Television won the Olympic battle
It was hailed as the first truly digital Olympics – yet most still watched on TV with friends and family. By Kantar Media’s Dalia Gereis, UK Commercial Director and Richard Brinkman, Head of KantarSport.
More people in Great Britain watched this summer’s Olympic Games on television than any other Games since the electronic measurement of viewing figures began. Hardly surprising, given the pulling power of being host nation.
More surprising, perhaps, is the fact that despite the number of different ways people were able to access coverage – not to mention the wide proliferation of tablets and smartphones – few claimed to interact with the Olympics online according to new data.
Before the Olympics began, the majority of the GB population (84%) said they intended to follow the Games, according to the Sportscope, a monthly syndicated sports tracker run by Kantar Media. And a significant proportion of those were not traditionally sports fans: two thirds of people who didn’t normally follow a sport (16% of the total GB population) said they would watch the Games – the highest in Europe.
Levels of enthusiasm were high, with almost half the GB population giving their level of interest in the Olympics, on a scale of 1-10, as 6 or above – again, the highest in Europe.
According to BARB viewing data, the vast majority (80%) of people who followed the Olympics watched it on television – and they tended to watch the coverage live, with only 3% of viewing time-shifted within seven days of a live broadcast.
This is lower than ‘regular TV’ where, on average, 10% of viewing is time-shifted (6% for regular sporting broadcasts), suggesting that viewers wanted to experience the live events in real time.
71% of Olympics viewing was done socially – in a group – which is higher than other recent high profile sporting events: 43% watched the 2011 Rugby Union World Cup in a group, for example, and 59% of all viewers of Euro 2012 watched in a group.
Football, tennis and rugby fans follow their sport using a range of different touch-points; reading live text commentary online, for example, if they’re at work and can’t watch a match live. Those who followed the Olympics interacted with the Games through a lower number of touch-points, on average, than other sports.
Only 9% watched any coverage live on their mobile device, and 19% viewed streamed coverage live on a PC – whereas 31% of football fans watch football online via a PC, for example. Only 7% kept up with what was happening by listening online.
When it came to reading about the Games, 21% of Olympic followers consumed news, blogs and statistics online via a PC and 8% via their mobile device, while 31% read newspapers and magazines.
Involvement in and discussion around the Olympics on social networking platforms such as Facebook was also limited with only 12% interacting in this way.
The behaviour of many people who followed the Olympics was markedly different from that of ‘traditional’ sports fans. Whereas they tended to watch live TV in groups, they also interacted via a fairly limited range of touch-points and, unlike ‘true’ sports fans, they did not seem compelled to stay in close touch with the Games wherever they were, nor to consume news, statistics and opinion.
When the flame went out at the end of the closing ceremony, most people reverted to ‘business as usual’ in terms of their attitudes to and involvement in sport.
Future behaviours
Half of non-sports fans do feel that the Olympics showcased London at its best, and 43% believed the Games would have a lasting impact on sport. However, despite this – and the high numbers of non-sports fans in GB who followed the Games – only 6% now say they have been encouraged to start participating more in sport, and only 10% intend to watch it more often on TV.
The study showed that those who were sports fans before the Olympics are more optimistic, with almost a third claiming that the Games has encouraged them to start participating more in a sport.
While interest levels around the Olympics were high, and engagement was strong, that engagement wasn’t particularly deep or long-lasting, especially among people who didn’t usually follow any sport – and so it was seen as a real one-off experience and not a motivator to make people behave differently in the long term.