When it comes to technology, there are often clear-cut winners and losers. Sure, every company gets kudos for its efforts in furthering the industry, but when it comes down to it, the winners are determined by public opinion, and, well, sales. In this sense, public opinion can change much faster than sales and is generally the more valuable of the two.
We’ve talked before about live streaming and where it might go next, but in today’s blog, we’re going to be discussing the winners and losers (but mostly the winners) of live streaming. Yes, it is still fairly new in its inception but many industries have used live streaming in innovative ways to capture large audiences.
If you search “live streaming” on Google, you’re guaranteed to find one of two things within the first five choices: sports and reality TV or game shows. When you think about it, these are the only two genres that it’s even possible to show “live”. All other genres require a fair amount of post-production and it’s simply not feasible to work live streaming into the equation.
Outside of being the easiest to execute, why are these genres performing so well? It might have something to do with the channels and platforms they’re executing on. One tweet from this week’s Adweek chat stood out, as it echoes the same reasoning why live streaming for these genres is so successful:
.@Adweek A1: Media planning is important because to connect with the right audience, you need the right platforms #AdweekChat
— Bryana Koch (@BryanaKoch) September 14, 2016