Attitudes to Digital Television

8/6/2019 Attitudes to Digital Television

1/77

ATTITUDES TO DIGITAL

TELEVISION

Preliminary findings onconsumer adoption ofDigital Television

IN ASSOCIATION WITH

THE GENERICS GROUP


2/77

The DTI drives our ambition ofprosperity for all by working tocreate the best environment forbusiness success in the UK.We help people and companiesbecome more productive bypromoting enterprise, innovationand creativity.

We champion UK business at home and

abroad. We invest heavily inworld-class science and technology.We protect the rights of workingpeople and consumers. And westand up for fair and open marketsin the UK, Europe and the world.


3/77

Attitudes to Digital Television

Preliminary findings on consumer adoption of Digital Television

Prepared for the Digital Television Project by

Dr Jeremy KleinSimon KargerKay Sinclair

The Generics Group

in association with

Ipsos UKKings House

Kymberly RoadHarrow HA1 1PT

7 January 2004

The Generics Group is a leading integrated technology consulting, developmentand investment organisation, with an international reputation for successfully

commercialising emerging science and technology

UK Head Offices:Harston Mill

HarstonCambridge, UKCB2 5GG

Phone: +44 1223 875200Fax: +44 1223 875201

Email: [email protected]

www.genericsgroup.com

Attitudes to Digital Television 7 January 2004
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/77

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 1

1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 8

2 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 9

2.1 Introduction........................................................................................... 92.2 Policy Context....................................................................................... 92.3 DTV Adoption To Date........................................................................ 102.4 Previous And Related Work On DTV Adoption in the UK................... 16

3 WORK UNDERTAKEN................................................................................ 18

3.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 183.2 Consultation........................................................................................ 183.3 Quest Survey...................................................................................... 183.4 Focus Groups ..................................................................................... 19

4 HOW MARKET SEGMENTATION WILL CHANGE OVER TIME ................ 22

4.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 224.2 Voluntary Phase ................................................................................. 234.3 Pre-switchover Phase......................................................................... 244.4 Post-switchover Phase ....................................................................... 24

5 DETAILED SEGMENTATION WITHIN THE VOLUNTARY PHASE............ 25

5.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 255.2 The Six Segments .............................................................................. 265.3 Implications Of These Segments........................................................ 26

6 HOW CONSUMERS FORM THEIR OPINIONS ON DTV............................ 28

6.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 286.2 Key Features Of The Model................................................................ 286.3 Platform Symbolism............................................................................ 316.4 Content Attractiveness........................................................................ 326.5 Equipment Practicality ........................................................................ 32

7 ATTITUDES TO SWITCHOVER.................................................................. 34

8 INTERVENTIONS........................................................................................ 35

8.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 358.2 Mapping Interventions ........................................................................ 358.3 Adopters........................................................................................... 368.4 Could bes ........................................................................................ 378.5 Wont bes......................................................................................... 38

9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................ 39



5/77

APPENDIX A TERMS OF REFERENCE............................................................ 42

APPENDIX B QUEST SURVEY RESULTS........................................................ 43

B.1 The Survey ......................................................................................... 43B.2 The Limitations of Quest..................................................................... 43B.3 Current Status Of DTV Adoption ........................................................ 43B.4 Reasons For Not Yet Having Acquired DTV....................................... 46B.5 Number of DTV Sets........................................................................... 48B.6 The Benefits And Problems Of DTV................................................... 48B.7 Switchover .......................................................................................... 51B.8 Characterising The Wont bes ......................................................... 54

APPENDIX C FOCUS GROUP RESULTS...................................................... 57

C.1 Overview............................................................................................. 57C.2 Summary Of The Six Mindsets ......................................................... 58C.3 Comfortable Adopters ...................................................................... 60C.4 Marginalised Adopters...................................................................... 60C.5 Experimental Adopters..................................................................... 61C.6 Could bes ........................................................................................ 62C.7 Wont bes......................................................................................... 63C.8 Passive Wont bes........................................................................... 63C.9 Active Wont bes.............................................................................. 65

APPENDIX D FOCUS GROUP FORMAT ....................................................... 67

APPENDIX E ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................ 69



6/77

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background

1

2

3

4

5

6

This report was commissioned as part of the human aspects element of theDigital Television Action Plan. It concerns the adoption of digital television(DTV) by households in the UK: why some people decide to switch to DTV,why others decide not to switch, and opportunities for governmentintervention to increase take-up.

The work undertaken in the compilation of this report included:

Consultation: A series of consultations were held with key stakeholders

Quest: A quantitative survey of 4000 typical viewersFocus Groups: Eight consumer focus groups, each comprising seven toeight people with different views on DTV, and with different demographicprofiles.

The Current State of Digital Adoption

The Quest survey in March 2003 showed a penetration of DTV of 38% of UKhouseholds. This was roughly the same statistic as other surveys at the time,thereby validating the Quest sample. The latest statistics indicate that DTVadoption has increased to almost half of all households (MultichannelQuarterly, Q2 2003, ITC)1.

The Quest survey gave demographic data on the types of household thatwere using each platform. We found that Freeview had a different profile tothe other platforms: more over 55s and more ABC1s.

Todays digital viewers have adopted through a combination of variousmechanisms. In most cases, these are unlikely to have been fully voluntary,conscious decisions to adopt DTV as such. Many satellite or cable TVsubscribers made the choice to purchase multi-channel TV with no regard towhether it was digital or analogue. In cases where these viewers now receivetheir signal digitally, if they previously had analogue, they may well have beenprompted to convert by their satellite or cable TV service provider. Onlyrecently, especially with the launch of Freeview, have large numbers of

consumers been making conscious, voluntary decisions to go digital.

Consequently, the past growth in satellite and cable DTV should not besimplistically projected into the future, either for these platforms or forFreeview. Achieving adoption by the remaining 50% of households will be amore difficult task for government and the industry than was the achievementof the current 50%.

1 http://www.itc.org.uk/uploads/ITC_Multichannel_Quarterly__Q2_2003.doc

Attitudes to Digital Television 7 January 2004 Page 1


7/77

Overview of Consumer Attitudes

7

8

Prior to our work, the Go Digital trial had identified a group of consumers whosaid that they could not be persuaded to purchase DTV. This segment hasbecome known as the wont bes. Our quantitative research has establishedthat this segment is approximately 13% of UK households (3.2 million). Whenprobed further, about 6% of existing households (1.5 million) expect nevertobuy digital equipment even if it means stopping watching TV. Thispercentage reflects what people say rather than what they are likely toactually do. Given the possibility of some bravado in peoples statedintentions, we suspect that these hard core resisters will be a smallerpercentage than this.

We have used the Quest data to further quantify consumers intentions as

shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Consumers intentions with respect to DTV

Classification Intentions Percentagefrom Quest

Equivalentnumber of UKhouseholds

Adopter Already have DTV 38% 9,400,000

Likely Intend to get DTVsooner rather than

later

12% 3,000,000

Could be Unlikely to get DTVbut could bepersuaded

29% 7,200,000

Wont be Unlikely to get DTVand cannot bepersuaded

13% 3,200,000

Note: 6% of respondents did not have DTV and did not state their future intentions.Percentages do not total exactly100% due to rounding

9

10

Using the quantitative data from our Quest survey, we have built-up a profileof the wont bes. Of respondents falling into this category, 52% were overthe age of 55 and there was a bias towards the social grades C2DE. Wontbes are more likely to have disabilities (particularly hearing impairment) orhave special needs. In terms of attitudes, they are less convinced thatswitchover will happen; they often cannot see the benefits of digital overanalogue; and they are three times as likely to consider that DTV is not forpeople like me.

Those who have adopted DTV to date have done so in order to receive thecontent on offer and the services that are attractive to them. As such theyhave adopted multi-channel TV rather than DTVper se.



8/77

The Evolution Of The Market Towards Switchover And Beyond

11

12

An important finding of our work has been an understanding of how themarket will change over time. The adoption of DTV is currently a voluntarymatter for consumers. Just as with any product or service, consumers aremaking decisions about whether they want DTV or not; they are not in anyway being forced into DTV. However, once the analogue signal has beenswitched off, people will have to get DTV if they are to continue to watchtelevision. This will have a profound effect on market segmentation. Thecurrent segmentation is based on voluntarism, ranging from people who wantDTV to those who do not. The prospect of switchover will change the basis ofmarket segmentation towards one based on the extent to which people arewilling to go along with the switchover process. Some people will go alongwith switchover, acquiring DTV whether or not they would have chosen itvoluntarily. Others will refuse.

The expected evolution is shown schematically in Figure 1. Ultimately,segments defined principally by consumers compliance with switchover willreplace the existing market-based segments. It is vital to recognise thisevolution in managing the switchover process.

Voluntary

phase

Pre-switchover

phase

Post-switchover

phase

Voluntary

adopters

Likelies

Could bes

Wont bes

Captive

adopters

Voluntary

adopters

Intend to adopt after

switchover

Captive

adopters

Captive

adopters

Voluntary

adopters

Intend to adopt

beforeswitchover

Intend to adopt

Time

Refuse to adoptRefuse to adopt

2003

Figure 1. Hypothesised development of segmentation over time. The relativeproportions are illustrative; they are not intended to be accurate.



9/77

13

14

15

16

17

In late 2003 we are still in the voluntary phase. Government has recently

made the announcement that switchover will definitely take place, but dateshave not been set and public awareness of switchover is still low. However,as the Governments intentions become more widely communicated, themarket will evolve into the pre-switchover phase.

Our consumer research found considerable latent opposition to switchover.Entering the pre-switchover phase may crystallise resistance unless peoplesconcerns are addressed beforehand.

The formation of attitudes to DTV

The focus groups have allowed us to investigate consumer attitudes. In total,we have identified six segments of viewer, as shown in Figure 2.

PassiveWont Be

Could Be

Active WontBe

Marginalised

Adopter

ExperimentalAdopter

Comfortable

Adopter

I am concerned about declining standards.

While I dont think much can be done aboutthis, I would not pay for more of this type of

TV (such as DTV) in my home


While I dont think much can be done about

this, I would not pay for more of this type of


I thought that DTV would offer me

something new and different, but in the end I

watch the same channels and use the TV inthe same way as I always have

I thought that DTV would offer mesomething new and different, but in the end I


While DTV means that my family hasgreater choice, I worry that as everyone goes

their own way we are spending less time

together as a family


their own way we are spending less time

together as a family

DTV meets my needs. It is all about

increased choice and having the most up todate technology


increased choice and having the most up to

date technology

People nowadays spend too much time

watching bad TV rather than talking to eachother and doing family activities. DTV simply

offers more channels of bad TV

People nowadays spend too much timewatching bad TV rather than talking to each

other and doing family activities. DTV simplyoffers more channels of bad TV

I dont really know what DTV is and I am

quite happy watching TV as I have alwayswatched it.


quite happy watching TV as I have alwayswatched it.

Adopters

Could bes

Wont bes

Generics

segmentationGo Digital

segmentation

Figure 2. The six segments

Looking first at adopters we have found that, while some embrace DTV(comfortable adopters), some have had to be convinced by family membersto adopt (marginalised adopters). Furthermore, some have adopted due toincorrect perceptions and expectations and may not be fully satisfied withtheir purchase (experimental adopters).

We have found that the wont bes can be sub-segmented into two groups:those who disagree fundamentally with DTV as a concept but are passive in



10/77

their actions, and those whose strong personal moral values drive them to

more actively oppose DTV.18

19

We have identified a consistent set of thought processes by which peopledetermine their views of DTV. People consider many aspects of DTV,ranging from practical issues like cost through to social issues like the effectof DTV on society. These thought processes are arranged hierarchically, witha higher level only becoming of prime importance once the level below hasbeen overcome, as shown in Figure 3.

Equipment

practicality

Content attractiveness

Platform symbolism

What do DTV platforms

stand for in my valuesystem?

What content does DTV

offer me given my TV

usage and viewing

tastes?

What is necessary to make DTVa reality in my household?

Figure 3. Summary representation of consumer decision-making

Some respondents particularly the wont bes had concerns about what

DTV stands for. Such an assessment draws on peoples value systems, theirviews of TV in general, and on their knowledge of DTV platforms andoperators. People are thinking here not of individual channels but of DTV asa whole. For example, they may ask, is it a good thing for society that thereare hundreds of channels and that people may watch more TV as a result?If they think that multi-channel TV is a Bad Thing, they will tend to opposeDTV. Where they are aware of them, people may view the different platformsand operators differently. DTV platforms and operators are all multi-channelbut not all are pay-TV. Both these characteristics elicit different responses indifferent people. For some people, DTV simply did not represent bettertelevision.



11/77

20

21

22

23

24

1

2

Providing people were not deterred by the platform symbolism, they then

assessed the relevance and attractiveness of DTV channels and content tothem and their households.

Finally, they addressed practical concerns regarding the cost of acquiringDTV, the complexity of installation or the operation of DTV equipment.

The focus groups have shown that these levels of concern relate differently toeach type of viewer. The wont bes have concerns that are primarilyfounded at the level of platform symbolism, whilst the could bes are moreconcerned with the relevance of content and the various practicality issuesthat might face them.

Vitally, we have concluded that these segments are not static. Throughaddressing the individuals at the correct level with the correct message, a

viewers attitudes to DTV can potentially be changed.

However, each segment of viewers requires a specific message and theirindividual concerns must be met appropriately.

RecommendationsWe are able to draw some high-level recommendations from our research.

While the technology, practicality and cost of DTV remain important,attention should now also be given to DTV as an overall proposition sothat DTV becomes more widely interpreted as better television.

Those people that currently reject DTV seem to be rejecting it as an overallproposition. They look at DTV in terms of what DTV platforms and operatorssymbolise for them, and they form value judgements about the programmesand channels available through DTV. For these people, DTV simply does notrepresent better television, even if they acknowledge DTV as bettertechnology.

In coming to a view about whether DTV is better television, people takeaccount of the whole mix of channels, regardless of whether they individuallywould watch them. The continued or expanded provision of what they mayconsider to be high quality content on some channels does not mitigate theeffects of what they may consider to be poor quality content on other

channels. Their judgements are not limited to the public service broadcasting(PSB) channels which are regulated for quality. Given the rapid recent take-up of Freeview, the content of the non-PSB free-to-view channels will beparticularly important in shaping attitudes.

We suggest that this recommendation is considered within the context of therecently announced Review of Public Service Broadcasting.

The rationale for public policy on switchover needs to be updated.

The original policy was created at a time when DTV was just being launched.It is clear from our research that the rationale for the original policy is notwidely understood. Policy needs to be updated to fit current circumstances.



12/77

In 1999, the transition to DTV would probably not have been seen as being

inevitable. Now, with almost 50% of households having at least onetelevision capable of receiving DTV, few people disagree that the transition todigital is an inevitable consequence of technological progress.

This makes a difference. In an updating policy, technology, rather thangovernment objectives, can now be highlighted as the driving force.Government policy can thus be understood as helping to manage aninevitable transition.

3

4

5

6

Alongside publicising this rationale, there is a need for basicinformation on digital television.

This information should cover both the practical issues and the content. Itshould make clear the options for receiving DTV and explain the implications

of each reception route. Any information campaign must also serve to setaccurate expectations of DTV in consumers minds. Information should beprovided in a number of ways to reach the most viewers; a natural way toinform people would be to provide information in conjunction with TV licences.

The potential negative reaction to an imposed switchover should berecognised within the timetabling of the Digital Television Action Plan.

As yet, there has been no public resistance to switchover. However, ourresearch has discovered latent resistance. This latent resistance is toswitching off analogue TV, not to introducing DTV. Indeed, some people whoalready have at least one DTV receiver in their home nonetheless resist

switchover. It is the imposed nature of switchover and the associated coststhat gives people concern.

The absence of public resistance at this point probably results from peoplenot fully believing that analogue will be switched off, not comprehending theimplications for them, and not knowing when it will happen.

The announcement of a switchover timetable could act to crystallise the latentresistance that we have observed. While it is beneficial that governmentdemonstrates to manufacturers and retailers that the UK is committed toswitchover within a defined period, announcing a timetable could have anegative effect on consumers if done without careful preparation. Thepotential for negative reactions should be taken into consideration.

The role of government as the entity which is responsible for setting thepace of switchover needs to be taken on board, together with theresponsibilities that flow from this role.

This means helping people switch over smoothly and cost effectively, andnot leaving the process to market mechanisms alone.

Government involvement in improving the usability and accessibility ofDTV equipment and services should continue, together with efforts toimprove the perception of usability and accessibility.



13/77

1 INTRODUCTION

This report is the second of three reports commissioned as part of a year-longprogramme of research into the human aspects of digital television (DTV) beingundertaken within the UK Digital Television Action Plan (DTAP). The first reportconcerned the usability and accessibility of DTV2. This report presentspreliminary findings on the human aspects of the process of switching over toDTV. It is concerned with understanding why people decide to switch to DTVand, more importantly, why they decide not to switch. Full terms of reference areprovided in Appendix A. The third report, which is due for completion in early2004, will present further findings and analysis, including the results of aprogramme of 1500 consumer interviews.

Our focus from the start has been on non-adopters: people who have said thatthey do not intend to adopt DTV. This group inevitably constitutes a barrier to theGovernments objective of achieving a rapid and largely willing transition to DTV.So there is a particularly strong need to better understand why non-adoptershave taken the position they have. It was envisaged that by better understandingthe barriers to adoption it would be possible to recommend ways of overcomingthem, effectively converting non-adopters sub-group by sub-group.

The report is structured as follows. Chapter2 sets the background for our studyand Chapter3 describes the work we have done. The results of the fieldwork arepresented in detail in Appendices B and C. Chapters 4 to 7 present our analysisof a range of key issues. The first issue concerns the way in which thesegmentation of the market will evolve over the period up to switchover andbeyond. The second issue concerns the market segmentation. The third issueconcerns ways in which consumers form opinions on DTV. Chapter8 thenexplores ways of targeting the market segments given our knowledge of the waysin which consumers form opinions on DTV. Chapter9 then presents ourconclusions and recommendations.

2Digital Television For All: A report on usability and accessible design.

http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/dtv_for_all.html



14/77

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 Introduction

Three pieces of background to our research are discussed in this chapter. Thefirst is the policy context set by Ministers (section 2.2). The second is theprogress on the adoption of DTV so far in the UK (section 2.3). The third is thework already undertaken to understand the human aspects of the adoption ofDTV (section 2.4).

2.2 Policy Context

Current policy was first made public in a speech by Chris Smith, then Secretaryof State for Culture, Media and Sport, to the Royal Television Society inSeptember 1999. Smith painted a compelling picture of the benefits of DTV, andlaid out an ambitious programme for a joint industry/government approach to anearly switchover. The speech suggested that switchover could occur between2006 and 2010.

However, Smith also committed the government to ensuring that terrestrialanalogue broadcasting signals are maintained until:

Everyone who can currently get the main public service broadcastingchannels in analogue form (BBC 1 and 2, ITV, Channel 4/S4C and Five) canreceive them on digital systems;

Switching to digital is an affordable option for the vast majority of people3.

The Government would prefer this transition to happen voluntarily:

Millions of people have decided to change to digital to keep themselvesbetter informed and take part in the changing world around them. Every day,more homes make the change. This has to be a willing decision, people donot want to be pushed, bullied or cajoled. Only a compelling offering will

foster this - a key factor behind our decision on BBC new services and therequirement for the BBC to promote digital television. 4

Nevertheless, voluntary switchover will, at some point be supplemented by thereal prospect of analogue being turned off:

Analogue services will continue for some time, but the Government intendsto switch over fully to digital transmissions. The Government wants to do this

3The target indicator of affordability was that 95% of consumers have access to digital

equipment4

The Government's policies for digital television, Patricia Hewitt and Tessa Jowell, 2003.

http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/ministers_fwd.html



15/77

as soon as possible and expects to do so as early as 2006-2010. Digital

broadcasting makes more efficient use of the limited amount of availablespectrum than the current analogue system. Switching to digitaltransmissions will free up a number of spare frequencies which could then beused for improvements in the digital service or for other uses such as mobilecommunications. 5

It is important to note in the context of public perceptions that people may haveproblems reconciling the voluntaristic approach (people do not want to bepushed, bullied or cajoled) and the more directed approach (Government wantsto do this as soon as possible).

An important milestone in the switchover process was the recent speech by

Tessa Jowell, Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport to the RoyalTelevision Society biennial convention on 18 September 2003. In this speech,Government clearly announced that switchover will happen:

The advantages of digital are such that the question is not whether, buthow and when we will achieve switchover.

We now know that switchover will not happen overnight, but will be aphased process, perhaps over four years: transmitters will have to beconverted, and switchover will happen region by region.

So, we are still on track to complete the process by 2010, if that is what

we decide. Tough but doable, if together we can resolve the many issueswhich remain.

People do understand that some things are so advantageous for the widercommunity that they accept the need to accommodate them.That's where we need to get to with the move to digital. 6

2.3 DTV Adoption To Date

2.3.1 Historical Perspective

At the time of Chris Smiths speech in September 1999, DTV was installed inunder half a million households, a DTV penetration of 2%. The predominantdigital platform at that time was SkyDigital, though the pay-TV service OnDigital(subsequently renamed ITV Digital) had already gained its first customers. Since

5Frequently Asked Questions - http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/faqs.html

6"After the Communications Act" Tessa Jowell, 18 September, 2003 -

http://www.culture.gov.uk/global/press_notices/archive_2003/dcmsspeechbroad_2003.ht

m



16/77

then, DTV has been adopted by almost half of all UK households7. This level of

take-up has been achieved through commercial as opposed to political processes. The adoption of DTV in the UK has been more rapid than mostcommentators predicted, and has lent support to the view that the transition is ontrack:

Doomsayers may suggest we wont meet the target. I would say to themthat if industry can make this much progress on its own, anything ispossible. The strong take-up since the launch of Freeview shows digitaltelevision is a product the public wants. 8

The processes that have led to this level of take-up vary across platform. Thepenetration by platform is shown in Table 2 and the historical growth of adoption

across the different DTV platforms is shown in Figure 4. It can be seen that therate of adoption differs by platform. This is because the processes drivingadoption are different for each platform. The nature of the adoption process foreach platform are discussed in section 2.3.2.

7Multichannel Quarterly, Q2 2003, ITC -

http://www.itc.org.uk/uploads/ITC_Multichannel_Quarterly__Q2_2003.doc8

New Report Shows Good Progress Towards Digital Switchover. Tessa Jowell, 4 April

2003 - http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/press_notices/dcms41_03.html



17/77

Table 2. DTV penetration by reception method, Q2 20039

Platform ReceptionMethod

Number ofHouseholds

Proportionof DTV

households

Proportionof UK

households

Sky STB 6,559,000 58.17% 26.47%Satellite

Satellite FTA 738,900 6.55% 2.98%

Digital cable Cable STB * 2,188,375 19.41% 8.83%

Freeview STB ** 1,397,000 12.39% 5.64%DTT

iDTV 393,000 3.49% 1.59%

Total 11,276,275 100.00% 45.50%

* NTL and Telewest DTV Subscribers** Includes ITV Digital STBs

-

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

Q3,

199

8

Q4,

199

8

Q1,

199

9

Q2,

199

9

Q3,

199

9

Q4,

199

9

Q1,

200

0

Q2,

200

0

Q3,

200

0

Q4,

200

0

Q1,

200

1

Q2,

200

1

Q3,

200

1

Q4,

200

1

Q1,

200

2

Q2,

200

2

Q3,

200

2

Q4,

200

2

Q1,

200

3

Q2,

200

3

Household

s

Analogue satellite Pay digital satellite Free to air satellite Analogue cable

Digital cable DTT (Freeview)

Figure 4. DTV penetration by platform, Q3 1998 to Q2 200310


9Multichannel Quarterly, Q2 2003, ITC -

http://www.itc.org.uk/uploads/ITC_Multichannel_Quarterly__Q2_2003.doc10

Multichannel Quarterly, Q2 2003, ITC -

http://www.itc.org.uk/uploads/ITC_Multichannel_Quarterly__Q2_2003.doc


18/77

2.3.2 Platform-By-Platform Description

Satellite (Sky)

Satellite TV signals can be received by virtually every home in the UK through theinstallation of a dish, some internal wiring and a set top box. There are now twoways to receive satellite TV. One is to subscribe to the Sky Digital pay-TVservice, in which case the installation is normally part of the subscriptionpackage. It is also possible to receive the BBC suite of channels, which are nowbeing broadcast unencrypted.

Sky Digital is run by British Sky Broadcasting (BSkyB). Sky is primarily apremium content service provider. As such, Skys target customers purchase the

service by subscription. Since its launch in 1989 Sky has experienced stronggrowth in subscribers. According to BSkyBs figures, there are some 6.7 millionSky subscribers in the UK11.

In 1998 Sky commenced a programme (running for approximately three years) toconvert their subscribers from analogue to digital the Sky Digital service. Skyanalogue was closed down completely on September 27th 2001. While this wasa managed switchover process, with existing customers being given no optionbut to convert, the equipment costs were largely borne by Sky and the net cost tocustomers was small. However the increase in the number of channels available,and the introduction of interactive services, was a perceived benefit to itscustomers.

As shown in Figure 4, approximately 3.5 million of the current Sky Digitalcustomers (about half) can be thought of as captive adopters in that they firstmade the decision to switch to multi-channel pay-TV and only subsequentlyallowed their analogue equipment to be replaced by digital. Thus, these viewerscannot be thought of as having voluntarily adopted DTV. To these consumersthe decision was to choose multi-channel TV and pay for premium content. Theirsubsequent conversion to DTV was not only a means to an end, but was alsoenforced by Sky.

Figure 4 also shows that a small but growing number of viewers had adopted

DTV through Skys Free-to-Air (FTA) service. This service provided BBC1,BBC2, ITV1, Channel 4 and Five with no monthly subscription using a Soluscard. This means of adoption was not actively promoted by Sky; it was a little-known option that required professional installation at the viewers cost. In May2003, the BBC moved its digital satellite services from the Astra 2A satellite toAstra 2D. The new satellite has a tighter footprint, covering the UK and Republicof Ireland, with some spill over into France and Benelux, so the BC decided tobroadcast these channels unencrypted. As a result of these changes, it becamepossible to view BBC services on digital satellite free to air without the need for aviewing card.

11 BSkyB Press Release, 14 November 2003



19/77

Cable TV

There are two main cable TV companies in the UK Telewest and NTL. Digitalcable accounts for 19.8% of all households with DTV12. The population of digitalcable viewers is made up of both new digital customers and customers that haveconverted from analogue cable TV. Whereas Sky took under three years toconvert all its customers, the cable TV companies pursued digital conversion lessaggressively. Around a third of cable TV customers still have analogue. Part ofthe reason for the slower conversion is that some parts of the cable networksneed to be physically upgraded before they can offer digital services.

The digital cable offering should be considerably more attractive to viewers thanthe analogue one. For example, analogue cable has no EPG and often has farfewer channels.

The conversion process can be understood in similar terms to Sky. Many digitalcable adopters have been captive in the same way and their conversion has notbeen entirely self-initiated. As with Sky, the conversion to digital cable fromanalogue cable typically imposed only small costs on consumers.

Digital Terrestrial TV (DTT)

Compared to the other two platforms, DTT has had a number of problems andhas only recently taken off. DTT was first launched in 1998 as OnDigital.OnDigital offered a premium, subscription-based service providing access tomulti-channel TV, plus a suite of free-to-view channels, through the aerial. This

service was thus in direct competition with Sky and cable TV. The basicsubscription package wasnt much less expensive than that offered by Sky, but itoffered fewer channels. The service was seen as suffering from receptionproblems. In 2001 OnDigital was renamed ITV Digital. Based on the samebusiness model, ITV Digital fared little better and in May 2002 went intoadministration. Despite the poor reputation of DTT as a platform, the ITCreceived six proposals for the three multiplex licences previously held by ITVDigital. The ITC reallocated the three licences previously held by ITV Digital, oneawarded to the BBC, and two to Crown Castle International. A joint venturebetween the BBC, BSkyB and Crown Castle was set up to market DTT under theumbrella brand Freeview. Freeview, launched on 30 October 2002, offered arelatively limited number of channels (30 TV and 16 digital radio) for a oneoff

cost of a set top box (100 or less) and, in some cases, a new aerial.

In the 12 months since the launch of Freeview, the service is generallyrecognised as a success. Over 1.8 million homes in the UK now have a DTT settop box or IDTV. Although approximately 600,000 are believed to be receivingDTT services through the old OnDigital and ITV Digital set top boxes, currentsales of DTT set top boxes are running at 55,000 per week13.

12Multichannel Quarterly, Q1 2003, ITC

13 http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,1074338,00.html



20/77


21/77

2.4 Previous And Related Work On DTV Adoption in the UK

2.4.1 Overview

There have been three key previous studies into some of the human aspects ofDTV:

Human Aspects Scoping Study A scoping study into the key humanfactors facing the switchover process. This study was led by Professor LeelaDamodaran at Loughborough University.

Go Digital Commissioned by a consortium of industry stakeholders, the ITC

and Ipsos-RSL installed digital television equipment in 300 homes in theMidlands. The aim was to understand consumers responses to DTV throughpersonal experience.

Easy TV Carried out by the ITC and i2Media, Easy TV was commissionedto understand the attitudinal factors that determine consumers views of DTV.

2.4.2 Human Aspects Scoping Study

The work carried out by Damodaran et al15 was commissioned by the DigitalTelevision Project (DTP) as an initial scoping study to examine management ofthe key human aspects of the switchover to digital-only broadcasting. This studyinvestigated six main areas:

Stakeholders and their requirements

Promoting public uptake

Equipment design (designing for inclusion)

The human issues for e-business and the economy

The transition process

Existing knowledge resources.

As a result of this study, the Loughborough University team made a series ofrecommendations to the DTP. It is as a result of this work that the current studywas commissioned.

15Analogue to Digital Switchover: Human Aspects to adoption, A Scoping Study for the

Digital Television Project CRSP456 A consortium led by Professor Leela Damodaran

Loughborough University - http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/pdfs/scoping_study.pdf



22/77

2.4.3 Go Digital

The Go Digital project was run during 2002. The project was commissioned by aconsortium of key stakeholders in the digital television industry includingmanufacturers, broadcasters, government and independent industry bodies.

The goal of the project was to understand consumers responses to a fully digitalexperience. A sample comprising approximately 300 homes in the Midlandswere converted to DTV through a combination of platforms (cable, satellite,terrestrial). The responses of the households to DTV were monitored throughoutthe study.

A key finding of the trial was the warming of attitude among 93% of household

decision makers who had previously been classified as rejecters before the trialonce they had had actual experience of DTV. The study also showed that thereis a proportion of the population for whom digital is not sufficiently attractive andwho show no inclination to adopt. This remained the case for some people evenafter they had experienced the system at no cost for a period of three months.

The findings from the Go Digital study have been very influential in building aconsensus among the DTI, Independent Television Commission (ITC) andindustry about the types of issue that need to be addressed when trying tounderstand DTV adoption. In particular, the way in which the Go Digital projectdescribed the segmentation of the market has endured, and has also informedour study.

2.4.4 Easy TV

Easy TV comprised two studies carried out by the ITC and i2Media.

The first was a usability experiences survey. The survey showed that relative toanalogue TV, DTV is perceived to be difficult to use. The authors argued that thepotential benefits that DTV can bring to those sections of society who currentlylack access to interactive information services are unlikely to be realised if DTVequipment and services are not easy to use, and perceived as such. Theywarned that low ease of use, or even perceptions of low ease of use, might

constitute a significant barrier to the take-up of DTV.

The second was a consumer segmentation study based on 13 attitudinal scalesrelating to: technology, media consumption, and digital and interactive TV. Usingcluster analysis the researchers identified seven types of media consumer whichthey labelled: Strong Resisters, Telly Traditionalists, Swung by the Offer,Discerning Viewers, Busy Professionals, TV Families, and TechnologyEnthusiasts. The goal of the study was to address ease of use issues for thedifferent types of media consumer. It was not part of the brief to look at how thedifferent attitudinal groups could be won over to DTV.



23/77

3 WORK UNDERTAKEN

3.1 Introduction

The findings in this report are based on a three-stage programme of researchinvestigating the human aspects of DTV and its adoption.

Quest Survey & AnalysisMarch June 03

Questionnaire survey of 4000 typical

viewers

March 03 August 03

Focus Groups (incl Preparation &

Analysis)June - August 03

Eight consumer focus groups investigating attitudes

ConsultationsMarch June 03

Including manufacturers, broadcasters,government & representative organisations

June 03

Figure 5. Our three-stage programme of research

3.2 Consultation

The nation-wide adoption of DTV will necessarily depend on the involvement of awide spectrum of stakeholders, ranging from consumers to manufacturers tocontent providers. We sought the views of these stakeholders through formalmeetings with representatives of 36 organisations and at least as many informalmeetings. A full list of the organisations and individuals consulted is included inthe acknowledgements, Appendix E.

3.3 Quest Survey

The purpose of the Quest survey was to provide quantitative information aboutthe TV viewers attitudes to DTV and preparedness for switchover.

This survey was conducted by means of a self-completion multiple choice postalquestionnaire completed between March 17 and March 23 2003. In total over4000 respondents aged 16 or over completed the questionnaire, and weighting

was implemented to ensure that they were fully representative of the UK



24/77

population in terms of key demographic variables. The questionnaire covered

many aspects of DTV and the roles it may play in respondents lives.

The survey enabled us to quantify many aspects of the adoption of DTV. Theresults are summarised in Appendix B.

Following the focus group research we used Quest again to research andquantify some attitudes to switchover that had been expressed in the focusgroups. This survey was undertaken in July 2003. These results are alsopresented in Appendix B.

3.4 Focus Groups

3.4.1 Purpose

The purpose of the focus groups was to provide a qualitative understanding ofthe way in which people generate their views on DTV. While we were particularlykeen to understand the thinking process that leads people to reject DTVcompletely, we also decided to look at people who had already adopted andthose who thought that they may be persuaded but had no plans to adopt withinthe next 12 months. By doing this we were able to understand the way in whichdifferent opinions come to be held across the population.

3.4.2 Composition

Eight focus groups were held with seven to eight people in each group. Thecomposition of the focus groups was planned in order to give a spread of differentages, socio-economic groups, geographical locations and attitudes to DTVadoption (see Table 3). The participants were entirely independent from theQuest survey respondents.



25/77

Table 3. Composition of the focus groups

Attitude to DTVadoption

Age Socio- economicgroup

Location

1 Wont be 25-45 BC1 London

2 Wont be 46-65 C2D Nottingham

3 Could be 25-45 C2D Nottingham

4 Could be 46-65 BC1 London

5 Adopter 25-45 BC1 Nottingham

6 Adopter 46-65 C2D London

7 Could be 65+ C2D London

8 Adopter 65+ BC1 Nottingham

Attitude to DTV adoption was based on the categorisation previously developedas part of the Go Digital Project (see section 2.4.3). This categorisation definedfour possible attitudes to DTV:

Adopters Those who have already adopted DTV in some form on atleast one TV in the home

Likelies Those who have an expressed desire to adopt DTV and areexpected to adopt within the next 12 months

Could bes Those who may be persuaded but have no plans to adoptwithin the next 12 months

Wont bes Those who have no interest in adopting DTV in theforeseeable future

In our programme, the three adopters groups acted as a comparison andrevealed motivations for adoption. The likelies group were not included as theywere not seen to present a barrier to switchover. Three could bes groups wereincluded as they were expected to include the broadest range of views andconcerns both for and against DTV. While they were critical to this phase ofthe research, only two groups of wont bes were included. This was becausewe feared that the wont bes would have fixed views which would not be easilyprobed within a focus group context.

The demographic composition of the groups was chosen as follows. The threeage groups were chosen to reflect age bands which are appropriate forresearching television consumption generally. Contrasting BC1 and C2D allowedthe effect of socio-economic group to be studied. Groups A and E were excludedbecause they represented extremes. To investigate the effect of location, thefocus groups were conducted in two locations London and Nottingham.

In all groups, we only invited people if they were solely or jointly responsible forthe decision about purchasing TV equipment in their household. We aimed for amix of men and women, and all had to be existing television owners.



26/77

Viewers for whom cost was their primary reason for resistance were also

excluded from the research. This was due to cost being an umbrella barrierwhich would prevent the discovery and understanding of the other barriers.

3.4.3 Structure

The structure of the research was designed to abstract the required informationwithout giving leading questions to the participants. The aim was to understandthe following:

The pre-existing level of DTV awareness and understanding.Participants were not told that the research was about DTV. It was importantbefore any mention of the specific topic of the research to explore how much

DTV was already present or absent from participants lives. For example, hadthey encountered any form of advertising or experienced DTV at a friendshouse? If so, what was their understanding of what DTV offers and howrelevant was this experience to them?

The awareness and understanding of switchover.It was critical to understand if the respondents had heard of switchover beforethe focus groups. What information and messages they had remembered,how they had interpreted them and subsequently how did they believeswitchover may affect their lives?

The role of television in their lives and how DTV maps onto this.We wanted to put peoples views of DTV in the context of their currentfeelings about television and where it fits into their lives.

More detail on the structure of the focus groups is provided in Appendix D.



27/77

4 HOW MARKET SEGMENTATION WILL CHANGE OVER

TIME

4.1 Introduction

Managing the switchover process is dependent on understanding peoplesattitudes to DTV. Only by understanding peoples views on DTV and their fearsand concerns will it be possible to put across the right messages and ensure thatno one is left behind. Much of the research work for this report has been framedaround the attitudinal segmentation arising out of the Go Digital Project (seesection 2.4.3 for an explanation of Go Digital and section 3.4.2 for thesegmentation that was developed.

An important finding from our work is that the Go Digital segmentation onlyapplies to the current, voluntary, phase of switchover. From our investigation ofattitudes to switchoverspecifically rather than attitudes to digital TV we haverealised that the market segmentation will change fundamentally over the courseof the transition to DTV. We have shown how the segmentation may develop inFigure 6. The proportions in the diagram are illustrative because we have notresearched the future proportions in our work to date.

We see the transition to DTV occurring in three phases which are described

below.



28/77

Voluntary

phase

Pre-switchover

phase

Post-switchover

phase

Voluntaryadopters

Likelies

Could bes

Wont bes

Captive

adopters

Voluntary

adopters

Intend to adopt after

switchover

Captive

adopters

Captive

adopters

Voluntary

adopters

Intend to adopt

before

switchover

Intend to adopt

Time

Refuse to adoptRefuse to adopt

2003

Figure 6. Hypothesised development of segmentation over time. The relativeproportions are illustrative; they are not intended to be accurate.

4.2 Voluntary Phase

The first phase is the current one in which the adoption of DTV is an entirelyvoluntary matter, driven by market forces and with little overt pressure fromgovernment as far as the consumer is concerned. In this voluntary phase, the

segmentation of peoples intentions are defined in relation to the product itself: dopeople want it or not?

We expect the Go Digital segments described above exist only in relation to thevoluntary phase of digital adoption. Once switchover becomes widely understoodand expected, the segmentation will change. The trigger for the transition to thesecondphase, which we callpre-switchover, could be caused by a widelyreported ministerial announcement, or by greater attention to switchover in themedia, or by a combination of the two. Whatever the trigger, the differencebetween the twophases is that consumers will consciously expect switchoverand believe that it will affect them and their households rather than think of it assomething uncertain and in the far distant future. Though the Government has



29/77

now stated its definite intention to switch off the analogue signal (see section

2.2), we cannot be sure thatpublicawareness is high enough that we are yet inthe pre-switchoverphase.

4.3 Pre-switchover Phase

Once switchover is widely expected in this way, the segmentation of those whohave not yet adopted will start to get defined in relation to switchover.We cannot know for certain how the segmentation will evolve but our expectationis that:

some people will intend to adopt before switchover

some will refuse to adopt before switchover but will intend to soon after

others will refuse ever to adopt the hard core resisters.

Because we are not yet in this pre-switchover phase, and because the way inwhich government and the media will present it is yet to be seen, the proportionscan only be inferred at this stage:

The majority will have adopted before switchover or expect to wait untilswitchover before they buy digital equipment.

Only 6% of existing households (1.5 million) expect to be hard core resistersand neverbuy digital equipment even if it means stopping watching TV. This

percentage, gained through our Quest research, reflects what people sayrather than what they are likely to actually do. Given the possibility of somebravado in peoples stated intentions, we suspect that the hard core resisterswill be a smaller percentage than this.

The eventual proportion of resisters at the point of switchover will be influencedby many factors including communication campaigns, timing and politics.

4.4 Post-switchover Phase

In the post-switchover phase, the segmentation will change yet again:

some people will intend to adopt when they are able

others will continue to resist.

We have no way of estimating the size of these segments at this stage.



30/77

5 DETAILED SEGMENTATION WITHIN THE VOLUNTARY

PHASE

5.1 Introduction

This report is principally concerned with consumer attitudes within the voluntaryphase, rather than the pre- and post- switchover phases, which will be the subjectof our third report. The main purpose of the focus group research was tounderstand at a deeper level how consumers come to their views about DTV.We hoped that by better understanding consumer thinking it would be possible toelaborate on the segmentation originally developed in the process of the GoDigital trial. Note that whereas the Quest research aimed to probe households,the focus groups probed individuals. Household behaviour cannot be assumedto be identical to individual behaviour because there may be more than oneindividual in a household.

The focus groups did indeed allow us to understand consumers better. It hadpreviously been assumed that consumers decision making was based on arelative assessment of pros and cons. Consumers who perceive a greater weightof benefits than problems, would be expected to adopt DTV and consumers whoperceive the converse would be expected to reject DTV. This calculus doesappear to be occurring (see Appendix B.6), but the focus groups also showed

that the deeper-rooted attitudes about DTV were the product of strongly-heldoutlooks on television and that these in turn relate to social attitudes.

Accordingly, we believe, a persons response to DTV should be understood in thecontext of their mindset on life. Because all information received about DTV isfiltered through this mindset, any attempts to encourage adoption need toacknowledge the underlying outlook. Without this understanding, communicationruns the risk of failing to address the real issues. The focus group researchsuggested that, in some instances, reported concerns such as difficulty of use orcost are simply rationalisations, which hide the real, under-the-surface concerns.

Prior to the focus groups it was assumed that the wont bes were simply a more

extreme form of the could bes, and that adopters are people who havecrossed the threshold. In other words, each main segment fell along a continuumin the adoption process. By analysing the attitudes expressed by focus groupparticipants, we have concluded that six distinct segments can be identified.Each of these new segments represents a partiular outlook on the role of digitaltelevision, and television more generally. The next section summarises thesemindsets16.

16While the focus groups were conducted in two cities we did not find any differences

between the attitudes expressed in the two locations.



31/77

5.2 The Six Segments

Figure 7 illustrates the new segmentation in comparison to the original three GoDigital segments covered in the focus groups (note that we did not includelikelies; see section 3.4.2 for an explanation). The original adopter segmenthas been split into comfortable adopters, marginalised adopters andexperimental adopters. The original wont bes segment has been split intopassive wont bes and active wont bes.

Passive

Wont Be

Could Be

Active Wont

Be

Marginalised

Adopter

Experimental

Adopter

ComfortableAdopter








something new and different, but in the end Iwatch the same channels and use the TV in

the same way as I always have


something new and different, but in the end I


While DTV means that my family has

greater choice, I worry that as everyone goes

their own way we are spending less timetogether as a family


their own way we are spending less timetogether as a family

DTV meets my needs. It is all aboutincreased choice and having the most up to

date technology


increased choice and having the most up todate technology

People nowadays spend too much timewatching bad TV rather than talking to each

other and doing family activities. DTV simplyoffers more channels of bad TV

People nowadays spend too much time

watching bad TV rather than talking to eachother and doing family activities. DTV simply

offers more channels of bad TV


quite happy watching TV as I have always

watched it.

I dont really know what DTV is and I amquite happy watching TV as I have always

watched it.

Adopters

Could bes

Wont bes

Generics

segmentationGo Digital

segmentation

Figure 7. The new segmentation

Within the six bubbles in the diagram we have included statements whichcharacterise how a person in each segment might express their views if askedabout DTV. These statements characterise what several people said in the focusgroup discussions.

5.3 Implications Of These Segments

Our initial assumption was that attitudes to DTV would be a fairly simple matter ofpeoples attitudes to technology and their personal assessment of how useful

DTV would be to them, relative to the costs involved. The segmentation we



32/77

uncovered emphasises, however, that attitudes to DTV are based primarily on

views about society and the role of television within it. For example, the viewwhich defines the active wont bes, is a criticism of the volume of televisionwatched and the perceived declining moral standards represented in someprogramming.

These different segments give an insight into the different consumer mindsetsthat will need to be taken account in communications campaigns and any othergovernment interventions (see chapter8)



33/77

6 HOW CONSUMERS FORM THEIR OPINIONS ON DTV

6.1 Introduction

The research undertaken by Generics and others has revealed that peoplesresponses to DTV are complex. Faced with the same advertising about DTV,some people will be attracted, others will be uninterested and still others mayeven be alienated. Peoples concerns are wide ranging. For example, they mayhave concerns over the practical problems of receiving DTV, worries about thecontent, doubts about the consequences of having more channels and possiblyof watching more TV, and reactions to the principle of having to spend their own

money in order to switch to digital in a time-scale not of their choosing.

We have devoted a lot of effort to trying to unpack peoples responses to DTV.In doing this we have developed a simple model which attempts to explain howconsumers generate opinions about DTV. By doing this, it gives some insightinto the processes underlying the segmentation: why, for example, someonebecomes a wont be or a could be.

6.2 Key Features Of The Model

The core assertion of the model is that consumers make up their minds aboutDTV by looking at three different levels platform symbolism, contentattractiveness and equipment practicality which are arranged hierarchically inthree levels (Figure 8). In the hierarchy, people must be satisfied with a lowerlevel in order to progress to the next level up.

Equipment

practicality


Platform symbolism

What do DTV platforms

stand for in my value

system?

What content does DTVoffer me given my TV

usage and viewing

tastes?

What is necessary to make DTV

a reality in my household?

Figure 8. Three levels of decision-making



34/77

In this model, consumers first have to be comfortable with what DTV stands foras an overall proposition. Making this assessment draws on peoples valuesystems, their views of TVper se, and on their knowledge of DTV. People arethinking here not of individual channels but of DTV as a whole. For example,they may ask, is it a good thing for society that there are hundreds of channelsand that people may watch more TV as a result? If they think that multi-channelTV is a Bad Thing, they will tend to oppose DTV.

Where they are aware of them, people may view the different platformsdifferently. DTV platforms are all multi-channel and some are pay-TV. Boththese characteristics elicit different responses in different people. An importantimplication of this, which we return to later, is that the different platforms have

different characters. Freeview because it is free and has a relatively limitednumber of channels - could usefully be distinguished from the other platforms.Where people are not aware of the different platforms they would be expected tolump them together, failing to appreciate, for example, that they are not all pay-TV.

The next level in the model concerns the attractiveness or usefulness of channelcontent. People assess whether DTV and the content and services it offers isrelevant and useful to them and their households. In making this assessment,people compare what they know about DTV channels with their own viewingtastes.

Finally they consider whether that they will be able to cross the practical hurdlesof purchasing, installing and using the equipment.

Although this three-level model is clearly a simplification, it does provide a usefulbasis from which to start to explain how the population segmentation arises out ofindividual decision making. These mechanisms are shown in Figure 9.



35/77

Equipment

practicality

test

Content

attractiveness test

Platform symbolism test

Wont be

Likely

100% of Population

Adopter

Could be

Figure 9. Origins of the segmentation

The rejection of DTV, or a decision not to adopt it, can occur at any level at thelevel of what DTV platforms symbolise, at the level of the relevance andusefulness of channel content, and at the level of practicality. The focus groupsessions suggested that by far the biggest group of wont bes are those whoreject DTV at the level of symbolism: what they think DTV stands for.

We shall be suggesting that the model exposes a gap between the way in whichDTV has hitherto been presented and addressed by government and the

industry, and the way in which consumers think about DTV. Understandably, thebulk of effort, particularly under the Digital Television Action Plan, has been at thetop of this hierarchy trying to make DTV a practical option and helping toportray its utility. Having helped solve many of the practical obstacles, and with agrowing awareness of the utility of DTV, attention now needs to be given to thesymbolism of DTV and its different platforms. Most of the wont bes seem to berejecting DTV at the level of what DTV platforms symbolise.

To further explain the model and its implications we will discuss each level inturn.



36/77

6.3 Platform Symbolism

The key finding of our focus groups was that, in the case of the wont bes,peoples rejection of DTV is primarily a result of rejecting what DTV stands for intheir minds: its symbolism. DTV and indeed any multi-channel TV is oftenassociated in rejecters minds with consumerism, permissiveness (e.g. violence,sexuality), the Americanisation of culture and a breakdown in family values.Fundamentally, many of these people feel that TV needs to be kept in its properplace and that more TV is a bad thing for society. Importantly, attitudes to DTVare linked here to attitudes to TV in general particularly to multi-channel TV. Ifcurrent TV is seen to have degenerated, and if this degeneration is associatedparticularly with multi-channel TV, then nationwide adoption of DTV will be seenas even more undesirable.

For all but the comfortable adopters, the segments are at least partially criticalof current TV. The comfortable adopters tend to see multi-channel TV ashaving fragmented family viewing. Experimental adopters and could bes areoften dissatisfied with aspects of current TV. The wont bes are usually highlycritical of TV and its presumed effects.

There is a marked contrast between these concerns and the symbolismhistorically promoted by government. Chris Smiths speech spoke of the digitaldream, a digital revolution, and the way in which DTV signals the end oftelevision as broadcasting and the beginning of electronic communication as aseamless web which transcends the old distinctions between TV, computer andphone. Smith also positioned DTV as a plank in the UKs aspiration to lead theworld in digital technology. Chris Smiths speech was made on the eve of theMillennium and in the context of the Dot Com bubble which at that stage showedno sign of bursting.

Subsequent ministers have reinforced much the same messages: The future iseven brighter - today's cutting edge and pilot services already offer health advice,shopping, education, holidays, text messages, email, auctions, games and fooddelivered to your home.17

Our Quest research has shown that only one quarter of people are attracted by

the digital revolution messages. We think that there is a gulf between thepositive symbolic representation of DTV as usually promoted by government andthe negative symbolic representation of DTV which is driving rejection. For somepeople, the positive symbolism is in itself a barrier. For people who want to sitback and enjoy TV just for entertainment and relaxation, the prospect of usingtheir TVs for education and health advice is unappealing. As a result, it is vitalthat the messages that are put across to consumers draw on a positive andcurrent symbolism, and that the messages are designed to address the concernsof each of the different segments appropriately.

17The Government's policies for digital television, Patricia Hewitt and Tessa Jowell.http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/ministers_fwd.html



37/77

6.4 Content Attractiveness

The content attractiveness level shows the extent to which household decision-makers perceive relevance and usefulness (ie, utility) in DTV. Unlike thesymbolic level which looks at DTV in the context of personal values and thepresumed needs of society as a whole, this level is concerned with DTV as itaffects individual households. This level is important once people overcomebarriers at the symbolic level and are now looking at whether DTV is somethingfor them.

Those people that reject or do not adopt DTV in this level fall into two groups.The first group comprises people who reject DTV incorrectly because theywould find it useful if they had it. For this group, the solution is through better

information or personal experience. The other group rejects DTV correctlybecause for them, there is nothing that DTV offers that they value over and abovethat offered by existing analogue services. For this group the solution wouldhave to be a change in the digital offer.

We have not yet undertaken detailed research on peoples view of the content ofDTV. (Such research will form part of our third report) However, there arerelevant findings in both our initial research and others that imply that theproportion of the population for whom DTV has no utility is small. The Go Digitalproject showed that 81% of people who were doubtful beforehand were positiveafter experiencing DTV. Our Quest survey showed that by and large, people whohave got DTV perceive it to be useful. They like the extra channels, the bettersound and vision and the interactivity. So, while there is evidence that DTV isuseful and relevant to most of the population, there remains perhaps a fewpercent of the population for whom DTV is not useful and relevant.

Because the utility of DTV is primarily the additional channels, the spotlight mustalso fall on content - the portfolio of channels offered through the cable, Sky andFreeview platforms. Government has no direct control over these portfolios.However, it does have a role with respect to public service broadcasting ingeneral, and it has to approve new licence fee-funded public services.

The utility level of DTV particularly that of content needs to be addressed

within the switchover process. Government needs a way of talking about thecontent of DTV as well as the technology of DTV. One way to do this might be toshow that DTV is a way to enhance public service broadcasting. Ideally, thereneeds to be an effort to provide and promote content for all within DTV. Thepromotion has to be carefully balanced because greater choice and varietyconstitute barriers for some people.

6.5 Equipment Practicality

There are numerous practical problems which could prevent people from usingand enjoying DTV. These include cost, which is cited as a barrier by over 20% of

current non-adopters. Equally, there are numerousperceivedpractical problems,



38/77

and these perceptions can have an equally damaging effect. Our research has

shown that DTV is perceived to be difficult for many people to use18

and Easy TVmade similar findings. There has been a lot of progress within the DTV ActionPlan to help manufacturers improve the usability of their equipment and to makeit accessible to people with special needs.

While there should be improvements in ease of use as the manufacturersimprove their products and start to implement the recommendations producedunder the DTV Action Plan, these improvements need to be widely perceived ifpeople are not to reject DTV incorrectly on practical grounds.

Where there are residual practicality problems, then provided that people canperceive utility, many people will be motivated to tolerate a certain level of

practical barriers.

Our research to date suggests that practicality is not a key dimension of rejectionfor the population as a whole. However, the elderly, special needs segments andpeople with little understanding of technology face additional problems in usingDTV equipment, and government involvement will therefore continue to benecessary.

18Digital Television For All: A report on usability and accessible design.

http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/pdfs/Digital_TV_for_all.pdf



39/77

7 ATTITUDES TO SWITCHOVER

Our research has shown that the imposed character of switchover generatessets of concerns that are distinct from those relating to DTV itself. Imposedswitchover raises a set of concerns which have the capacity to create a strongtendency towards rejection.

Our Quest research shows that 70-80% of people feel angry at governmentforcing them to switch, and are suspicious of governments motives, which aregenerally not well understood. Some of the people who feel angry are alreadyDTV adopters, so for them the question of imposed switchover is separate fromthe issue of DTVper se. Again, there appears to be a gulf between governmentand consumers which needs to be addressed well before switchover dates are

determined and then made public.

Nevertheless, almost half the population recognises the inevitability of DTVbecause they see it as the result of technological progress. The focus groupsshowed that the could bes were tolerant of such progress. Older people, too,have seen a lot of change in their lives, and seem to expect further change evenif they do not particularly relish it. This implies that switchover would be moretolerated if represented more as something technologically inevitable instead ofsomething in which government is the prime mover.

Imposed switchover places certain expectations on government in peoplesminds. For example, 75% think that it is irresponsible of the government to allowpeople to continue buying analogue TVs if they are intending to switch to DTV.Of course, analogue TVs will still have a place after switchover, so the solutionhere might be for better information tied to equipment labeling. This exampledoes illustrate, however, that in the pre-switchover phase, if government is seenas driving and setting the pace for switchover, then people will also expectgovernment to help them switch over smoothly and cost-effectively.



40/77

8 INTERVENTIONS

8.1 Introduction

This study has identified three new ways of thinking about UK consumers inrespect of their voluntary adoption of digital television:

The first is a way of characterising the different phases by which switchoverwill progress, starting with the current voluntary phase, moving on to a pre-switchover phase in which consumers will be more consciously aware ofswitchover, and then forward to the post-switchover phase in which non-

adopters would not be able to watch television (see Chapter4).

The second is a new market segmentation for the voluntary phase. Bysplitting up the previously used Go Digital segments into sub-segments, thissegmentation allows us to think more specifically and accurately about themarket (see Chapter5)

The third is a model of consumer decision making which combinesconsumers criteria of platform symbolism, content attractiveness andequipment practicality. It asserts that the most trenchant rejection of digitaltelevision is the result of rejection at the level of symbolism what digitaltelevision stands for in peoples minds rather than content attractiveness orpracticality (see Chapter6).

The purpose of this section is to pull together these insights into some generalguidance for potential government intervention. Given that we are still in thevoluntary phase, this chapter concentrates on potential interventions during thephase of voluntary adoption. Essentially we have considered what forms ofintervention will be most important for each segment.

8.2 Mapping Interventions

Figure 10 summarises our view of the priorities for government intervention. The

diagram shows the levels at which different segments should be addressed. Forexample, marginalised adopters should be addressed at the symbolic levelwhereas could bes should be addressed at all levels. The sections below givemore detail for the six market segments.



41/77

Platform symbolism


Equipment practicality

Activewont

be

Passivewont

be

Experimental

adopter

Marginalised

adopter

Comfortable

adopter

Wont BeCould

Be

Adopter

Key : Blank Not a key target for intervention - Low level of intervention should be considered

- Priority for government attention

Figure 10. Mapping of intervention priorities

8.3 Adopters

Although members of this group have already adopted DTV, successfulswitchover will rely upon them continuing to convert their remaining analogueequipment. Their preparedness to do this will depend both upon their satisfactionwith DTV to date and on the expected benefit from being able to receive the

same content and services elsewhere in the home. The pace of conversion willdepend on the circumstances of each individual household such as the numberof analogue devices and on patterns of viewing.

8.3.1 Comfortable Adopters

Members of this group have adopted because of the choice, content and serviceadvantages offered by DTV. They have not displayed any negative symbolicobjections in their adoption process to date. comfortable adopters are alreadyfamiliar with the advantages of DTV and so are likely to have an inherent interestin expanding reception around the home. They may be interested in enhanced

services offered by new technologies such as Personal Video Recorders (PVRs).As a result, members of this group are more likely to upgrade their systemsfrequently in order to gain the benefits of new developments.

Comfortable adopters will be encouraged to continue to convert their analogueequipment by emphasising utility and overcoming practical problems. This groupwill be most swayed by new content, new services and new products. Supplierswill find this group attractive so market forces should work efficiently.Accordingly, there is little that government needs to do for the comfortableadopters.



42/77

8.3.2 Marginalised Adopters

While members of this group have accepted conversion to digital for the main set,they are likely to feel dubious about the proliferation of DTV throughout theirhomes. This reluctance is primarily at the symbolic level, relating to theincreasing pervasiveness of TV and to the possible effects on family life.

Family-level symbolic objections must be addressed for this group. Marginalisedadopters will need to be assured that DTV remains a positive phenomenon,perhaps by highlighting of the educational nature of DTV and its role as aninformation source.

8.3.3 Experimental Adopters

Although members of this group have already adopted DTV, they do notnecessarily feel that DTV offers sufficient benefit beyond analogue TV. As such,they will not necessarily convert additional sets. Where they do adopt, theiracceptance is likely to be driven by an assessment of benefits. In looking atbenefits, experimental adopters will draw on their experiences so far.

This group must therefore become convinced of the value of the equipment theyhave already installed, and the services to which they have access. Likely to becentred on high quality and appropriate content, these adopters need to beencouraged to move beyond their traditional viewing habits. In addition, the

simplicity and usability of the systems must be maximised in order to enablethese users to fully appreciate the advantages DTV can offer.

8.4 Could bes

Members of the could be group can be primarily characterised as followers andtypically have limited awareness of DTV and its potential benefits. In order forthis group to feel comfortable with adoption, DTV must be perceived as a massmarket, stable product offering. While they express dissatisfaction with todaysTV, they have a take it or leave it attitude to content, watching what they likewhile ignoring content to which they object. These viewers perceive TV ashaving a symbolic role but whether their view of this symbolic role is positive ornegative will largely be shaped by their experiences and the messages theyreceive. As a result, if their concerns are not addressed appropriately, thesepeople have the potential to become more resistant to adoption than accepting ofit.

The key priority for this group is to try to ensure that they come to accept DTV asa mainstream product. Their very practical concerns regarding the installationand use of the systems must be addressed. The role of DTV as a source ofinformation, education and entertainment must be highlighted in order topositively influence their perception of utility and to counter potential symbolic

objections.



43/77

8.5 Wont bes

Members of the wont be group have been shown to reject DTV on primarilysymbolic grounds. While they do display concerns regarding the utility andpracticality aspects of DTV, these do not come to the fore.

8.5.1 Passive Wont bes

The resistance exhibited by the passive wont bes will be mainly concentratedon the symbolic level. This group grudgingly accepts adoption by broadersociety.

In order to address this segment of viewers, the appropriateness and potentialvalue of the content available must be highlighted in the correct way,concentrating on moral values, information and education with which they justifytheir current ownership of TV. Additionally, the rationale for widespread adoptionand cumulative benefit to society of conversion to DTV should be made clear.

8.5.2 Active Wont bes

This segment of society believes that theiractive resistance to DTV will help tochange society for the better. Their symbolic objections must be addressed in

two ways simultaneously. On the one hand, the educational and informationalaspects of DTV and the quality of the content (as perceived by them) must behighlighted. On the other hand, these viewers also need to accept that there is aclear and beneficial rationale for the mass adoption of DTV.

One approach to addressing the symbolic concerns of this group would be toprovide them with the opportunity to express their views so that they can feel partof the decision-making process, perhaps in the public consultation phase. Thesymbolic barriers facing this group must be addressed before progress can bemade on the other levels. While these concerns can be addressed, there will nodoubt rema

Attitudes to Digital Television

Documents

Transcript of Attitudes to Digital Television