by Inge Hansen (@mecnotabene) At the end of February 2014, in a landmark ruling for South Africa, it was confirmed that the murder trial of former Olympian Oscar Pistorius would have parts of the proceedings broadcast live via television. Since the commencement of the trial on 3 March, South African TV audiences have voted with their remotes and the Oscar Pistorius Trial Channel (Channel 199 on DStv) has drawn larger numbers than expected.
What with showing the local population a view of the judicial system most have never seen on the inside, and providing real unscripted reality TV, the trial has seen viewers trickling away from regular programming.
Attracts the most attention
Now that those audiences are aware and tuned in, if we look at the average April data to get a view of who’s been watching the trial, we can clearly see that the live trial coverage attracts the most attention.
At its peak on 10 April, the two-hour afternoon live court session was watched by more than 300 000 viewers (All Individuals), which is a higher audience figure than many primetime shows on DStv. As an average during April, the Court in Session coverage was watched by over 180 000 viewers during the broadcast, with the lunchtime show drawing still significant numbers in excess of 184 000 viewers on broadcast days.
Within this, we have a slightly biased female audience (56%) with an almost equal white or black racial split viewer, 60% of whom are between the ages of 35 and 64.
Clear breakout in higher interest
Although the trial is available on DStv Premium, Extra and Compact, there is a clear breakout in higher interest in the live trial coverage in LSM 9 and LSM 10. The Lunch Time Show and Afternoon Show follow subsequently with similar viewership profiles.
| Market | Target | Channel | Activity |
| National — Total Indv (incl guests) | The Oscar Pistorius Trial | COURT IN SESSION | Live + VOSDAL |
| Profile Header | Profile Details\Variable | AR (AMR%) | Weight of Viewing (ADH%) |
| Gender | Male | 0.4 | 43.26% |
| Female | 0.4 | 56.74% | |
| Age Groups — NEW | 11-14 | 0.1 | 0.95% |
| 15-24 | 0.2 | 9.06% | |
| 25-34 | 0.2 | 11.06% | |
| 35-49 | 0.5 | 22.89% | |
| 50-64 | 1.2 | 38.98% | |
| 65+ | 0.9 | 14.73% | |
| Ethnic Group | White | 1.9 | 46.31% |
| Coloured | 0.3 | 6.40% | |
| Indian | 0.4 | 2.83% | |
| Black | 0.2 | 44.46% | |
| LSM Group | LSM 5 | 0.0 | 1.68% |
| LSM 6 | 0.1 | 7.43% | |
| LSM 7 | 0.3 | 10.86% | |
| LSM 8 | 0.7 | 15.20% | |
| LSM 9 | 1.0 | 27.29% | |
| LSM 10 | 2.0 | 37.55% |
Some similarities with OJ
Although it’s been nearly 20 years since the final verdict, the OJ Simpson trial draws some similarities, while on a different scale to our local audience.
The OJ Simpson trial was essentially the beginning of the American foray into reality TV; it drew massive audiences and, as with the trial we are currently watching, was also pegged as the ‘Trial of the Century’.
When the final verdict was delivered in October 1995, it was shown on multiple channels and, according to Nielsen Media Research, achieved a 93% share of TV viewers, even though it was broadcast during working hours.
News anchors not needed
The extreme length of the duration of the trial even affected news networks, causing their viewership and ad dollars to drop as viewers watched the trial live, not needing their news anchors to fill them in during the evening any longer.
Unlikely celebrities were also created, much as we are seeing with the Pistorius trial, with your average South African now doing their own Barry Roux impressions at the weekend braai.
With regards to when people are watching, we need to look not only at the TV data that is available for April but also to a driving factor behind awareness of the trial — social media.
Over 150 000 social conversations online
When Pistorius took the stand on 9 April, interest intensified — on 10 April, there were over 150 000 social conversations online and, at the same time, audiences on the Oscar Pistorius Trial Channel peaked substantially.
This speaks to the increase of second-screen viewing in SA as consumers watched the trial live, voiced their opinions on social media and further drove interest, engagement and talkability. The trial channel has used this to its advantage through the clever deployment of social media influencers (ie in round-table talks) to amplify their content.
Yet while this happening, aside from advertising by the Naspers group properties themselves, there were less than a handful of advertisers in March and a limited presence in April. There are multiple reasons for this.
Unpredictable
Initially, the trial was not set to go beyond a month to sentencing, and therefore the opening advertising packages offered were for three weeks only, with no subsequent offers. As the trial stops and starts for public holidays and adjournments, it’s become unpredictable.
Our market is also conservative and therefore less proactive, with plans often having already been committed in advance; this leaves less budget available for innovative opportunities.
Surprisingly, no advertising has been aired from non-profit organisations, government initiatives for women and the like, where one would perhaps expect to find a sympathetic audience open to this messaging.
Primary vs secondary objectives
In addition, with reference to the Naspers September 2013 Financial Results, advertising revenue makes up 8% of its Pay TV revenue, with the majority of income being derived from its subscriber base. This makes ensuring quality content and gauging the SA appetite for this type of programming the primary objective for this initial peek into court room TV, with advertising a second objective.
It appears that South Africans have now developed a taste for this type of television and this will shape future opportunities for advertisers.
At the moment, we wait as Pistorius undergoes his 30-day observation, giving advertisers an opportunity to plan for the future, but will stringent media-owner deadlines and logistics allow for the flexible approach required to take advantage of this?
And with rumours abounding that a similar application will be made for the live broadcast of the trial for murder-accused Shrien Dewani, will advertisers and media owners make adjustments to tap into the engaging audiences who are sure to tune in?
Sources:
- Arianna Post Campaign, Programming & Profiles
- Telmar Ebb & Flow
- http://oscartrial.quirk.biz/#mentions
- The Courant: O.j. Simpson Verdict Scores Sky-high Television Ratings
- The New York Times Archives: THE MEDIA BUSINESS; Simpson Case Gives Cable An Edge on the Networks
Inge Hansen is an analytics and insights strategist for MEC NotaBene Cape Town. Working with diverse brands across the agencies client portfolios, her previous media experience includes time in the print industry with Media24. Inge contributes Thinking TV, a monthly analysis of South African TV viewership figures, to MarkLives. Follow @mecnotabene for regular media updates.
— MarkLives’ round-up of top ad and media industry news and opinion in your mailbox every three work days. Sign up here!