Television and Participation

"Interaction" and "television" are two words you would definitely not use in the same sentence today. Maybe not even in the next 3 years, but it is coming...eventually. In an online world where you can put your comments to almost anything, it seems odd that something as social as the television has not yet embraced this concept.

When Tweens are able to comment on their friends' Facebook pictures, give feedback to a YouTube video or express their thoughts and views on news articles, television, in comparison, seems like just another antiquated medium for media. The need for participation and association in today's youths is very high in all aspects of media. They want to be heard, they want to be seen, they want to be involved.

The television industry will eventually have to adopt some form of interactivity with their programs if they want to stay relevant in today's social media environment. A possible solution might be to expand the capabilities of the current television digital boxes which includes a way to interact with other viewers who are using the same service. A social portal for television in fact. With a wireless keyboard peripheral, viewers can submit comments after each show and see other people's thoughts and views instantly. There could be forums dedicated to each show where fans can interact. When shows are running, there could be a section on the bottom of the screen that shows viewers' comments about what is being played on the screen.

THIS would be active participation for television. And I believe that this evolution in Television 2.0 will happen.....eventually.

Does You Tube Hold the Key to the Future of TV?

News Corporation and NBC Universal are attempting to upstage YouTube through a video site called Hulu. It only shows professional television shows and films but is forecast to draw level with Google’s You Tube in US advertising revenue next year. This suggests traditional media companies can make money online without having to relinquish control to Google, similar to the music industry doing it to Apple, whose iTunes music store dominates the digital music market. It also shows the difficulties other social networks might have in generating revenues from their amateur content.

Google paid $1.65bn two years ago for You Tube and it is by some distance the most popular online video destination, with 83m unique viewers in the US in September, compared to Hulu's 6m, according to Nielsen, but Screen Digest claim Hulu's advertising revenues are growing more quickly. Neither company breaks out its advertising revenues but Screen Digest, forecasts that in 2008 YouTube will generate about $100m in the US, compared with about $70m at Hulu. Next year both sites will generate about $180m in the US. An analyst states that YouTube is in a very tough place as most of the user-generated content is worthless or illegal. The next 18 months will determine whether or not it was just an expensive mistake for Google.

Advertisers prefer to associate products with well-known entertainment brands, said Tracey Scheppach, video innovations director at Starcom, a media agency. "YouTube hasn't done a great job justifying why advertisers should migrate online." Shorter, amateur clips make up the vast majority of YouTube videos. Hulu's hit shows range from The Simpsons to The Office , from media owners including NBC, Sony, Fox and Viacom. YouTube executives argue that their real opportunity lies in making money from the massive audience for the site's user-generated videos. But they have also stepped up efforts to bring in more professional content. But many large media groups, including Disney, Viacom and NBC Universal, have been wary of adding their content to YouTube.

The ultimate argument here is about who will have the right content to attract he advertising budgets. Tried and trusted professional content will always be less of a risk for advertisers as they know they will not end up around an amateur clip with the potential of unsuitable content for their brand. It is feasible that the content is actually the critical piece in the jigsaw but it also has to attract the audience. The traditional Media players, if they combine, could become more of a force in this space in the future but they must also understand that they have to move away from traditional broadcasting of content and be prepared to interact with the audience to make it a success in the new world of entertainment.

If There Is A Future For Television It Must Enable Viewer Interaction or Participation

Recent viewer figures identify that programming that enables viewers to interact with the show in a way that they effectively decide the outcome create a much larger audience. - 'I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here!' almost halved the audience for BBC One's 'Apparitions', as 8.1m viewers tuned in to watch Robert Kilroy-Silk face the grimmest Bushtucker Trial to date.
A two-hour special, in which Kilroy-Silk topped a live vote among viewers to face the 'Jungle Gym', captured a 35.3% share of the audience between 8pm-10pm.

The show grabbed a large share from BBC One's new supernatural drama 'Apparitions'. It drew a relatively tiny audience of 2.9m viewers,12.5% share of the audience in the 9pm-10pm slot, after launching with 4.6m viewers the previous week.

A Channel 4 documentary about disabled domestic pets was watched by 1.8m viewers taking a 7.6% share of the audience at the same time. Including viewers on Channel 4+1, 'Special Needs Pets' had 2m viewers and an 8.7% share of the audience.

Cult pop quiz 'Never Mind the Buzzcocks' brought BBC Two 1.9m viewers and an 8.3% share of the audience between 9pm-9.30pm. Five's documentary series 'Danger Men' netted 871,000 viewers and a 3.7% share of the audience with a look at 'Extreme Divers' between 9pm-10pm.

This trend is sure to set the future of Television success, The X Factor is another prime example of a large audience show which has participation on 2 levels, the first is that the contestants are actually picked from the general population and the audience effectively decide their destiny. The BBC has their own show that also attempts to pull in large audience figures through participation. This is Strictly Come Dancing. It is really interesting however to see the reaction of the BBC show compared to Simon Cowell and the X Factor team when the audience are being seen to hijack the program. The UK audiences have been following celebrity fuelled campaigns to keep in these competitions participants who are seen as weaker than some of the others. The BBC Judges appeared to get more frustrated with the general public and take that out on the contestant, John Sergeant, They are not actually accepting that the audience are not taking the show as seriously as a dancing show and more as an entertainment show. The result was John Sergeant to resign from the show, this effectively removes some of the participation that they are trying to encourage. Simon Cowell however just made a comment that if the audience carried on voting for the weaker singer then they would only end up having to buy and listen to his songs on the radio at the end of the show – he went that evening based on public voting.