TV seems impervious to Silicon Valley's advances

August 2, 2013 by Troy Wolverton

Google's unveiling last week of yet another device it hopes will change the way people watch TV highlights a stubborn truth: The revolution may be televised, but television itself has so far been impervious to a revolution.

Technology companies-many in Silicon Valley-have radically transformed the way we communicate, listen to music, play games, shop and read. But to date, they've utterly failed to significantly change how most Americans watch .

Not that the tech industry hasn't tried. Indeed, since at least the release of WebTV some 17 years ago, the tech industry has attempted to revolutionize television.

Yet despite the efforts of heavyweights like Microsoft, Google, Apple and Netflix, as well as numerous startups and smaller companies such as TiVo and Sling, the vast majority of TV viewing is still done the same way it was 15 or 20 years ago-by tuning in to a traditional channel on a service and watching a broadcast in real time.

"It's not obvious that most consumers want the main job of the TV set to be changed," said Dan Cryan, research director for digital media at research firm IHS. "The TV experience isn't really that broken."

Silicon Valley isn't giving up. Google's new $35 device, the Chromecast, promises to allow consumers to easily and cheaply view on their big-screen TVs some of the videos they watch on their smartphones and tablets.

Meanwhile, Intel is developing a box that could replace consumers' pay TV services and Internet-connected living room devices by offering access to both live broadcasts and Internet content. And Apple has reportedly been working for years on a device that the late Steve Jobs himself promised would radically change the way we watch television.

For its part, Google may have a hit on its hands. On Thursday, just one day after announcing the Chromecast, the company canceled a promotional offer that included three months of free access to Netflix's , citing "overwhelming demand."

Still, it doesn't look like the way we watch television is going to change anytime soon. Although Apple CEO Tim Cook lamented recently that few people love the television experience, most people seem to like it well enough.

Despite a Great Recession that has put pressure on the budgets of millions of households and despite ever-increasing pay TV rates, few folks have cut the cord. While the number of subscribers to Netflix is steadily growing, its average viewing audience is the equivalent of just one large cable channel.

The Silicon Valley technology that has most influenced TV watching-the DVR-still is in barely 50 percent of American homes, even after 14 years on the market. And its impact has been minor-less than 10 percent of all TV watching is of shows recorded on one.

For an industry that upended the music business in less than a decade and transformed the mobile phone business in under five years, the resistance of television to Silicon Valley-directed change has been humbling. Apple, for instance, acknowledges its slow progress by calling its Apple TV media adapter a "hobby," not a real business.

Analysts point to a number of factors that have made the television experience so resistant to change. Perhaps chief among them is that much of the programming consumers want to watch-news, major sports events and first-run television shows-is only available through traditional television channels.

"As long as must-see TV is only available from pay TV operators, that's where consumer are going to go," Cryan said.

For now, the television industry has little incentive to change. Ten years ago, the music industry, fearing that its CD business was going to be destroyed by piracy, embraced Apple and digital music sales. But the television industry appears to be more afraid that its business will be undermined by Silicon Valley than by pirates.

And consumers haven't pushed for change. Smartphones replaced basic mobile phones because consumers, it turns out, want to do more than just talk on their phones. But when it comes to television, it's not at all clear that consumers want to do much more than watch programs the old-fashioned way, Cryan said.

"As long as the core value of TV remains TV, there's unlikely to be the rapid disruption that we saw with the iPhone and Android" he said. "We're not changing the job that TV has been hired to do."

Explore further: Apple TV adds HBO Go, WatchESPN to line up


Related Stories

Apple TV adds HBO Go, WatchESPN to line up

June 19, 2013

Apple on Wednesday added HBO GO and WatchESPN to the line-up of programming available on its Apple TV devices that stream shows from the Internet to living room screens.

Review: Chromecast streams media at a nice price

July 31, 2013

A new device from Google makes it easy to stream video from several popular services to a high-definition TV. Chromecast is tiny enough to dangle from a keychain when not in use, but it packs a big punch for a low price.

There's more than one way to connect

May 28, 2013

It's not enough these days to wonder what to watch on your TV; a growing question for many is how to watch. Just like any device in your life, TVs can now connect to the Internet. This lets you grab shows from the Internet ...

Recommended for you

Making it easier to collaborate on code

October 26, 2016

Git is an open-source system with a polarizing reputation among programmers. It's a powerful tool to help developers track changes to code, but many view it as prohibitively difficult to use.

Dutch unveil giant vacuum to clean outside air

October 25, 2016

Dutch inventors Tuesday unveiled what they called the world's first giant outside air vacuum cleaner—a large purifying system intended to filter out toxic tiny particles from the atmosphere surrounding the machine.


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Aug 02, 2013
There are so many factors to this, and when you think about them it is obvious why the TV or the way programming is delivered to it has not changed.
- Digital Media uses ALOT of bandwidth, I know several people who tried to just use netflix and other online TV services, only to have thier bandwidth capped by thier ISP. This is a real problem, delivering video through internet-routed packets is nowhere near as efficient as Cable or Satellite
- People making money on regular TV and movies do not want to have that taken away, and they do not want to make less money for producing the same shows
-TV is not interactive in virtually any way. Why have two-way communication when all you really need is a one-way feed?
-Old people will typically ignore any other way of watching TV than what they are used to
-Pay-per-view and other Digital Movie Rental services are usually more costly than just going to a Redbox, Why pay $4.99 when I can pay $1.38 for the same movie on disc?
not rated yet Aug 05, 2013
People haven't stopped listening to the radio either, which also hasn't been significantly affected by Silicon Valley; TV is far more akin to radio than it is to CD. An overlooked attraction of both TV and radio is that, for the most part, you let someone else take the responsibility of deciding what you watch or listen to; just pop into a comfortable chair, hit power on the remote and get on with consuming it. Very little effort needed initially compared to most interactive programming.
not rated yet Aug 05, 2013
Bottom line is, When you put EVERYTHING someone wants to watch in ONE PLACE, EVERYONE will start using it and you will have replaced regular Television. There are too many services and backoffice agreements, Neflix has this, Hulu has that, Amazon Videos has some other stuff, and I will not pay for multiple viewing services! Just like the iTunes Store, if you standardize it, they will come...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.