The Evolution of TV

It is hard to imagine, but TV hasn’t been around for that long. In fact, TV was made commercially available in the 1930s. TV’s popularity grew exponentially and it soon became the dominant media. By 1960 that over 87% of households in the developed countries had a TV set. Therefore, our grandmothers didn’t grow up with a TV. They entertained themselves with more communal means, such as playing cards, and storytelling. These means of entertainment were more interactive and participative than the TV, in which viewers just sit and receive information.


In recent years, as the Internet use has grown, the TV has begun to lose its position as the dominant media. The situation is particularly so in the Western world, where the Internet is the norm. People can read the news, and watch programs over the Internet whenever they want. People can get their favourite series or movie and watch it at their leisure and without advertisements. Moreover, quality content on TV is sometimes lacking, or sometimes it might be the opposite but the viewer simply does not have time to watch it at that particular moment. TV can feel a bit imposing since viewers have to watch whatever is being broadcasted whenever the TV Company broadcasts it. It is very limiting, and there isn’t much choice.
Things change when it is an important live event such as the Olympics, or a federal election. In this case viewers will want to take advantage of the full coverage provided on TV. Also, viewers can only watch something on the Internet individually, so when they want to have a shared experience, they will still seek the convenience of the TV. For example, viewers watching a football match in the company of their friends.


In other countries, where Internet still hasn’t reached the majority, TV is still the dominant media. In sum, TV is loosing its importance and power to the Internet, but it is by no means doomed. The TV will still keep an audience which will be focused on live events and shared experiences.


Sources
http://news.yahoo.com/page/televisions

Future of Television: who will survive?

Big networks now see the growing popularity of online TV, and see it as opportunity to catch even higher number of viewers across the globe. It is undeniable that more and more viewers choose to watch TV programme online. Even though, the idea of watching the show on a small laptop screen cannot match with watching it on big screen in the living room, people behaviour is beginning to change. Currently, people may choose to watch content online because they don’t have television or they miss the show. However, soon the audiences will see online TV as the priority mean of media and no longer need the TV sets.

It is the threat from Youtube that contains many unofficial TV show online which deteriorate viewer from the networks. Majority of the network see this trend coming and now start to offer more shows online with less advert than normal television. The owner of Fox and NBC Universal even launched Hulu.com, an online media that carries free TV programme while Warner Bros followed by providing TheWB.com for its own TV show. CBS also moved to online TV as it agreed to deal with 10 online distributors.

In addition, with the free content online, minor producers become widely approachable. I come across this discussion of indie producers who tried to put their film into the internet. Some have a hit of 5,000 and more. Even though, what they did was to give away their talent for free online, it is a great opportunity to build reputation as well as profile to sell the future films to investors and get real distribution. In the past, it is very difficult to be published to the public, and even the copy rights were transferred to the network with higher bargaining power . Soon the power of these so called indie producers will reach the level that they do not need to ask for networks’ or distributors’ approval. They can search for their own ads revenue from the high viewing rate they have built up.

It is a clear sign that the world is moving toward online media, which means that the role of major production house and networks may not be as important as before. Big names may still be able to survive due to the reputation and quality of the content they have produced so far. Majority of the people will still watch shows from big names producers, but minor producers will gain a larger piece of pie in the future.

Reference:

Major broadcasters benefiting most from online TV viewing

Is the future of TV on the Web?

CBS to launch online TV network

How does an indie producer get a movie or video on iTunes?

BBC strikes indie producer deal

Is Transmedia the future of Television?

"[T]ransmedia storytelling or more broadly transmedia entertainment [...] [is] a system where each medium makes a distinct contribution to the media franchise, each is left to do what it does best, and the reader is able to expand on their experience of a favorite story by pulling together bits and pieces of information from various sources", says Henry Jenkins - MIT Scholar of Comparitive Media Studies.

A Classic example of this is the season finale of Criminal Minds(for those of you who watch it). The season ended with one member of the BAU getting nailed by a serial killer. But the end was left to the viewer's imagination. So instead of forgetting all about the series until the next season, the viewers were busy cracking the case. And they did so in many different ways...some working by themselves others getting online to solve the puzzle together.

Henry Jenkins cites the Matrix as an example of transmedia storytelling. Jenkins explains that, "key bits of information are conveyed through three live action films, a series of animated shorts, two collections of comic book stories, and several video games. There is no one single source or ur-text where one can turn to gain all of the information needed to comprehend the Matrix universe.

The aim of this consumer immersion is decentralized authorship, or transmedial play. There are two prominent factors driving the growth of transmedia storytelling.

• The first is the proliferation of new media forms like video games, the internet, and mobile platforms and the demand for content in each.
• The second is an economic incentive for media creators to lower production costs by sharing assets.

There are many example of various television series jumping onto the transmedia bandwagon. What remains to be seen is how pervasive this trend will be?!!

References:

http://www.bigshinything.com/henry-jenkins-on-convergence-culture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmedia_storytelling

Business Models! Will Google solve it with VideoID or will advertisers look to studio produced content?

One of the largest concerns for online video content is the problem with revenue generation, and developing the business model to support royalties. HULU is looking into just this. It is a website competing with YouTube, but it only shows professionally developed content with advertisements playing at the beginning and end of the video. This appeals to advertisers, who don’t want to be associated with content they cannot control (which is the risk that keeps advertisers from being willing advertise around YouTube content).

Will Video IDs be Google’s answer to win over Media Companies? VideoID is technology developed by Google which allows copyright content to be identified no matter who uploads it? It is already being used by over 300 groups from CBS to Sony. This may content owners can elect to

Block the content
Generate Advertising Revenue
Track their popularity

Google says 90% of the claims are to place ads against the content… not to block it. But some companies still see this as copy write infringement.

Will other websites begin to compete with YouTube or will they continue to dominate this space? If companies like Hulu gain mass appeal, video producers will not have to concede to Google’s attempt at controlling piracy with VideoID. But if YouTube remains the dominant player, content producers will have to learn how to play along with Google. Not everyone is willing to come out and play. Viacom has a lawsuit against YouTube for $1Bn.


(All content above was developed from Thomas Bradshaw and Matthew Garrahan, “Start Up to match YouTube in Advertising” and “High Hopes for online Fingerprint”, The Financial Times, 17 November 2008.)

Other content:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6744325.stm
http://adage.com/article?article_id=132409

Will traditional TV producers have to go to "Cable 3.0"

Will cable companies be able to empower consumers to create their own ways to deliver cable created video? Jeff Rayport, marketing consultant and former Harvard Business School professor tells cable executives that they must reinvent their industry as “Cable 3.0”. CONTEXT is the new KING. Mainstream production companies must learn how to present content in a context that is relevant and engaging to their consumers.

Instead of empowering users to create CONTENT… can cable companies use the context, or the delivery mode to establish a connection with their consumers, without loosing the control of the content. This could be the appropriate middle ground. Allowing cable companies to control and produce excellent content, while still making it relevant and engaging to their consumers

According to Rayport, Cable 3.0 celebrates CONTEXT, enables users to create the context with cable companies producing the CONTENT… creating a GRAND ALLIANCE to generate the most compelling experience for video based content with the underlying business models underneath.

To view video... go to http://adage.com/brightcove/lineup.php?lineup=1266084202 (video “Cable Operators warned of weaker end user experience”)