Rather than displacing television, the internet, including social media is doing an excellent job of building the medium.

From an article titled, “7 Things You Need to Know About Social TV Right Now,’ the writer provides proof:

Back in the summer of 2009, we tracked everything from Sonia Sotomayor (then a nominee for the Supreme Court) to "Glee" to Major League Baseball to "True Blood."
Over time, it dawned on us that more than anything else, TV was driving social. Sotomayor would trend on Twitter only when her confirmation hearings were being televised; a specific team would trend because it was doing great (or sucking) in the game being broadcast at that very moment on ESPN; during prime-time hours in the U.S. and the U.K., Twitter's trending topics list would be all but taken over by TV-related chatter.

Why is this? In a word, behaviour.

Social TV is about watching TV with other people -- think of "50s-era family and friends gathered around an old Magnavox console to catch "I Love Lucy." Only now the living room has gone national.

In fact, it’s reversing problems such as time-shifting.

"We did a survey of our 10,000-person TV-fan panel last year," said TVGuide.com's Tanner, "and what we found is that 20% of them said they are watching more live TV specifically to avoid "social spoilers.'"

It’s not just TV that’s benefiting from social media, but brand campaigns running on TV as well, such as Old Spice. The brand was resurrected on television and only somewhat later extended to social media. However, had there not been a huge spend on TV, the social media effort wouldn’t have even been considered.

Pepsi learned this lesson the hard way last year when they shifted much of their budget away from TV to social media. Pepsi is now in third place behind Diet Coke.

So, contrary to the current crop of vested interest ‘experts’ claiming that traditional media such as TV will give way to social media and that, once again, advertising as we know it is dead, the opposite is happening.

Why is this? Why does TV continue to be so dominate? I think there are a couple of reasons. For one, it’s not about the conversation, it’s about what causes the conversation. And TV is really, really good at that.

For another reason, and not to belabour the point, it’s about behaviour.

People understand the internet differently than other forms of media. For one thing other than your hookup, the content is largely free. For another it’s an information medium first, whether that’s checking up on friends or family, or finding out the latest info or price on something you’re interested in.

People fan brands online mainly to get deals. They don’t recommend brands because they like the brand so much as they like their friends and want them to benefit from what’s on offer.

As a CEO of an online media company recently wrote about in Ad Age:

It's time to face the reality that the Internet sucks as a branding medium. I know that statement will rile up a few people, but I am starting to believe that the Internet may not be the right medium for brand development, at least in its current form. Trust me, it doesn't help my business if TV dollars don't come online, but it appears that online advertising is destined to become the greatest direct response medium in history and the greatest branding disappointment ever. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

The thing is, as an advertising medium, the internet and social media have their own value proposition and purpose. It’s an arrow in the quiver, not the whole quiver. It’s up to smart marketers to integrate these tools in the most effective way possible, based on an idea that can be executed across platforms.

It's odd that with over 10 years of facts piled up against 'click' based banners, marketers still employ them.

Well, here's another bit of research proving you'd have to be a pretzel to logically keep buying them.

99% of cookies examined never click.

More than expected, a tiny fraction of people ever click on an ad. In fact, 99% of stable cookies examined never click on an ad. This is a more pronounced disparity than was reported in comScore’s study. Further, users who have clicked in the past are twice as likely to click again in the future.

Many clicks are accidental.

Nearly 20% of ads that received any click activity received multiple clicks within the same impression, suggesting that these clicks were unintentional. This effect is especially seen among online gamers, who clicked 43% more often than non-gamers, and on mobile devices where users clicked 123% more often.

Intentional clickers are lower income.

An examination of who tended to click paints a picture of an audience that may not be attractive to most advertisers. Clickers tend to be lower income, older and late technical neophytes.

More here.

Apart from pretty much everybody roundly disproving that the rise of digital means the death of TV, Deloitte’s “State of Media Democracy” survey says that 71% of America rates watching TV as their favourite media activity. And 86% say that TV advertising has the most impact on their buying decisions.

Some highlights:

• Despite the continued growth of access to television content through other channels, with more than half of U.S. consumers preferring to watch their favorite shows on their home TV system.
• Nearly three-quarters of consumers prefer to watch their favorite TV shows live — even given a variety of other options, including recording systems or online video service.
• TV programming continues to be the most discussed content, ahead of social networking sites, music, websites and movies.
• Flat-panel TV ownership has increased dramatically, with 59% of households now owning at least one.

TV and traditional advertising sells. Digital is a nice compliment in extending the sell. That is, as long as you’ve got a good idea.

This is the kind of editorial tripe we put up with in Canada.

John Doyle, a columnist for the Globe, has more to say in defense of the CBC and particularly, The National:

"The CBC is not shoved down anyone’s throat."

Right. You mean other than the fact we are all forced to pay for it?

And this despite the fact that only 2% of Canadians tune into The National.

Do you believe the CBC is as essential as clean water and an education system?

Or, has John Doyle and his fellow travelers fallen off the edge of sanity into imbecile lake?

Despite the title, this slideshow focuses more on convergent media and how best to approach it.

Given media fragmentation and the problem of too many choices, we are advocates of Purpose Based Planning. It's based on the understanding that everything between a brand and its audience is media. In other words, get rid of the terms and descriptions that are not useful (and may in fact be detrimental), such as traditional, digital, above-the-line, below-the-line, etc. Although each has its purpose and unique uses, it's all media and media is converging. Given that, Purpose Based Planning defines the purpose of the initiative and plots the simplest and most logical path in achieving the business goal.

Creative, original content, as usual, is the most important part of any endevour. Without it, media is empty space.

Others are starting to understand that old agency organizational structures (and even new digital structures) do not work and can't be fixed. The writers of this presentation put it this way:

There used to be information architects at the online agencies and copywriters at the advertising agencies. Now you need a creative thinker who reconciles both and thinks multimedia. Online art directors have to develop stories, and offline art directors have to learn to use the internet for more than checking their emails.

Good enough, however, not far enough. We think the best solution is to create a new organization around a new team that's responsible and fully involved with client business from the planning stage forward. Rather than ever expanding silos and departments, housing art directors, copywriters, planners, account executives, media planners, digital planners, interactive designers, et al - the team consists of a creative person, a technology person and a strategic planner / project manager - all with a solid understanding of all media. Everything and everybody else is in support. We call this a cell structure and it's at the heart of what we do.

I reckon if you were behind this bus you'd remember the ad.

Slate ad critic Seth Stevenson tries out a Google service that allows you to run your own commercial on national TV for as little as $100.