Search Results for:

Segmenting the U.S. population by political party and ideology reveals some stark contrasts in American sentiments, on a wide range of topics. 

In many cases, political divisions are wider than those of generation, gender, and income. In fact, Americans today are just as likely to be at complete ideological odds with direct neighbors than someone on the other side of the country. 

To anyone spending too much time doomscrolling these past few months, it could seem like there aren’t any moderate Americans left. 

But for those of us looking to understand this crowd, it’s important to use 2016 as a learning opportunity. 

2016 delivered a popular vote decision within 3 million votes. One of the smallest margins ever, it came as a surprise to many who misjudged the size and feelings of undecided voters around the country.

Although the country seems at odds with itself, data from GWI USA reveals there are many who’ve yet to decide which direction they’re voting come November. 

There’s enough undecided voters to make a difference.

Looking back, it’s clear undecided voters turned the tide in a few key states in 2016, and there’s ample evidence to suggest they could do so again in 2020. 

This year, 11% of Americans intending to vote in November are undecided. 

With the vast majority of the voting population decided on how they’ll vote come November, the remaining 11% still represents a significant enough portion to seriously affect the outcome, much like we saw in 2016. 

Especially when we understand that undecided votes effectively count double, as a decision for one party means a lost vote for the other. 

Winning over undecided voters means catering to a diverse crowd, spanning the country. There’s many ways to categorize this audience, but here are a few key things we know:

• 53% live in a suburban neighborhood.
• 50% have a college degree.
• 45% have children.
• 40% are under 35 years old.
• Nearly 1 in 5 are Hispanic. 

They represent many different subgroups of the modern american populace, and connect with both sides of the aisle on different issues. 

With vast swathes of the population expected to vote by mail this year, time is ticking to convince these voters to register and request a ballot in time.

They’re moderate on many issues, except the economy.

Galvanizing undecided Americans may be easier said than done, as undecideds are generally less radical in their beliefs than both Democrats and Republicans. 

But, there’s plenty of opportunity to reach voters on issues they may care about. 

Even though there’s a slight conservative skew, the bulk of undecided voters see themselves as moderate or unsure. A quarter say they lean left or right, and only 5% say they’re either very liberal or very conservative.

For this reason, both candidates will have to decide whether to double down on their more radical stances in the hope of driving more of their base to vote, or to slide into more moderate positions in the hopes of winning over this small but crucial group of undecided voters.

The tendency towards moderation for undecided voters can be seen most clearly in the issues they care about. 

Unlike Democrats and Republicans, who’ve strong feelings one way or the other on issues such as equality, gun control, healthcare, and supporting the USA, undecided voters find themselves in the middle or uninterested by these debates. 

Overall, undecided voters are less worried about most of the issues that will be a focus in the coming weeks ahead of the debates. 

Compared to the average American, they’re over 20% less likely to say they worry about immigration levels, 17% less likely to worry about the stock market, and 15% less likely to worry about gun regulations.

While these may be hot topics for decided voters, undecideds are going to be less swayed by radical stances on either side.

The only issue that undecided voters are more concerned about than both democrats and republicans is their own job security. In fact:

Personal economic concerns may be the deciding factor for many undecideds. 

Undecided voters are less likely than both Democrats and Republicans to have a college degree, and in all likelihood have been more affected by economic shutdowns. 

In June, nearly one third of undecided voters describe their financial situation as “tight” or “struggling”, 44% find themselves in the lowest income segment, and one quarter expect their personal finances to get worse in the next six months.

So, as the candidates debate the economic impacts of COVID-19, and unveil their own plans to stem unemployment and ease the economic hardship felt by everyday Americans, it’s likely undecided voters will pay attention to candidates who can promise the best financial future.

They’re not a homogenous group.

As undecided voters weigh their options, both individuals and the collective appear quite torn – especially over the issues most prominently argued over between Democrats and Republicans – with the split falling largely along generational lines. 

While older undecided voters tend to be more likely to side with conservatives on issues like immigration and taxes, younger generations show more concern for topics typically championed by the left, such as diversity, equal rights, and climate change – although there are definitely exceptions. 

For candidates looking to win over undecided voters, a one-size-fits-all approach won’t work. 

Even though undecided voters are overall more moderate than decided ones, many subgroups within the whole are beginning to break that mold. 

For instance, undecided baby boomers are 21% more likely than the average American to say they’re worried about immigration levels, 30% more likely to say they’re worried about the national deficit, and 22% more worried about the stock market – slightly more so than the average Republican. 

On the other hand, Gen Z undecideds show concern for issues in ways reminiscent of Democrat-lead climate and COVID-19 stimulus legislation.

42% of American Gen Zs say they’re worried about pollution (compared to 47% of Democrats and 21% of Republicans) and only 15% say they’re concerned about immigration levels (compared to 11% of Democrats and 40% of Republicans). 

Even with these differences, both Gen Zs and baby boomers sometimes share distress for issues like gun violence, and tensions with foreign powers like Russia and China. At the end of the day, these voters are undecided in large part because they hold views that seem incongruous with just one party. 

For either candidate, a winning strategy will likely involve messaging specifically targeted to even more granular segments of the undecided population.

They’re a hard to reach audience.

With that said, specific targeting is a lot more complicated than it sounds, and both campaigns will likely need to turn outside of the traditional channels to do so. 

Only half of undecided voters currently subscribe to cable TV, and only one in five use social media to keep up with the news. 

In a given month they’re less likely than both Democrats and Republicans to read any news content whatsoever, with the exception of baby boomers who engage with printed news sources as much, or less frequently than their Democrat and Republican counterparts. 

While they aren’t searching out news content, they’re likely running into the same political commentary as their peers, as each age segment spends similar amounts of time on the same social media platforms as decided voters. 

It holds true across political parties and among undecideds that over two-thirds of Gen Zs are on Instagram, and over 6 in 10 are on snapchat; over 7 in 10 Gen Xs are on Facebook, and over 6 in 10 are on YouTube. 

But as we explained in our first election blog, Democrats and Republicans seem to put their trust in different institutions entirely; while the left is more comfortable with traditional media, the right places more trust in social media. 

With undecided voter segments, it may be significantly harder to get past their inherent mistrust in most institutions. 

If these sentiments have held true since 2016, it explains why so many undecided voters at the time sided with the “outsider” candidate, yet as Trump is now the incumbent candidate, there’s no telling whether this mistrust will swing these voters left or right. 

What can we expect in the coming weeks?

Ultimately, each undecided voter will vote in their own way. 

Altogether they’re a diverse, widespread audience with views that often overlap with the sentiments held by one party or the other. 

With less than 60 days to the election, and a minimum of four debates standing in between, many in this group can still be pulled one way or the other. And if 2016 is any guide, this group will be extremely influential in the final vote count. 

We’ve seen they show concern for a wide range of issues, and total apathy for others. They often side with Democrats on one issue and with Republicans on another, and the final decision for many will be driven by emotion and gut. 

In any case, undecided voters are running out of time to make their decision. 

Never has the United States Postal Service (USPS) come under such scrutiny as in these last few months.

Capping off a long history of financial struggles, a dire need for funding, and disrupted services due to a global pandemic is another debate: whether to allow universal voting-by-mail for the 2020 presidential election. 

Advocates of mail-in voting say it’s a safe, socially distant way to make voting accessible during a hugely important election. Detractors point to potential issues of inaccuracies and fraud. 

But what do American consumers think? In the heat of this fight over the future of the USPS, we polled over 2,000 representative internet users to get their perspective. 

Our findings reveal how truly polarized the U.S. political climate has become. 

The majority of Americans support mail-in voting for all.

Overall support for universal mail-in voting is high. Our research shows that two-thirds of U.S. internet users believe all citizens should be able to vote by mail for the presidential election. Only one in five disagree with this. 

But support for mail-in voting varies dramatically along party lines and largely reflects existing political divisions. 

Only 51% of Republican voters support mail-in ballots for all, compared with 80% of Democratic voters. Outright opposition is driven by Republican-leaning internet users as well, with 35% of them actively against vote-by-mail. 

But support levels vary greatly within the Republican Party, itself, and point to the ever-important role of identity politics in this election.

Among Republicans over the age of 55, nearly 50% actively oppose mail-in voting.

Younger party members are more open to it, with a high degree of uncertainty, rather than total refusal, characterizing their views. 

Additionally, lower income and rural Republicans are significantly more likely to oppose mail-in voting, with 45% of rural residents reporting they’re against this system vs. only 26% of urban party dwellers. 

Findings like these validate a lot of what we know anecdotally. The Trump administration’s strongest voter base has always been older, white, rural Republicans who feel disenfranchised by the system of elitist Washington politics. 

With this group so anti mail-in voting, the suggestion is that the administration’s rhetoric of suspicion and fraud is having its intended effect. 

Among Republicans, suspicions of voter fraud run high. 

Despite widespread support for mail-in voting, concerns still exist – even among its strongest proponents. For example: 

More than two-thirds of Democratic voters express at least some concern about a universal mail-in voting system. 

But their biggest worry isn’t necessarily about actual fraud – it’s that the election results could be disputed, and perhaps unjustifiably so. 

Their fears are not unfounded. Despite no evidence to support this, the current administration believes mail-in voting would lead to a fraudulent election – more specifically, to “the most INACCURATE and FRAUDULENT election in history,” 

A contested election is worrying for Republicans too, but it’s not at the top of the list – legitimate forms of fraud are.  

Among Republicans, 56% are concerned about fraud when counting ballots. This is compared to 32% of Democrats. And among older Republicans, the concern is especially dramatic; 7 out of 10 over 55s worry about fraudulent vote counting. Similarly, Republicans are over twice as likely as Democrats to see verifying voter identity as a potential issue with mail-in voting. 

Safety is a factor for all – but voter turnout is a big consideration for the Dems.

From the beginning, it was the coronavirus pandemic that brought vote-by-mail to the table as an option for this election. As such, perceived benefits understandably center around safety – and our research reflects this. 

Among all internet users in the U.S., 6 in 10 believe that reducing the risk of COVID-19 exposure to the public is a clear benefit of mail-in voting, surpassing all other potential positive outcomes. 

But like all of these views, the split down political lines tells the most interesting story. While 69% of Democrat-leaning Americans see this benefit to public health, less than half of Republicans agree. 

But mail-in voting is likely to have knock-on effects beyond pandemic safety, and these could impact voter behaviors longer term. 

Increasing voter turnout overall is one positive outcome that’s widely discussed by advocates for voting-by-mail, and one-third of all U.S. internet users also recognize this. Higher-income and, especially, university-educated Americans are even more likely to see this as a positive outcome.

When looking at Democrats vs. Republicans, clear differences emerge yet again. 

While 45% of Democrats see mail-in ballots as having a positive impact on voter turnout, only 23% of Republicans agree. 

These point to deeper issues around voting access – and, consequently, voter suppression – as a campaign tactic. Republican politicians, strategists, and even President Trump have remarked that mail-in voting hurts Republican chances because it increases overall voter turnout – giving many disadvantaged groups, who typically sway Democrat, better access to cast their votes. 

Many of the recent attacks on the USPS, both vocally and through defunding efforts, can be traced to this voter suppression, as the President has openly stated. In this case, the discrepancy among consumer groups aligns with whose party stands to benefit, and whose stands to lose. 

What happens in November? 

Anyone following the media cycle will be familiar with the controversies plaguing the USPS – from assurances by the postmaster general to prioritize election mail, to more recent investigations into that same postmaster over a fundraising scheme to benefit Republicans. 

So while the debate around mail-in voting will genuinely affect voter turnout, exactly how this plays out is anyone’s guess. 

Ultimately, mail-in voting is just one factor in a dramatic, highly consequential election – one that’s being watched the world over. Through our research, we’ll continue to explore consumer perspectives on critical issues, such as this one, leading up to November. 

TikTok has been in the media spotlight for quite some time. Even in light of its speedy climb to success, it’s not easy to figure out why the app succeeded where so many social media challengers failed.

Creative, fast-paced, and always delivering content to users, TikTok has given creators and influencers a substantial profile, and arguably the biggest shortcut to a huge audience – all of which are possible explanations. 

But the question many are now starting to ask, as the app increasingly receives more attention from marketers and government bodies worldwide, is how do consumers and brands actually use it? And, what does this suggest about the future of social media? 

Research from a recontact study we conducted in June among U.S. and UK internet users, and insights from the latest wave of our B2B dataset, put forward some possible answers. 

Why consumers use TikTok

TikTok’s ability to shape the cultural sphere has been obvious since it powered “Old Town Road” to top of the charts, and gave artists like Lil Nas X and Lizzo a substantial boost. It’s easy to obsess over the celebrities and big-name influencers on the platform, but our data highlights the platform’s broad package of use cases. 

The motivations often attributed to TikTok, like following influencers and self-promotion, come significantly behind the broader reasons for using social media – like entertainment and filling up spare time.

Compared to other platforms, the “social” reasons for using the app are much further down the list. With the focus on content creation, TikTok’s direct messaging features aren’t front-and-centre, in the way that social media sites have generally taken shape. 

52% of social networkers in the U.S./UK mainly use social media to stay in touch with what their friends are doing, compared to 22% of TikTokers in our chart. 

So though it’s worth noting the often overlooked similarities between TikTok and other social sites – which also help fill in time during the day – there are several important differences. While only 11% claim to be using TikTok to get famous, around 3 in 10 use it to express themselves, with the app’s inspirational qualities also shining through our research. 

Learning, for example, is not a word typically associated with TikTok. But with a quarter of TikTokers using the app to discover how to do new things, it clearly has many unexplored capabilities. 

The trend of using TikTok as a means to teach science to Gen Zs emerged last year, and university researchers have since used it to explain a diverse range of topics. High school chemistry teacher Phil Cook first posted a lab demonstration last August, and now has over a million followers.

With big names in the tech space lining up to buy and control TikTok’s U.S. arm, there’s plenty of opportunity for further expansion. Many have wondered what Microsoft would do with TikTok, but a future acquisition could leave room for “imaginative synergies in gaming, chat and education”.

How consumers use TikTok

TikTokers are regularly viewing a string of recommended videos, as well as hashtag challenges and livestreams – which offers countless opportunities for exposure.

The pandemic has led many to have a go, with 27% of Gen Z creating more videos during lockdowns.

But despite users upping their creation efforts, TikTokers are still less likely to participate in challenges themselves.

Committed creators remain in the minority and should therefore be considered separately by brands: among those who regularly create videos and participate in challenges, the desire for inspirational content is much higher and over half like to watch trending videos, which spark the imagination.

Campaigns that draw on popular culture and recent events in ingenious ways will capture the attention of this resourceful group – enabling them to stay on top of, as well as participate in, the birth of new trends. 

The potential audience on TikTok has led some brands to dabble with social selling, but the platform’s nuances in this area have to be respected. Fewer TikTokers cite researching products to buy as an incentive for using the app (14%), than social networkers do for using social media sites in general (28%).

However, compared to other social networkers in the U.S. and UK, TikTokers are over 80% more likely to cite a “buy” button on a social platform as a purchase driver. As the platform’s selling tools develop, it’s likely that impulse buying will be most at home on it, rather than a detailed researching of products. 

While TikTok introduces selling features in the U.S., commerce capabilities are already well-embedded in the Chinese version (Douyin). It’s had success in its home country, largely thanks to a partnership with shopping app Alibaba. 

With impulse buying seemingly in mind among TikTok users, selling strategies in the West may well end up akin to the “drop” model often used in China, where limited runs of merchandise are teased and sold through the app.

This points to the sort of direction this platform, and others like it, can hope to move in the future.

TikTokers are clearly open to interacting with branded content and buying via social media, but brands need to make full use of the app’s capabilities and introduce relevant content to drive engagement. 

Popular hashtag challenges come from the likes of Walmart (#dealdropchallenge) and Chipotle (#Boorito) – with the former urging customers to express how its savings make them feel through dance, and the latter using the Halloween season to bring costumes into the creative mix. 

By inspiring entertaining content that can be linked to the brand, these companies offer demonstrations of how TikTok can be put to good use. 

Why brands use TikTok

The agricultural sector may not be the first that comes to mind when contemplating TikTok usage stats, but a quick Google search reveals that a massive 1.8 billion people have watched a video with the farm hashtag. 

The app has been credited with connecting farmers and consumers during the pandemic, which speaks to the reasons brands use TikTok. 

Surprising as it may seem, you can understand a lot about TikTok and similar apps’ potential by looking at farmers. Douyin has been a revelation to Chinese farmers, giving them a direct line to their end-consumers for the first time. When you think about it as a D2C model, you can see the potential for businesses in other sectors to connect directly with consumers.

At the moment, around 1 in 10 knowledge workers are aware of their team or company having a work-related TikTok account. This does vary significantly by sector – rising to 25% for the agriculture industry, followed by the likes of PR (20%) and IT (18%). 

TikTok is primarily used in the early stages of a sale: for raising brand awareness and driving consumer engagement. 

This holds a lot of potential for D2C companies more broadly, as small businesses can reach a huge audience without the traditional spend on marketing.

What’s more, over 1 in 4 knowledge workers in this group claim to use TikTok for the purposes of selling.

TikTok has gradually been adding to its shopping features over time, while involving creators. Levi’s is one of the first retailers to integrate a “Shop Now” button into its creator videos, and has already witnessed increased traffic to its website as a result. 

Though the reasons for brands using the app generally center around communication, certain countries and industries are breaking this pattern. 

Selling is the top reason for businesses using TikTok in the U.S., and peaks in industries like marketing (50%), insurance (50%) and the environmental sector (45%) – known for its grass-themed merchandise. 

While it’s early days, we can expect the selling-related stats in our chart to slowly increase as companies become better acquainted with the app’s evolving purchase tools. 

What brands should know about advertising on TikTok 

We’ve laid out the reasons why TikTok is well-suited to lend itself to social commerce and given examples of how brands have used it in the past. But also worth pointing out is that the app has a distinct vibe, which gives off a different energy to that of other social platforms. 

And with rival apps emerging as well, these might herald broader changes in social media behavior – especially in light of what some are calling “COVID-fatigue”, as social networkers begin to crave more light-hearted material.

We asked TikTokers what content they most like to see on the app, and the most-cited video qualities were funny and creative. 

Various brands have figured this out. In contrast to what’s usually shared on its YouTube and Instagram accounts, the NBA’s TikTok clips are typically more laid-back – once featuring a chihuahua dunking a basketball during its halftime show.

This doesn’t mean brands shouldn’t vary the nature of their videos; the league regularly posts motivational videos on the app, which is a type of video content that around a third of TikTokers like to watch. And the agricultural industry may be better suited to an informative tone, which is equally popular among users. 

By the same token, different age groups also take more of a liking to certain types of content: 35-44s are the leading enthusiasts when it comes to motivational snippets (44%), while 25-34s take a shine to informative videos (41%). 

TikTok is dancing, for now

With a third of TikTokers in the U.S. and UK following brands they like on the app, the platform is well-positioned to boost its commercial qualities. 

TikTok may be facing a long list of pressures, most noticeably in areas like data privacy; but its success has forced rivals to move, as evidenced by the creation of Instagram Reels.

Though the app’s continued presence in the West isn’t guaranteed, it’s introduced several new ingredients to the social media mix that are worth noting. 

From taking creativity to a whole new level, to establishing fresh space for D2C companies to flourish and brands to display character, TikTok has left a permanent stamp on the social sphere – and serves as an example for platforms looking to enhance these qualities in the future. 

With the U.S. presidential election drawing nearer, knowing how and where voters consume information is more important than ever. Especially with the rise of the “fake news” phenomenon making consumers increasingly unwilling to trust various media outlets and institutions. 

Using GWI USA, our newest data set focusing on the U.S. market, we’ll explore how these issues play out among consumers ahead of the election. 

American consumers don’t trust their government. 

The current presidential administration’s tenure has been characterized by mistrust from the start. Since the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, U.S. consumers have been particularly skeptical of the information coming out of the government. Our Coronavirus research sheds some light on this. 

At the beginning of April, 42% of people agreed updates from health organizations were the most trustworthy sources of information on the virus. 

Meanwhile, 38% considered news channels on TV trustworthy. Only about one-third said the same of government updates. 

The global picture, by comparison, is much more trusting of the government. Our research shows half of global consumers consider government updates a trustworthy source of COVID-19 news – making it the most trusted source. 

This discrepancy between U.S. and global sentiment is unsurprising for many. And reflecting on how the United States has failed to adequately deal with the outbreak is likely a factor.   

Overall trust in the government, aside from pandemic-related questions, shows clear divisions along party lines. 

Data from GWI USA shows 14% of Americans don’t trust their government at all.

14% of Democrats align with these feelings of distrust, while trust is higher among Republicans – only 9% don’t trust the government at all. 

Meanwhile, nearly a fifth of U.S. consumers who don’t plan to vote in the next election report this feeling of distrust – suggesting there may be a connection between complete distrust in the government and abstention from voting.

Suspicions around the media, and its treatment of the president, are high.

Distrust in the U.S. government falls hand-in-hand with distrust in the media. 

“Fake news” has posed particularly difficult challenges for the American public, and this problem will likely only get worse as we get closer to the election. 

41% of Americans say they don’t trust the media at all, and nearly half report they don’t trust some of the news stories they see online. 

Feelings of distrust differ across party lines, with Republicans generally being less trusting of the media. 37% of Democrats and 45% of Republicans say they don’t trust the media at all, for example, while the split among those who distrust news stories they see online is at 44% among Democrats and 60% among Republicans. 

Interestingly – and very consequentially – swing voters are the most distrusting of all. 48% of swing voters report they don’t trust the media at all, and 64% don’t trust some of the news stories they see online. 

As these are often the most influential group of voters, this finding is concerning as we come closer to the presidential election. It also has huge implications for how candidates, party leaders, and their super PACs try to credibly speak to swing voters. 

Attitudes towards political news coverage also reflect distinct party values – as well as who’s in office. 

While 30% of Democrats feel that major news outlets treat the President fairly, only 7% of Republicans agree. 

Meanwhile, only 27% of Democrats wish news outlets were less biased in their coverage, but 58% of Republicans share this concern over news coverage biases.

If voters feel they can’t trust the media, this opens up many questions this election season. Where will they turn for accurate information on the candidates? And how will they decide to cast their vote amid questions of potential hazards of in-person voting during a pandemic, and controversy around the veracity of mail-in ballots? 

Americans are both reliant on, and suspicious of, social media. 

Social media has transformed into an alternative outlet for political and other news. 

And in some cases, platforms have taken up the mantle of holding both leaders and traditional news outlets to account. Twitter, for example, has been flagging tweets that don’t follow community guidelines and values – including any that may dissuade people from voting.

These actions are key, particularly since the next generation of voters is highly active on social channels and largely relies on them for crucial information when forming their political views.  

But social media as a political news source goes far beyond the youth voter bloc. 

Nearly a third of all American internet users have viewed news clips or articles on social media in the past month.   

Despite increased use of social media for news in recent years, however, 23% of Americans don’t trust social media companies at all. This distrust is most strongly felt by non-voters (28%), followed by Democrats (26%), swing voters (24%) and Republicans (16%). 

Looking at this by age groups, nearly a fifth of 16-34s report they trust social media companies quite a bit – more than any other group. This reaffirms the crucial role social media plays as a news source for young audiences and shows as candidates and their supporters work to get the youth vote out, using social media responsibly will be key.  

However, despite a distrust in social media companies by older generations, these audiences view more news articles on social media than younger groups. This may partially be attributed to younger audiences using social for a myriad of reasons, whereas these platforms have more limited applications – namely maintaining connections to friends/family and the world – for older audiences.

This points to an interesting and important dichotomy that is often at the heart of our relationship with social media. Despite  being more distrustful of social media, older internet users are actively consuming its news content. More actively, even, than the younger user base. For all of the grumbling, social media is a core source of news – and that’s unlikely to change. 

What does this distrust in news and media mean for the election?

The issue of trust, news, and credibility is one to be reckoned with this election cycle – perhaps more than ever. This is a challenge for those who create and disseminate information, in finding the right messages and channels to resonate with their audience. But it’s also a challenge for consumers – where do they turn to for credible information? 

Additionally, the clear divide between political parties, swing voters, and even non-voters in their levels of trust adds complexity. On the one had, Republicans are trusting of the government but not of the media. On the other end of the spectrum, Democrats and younger voters distrust the government, yet are more trusting of both social and traditional media. 

National distrust in the government and media is unlikely to abade as we draw closer to the election. 

And the consequences on voting practices, perceptions of fraud, etc. may be far-reaching. The current debate around mail-in ballots and the USPS tells us that much already. By understanding the unique biases of both our target audiences as well as ourselves, those targeting Americans can enter this election season with a more informed outlook. 

Lockdown has expanded the ranks of gamers. There are now as many gamers as there are people who watch TV.

While this offers brands huge potential in reaching new consumers, it means targeting them has become more challenging.

It’s time to change the way we define gamers.

Using data from our core survey and custom research fielded in the UK and the U.S. in July, we explore the following questions:

• How has mobile gaming impacted the industry?
• Why is the term “gamers” no longer viable?
• How can using gaming motivations improve in-game advertising?

Gaming is attracting the attention of some unexpected audiences.

We’ve witnessed gaming’s popularity explode in a short space of time, with the industry value expected to reach $250 billion by 2025.

Between Q4 2019 and Q2 2020, gaming via any device grew by 7 percentage-points, with 87% of global internet users doing so.

To put this in perspective, gaming as an activity experienced somewhat of a downturn before Q4 2019, having fallen to 80% of internet users from 88% in Q4 2015.

This quick rebound stems from activity during lockdown, as the first wave of our coronavirus research in March shows over 1 in 3 internet users across 13 markets playing more video games.

As the figures haven’t budged by our fifth wave from July, it appears these habits are here to stay.

To really understand the importance of this surging popularity, we have to look at gaming engagement among some unexpected audiences.

Traditionally, gaming was associated with young males, of which 92% aged 16-24 played games on any device in Q4 2019, compared to 85% of females in this age group. 

But as of Q2 2020, however, 92% of females aged 16-24 play games on any device – putting them just 3 percentage-points behind their male counterparts. At the same time, gaming on any device among 55-64 year-olds grew from 57% to 67%. 

Smartphones are at the heart of this. They’ve proven crucial in attracting new audiences to gaming for some time and the outbreak has only accelerated this.

No longer requiring users to make an expensive, one-off purchase to play high-quality games, smartphones are providing budding gamers with a valid means to get into the activity.

Additionally, some of the world’s most popular franchises can now be played on mobile devices, further adding to their popularity. 

A major advantage is their equal appeal among male and female audiences, with 74% of male and female internet users playing games on this device. 

It’s something consoles and PCs have struggled with since their inception, both of which are more popular among males instead (29% vs 21%).

In Europe and North America, smartphone gaming is actually slightly more prominent among females than males (typically around a 5 percentage-point lead). This follows a similar trend to APAC, where mobile gaming has been a real hit for budding female gamers.

Likewise, 45% of 55-64 year olds now play games on their smartphones, but the real growth among this audience has been on PC/laptops – up 10 percentage-points in Q4 2019 (now on 35%).

Gaming on PC/laptops has risen just 2 percentage-points since Q4 2019 on a global level, but their popularity among older age groups signals a new lease of life for these devices, having experienced a period of slow decline prior to the outbreak. 

It’s worth noting also that mobile-gaming has promoted cooperation between smartphones and other gaming devices. This is dramatically furthering the development of cloud gaming – such as Microsoft’s XCloud service – which provides high quality gaming anytime, anywhere.

Gaming’s ubiquity puts it on the same level as social media usage or movie watching. Marketers would not target these groups indiscriminately, so why do the same with gamers?

The “gamer” tag is no longer useful.

Gaming hasn’t been limited to a niche group for some time, making the process of defining “gamers” a near impossible task.

Only by recognizing the numerous subcultures within gaming can we gain a truly harmonized perspective of different gaming audiences – instead of using an umbrella term to describe them all. 

Brand safety is at stake here. Making an ill-conceived effort to reach out to these subcultures through blanket advertising can do more harm than good.

Acknowledging how each franchise has its own very different set of players is the first step to understanding the tribalistic nature of modern gaming.

For example, franchises such as the Endless series attract a player base more likely to be community-minded, with over 1 in 3 players saying they buy products to access the community built around them. 

By comparison, just 1 in 5 Plants vs Zombies players buy products for this reason, and will require a different marketing approach to that of Endless players.

Lawrence Chan, Managing Director at MyRepublic Singapore, says brands need to understand that communication is about engagement.

“If you’re talking about a gaming community, focus on what you need to do to reach that audience. It’s a big market. And it’s a big base of consumers who are very interested in consuming your products if associated with the things they care about.”

Marketers should conduct research into the culture, history and community of the specific games their target audience plays. Rather than assume two different sets of players will be equally receptive to the same marketing strategy.

We can demonstrate these differences further by comparing two sets of franchise players based on their preference for community.

For example, 31% of Total War players say they want brands to run customer forums, in-line with their community-oriented mindset – while for Mario fans, this falls to 23%. The former want to be connected, and brands will have more success speaking to this player base en masse. 

But for players who are less community-minded put a greater emphasis on individuality, meaning they’re unlikely to respond to campaigns that fail to treat them as such.

Call of Duty fans, for example, want brands to make them feel valued (46% say this) against 38% of Endless fans. 

While these differences at a franchise level are indicative of the vast differences between gaming subcultures, brands also need to be aware of the reason these players are gaming in the first place.

Alongside gaming subcultures, identify motivations.

Gaming is a diverse activity, and people have different motivations for doing it. 

We used custom research fielded in the UK and the U.S in July to spotlight the motivations of those playing games during lockdown – specifically casual gamers, who game solely to pass the time, and habitual gamers who game out of habit. 

Here, we look past the act of gaming and zero in on their motivations for doing so. Brands that do this can thereby identify the most committed individuals and make an informed, data-driven approach to tap into the growing gaming advertising opportunity.

For example, of all those who say they played games during lockdown, 19% say they do so to socialize with friends. 

But by segmenting audiences by their motivation, we see 32% of habitual gamers play games for this same reason.

We can then go deeper, with male habitual gamers more likely to play games for social reasons (35%) than females in this audience (26%). 

Had we stuck to traditional gaming definitions, this is a sizeable female audience that would have otherwise gone unnoticed.

Another key motivator are online tournaments. They’ve proven extremely popular on the mobile scene and are important to both male and female habitual gamers who show equal interest in this feature (19%). 

In the absence of live sports and large events, advertising in tournaments presents a lucrative opportunity. And since many mobile games require ads in order to fund their free-to-play model, brands should have no trouble reaching these audiences.

But they need to bear in mind that casual audiences who game less aren’t as receptive to ads as their habitual counterparts. Hence identifying the greater need for a deeper look into gaming behaviors.

71% of casual mobile gamers say it’s important games are free to download (vs. 63% of habitual gamers), with 48% in this group also insisting games have as few ads as possible. 

Because they’re generally less committed gamers, casual audiences are more bothered by costs to their time and money.

But they shouldn’t be ignored in favor of habitual gamers, given their size and influence in the industry – casual gamers represent 48% of UK and U.S. internet users, while habitual gamers account for just 19%.

The growing importance of in-game advertising cannot be understated. And with more people gaming than ever, brands haven’t been slow on the uptake.

More mainstream brands in this space include such examples as JD Sports hosting esports competitions or Estée Lauder developing their own branded game, each having catered to a huge market of loyal fans by recognizing the diversity of gaming.

The lockdown has proven itself a real game changer for brands. Those who continue to treat “gamers” as a term befitting everyone who picks up a controller are missing out on a huge audience – and greater rewards.