Instagram has been circling around TV for a while now—remember 2018’s ill-fated IGTV—but it seems they are finally ready to make their big play.
The company has announced plans to fully roll out the long-form horizontal video feature they’ve been testing in Brazil. It’s called “Features,” it can support video of up to 90 minutes and is meant to be watched on an actual TV set.
Creators will be able to link up to eight promo “Reels” to each “Feature”, with the user journey being they see the Reel and are then able to click through to watch the full Feature on TV. (It’s unclear how they go from watching the Reel on their phone to watching the Feature on TV, but it appears to be some kind of casting or saving or both.)
The benefit for all the creators currently on Instagram with long-form content is that it lets them avoid the dreaded “Link in Bio” step—Instagram only allows for hyperlinking in its ephemeral Stories, not in Reels or Posts—and that should ideally reduce friction and lead to more views.
Why It Matters
Creator content is hot right now and many are hailing this as not just a response to YouTube’s success on TV, but as a full-out assault on TV in general. The idea being that Instagram/Meta is in much better position to provide data, especially to performance marketers.
And it’s a valid take too, though I think it opens up a way for current TV companies to claim their own unique space in today’s Feudal Media ecosystem.
Allow me to explain.
Most creator content is not memorable. It’s quick and snackable and while we don’t mind it, it rarely (if ever) rises to the level of art.
That’s because the algorithm is designed to reward content that is popular. And popular rarely equals memorable.
I’ve noted this before, but most of the shows of TV’s second Golden Age—from Mad Men to The Wire to The Americans to Succession—had shit ratings. Their value was in their cultural impact and their ability to attract viewers years later.
The gap between the truly memorable and very popular is true across every art form—TV is not special that way—and I am far from the first person to notice.
What it means though is that Instagram will, at best, become home to a lot of popular filler—the sorts of shows you watch to disengage and unwind, the TV equivalent of scrolling. Which, if you think about it, is just an updated form of flipping through the channels.
This opens up the door for legacy television to become the antithesis of junk food, the place for well-crafted shows you actually want to watch, the sort of TV you actually put down your phone for and focus on.
In other words, the types of high production value, high concept shows that are not emerging from the engagement-focused creator ecosystem.
Now there is a problem with this premise and it’s a big one: there are not enough viewers interested in high concept shows to support the number of TV content providers (networks and streaming services) we have now.
It's a problem because the financial underpinning of TV, starting back in early network days, has always been that you could sell commercials for large amounts of money based on the fact that they’d reach a mass audience.
And when that mass audience is gone, you’re left with ad-supported PBS.
That means we’re likely to see more mergers as the remaining TV companies shrink themselves down into a Big Three or Big Four scenario.
Meanwhile YouTube and Instagram will take over pumping out the filler content, fueled by successive waves of creators all trying to grab the golden ring before they burn out.
Which brings up another problem with Instagram.
While YouTube has a long-established system that rewards creators with 55% of ad revenue, Meta has no such system. Which is going to leave lots of creators wondering why they bother. Especially if Meta introduces a system that is notably less generous than Alphabet.
One final thought: if Instagram Features takes off, it can also be home for a lot of syndicated TV shows.
This would allow Meta to distinguish Instagram from YouTube, and would give TV networks and streaming services a place to put much of their existing library content, everything from sitcoms to reality shows.
Using Reels to promote these shows would be far more efficient than trying to figure out where in this fragmented Feudal Media universe they needed to place media. If nothing else, Instagram’s very efficient algorithms will ensure they target the right viewers.
Or, at the very least, most of them.
It would benefit advertisers too, as they could count on Instagram giving them the sort of reach they needed, versus trying to cobble together an audience across a range of scattered streaming platforms.
But here again the question looms: is the upside enough to keep all of these TV companies in business, is there enough potential revenue from Instagram to make up for all the other income they’d be losing?
And the answer, at least for some, is probably not.
What You Need To Do About It
If you are a legacy TV company or streaming service, you need to think about what your future looks like.
Will there be enough of an audience—and enough demand from advertisers—to keep the lights on? Or will the costs of producing enough programming overwhelm your revenue?
And, if you’re not sure, can striking a deal with Instagram, or Instagram AND YouTube, to take on your library content result in a favorable enough deal so that it makes sense for you to stay in business?
The other question you need to ask yourselves is what your comfort level is with “Peak TV” type programming and the people who make it.
Are you willing to suffer low ratings and negative cash flow for a shot at four above-the-fold articles in The New York Times the day of your series finale? (Points if you get the reference.)
If you are, then you need to double down on that and build your Feudal Media kingdom around that type of programming and the people who watch it.
Bonne chance.
Finally, if you are Instagram, you need to figure out how to pay creators in a way that is fair and does not have them all running to YouTube. Or to a TV company who gives them a better rev share.
You also need to figure out the difference between yourself and YouTube. What do you stand for that they don’t? Right now Instagram, as I note in my new book Welcome To The Age Of Feudal Media, is very image focused. As in the images of its users, not just photos. It’s kind of slick and sexy, with a lot of accounts that veer awfully close to the edge of that “R” rating.
Just something to think about when you think about what the future will bring.
Then there’s the ad thing: right now there are no ads on Features. But there will be. How you do that will make or break the platform. So don’t get greedy and jam them in there and remember how much people like non-interruptive formats like pause ads and home screen ads.
Even pre-roll if it’s short enough
Finally, if you are the sort of person who reads TVREV, let’s all hold back judgment until we see the product in the wild.
Theory is one thing. Reality is another.
