During todays session we had probably our last guest speaker coming in to see us. This week it was Paul Appleby, who is mainly a series producer with interests in interactive broadcasting (i.e. the web, interactive shows, mobile device content delivery, etc). He currently is working for the BBC and has worked on programmes such as 'Saving Planet Earth' and other natural history programmes out of Bristol and has also been involved in the ongoing digitisation of the BBC, but mentioned that he will be going freelance soon, something to do with interactivity.
He came across as being very consumer driven, wanting to deliver content to specific audiences. He believes that interactive TV is the way forwards. Interactive TV is a little misleading as a term, interactive broadcasting describes it more fully. It would involve the use of multi platform broadcasting, e.g. a short radio or television advert run between shows informing the audience of a specific programme they might be able to catch online, as and when they want to. One down side to this he pointed out thought was that you would loose the social aspect of television, sitting down with friends to watch a programme at a set time. As a community, audiences still seem to like the social aspect, the sense of belonging to say half a million people watching neighbours each night, you know your not the only one doing it. This gives the audience a sense of connection to the show, a sense of belonging. But he also feels that more interactivity will increase this sense of community in the audience. If you miss an evenings episode because your late home from work you can catch up again on it later (not at the moment as I just remembered neighbours is now on 5 and not BBC), but the message is there that more interactivity doesn't lead to a loss of what I could only describe 'television'. That magical feeling i remember from last decade before Sky caught on in a major way, of sitting in front of the TV with your family or friends and watching a programme at a certain time, cancelling all plans on a Friday night to stay in and watch the latest episode of Red Dwarf.
Susan asked us to type up a few of the questions that were asked, frankly I've typed enough I reckon here to keep and pretty illiterate clown happy for a wee, but I suppose I better touch on those subjects as it will help give a better understanding of what Paul was telling us.
1.) I asked Paul about advertisings role in internet broadcasting and his first reaction was that someone needs to do it correctly first. Television at its basest form is a business model and is there to make money, not just for the broadcasters but also now for advertisers. Advertisers want to target more closed knit groups of consumers these days and internet 'TV' could be one way for them to do it. At the minute it seems to subsidise what companies are putting into it unless you are a specialist site providing specific content (look at Mpora.com, an extreme sports video website, which I think is flooded with adverts but they are all targeted at skateboarders, snowboarders, mountainbikers, etc). He mentioned how wrap arounds or the dreaded pop ups could be used to target certain demographics.
Also during this however he mentioned that the TV lisence needs reviewing, the name changing to something more descriptive of wat it actually does. Maybe 'BBC Content Lisence' would be a better term for it as the money used from it not only goes into production for television shows, but also radio and internet (iPlayer used a big chunk of the income from the TV lisence when it was first set up). With the correct advertising subscription fees would then become un-necessary unless paying for things like movies.
2.) I asked what new roles could pop up in the business with the emergence of interactive broadcasting and though he didn't seem to answer my question directly he suggested that there could be new roles appearing for people with the right skills. Self shooting directors/producers with internet authoring knowledge, creative types with the technological know-how to adapt to this new form of media communication. There will however be more opportunities to communicate through visual media, whether it will make you a lot of money is waiting to be seen but there will definately be openings in companies other than traditional media ones as people will realise the importance of visual communication.
3.) Also asked, thought I cant remember whether by me or one of my class mates, but this is one had been trying to ask for some time I think, was the question of how could he see interactivity playing a role in the future of broadcasting?
This made him very animated as I think its something he is very passionate about. The need to embrace web delivery and design, the fact there is more than one way to get a point of info across and easier collection of audience data were the main points. He pointed out three types of viewer, the inwardly focused viewer (I presume the type to watch designer shows etc), the outwardly focused viewer (someone who may watch a lot of factual based programmes) and the viewer focused on the now (maybe your soap opera addict) and the need to provide shows that cater to all tastes available as making a show about interior design and putting in a slot that might turn you outwardly focused viewer away will loose you ratings, but making three types of show available to audiences at the same time by the press of a little red button on your remote or the click of a mouse could possibly mean higher ratings for your channel than showing one type of show. OK he didnt go this far deep into it but after thinking about this matter I can see how the future of broadcasting may go, and it looks like it could be good.
I think that with the emergence of 'Interactive Broadcasting' (to give it a better name than 'Interactive Television') the future can only hold a new and exciting time for broadcast media in any form.
No comments:
Post a Comment