Cancellation Fallout

I want to thank Doug for the great post and for joining this discussion. I appreciate the opportunity we have to interact with each other and with our readers.

Doug is correct when he states that this year’s network cancellations were not a result of the Writer’s strike. I believe that cancellations in general highlight the need for continued adaptation and change in this digital media age.

Previously broadcast networks decided when and what viewers could watch. Viewers were limited to the television set, and had a limited number of channels to choose from. Consequently, networks attracted a very large viewing base and advertisements were displayed for the majority of viewers.

This is no longer the case. Cable increased channel and content selection. VCR’s and later DVR’s allowed viewers to skip commercials. Personal computers, internet, youtube, myspace, torrent sites, and mobile devices all further diversified the market.

Suddenly, media consumers can choose what they watch, when they want to watch it, and can do so wherever they choose. The viewer is now free to spend their limited time on what interests them most. As a result, niche audiences and communities develop.

Ivan D. Askwith, in his excellent thesis Television 2.0: Reconceptualizing TV as an Engagement Medium writes,

“Time-shifting and location-shifting technologies make traditional assumptions about the television viewer impossible, since network executives no longer have the power to control when, where, or how audiences consume their programming. Competition for audience attention is more intense than ever, as television shows compete not only with each other, but also with video games, DVDs, and the near-infinite supply of information and entertainment options accessible on the internet.

Thus, if the television industry hopes to survive in a digital, Internet-enabled era, the existing models and practices that govern the television business will require some dramatic change. Even more important, if television executives hope to effect meaningful change, the industry will have to accept that everyone – executives, advertisers, and audiences alike – needs to rethink not only the role of the television business, but the nature of television itself.”

Increased competition in this digital media age necessitates adaptation. The broadcast networks do see this need for change and are continuing to place more and more priority toward “engaging” their viewing audience. However, if the networks are seeking to engage viewers in active participation, I believe they need to rethink cancellations.

Doug is correct in stating that the primary reason networks give for deciding to cancel a show is “A lack of X where X equals advertising dollars or Nielsen stats”. I would further agree that the primary reason cancellations exist is related to underperformance. But I believe that this underperformance is on the part of the networks, not the canceled shows. Networks must perform better in order to remain competitive.

I believe that cancellations exist for at least three main reasons:

1. A failure to realize that it is much more difficult to draw the mass audience of the past.

2. A failure to expand and extend traditional content in a manner that actually brings about active participation and also increases the marketability of that content.

3. A failure to consider the fallout of cancellations in a digital media age (this is the primary topic of this post).

Content which attracts a loyal viewing base is a key opportunity for engagement as well as for advertisement. I believe that the cancellation of this content not only evidences the divide that exists, it actually increases that distance. Rather than networks winning viewers back, they push them further away.

As viewers participate and interact within a story they become immersed into that reality, and they identify with it. The viewer personally identifies with the experience and they have a stake in how the story plays out.

The deeper a viewer is immersed into a show, the more invested they become. The more invested they become, the more they will react negatively to the cancellation of their experience. At that point, it isn't just a show that is being canceled, it is part of their life.

Take for instance someone who immerses themselves into a video game. They spend hours investing themselves into the game and come to have a stake in what happens. They talk about the game with their friends, blog about it, and even make a video remix. They post the remix on youtube and receive primarily positive affirmation for their work.

The gamer loads up the game and eagerly jumps back into the action. After finishing a major subplot they are rewarded with a nice cut scene. Multiple story lines converge together, the plot deepens, and their enthusiasm builds. At this point, the screen fades to black and a message pops up. It reads,

“Sorry, due to factors related to underperformance, your game has been canceled.”

A second message takes its place,

“On the positive side, do you want to try this new game we just developed, but may not finish?”

A third message appears,

“Oh, and by the way, we really want to win you back. We know that there are other game companies who finish the games they start, but really, try out this new game that we might not finish.”

It becomes evident that cancellations have more fallout with active engagement.

This is a fundamental principle that I believe networks would do well to consider. Video game production companies finish and provide adequate closure for the games/stories they start. Cable networks also have a tendency to finish the stories they start. Broadcasting networks need to remember who they are now competing with and who they are competing for. The landscape has changed and they need to rethink cancellations.

On one end of the spectrum is cancellation fallout, at the other end is something I refer to as network loyalty ROI (Return on Investment).

Network loyalty ROI is the idea that active participation and network loyalty will create and foster commitment from viewers. If convergence leads to immersion and product identification and the viewer knows that the network is committed to finish the stories it starts, networks won't have to promote their shows, their viewers will do it for them (Oh, the irony). :)

Network loyalty and commitment to viewers will inevitably lead to profit loss for some shows, no doubt about it. I believe that the networks that will succeed, are those that can provide a long term approach to account for these short term losses and be absolutely committed to finish the stories they start.

This year's cancellations provide a great opportunity for a network to invest in network loyalty ROI. A network could bring back one of the shows they decided to cancel or a network could save one of the canceled shows. My picks are October Road and Moonlight.

Engage the viewers by expanding the media and perhaps even, take a loss in the short term. What you gain is reputation, commitment, loyalty, and fans. This would also draw viewers from other networks. Viewers who want to get behind a company that listens, is committed to its viewers, and is committed to finish out and provide adequate closure to the shows they start.

When networks engage viewers in active participation, loyalty and commitment go hand in hand. Brand/network loyalty will be key. Otherwise, viewers are left with an Ovaltine commercial!

Cancellation fallout and network loyalty ROI are polar opposites. One pushes people away, the other draws them in. Viewers now choose what, when, and where they watch content, will they choose your network or will they go somewhere else (Video game, books, youtube, myspace, Gemini Division, etc., etc., etc.)?

P.S.
Thank you all for the comments. This interaction adds an amount of depth that blog posts alone simply cannot bring about. Engaging in conversation involves us all in the process of bringing about change. As you share your opinions, your insight, and your feelings you are an active participant engaged in a larger community. Whether the reader is a network executive, a writer, a producer, a CEO of an ad company, or a viewer it is our hope that by engaging in this discussion together we can improve our media experience.