1 attracted approximately 11.7 million listeners in the last quarter.)

However, what does emerge clearly is a view on what the public feel the BBC should be delivering: 53% of adults agree that the BBC “has a duty to fulfil the needs of niche interest groups in the UK”, a figure which rises to 60% amongst 16 – 34 year olds.

Furthermore, 64% agree that the BBC’s roster should be diverse enough to “satisfy all wider ranging interests, both mainstream and niche”. Again, amongst 16-34 year olds, this rises to almost 70%.

These wider ranging interests are exactly what the likes of 6 Music deliver; a place to get to new, exciting music that will never be covered by mainstream stations. Of course, as the Trust pointed out in its review last year, the BBC has to prioritise expenditure and in order to justify its existence it is not enough to simply broadcast, the station must deliver an audience to the content. However, I can’t help but feel there’s a middle ground here – why should ‘popular’ (as opposed to classical) music stations always have to resort to lowest common denominator playlists? – in my opinion, removing such diversity is against what we pay the licence fee for and I would hope there would be room for both.

Furthermore, although it was somewhat accidental, the BBC has in many ways done what it set out to do (cater to a niche market, enhance creative offerings and engage a bigger audience.) So, while listening figures tell one story, this episode also highlights the importance of the BBC to engage with audiences, in order to stimulate debate, campaign and a greater sense of ‘civic-ness’ first.

While it’s perhaps not the best time to be quoting Gordon Brown, the ex-prime minister recently summed up quite eloquently why I feel the BBC must accommodate 6 Music in its budget once the BBC Trust consultation exercise comes to its decision on 25 May.

When asked whether he was in favour of keeping the station, Mr Brown stated: “Yes because it’s the next stage you worry about. A lot of things that the BBC does are incredibly creative and quite risky…
…But this is a necessary means of us being a creative society.”

Want to read more?
There are many excellent, heart-felt articles about this issue. Here are a selection:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/feb/27/bbc-to-cancel-6-music
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/mar/07/6-music-asian-network-review

* Sources for used figures & quotations:
http://www.rajar.co.uk/listening/quarterly_listening.php
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/feb/26/bbc-6-music-opposition-closure
http://www.nme.com/news/lady-gaga/50636

RESEARCH NOTES:

GfK NOP Technology conducted a survey among 862 UK adults in March 2010. The interviews were conducted online and are representative on UK adults who have access to the internet.

Image from…

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sean-b/ / CC BY 2.0

IPTV – shall we all forget the set-top boxes and buy internet-enabled TVs?

IPTV is no longer tied to commercial bundles of high speed internet access, television and telephone (triple play), but the success of the technology continues to be dependent upon the strength of the home broadband connection.

The uptake of triple play offerings in the UK is somewhat sluggish compared with the US and other EU markets. However, along with the two established players, Sky (satellite) and Virgin (cable), the adoption of high speed broadband internet connection over recent years has led to the rise of various forms of bundled and unbundled internet protocol television (IPTV) services.

For the purpose of this article, IPTV as a term includes subscriber-based offerings requiring the installation of set-top boxes (eg BT Vision, TalkTalk TV, etc.), but also free or commercial services that offer some sort of live television, time-shifted TV programmes, and video on demand (eg BBC i-Player, ITV Player, Channel 4 on demand (4oD), YouTube, LOVEFILM etc.) relying on other customer-premises equipment (CPE).

With CPEs, aside from the traditional definition (ie a router bundled with an internet connection, a mobile handset as part of a contract with a mobile provider, etc.), it makes sense to include any internet-enabled, end-user equipment that consumers use to view any of the forms of IPTV mentioned previously. As such, recent research* by GfK NOP Technology division indicates that 80% of the UK internet population watch IPTV and are using primarily the following CPEs:

An emerging trend here is the role of the TV set as a CPE device. Further more, isolating the fact that there is a good portion of the population (25%) who use their flat panel TV set to view IPTV, the same research identfies that the top three ways to do so are:

By connecting to a pc/laptop – 38%
Via a game console – 22%
Directly connected to a broadband router – 16%

Interestingly, the list does not include services that rely on a set-top box installation (Virgin is in fourth place – 11%, while BT Vision has only a very small penetration – 2%). In addition, internet-enabled TVs, only available since 2009 in the UK, appear to make an interesting category.

Having seen consumers bypassing the standard triple play offerings in terms of CPEs, the next question is what type of content they choose to watch over internet?

Our research indicates that amongst all people who watch video content over the internet, free IPTV services such as BBC i-Player, YouTube, 4oD and ITV Player, are the highest used, while premium services, like iTunes, Sky TV and Virgin Media fall behind:

In this situation, it is not surprising that triple play offerings (eg Sky and Virgin) are already including, or are starting to include, these popular video on demand services (i.e. BBC i-Player, YouTube, etc.) as part of their offering. Nevertheless, some might question why they should buy into triple play rather than just get an internet enabled TV in order to watch the most popular and free IPTV services such as BBC i-Player?

Leading TV manufacturers are all starting to offer this type of functionality – Panasonic with its VieraCast system, Philips – NetTV, Samsung – internet@tv, Sony – applicast, etc – and are making an effort to incorporate popular IPTV services into their internet widgets. However, the technology relies on the quality of the home broadband connection, without any control over the “last mile”, or guarantee over the quality of service that a commercial triple play provider can offer. This might sound trivial, but our survey also confirms that satisfaction with IPTV when considering connectivity/speed and image resolution is only moderate at 62% and 66% respectively.

Nonetheless, consumers today have increasingly more options to watch IPTV and this can only be a good thing. The challenge should lie with the providers of IPTV services and CPEs to leverage the technological advantages and create new opportunities. Triple play providers should not perceive this evolving nature of IPTV as a threat, but as something that can help boost its uptake in the UK market.

Research Info
*1000 online interviews were conducted by GfK NOP among a UK representative sample of internet users. The fieldwork was conducted in March 2010

Old media trumps new media on influencing the UK electorate

Social media campaigns via popular sites like Facebook may be able to get ‘Rage Against The Machine’ to Number One in the music charts but they will have little influence on the outcome of the 2010 UK general election. In contrast, the televised election debates will prove a powerful platform for the three main political parties.

GfK NOP Technology research conducted online (so we would also expect a skew towards online sources) shows that TV debates have the most influence on how we vote as a nation. Despite the fieldwork for our survey being conducted after only the first of three televised debates on 16 April, they are still the number one source of information for the election on 6 May.

As an example of this contrast, official viewing figures suggest that around 8.4m viewers watched the third debate, vs. 3.2 m UK visitors to the BBC news website (with 350,000 streaming the debates online).

Interestingly, a similar number of people had watched party political broadcasts and election news (45%) as the TV debates (49%) but their influence varies considerably. Of those who watched TV debates 26% said that they had had the biggest impact on who they would vote for. Conversely, for party political broadcasts or election news on TV, this fell to just 10%.

In an election where it is becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate between the parties and navigate through the spin, the TV debates have provided a platform for UK voters to truly assess each party. The TV debates put the party leaders on the spot, not in terms of questioning, (I’m sure they’re fully briefed) but in the way they respond to each other.

Debates offer the chance to see the personality behind the policy (or perhaps a carefully sculptured version of that image), which is more than can be offered by a written press release. Although the three candidates are still mainly dealing in easily-digestible sound bites, the televised debates offer those members of the public who perhaps don’t have the time or the inclination to read the manifestos in depth to get a grasp on the key issues.

In contrast, internet sources lack the ‘live’ human connection the TV debates provide. Twelve per cent of the UK have read election news via broadsheets’ online news websites, but only two per cent of this group say that it was the biggest influence on their vote. The main social media site to register any influence was Facebook, where six per cent of people had discussed politics, but only one per cent of this group said it was the most influential source of information about the election.

The lack of influence from social media could also be down to a lack of investment and understanding. The Conservative Party have probably considered this medium the most, but overall, all three main parties’ online and social media strategies are pretty poor. For example, there are no obvious attempts to link social media platforms, like Facebook, to party promotional material. Furthermore, Labour MP Stuart MacLennan showed a complete lack of understanding about how Twitter works (you say things that are controversial… it spreads pretty quickly) and was consequently sacked for inappropriate comments.

Whether it’s a lack of interest from the public or a lack of understanding by UK political parties, online and social media will have little influence on how people vote on 6 May. Despite this, we strongly believe that new media will play a bigger role in future elections, just as it is increasingly influencing other areas of society.

For all those interested in the data from this survey you can view it here

RESEARCH NOTES:

GfK NOP Technology conducted a survey among 1279 UK adults between 16^th and 21^st April 2010. The interviews were conducted online and are representative on UK adults who have access to the internet.

GfK TechTalk

Independent technology research and opinion

The Green Technology Revolution

6 Music – Does the principle matter enough?

IPTV – shall we all forget the set-top boxes and buy internet-enabled TVs?

Recent Posts

Sister Sites

Links

Subjects

Archive

Tag Cloud

Users Online