Wednesday, March 25, 2009

That new blog smell...

I stumbled on some fresh produce: Brent Friedman, co-founder of Electric Farm Entertainment, has a new blog at the EFE website.

Having been a fan of EFE projects [Afterworld, Gemini Division] and having interviewed Mr. Friedman a few times in the past I am always impressed by his vision. In this new blog Brent spells out the building blocks of "New Media"

As I posted in my comments there;

the salient points of “Old Media” copycat success and the “New Media” symbiotic relationship between content and consumer are the meat of the paradigm that is “Internet Broadcasting”.

What I am going to be excited to learn about in future blogs is the transparency between portals and viewer immersion; being able to watch/play/immerse myself in a project through multiple portals seamlessly. Not just Enhanced Experience or ARG ancillary content, but truly seamless pathing between distribution platforms to allow viewers active [or passive] participation in a project.

At the bottom of the post was a must have for those new to serialized web projects: If you haven't watched all of those GO NOW!

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, August 7, 2008

Immersive viewing illustrated


I’d like to start my post this week by thanking everyone who drudged through the ‘corporate view’ post from last week.  I felt it was important to illustrate the perception of those managing the networks that are canceling our favorite programs.  After some comparisons I am going to talk about some profitable alternatives available for shows being seen beyond just television broadcast.  If you are less interested in the business market please jump to Media Moving Forward, or skip straight to to the immersive viewing experience example.


Market Comparison

 I know that I have touched on this point previously, but I wanted to further describe the correlation between the American Auto industry and the American Broadcast Industry. General Motors was once the largest corporation on Earth {now replaced by Wal-Mart}.   $54.00 a share in 2003, however, as of this writing, GM stock has bottomed at $10.00 a share, the lowest price since 1974.  That is an astronomical market and profit loss, especially when you do a comparative dollar valuation and see that after conversion today’s stock price it is actually less than the lowest value reported in 1974.


While I concede that the current higher cost of fuel is a contributing factor I disagree that it is the major driver behind the $15.5 Billion dollar loss reported for Q3 by GM.  A comparative analysis between GM and import auto makers shows that while GM has tanked, import corporations like Honda have seen a steady progressive increase in stock value over the same period.  [As of this writing BMW $27.50 per Share, Honda $32.00 per Share, Toyota $86.00 per Share]


In 2003, around the same time that GM began to bleed market share, Toyota created a division called Scion.  What followed was a truly unique vision for marketing that we interweb peeps would consider viral marketing.  In the hard copy world of 2003 it was known as guerrilla marketing.  Toyota moved beyond the traditional hard copy advertising to embrace the digital medium with resounding success ($86.00 a share).


Broadcast television would do well to heed the lesson illustrated above, especially with the drive for convergence between media outlets.  A quick look at their stock performance over the last seven years displays the same loss trend experienced by the US auto makers (like GM).


Company

Stock Value per Share Aug 2000

Stock Value per Share Aug 2008

% Value Lost

ABC

$54.43

$31.02

-43.01%

CBS

$84.00

$16.10

-80.83%

FOX

$26.09

$13.49

-48.29%

NBC

$56.90

$28.70

-49.56%


With the recent announcement of News Corp (FOX) [August 5] losses on domestic television revenue we continue to see local and national market loss.


Media Moving Forward
Today I can place a phone call to a single vendor and purchase mobile service, FiOS (Fiber Optic) mega-fast-speed internet, cable television, and a land line phone…all connected to one account.  Add to that the HDDVR and you have a one stop shop for all your media needs.


With this type of converged service infrastructure and the current and soon-to-be-released mobile technology platforms, I have the ability to read my email through my TV, phone, or laptop.  Soon I will be able to DVR my favorite TV show and view that DVR on my mobile or laptop…all courtesy of that FiOS broadband connection.

As someone who spends two hours a day commuting by train that type of service model strongly appeals to me.  Beyond having a way to catch up on my favorite series while I ride the train, this model also speaks directly to the bleeding edge vision of companies like Electric Farm Entertainment, Mutant Enemy Productions, and NBC Universal.


Speaking of bleeding edge entertainment, be sure to check out an excellent example of web based entertainment at Gemini Division (EFE/NBC) or, for those Joss Whedon fans among us, Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog. Whedon’s master plan was to produce a short series with limited budget [read non-existent budget by normal Hollywood standards] that would find a following.  It did, but then Joss tends to do that.


Note that unlike the traditional ‘webisode’ produced by independents these two vehicles are developed and distributed by established Hollywood production companies; as such they are prime examples of how Broadcast Television can migrate some of the cancelled 2007 schedule to the web and still drive revenue.  Not to leave the independent’s feeling disparaged, productions like Ask a Ninja and Chad Vader have risen to become pop-culture icons without the financial backing of “Hollywood”.


As we continue forward, broadcast television will have to delve more deeply into the immersive user experience or fall by the wayside, much as broadcast radio did in the late 50’s.

Current and future technology is leading toward media availability 24/7 wherever you can receive a signal.  As someone that lives in the ‘outback’ of Washington State, this is vital to me on my Saturday morning fishing trips.  While sitting on the lake awaiting a nibble, I can still cruise the web on my BlackBerry, make phone calls, or download and watch video, albeit not as much cool video as is available on my fishing’ buddies iPhone.  Often I check the real-time online fishing reports to help me in finding the best place to drop line.  Having that connectivity is something that wouldn’t have been possible even a few years ago.

Take that same experience and port it over to the viewing of your favorite dramatic show.  Weekly episodes on TV with additional ‘sub-episodes’ (5-7 minute webisodes) released daily could fill in plot points or provide additional information between the weekly television releases. This would work well for a series like October Road.  Expanded immersion could include additional three to five minute ‘episodes’ distributed by mobile.  Beyond that, there is also the ability to release a full season straight to DVD and OnDemand.


Dramatic shows are limited in leveraging tools that science fiction vehicles have in place.  An already alternative reality show such as Moonlight is able to make full use of the internet’s alternate reality game base for additional supplemental immersive content beyond the examples provided above for a dramatic series.  ARG websites in combination with the afore mentioned television, webisode, mobisode toolset would allow for that all encompassing experience the industry gives lip service too.

Sci-fi shows could also incorporate both mobile and PC/platform based video games to compliment the show. There is also the option of releasing straight to DVD or On Demand, another very viable profit driver.


Immersive Viewing: An executive summary using the cancelled CBS series Moonlight as an example.  This type of science fiction vehicle is able to utilize all avenues of distribution.   Note:  an additional value add for advertiser marketing can be built in to any of the elements below.

  • Television Spots


    • Weekly episodes – 16 per season, 41 minutes in length.

    • Broadcast prime time, one day per week.


  • Web Spots:  Daily webisodes – 110 per season, 5 minutes in length


    • Released once per week day through the season

    • This equates to five additional television weekly episodes, bringing the entire season to the 21 episode level.  These episodes could be shot in conjunction with the regular shooting schedule then edited to include additional content as a supplement to the plot of the 16 episodes edited for television broadcast

    • Supplemental information discovered should add to the plot of the broadcast television show.


  • Mobile Spots: 27 per season, 90 seconds in length.


    • Released once per week, the day after broadcast of Prime Time

    • These 27 mobile spots equate to one 41 minute television episode and could be shot in conjunction with the regular shooting schedule then edited to include additional content as a supplement to the plot of the 16 episodes edited for television broadcast.

    • Supplemental information discovered should add to the plot of the broadcast television show.

    • Additional five spots could be shown after the season finale as additional driver for the following season


  • RPG Mobile Game:  Role playing game developed to lead the user through a series of tasks providing additional back story or plot information in conjunction with the season plot line.


    • Released the week after the broadcast television premiere.

    • Number of levels should equal approx. one hour of game play.

    • Supplemental information discovered should add to the plot of the broadcast television season.


  • RTSRPG Video Game:  Real time strategy role playing game developed to lead the user through a series of tasks providing additional back story or plot information in conjunction with the season plot line.


    • Released in conjunction with the mid-season climax

    • Should be multi-platform: Online, PC, and Console based release.

    • Number of levels should equal approx. two hours of game play.

    • Supplemental information discovered should add to the plot of the broadcast television season.


  • ARG Online Game: Alternate reality online game.


    • Released in conjunction with the season premiere

    • Number of ‘levels’ should equal approx. two hours of game play.


      • Users will be led through a series of websites that offer tasks, clues, and solvable puzzles

      • Some websites will be difficult to find requiring ‘hard core’ fan research.  These websites will offer the most supplemental plot information.

      • Direct tie to advertisers websites providing viable click through revenue:


        • Example: Show sponsor Dell places a link on their “Home Computer” page.  When a user looks at a specific product there is a disguised link out to an ARG website for the season.

    • Supplemental information discovered should add to the plot of the broadcast television season.

    • Users may choose to subscribe to ARG communications such as emails, mobile texts, or mobile messages.

    • Additional ‘real’ sources may play in to the ARG universe.  Example, contracting a link from the local news website in Los Angeles to a false ‘news’ section related to the season.  To prevent confusion users would be required to enter a user name and password gained from one of the other tools, such as either the mobile or video game.


      • Can be multilayered: Entering the password from the mobile game will only get you to “X”.  To go beyond “X” you have to enter the password found in the Video Game.  Once that content has been viewed you need a password found in one of the ARG websites, then one leaked on the fan community, ect.

  • Fan Communities:  Social networking to drive fan enthusiasm about the season.


    • Social Networking profiles on sites such as Facebook and MySpace

    • Preview, interview, and teaser video should be made available on SN sites like Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube.

    • Official and unofficial fan community websites.


      • Official sites will list additional information, approved spoilers, additional behind the scenes video, interviews, and live fan/talent/crew interaction (chat/BlogSpot)

      • Unofficial fan sites may also be managed by the distribution or production company and offer ‘leaked’ photo or videos in a viral manner.

  • Additional online resources:  additional resources that can be used to drive enthusiasm for the season.


    • Exclusive content agreements


      • Exclusive content supplementing the season could be released on websites like E, AOL, MySpace, Facebook, and other entertainment web sites.


    • Additional information


      • Sites such as IMDB and Wiki can be utilized to provide additional information to drive fan enthusiasm.

There are many other ways to continue this model to add additional levels of immersive participation by the viewer.  This executive summary is meant to provide the highest level view without focusing on the granular details.

As we see in this model there are a large number of tools not being utilized by broadcast television, though we do have to note that NBC is making large advances in tool utilization with Heroes and their new web series Gemini Division.


At this point, using the model above, I’d like to hear your feedback.  If television shows were offered with these supplemental elements how do you think it would impact your viewing?  Would you be more or less likely to watch the show?  Would you be more or less likely to participate in the other non-television options?
Comment and let us know!


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Finding Forrester

This post is Part I of a series examining the TV executive viewpoint outlined in Doug’s last post. This series should make it clear that the reports and analysis he presented do not support the assertion that online use hasn’t changed all that much. Rather, it will reveal that the landscape has changed, is changing, and will continue to change.

I believe that the corporate broadcasting executive view (as presented by Doug) is out of step with Forrester, with Gartner, and with present reality. Cancellations drive apathy, not enthusiasm. Instead of winning viewers back they push them away.

Broadcast networks appear to be resistant toward realizing that the landscape has changed and instead have a tendency to cling to an antiquated position forged from the anvil of entrenched historical practice. I think they would be wise to continue to move away from the sand that still engulfs their view (think of a large bird that likes sand) and take advantage of the opportunities that exist in a new digital media age.

This view appears to be maintained:

1. Through the inaccurate analysis of reports not directly or centrally related to the position in question.

2. By filtering recent and unprecedented phenomena through a rigid mesh of incongruent historical categories.

This post primarily examines the Forrester report titled, “Social Technographics”. This report advises companies to adapt and change to this socially transformed world. Further, it encourages them to adopt a more coherent approach toward social computing.

It is interesting and pertinent to note that this initial report was later expanded into a book titled, “Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies” with a publish date of April 21, 2008.

Groundswell is described in part by one of the authors as, “a book about a very powerful trend that is happening right now, the trend of people connecting with and drawing power from each other online, and how that threatens corporations" (You can see this here).

In contrast, it appears that the corporate executive would have us believe that the book should be titled, “Status Quo: Doing Business in a World That Hasn’t Changed All That Much”.

Advertising Age, in an article dated June 2nd, 2008 gives background information about Charlene Li (the author of the Forrester report) which provides additional insight.

“‘Charlene is a pivotal force in helping marketers navigate tectonic disruptions heralded in by social media,’ says Max Kalehoff, VP-marketing at Clickable.

‘She has an uncanny ability to instill calm and real understanding of the threats and opportunities inherent in a world composed of savvy, connected consumers.’

Asked to grade how marketers are facing up to those changes, Ms. Li gives them a C.

‘They're treating it more like a marketing channel than a relationship-building opportunity,’ she says, adding that a big roadblock is corporate cultures that aren't built to handle the lack of control over brand or message or even product development in a consumer-controlled environment.

‘Marketers are horrible at getting close to customers,’ she says. ‘They say they want it, but they don't.’”

At the bedrock level, both the Forrester report and the subsequent book maintain that the landscape has changed and that businesses need to adapt.

Ms. Li gives such an excellent summation of the divide between a corporate culture that still pines for the way it used to be and the ever increasingly consumer-controlled environment.

And now the kicker.

Intrepid reader, you may want to strap on your seatbelt and brace yourself. The next stop is the Forrester report, “Consumer’s Behavior Online: A Deep Dive”.

Are you ready to dive in…?

Here is the summary:

“Forrester tracks more than 150 activities, diving deep into 38 common and emerging media, shopping, communications, entertainment, and social networking online activities. The results are sometimes surprising. For example, shopping is only an occasional activity; receiving photos via email is the fastest-growing activity; instant messaging use is growing only among younger consumers; and PC time has surpassed TV time, even among Gen Xers. But the real value of tracking online behavior is that it helps interactive marketers and tech product marketers identify and target the best consumer segments”.

Houston, hold the horses, I think we just discovered the true Forrester.

Wow! PC time has surpassed…? TV? How can this be? And this report is dated January 2007?

It must be that… that… aberrant youthful generation. But wait…
This is true… even among Gen Xers?! According to Forrester, it is (and they aren’t alone).

Stay tuned for the next post in this series… “Category Confusion: Gartner, the Federal Census Bureau, and You!”

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, July 21, 2008

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.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,