Twitter Users Love TV So Much They'll Pay to Watch

The TV Industrial Complex is having a ratings problem, an advertising problem and a subscriber problem.

But if everyone used Twitter, those problems would go away!

Or, at least, get less bad. This is the suggestion Twitter has been making to the TV industry for some time, and today it has a study to help make its case: New research from Ipsos indicates that Twitter users are more likely to have a pay-TV subscription, and more likely to watch traditional TV, than people who don’t use the service.

That cord-cutting data point in particular might surprise you, since you’re reading this site and thus are more likely to be in the “I’m cutting the cord / everyone I know has cut the cord / I sure would like to cut the cord” camp. And you’d think the early adopter crowd that still has significant influence on Twitter would be more likely to be in that camp with you.

But Ipsos says 93 percent of Twitter users have a pay-TV subscription, compared to 86 percent of non-Twitter users.

And Ipsos says Twitter users are more likely to watch TV — both via traditional means and over the Web — than people who don’t use Twitter.

These aren’t always dramatic differences — 66 percent of non-Twitter users surveyed by Ipsos, for instance, say they watch cable TV once a week, and that number only bumps up to 67 percent for Twitter users. Still, in aggregate, they are striking enough that Twitter and Ipsos put together a nice infographic, which you can see here.

Again, this paper does a nice job of backing up the pitch that Twitter has been making to the TV business for several years now — people love using Twitter and TV together, and if you work with us we’ll boost your business — so it’s not a total shock.

The downside for the TV guys is that Twitter’s scale problem gets more acute here: Twitter has 284 million users, which is a lot of people, but only 63 million of them are in the United States, so it’s harder for them to have a demonstrable effect on any one network or TV show. Still, as TV audiences and ad dollars and subscriber rolls all shrink, the TV guys will take any help they can get.

If you want to hear a more eloquent version of Twitter’s pitch, listen to Twitter media boss Katie Jacobs Stanton, who makes a version of it all the time. This one came at our Code/Media San Francisco event last week:

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via