Abstract
The formation of Internet based TV channels denotes an elementary change in media markets. By combination of traditional broadcasting and interactive networks, television can be transformed from a mass medium into a customized service. In view of virtually unlimited channel capacity and addressable audiences, content will increasingly be adjusted to viewer preferences.
In this submission ad addressability and personalized content are discussed as the relevant options to customize IPTV services. We consider a two-sided market framework with an ad averse audience. The impact of ad addressability and personalized content on the TV market is analyzed in case of a monopoly channel and for the duopoly case. In both settings ad addressability enhances the equilibrium advertising level and increases channel profits. The program location on the preference spectrum and the audience share remains equal with ad addressability.
This submission contributes to the theory on two-sided markets especially Anderson and Gabszewicz (2006, Handbook of the economics of art and culture. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 567–614) and Armstrong (The RAND Journal of Economics, 2006;37:668–691). Further it contributes to the theory of free TV markets (Gabszewicz et al. European Economic Review 2005;45:645–651; Kind et al. Journal of Media Economics, 2007:20:211–233) by introducing interactive channels and it augments the discussion of ad addressability by Kim and Wildman (Journal of Media Economics 2006:19, 55–79). The theoretical results give inside to the challenges and opportunities of individualized content in IPTV markets. Ad addressability appears to be a profit increasing tool for IPTV providers. Customized content on the other hand leads to a more severe competition in advertising levels. An essential question for the future development of IPTV markets is therefore, to what extend channels can differentiate their program with exclusive broadcasting rights.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Quality is measured as per viewer satisfaction.
- 2.
For an overview see Peitz (2006).
- 3.
In a model extension with heterogeneous aversion to non requested content (τ i ) it can be shown that networks with a superior number of passive viewers choose higher ad levels then networks with a large share of active viewers.
- 4.
It has to be considered that the derivative of n z is strictly negative.
- 5.
With the assumption \( 2\ \theta \le 1 \) it is ensured that (31) exceeds 13 at least by the factor 2.
- 6.
According to Sect. 4.
- 7.
If viewers differ in income, consumption time, activity level or ad aversion, asymmetric equilibria might result.
References
Anderson, S. P., & Gabszewicz, J. J. (2006). The media and advertising: A tale of two sided markets. In V. A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of art and culture (pp. 567–614). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Armstrong, M. (2005). Public service broadcasting. Fiscal Studies, 26, 282–299.
Armstrong, M. (2006). Competition in two-sided markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37, 668–691.
Bagwell, K. (2007). The Economic Analysis of Advertising. In M. Armstrong & R. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organization (pp. 1708–1725). New York: Elsevier.
Barros, P. P., Kind, H. J., Nilssen, T., & Sørgard, L. (2004). Media competition on the internet. Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy, 4, 1–18.
Beebe, J. H. (1977). Institutional structure and program choices in television markets. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91, 15–37.
Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003). Chicken and egg; competing matchmakers. The Rand Journal of Economics, 34, 309–328.
Fritsch C., & Lucas J (2009) program choice revisited (forthcoming).
Gabszewicz, J. J., Laussel, D., & Sonnac, N. (2001). Press advertising and the ascent of the Pensée unique? European Economic Review, 45, 645–651.
Gomes, O. (2006). The dynamics of television advertising with boundedly rational consumers. Munic Personal RePEc Archive, 1–30.
Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in competition. The Economic Journal, 39, 41–57.
Kim, E., & Wildman, S. S. (2006). A deeper look at the economics of advertiser support for television—The implications of consumption-differentiated viewers and ad addressability. Journal of Media Economics, 19, 55–79.
Kind, H. J., Nilssen, T., & Sørgard, L. (2007). Competition for viewers and advertisers in a TV oligopoly. Journal of Media Economics, 20, 211–233.
Noam, E. M. (1987). A public and private-choice model of broadcasting. Public Choice, 55, 163–187.
Noam, E. M. (1995). Towards the third revolution of television (pp. 1–17). Bertelsmann Foundation: Gütersloh.
Peitz, M, (2006). Marktplätze und indirekte Netzwerkeffekte. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 7, 317–333.
Rochet, J. C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1, 990–1029.
Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1998). Information rules. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Spence, M., & Owen, B. M. (1977). Television programming. Monopolistic competition and welfare. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91, 103–126.
Steiner, P. O. (1952). Program patterns and preferences, and the workability of competition in radio broadcasting. Journal of Economics, 66, 194–223.
Tacheny, T. (1989). Observation and measurement of audience viewing habits: Zapping. In European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (Ed.), Seminar on broadcasting research: experiences and strategies Paris (France), 25th-27th January (pp. 259–315). Amsterdam: ESOMR.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fritsch, C. (2013). Ad Addressability and Personalized Content in IPTV Markets. In: Friedrichsen, M., Mühl-Benninghaus, W. (eds) Handbook of Social Media Management. Media Business and Innovation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28897-5_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28897-5_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28896-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28897-5
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)