So asked a Zogby poll conducted late last months. Here's how the numbers broke down by age.
Age |
% who included Internet |
% who included TV |
% who included radio |
Approximate margin of error (95% confidence interval) |
18-24 |
32.5 |
86.5 |
69.4 |
+/-9 |
25-34 |
71.9 |
42.5 |
70.7 |
+/-7 |
35-54 |
67.8 |
55.6 |
67.3 |
+/-5 |
55-69 |
78.3 |
44.3 |
65.9 |
+/-6 |
The 18-24 numbers seem especially striking, both as to their unwillingness to give up the Internet and as to their willingness to give up TV. Query how honest the answers are -- maybe some people just like to think of themselves as preferring the Internet, or don't like to think of themselves as being hooked on TV -- but if they are honest, they seem like a pretty big deal.
And, no, I'm not sure why the numbers don't quite add up to 200%, especially since the none / refused to state percentages were very low; I expect that there were some people who gave only one answer rather than two, but weren't recorded as none or refused to state.
The TV, you can have it (until college footbal season.)
What suprises me more is the percent of 25-34 who would give up the internet and the much lower percent who would give up TV. I understand wanting to keep TV -- without TiVo I would never see any film -- but how could they choose radio over internet? Is it all that NPR? Or are these country folk who love their country stations and their broadcast tv and just haven't found the internet that important or interesting yet?
Just kinda shows how fringe we all really are, i guess.
Every statistical prediction actually has both attributes: a margin of error and a confidence interval. When you hear "this poll has 5 percent margin of error" they're just leaving out the confidence interval.
If you see a statement that says "this poll is within an X percent margin of error with a Y confidence interval," the data really says that there is a Y% chance that the event in the actual population will be within X% of the event's incidence in the sample population.
So, in terms of a rule of thumb, if you have a 6% margin of error with 98% confidence, you might not want to "throw it out" as much as if you have a 6% margin of error with 50% confidence, which tells you information that is virtually meaningless.
Overall, I don't find the results that odd, except I would have expected radio to be a bit higher. I only listen to the radio in the car and only watch a couple of hours of TV a week. I really don't know anyone that makes a specific effort to listen to the radio outside of their car, though some seem to leave it on continuously in the background at work.
The willingness to give up TV probably has a lot to do with streaming video, TV shows online, Netflix, and, of course, episodes of a favourite show on DVD. (The young set probably also interpreted "TV" to mean "normal programming" but allowing for internet access of the same and use of a DVD player.)
Sure, if there's an industry standard assumption that all margins of error state values with a 95% interval, then I don't think the omission is a big deal. My experience is with cookie data, not polling data, so I don't know what the polling standards are.
I am surprised at the dropoff in Internet preference among those 25-34.
What's interesting to me is the jump from 86.5 to 42.5 for TV with the 25-34 group (my group). We're the ones who were literally raised on TV - from Sesame Street to MTV to ESPN. We like the internet, but we'd be lost without the glow from the corner of room every hour of the day. We enjoy our passive viewing.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that MTV still plays music videos....
radio has left my life already. i don't own a car. i listen to music on my ipod when on the bus.
television is great. i don't watch a lot of "network" television but do watch lots of DVDs.
but the internet. i was computerless and felt it for the last two years. with my new computer, i feel more involved. once i can actually watch television on my computer (not some archived things like the networks are doing now but real honest to god real time television)it'll be all internet for me.
i don't know where i fit in this but wanted to add my two cents since i never get polled.
This includes a sugnificant plurality (if not a majority) of Americans, myself included. And yes, I listen to a lot of radio even though I have CDs in my car (not hip to the whole iTune/iPod thing (yet?)). However, I still gave up TV and Radio and kept the internet, if only for practical reasons. I will gladly seek my entertainment in books and in the "real world". Nothing personal, guys.
I fall in the area between the first two age groups. I use the radio in my car but that's the only time. I can't see myself paying for XM or Sirius satellite radio services; if I'm going to pay for music I'd rather buy it--preferably on a DRM-free MP3 or if I must as a CD.
I will never get cable/satellite TV unless (1) I have a roommate who wants it and to be equitable I split it, (2) I happen to live someplace where the rabbit ears can't pick up the major networks.
I would pay just about any amount for high-speed internet.
Neither radio nor TV will be going anywhere any time soon. Traditional radio will probably die sooner, but not for many years. True internet TV is a long way off--but coming all the same.
The true TV revolution is Tivo and other similar DVRs (digital video recorders). I've gotten to where I never watch TV live. I only watch a few shows (several news programs + Survivor + movies) but I always wait to watch them so I can skip the commercials on my Tivo. Why waste 15 min. of my life on commercials for a 1 hour television program? Why watch TV without being able to pause it if I need to answer the phone, make dinner, use the restroom, etc.?
I predict that within a decade, once broadband gets universal and can stream video effectively, and Internet receivers can be put in cars, TV, radio and newspapers will die. (Oh and we'll need Internet traffic reports- probably sent from highway sensors to your car directly.)