OK in a ‘top list’ mode at moment and browsing the definitive AdAge media and marketing top 1000 I noticed even more than usual, the dominance of the most communicative country on the planet, the US. In fact of the top 500, the US counts for 327 – so I crunched the numbers and using the wonders of TextWrangler, filtered out leaders from the rest of the world, the other 173 (who write English) . It produced some interesting top tables and results. Who are the other leading countries, opinionated voices, insightful perspectives, top communicators in media and marketing blogs? Which countries are missing? Who are the leading voices in each country? Also would be interesting to look at gender breakdown, individual versus agency or even age of ‘the voice’ for each blog. But will leave that for others – for now, less get ‘national’!
It’s that time of year where things really start to kick-in. So on top of all my AFTRS lecturing, MA Supervision and LAMP R&D work plus commercial work via MUVEDesign and many consultancy sessions here are some nice breaks – seminars and conferences I am speaking at or running.
(BTW most of the LAMP ones can be booked at AFTRS short course pages in the MultiPlatform section – page being updated at the moment)
Virtual worlds are maturing at a rapid rate and brands are realising there are valuable business opportunities within them. Whether the objective is engagement, research or brand presence, virtual worlds are proving to be a legitimate marketing channel. In this session our panel will look to provide insights into the business benefits of working within a virtual world. Our panellists will provide:
– An overview of virtual worlds and why they’re suitable for business
– Insight for brand involvement including what’s in it for both the brand and the consumer
– Considerations before entering a virtual world and how to be successful
– Identifying the KPIs and how to measure the success of a campaign
– Engagement and brand presence
– With case study examples, this session will bring to life the importance of engagement and brand presence in a virtual world and how organisations are testing, developing, connecting, and marketing within these communities.
Gary Hayes, Director, Laboratory for Advanced Media Production, AFTRS & CEO MUVEDesign
Jeff Brookes, Regional Director – Asia Pacific, Sulake Corporation (habbo.com.au)
Wed 25 March 6-7pm – LAMP ‘State of Play’ Television 2.0: latest innovations in online video
Convergence and multi-platform production is front and centre at MIP TV this year. This seminar will provide background to the terminology, techniques and recent innovations in distributed online video, preparing you for all the key developments. Gary Introducing and speaking.
Fri 3 April – LAMP ‘Interactive Workshop’Â Documentary 2.0: Serious Games
Seminar and Workshop Fri April 3. The intersection between documentary filmmaking and games will be explored in this seminar and workshop, providing deep insight into the potential of Serious Games. Both games and stories have long been recognised as powerful learning tools. Their combination in the 21st century has the potential to provide learning experiences that are collaborative and globally connected. What are the best examples of Serious Games and where are they heading? How can Serious Games best be employed by educators, corporations or non-profit organisations? Gary facilitating and speaking.
20-30 April – “Innovation & Form Workshop” for AFTRS Students featuring:
Wed 22 April 10am-12pm Open morning seminar “Innovations in Multi-Platform Content”
A selection of leading innovators in multi-platform content present recent projects in the areas of social media, cross platform storytelling, extended entertainment, games and online entertainment. Presenters will include social media strategist Laurel Papworth, 2008 BAFTA winners Hoodlum Entertainment and representatives from Google and other cutting edge innovators and thinkers in global screen media. Gary speaking.
Wed April 29 — LAMPÂ ‘State of Play’ Seminar “Free & Collaborative: Latest Open Source Creative Tools”
Want to run your own Facebook or YouTube? Want to set-up a cool online video festival or manage a complex project online? What are the best, free tools for collaboration, video distribution and marketing? An insightful survey of tools such as Drupal, Ning, Celtx, WordPress, Mogulus, Joomla and many more. Gary speaking.
Thurs/Fri 14-15 May – LAMP ‘Interactive Workshop’ Machinima Virtual Story: The Art & Craft of Machinima
Games and virtual worlds are now being used as creative tools to make a wide range of films from horror genre, comedy to corporate training and education. YouTube, Machinima.com and scores of other video portals are filled with examples of these new forms of virtual storytelling and some are now being commissioned by mainstream TV. NBC aired a CSI episode in 2008 featuring machinima made in Second Life and HBO recently acquired the machinima series ‘Molotov Alva’.Â The seminar will explore the vast range of machinima made with console, PC and online games. It will also look at simple forms of film pre-visualisation now possible using games technologies. The intensive workshop will provide a hands-on introduction to the tools of machinima and the opportunity to work on a short project. Participants are encouraged to bring along a pre-recorded soundtrack (including voice and/or music) to use as the basis for their project. Gary facilitating and speaking.
Wed May 27 — LAMP ‘State of Play’ Seminar “Massively Multi-Storyteller Online Worlds”
Virtual worlds and online games are primarily used for role-playing but they can become host to your own narrative worlds. This session looks at how to locate, take-part in or build rich story environments inside shared online spaces. Gary facilitating and speaking.
8-10 June Banff TV Fest Canada – Still discussing speaking and mentor role!
17-23 JuneÂ Games and Entertainment Technologies Conference in Algarve Portugal
Keynoting at theÂ Game, WAC and Informatics conferences (www.gaming-conf.org, www.wac-conf.org and www.informatics-conf.org). The Keynote will look at major trends and futures ofÂ eLearning, Intelligent Systems, Wireless Applications, Games, Creative Industries, ICT and Society, Computer Graphics and IHCI.
24 June – LAMP ‘State of Play’ Cinema 2.0
Stereoscopic 3D, interactive cinema, games in cinema. Where does the future lie for cinemas and other public screen spaces? Gary facilitating and speaking.
Thurs/Fri July 2/3 – LAMP ‘Interactive Workshop & Seminar’ “The Social Media Campaign: Connecting with your audience”
Aimed at anyone who wants to promote themselves, their product or creation into communities. A workshop looking at how to understand the new audiences, build traffic and loyalty that goes way beyond uploading a 9 minute short onto YouTube but looks at techniques of engaging with online events, social networks and DIY social media. The workshop will examine case studies of successful campaigns from producers and creators doing it for themselves.
Led by Laurel Papworth who is a Power150 media blogger (global – AdNews) and in the top 5 media bloggers for Australia (B&T). She has been teaching for 20 years, mostly in the area of online communities and virtual communications. Laurel is the senior social media strategist in Australia, consulting to companies, not for profits and government departments in Australia, Asia and Middle East including: Middle East Broadcasting (Dubai/Saudi Arabia) – Channel MBC4, Telecom New Zealand, , Fairfax: RSVP Dating Community, Sony Corporation, Universal McCann Erickson WorldWide, CHANNEL TEN: including Australian Idol community, Sulake: Makers of Habbo, Macquarie Leisure, Macquarie Media, New Holland Publishing, Australasian, Performing Right Association (APRA), Peoplebrowsr, MySongcast.com unsigned bands community, Australian Businesswomens’ Network, Pink Sofa online community, ABC Australia, National Archives of Australia (gov), Department of State and Regional Development (gov), Department of Primary Industry (gov), Australian Film Television and Radio School (edu), University of Sydney (edu, public), University of Western Sydney (edu, Masters program).
“It’s tempting to shout – Stop It! The truth is that television in Britain is commissioned by middle-aged people who rarely watch the box, attempting to reach young people who look at it even less, when it’s actually watched by old people. Twenty to twenty five year olds aren’t sitting goggle-eyed for one very good reason: they’ve got better things to do.” – Jeremy Paxman, 2007 (more at bottom of post)
At home in Bondi doing a bit of pre XMas spring (?) cleaning in-between playing PS3 games (Mirror’s Edge & Fallout) and present wrapping then came across two very old books on a ‘media’ shelf. I remember picking these two Yearbooks up in a dusty basement of one of the many book shops in Hay-on-wye, near to my uncles (Hereford in the UK). Some years later I used an excerpt of text from one of them in a presentation I gave in 1997 to stick-in-the-mud TV producers, when I was at the BBC to illustrate the parallels between the birth of TV from it’s radio womb and the ‘connected’ web from it’s computer womb.
(Hilarious video from Ephemeral Media – “Magic In The Air – New Horizons 1941”)
But I just re-read them and noticed many new analogies (games, virtual worlds, social media, mobile) and it got me thinking. After a new media form is born, it evolves & grows with more and more elements added. Many layers are superficial but most are purely there to capitalise on its success and sell – how will social media evolve into ‘sales space’?.
What follows below are two excerpts I dug out from BBC Yearbooks 1946 and 1949 – significant because they immediately follow the worlds biggest conflict but also document the global introduction of public broadcast television – effectively the dawn of ‘live’, visual mass media.These extended excerpts are (as far as I can google) unavailable anywhere, so please re-use, they have lessons for us all 60 years on – and please switch into analogy mode, now!
1946 BBC Yearbook (incidentally they finished these yearbooks in 1952)
In the summer Of 1939, some 23,000 people in the south of England had their own television sets. They saw the Derby, the Theatrical Garden Paro, the return of the King and Queen from Canada, Peggy Ashcroft in ‘The Tempest’, ‘Me and My Girl’ from the Victoria Palace, visiting celebrities in ‘Picture Page’. Now . . .
TELEVISION IS COMING BACK
By MAURICE GORHAM, who has been appointed to take charge of the BBC Television Service
From 1936 to 1939 the BBC ran a television service-the first public service of television programmes to be given anywhere in the world. The BBC itself had been experimenting with television transmission for some years before 1936, but from that time onwards the ordinary citizen living in the London area could buy a television set, have it installed in his home, and see, every afternoon and evening, programmes that had real entertainment value: everything from ceremonial processions and top-line sport to studio plays, cabaret, discussions, and films.
I love it that there were such a small number of privileged TV viewers in 1939 and they had a staple diet of theatre and live events – which justified this whole move to have live, talking pictures. The thing that strikes me also is the clear focus on what TV actually brought to its audience – sport, events and re-distribution of theatre and film. Sound familiar?
This service closed down on 1 September, 1939, at the coming of war. Since then there has been no television in Britain, and more fortunate countries have had a tempting opportunity to catch up. In September, 1943, the Government appointed a committee to prepare plans for the reinstatement and development of the television service after the war. This involved special consideration of extending the service to ‘at any rate the larger centres of population within a reasonable period after the war’; of research and development, and of the question of export trade in television equipment…The committee held thirty-one meetings, in the course of which it heard witnesses from the electrical, radio, and telephone industries, the film producers, the Ministry of Education and Board of Trade, and the British inventor, Mr. J. L. Baird. The committee presented its report to the Lord President of the Council on 29 December, 1944 ; the Government indicated agreement with its main recommendations on 9 October, 1945 this gave the BBC its signal to go ahead, and preparations for re-starting the television service were put in hand at once. Before the end of the year intensive work was being done at the old television headquarters at Alexandra Palace ; the complex engineering equipment was being tested down to the last detail, studio circuits and lighting were being re-installed, scenery and wardrobe were being sorted, overhauled, and renovated. Much of this work was being done by former television staff who had earned their release from the Services in which they had spent some six years. By the beginning Of 1946, the return of the television service was within sight.
It is incredible that the world, or at least the decision makers here, had 6 years to ponder the value of this new medium while the bombs dropped around them. Also Mr Gorham suggested other countries were catching up, a typical sentiment when your on the cusp of something new – once the idea is out there, you have to act and develop it quickly. As all new forms, often a mammoth technological effort is always required, we can only admire those here who turned live radio into live TV.
Although the BBC has been charged with the task of operating the television service, this task involves co-operation with many other bodies, from the radio manufacturers, who will provide the sets, to the various Government departments who can supply facilities and also priorities in manpower and materials that are essential before television can resume and expand. And there is the same need in television as in sound broadcasting for friendly co-operation with private interests and professional organizations in the worlds of entertainment and sport, if television is to bring to the viewer the full range of broadcasts in which sight can usefully be added to sound. Granted that co-operation in all these directions is successful, what sort of television service can the BBC provide in 1946? The range of the service will be a radius of about forty miles from Alexandra Palace, on Muswell Hill, the site of the London television transmitter, the top of the mast being 606 feet above sea-level. This forty miles is no rigid limit. Before the war, many people living at a greater distance from London had television sets and became regular viewers. There were frequent reports of reception well outside the estimated range, and occasional reports of freak reception over unexpected distances ; for instance, the television picture from Alexandra Palace was once received in. New York. But hopes that radar research would turn such exceptions into the rule have proved premature, and in 1946 the range of television, as a service to give regular entertainment to the ordinary home, is not likely to extend much beyond the forty miles.
It is ironic that it was the medium of radio, those who probably considered TV a nice add-on service who openly helped television in the ‘maternity ward’ – TV was something that was ‘added to sound’ – ring any bells yet? With a range of 40 miles, TV was indeed a minority medium when it was a child.
The technical standards used will be those used in 1939: 405 lines, fifty frames interlaced, giving twenty-five complete picture frames per second. This means a picture technically considerably below the definition standards of the cinema, but whereas the cinema picture is viewed on a large screen in a theatre the television picture is viewed on a comparatively small screen in the home, and this difference in conditions of viewing makes the straightforward technical comparison rather misleading. With good lighting at the transmission end and the right adjustments at the listener’s end, the television picture becomes more than a picture-you know that you are watching real people doing real things. The same applies to the size of the screen, whatever it may be. A badly-produced programme may make you feel that the screen is small and cramped, but if the programme is good enough you will look at the screen not as a picture within a frame but as ‘a view seen through a window-and the view may comprise anything from a Boat Race or a shot up into the Big Top at the circus to a vivid bit of acting in the studio, or even a close-up of a conjurer producing a rabbit from a hat.
Ah now we are getting to the meat. Even the person in charge of TV in those days was not ignorant to that old chesnut – comparison. How does TV compare to cinema or theatre? So he is fast to pick up on its USP “you are watching real people doing real things” and a window to the world. This was and will become again what TV is really about. Not the abomination it has become in many parts of the world today. Onwards…
Hours of transmission before the war covered an afternoon session up to an hour and a half in length and an evening session up to two hours, plus a morning demonstration intended mainly for dealers who want to show customers their sets in action. (Though, it may be said in passing, nobody can expect maximum television sales from this sort of demonstration, still less from casual viewing at exhibitions ; the sure way of getting new devotees for television is to install the set for a trial period in their homes and let them enjoy it in the conditions in which they will be using it.)
Excellent, the freemium model, get them hooked in a trial still persists today of course – in fact reading Mr Wired’s ‘Freesis’ one would think it is the only model left today? I like the fact that Mr Gorham understands the power of this new medium in it’s natural surroundings (the home) vs the TV showroom.
Viewing television is a very different activity from listening to sound broadcasts. The radio set can remain on for hours at a time ; you can enjoy it as background to reading, writing, homework, housework (some people can even enjoy it as background to conversation, darts, or bridge). The television set demands your attention ; you cannot enjoy television from the next room. You must sit facing the set, with the lights down or shaded, and if you are a normal viewer you will find yourself very reluctant to be disturbed during a programme that you enjoy. This puts a limit on the hours that the ordinary viewer can give to his viewing. Broadcasting must go on from morning till midnight, but television is quite another matter, as most viewers will soon find.
And so we get to some key definitions and these are typical of what defines new form. Just to reiterate these quotes are from 1946, 63 years ago and to me that last paragraph could have been used to describe the conditions of how to enjoy the latest 3D cinema or PS3 game or social virtual world – it is a lot more immersive than the previous media and therefore you must ‘temper’ your indulgences of it! All things in moderation. Just to bring us full circle, it has not been until the last two years or so that TV viewing is seeing dramatic declines, and so ends its 60 year dominance of our attention – my TV viewing is mostly as ambient background, I know all the formulas, there is very little that is new or innovative.
As for programmes, there is no limit to what viewers can hope to see. judging from previous experience, the most popular items will probably be television ‘outside broadcasts’ of sporting events Cup Finals, the Derby, big boxing, tennis, cricket, seen whilst they are actually taking place-and from theatres, with of course big public events such as the opening of Parliament and the Lord Mayor’s Show. These outside shows will always appeal particularly to the new viewer. The old hand may in time come to earmark his evenings primarily for full-length television plays, which were the other great attraction in pre-war days. And then of course there will be variety, cabaret, ballet, fashion shows, demonstrations of everything from cooking to carpentry, talks, discussions, and quiz programmes, art shows, personality interviews, visits to the Zoo, street interviews with ordinary Londoners, jazz sessions, recitals, and films. Briefly, it might be said that television can do many things that sound broadcasting cannot do and can improve on almost everything that sound broadcasting can do. Almost everything ; for there are still one or two categories of sound broadcasting to which sight could add little and from which the exigencies of television production might even detract.
What goes around comes around and as I said at the beginning of this ‘diatribe’ the first uses of a major media form (not something like SMS for example) are the ones that will be the ones it returns to as it declines. They are strongest ideas. Look at pay-TV at the moment and compare it with the above paragraph from 1946!
When the pre-war staff are back, when Alexandra Palace is all cleaned up and on the air again, when television is again a household word in the London area ; what is the next move ? When will standards be improved so as to give a clearer picture with greater detail, and when will television spread out of London and into the other great population centres of Great Britain ? The answers to these questions are not likely to come in 1946. Nor will they come from the BBC alone. The Hankey Report made certain recommendations as to what the answers should be, but it also recommended the setting up of an Advisory Committee such as had done valuable work in the development of television before the war. The appointment of this Advisory Committee was announced on 27 November, 1945, and its chairman is Mr. G. M. Garro-Jones. Representing as it does the public bodies on whom the development of television into a national service depends, it will be concerned with all these problems of the future. Under its guidance, television has the chance to go forward fast to the stage when it is no longer a comparative luxury for people who live in one part of the country, but an -amenity that can be enjoyed by the bulk of the population, bringing to broadcasting the one element that it has always lacked.
And so began six decades of the opium of the masses. A new medium, TV broadcasting is defined, tested and slowly begins. Another key point about the “television is coming back’ excerpts is the amount of effort and consultancy it took to bring it to life – replace TV with ‘internet’ or ‘social media’ in any of the above segments and you will begin to understand how history does indeed repeat itself. In relation to social media I finish on some excerpts from the 1949 Yearbook that begins to address both media form comparisons & the sense of media by the people presented by ‘representatives’
1949 BBC Yearbook. Public Service Broadcasting by Francis Williams
…The extent of the listening. public and the fact that the BBC as a public service monopoly has the sole broadcasting access to it provides a dazzling opportunity to undertake the responsibility of informing the public on great issues. But with the opportunity goes the limitation imposed by all systems of mass communication the limitation of non-selectivity. Even the most popular newspaper may well be satisfied if an article it publishes will hold the attention of a million readers. But a million listeners to a BBC talk means that radio sets have been switched off wholesale over the country. A serious analysis of current affairs published in a serious weekly review will have had a most notable and worth while success if it is read by 50,000 readers. But a mere 50,000 listeners to a radio programme in a good listening hour means a colossal flop.
Wow. I like the numbers comparison here and how radio dominated the landscape in the forties and fifties. A million radio listeners regarded as a big problem?!
This problem of non-selectivity has to some extent, of course, been met by the three alternative national programmes and the regional programmes; but even on the Third Programme the size of the audience whose interest must be held by a serious talk if it is to be successful is colossal by any non-broadcasting standard. One further difficulty, moreover, arises out of the nature of the listening audience. This is the problem of the half-attentive listener. The vast majority of radio listening, certainly to the Light and Home Programmes although probably not to the Third, is family or group listening. In a vast number of cases the radio is turned on as a companionable accompaniment to other activities of a more or less distracting character. Now this may fit in admirably with a background of light music, with a group programme such as ‘Have a Go’ or a ‘Quiz’ in which the listening group can feel that it is participating with another group, or with a popular variety show or play; but it does not provide anything like so satisfactory a frame-work for a serious talk which requires a fair amount of concentration on the part of the listener.
Even Francis Williams has indentified the issues we still face today. That of a fragmenting and more localised (or niche) audiences & the wonders of multi-tasking. Radio was always a success because it could always be part of another activity – especially driving the car or house chores or reading etc: Interesting that different programmes though had to be promoted differently because of the ‘expectation’ of how an audience were expected to respond to it. Reminds me forcibly of how we are still expected to act in a cinema, even though the film may not hold our attention. This next section is contains the jewels.
And finally there is the problem which faces all those who would communicate ideas or information to the public. This is the problem not only of holding attention but of attracting it in the first place. Here the newspaper has two inherent advantages over the BBC, and one which, while not inherent, tends to exist because broadcasting is a monopoly public service. The first two arise from the fact that a newspaper is making a specific appeal to a particular audience and from the attention it can secure from typographical display. The third advantage arises from a freedom which is, in part at any rate, denied to the BBC, or which it has denied itself out of a sense of responsibility to its monopoly position, and the freedom to build up stars who can attract an audience on their own account on whatever subject, within at any rate a certain range, they are writing or speaking. By trial and error newspapers have discovered that with rare exceptions the expert in a particular subject is not necessarily or indeed usually the person most likely to possess those gifts of lucid and pleasing exposition which will attract and hold the public interest. They have found that skill in communication-what we call style and presentation-are of paramount importance, and that readers can be persuaded to read what would otherwise appear to them a dull or difficult subject if it is handled by a professional writer whose previous writings on other subjects they know, and whose personality and style they find attractive. The American radio companies have made great use of this same fact in building up star commentators. The BBC to a very large extent denies itself this means of attracting listeners in the field of public service broadcasting, although it has employed it, of course, very successfully in the realm of entertainment and in that field has established many commentators with a large personal following. But in public service broadcasting it has been shy, perhaps too shy although one sees the hazards of doing so because of the fear on the one hand that a regular professional commentator on public affairs may come to be regarded as expressing the views of the BBC itself and thus as an infringement of its obligation not to hold or express a view of its own or that alternatively he may by the accident of being a good broadcaster be built up into a political and public figure to an extent that would justify criticism.
I am impressed by the way Francis here uses the incumbant, or previous layered media, newspapers, to draw comparisons again. That they can have personality and PS Broadcasters cannot. This basic stance permeated TV, including commercial offerings, and as twitter, blogs, ustream, YouTube, mogulus, podcasts, flickr, vodcasts and all other forms of online self-publishing have taken over TV is now seen as lacking personality. It now represents corporation and impartiality to such an extent that is has been in grave danger of turning only into a distribution channel – and there are plenty of alternatives to that now. But I digress and finish on Francis’s last paragraph which was the dream of TV but which is now being squarely delivered by social media in connected platforms…
I have set out the limits within which, as it seems to me, the BBC has to function in its public service broadcasting because it is only against such a background that one can either properly assess what is already being done or consider what might be done. Of course not all the disadvantages are on the BBC’s side. It has the immense advantage that comes from being an instrument of the spoken word which very many people find much easier and more attractive than the written word, and the advantage also that it can present the actual living clash of ideas in debate and bring, when need be, greater actuality to the spoken word by a dramatic illustration. Yet the limitations remain. They are important. They provide the framework within which public service broadcasting must operate, and the BBC is not justly to be criticized, as it sometimes is, for failing to do things which such a framework does not allow. But has it carried out its responsibilities within the realm of public service broadcasting as efficiently and imaginatively as this framework allows? I think that a year or two ago the answer would have been’no’. Now I think it ‘yes’ though with some qualifications.
Again the new kid compared with the adult (newspapers) – sound vs written word. Both started with high ideals, grew an audience and so began the bandwagon – a million commercial entities flogging their wares off the back of the altruistic beginnings.
I wonder what will happen to the democratised social media form or console games or mobile entertainment or social virtual worlds as they become more dominant – in terms of where we spend most time. Most of those are still tweens compared with TV or radio who have to return to their roots to survive. Will these youngster learn from and respect their elders or carry on throwing stones at the windows of the ‘media form’ retirement home? The excerpts above show that TV was once a kid too, full of ideals, full or promise and had the potential to be a voice. We all have a choice to reflect on the lessons of the past or to mock with closed ears. Which path will you choose?
As a closing thought I would like to throw to one of UK’s most respected broadcasting journalists Jeremy Paxman who in a post entitled How can we trust TV fights for the return of trust in what TV should have become.
“There is a fight going on for the survival of quality television right across this industry. The recent skirmishes and scandals have not gone our way. As an industry we need to lay out much more clearly what we’re doing and why. Let’s spend less time measuring audiences and more time enlightening them.
Despite the last few months, I do not believe that this uniquely powerful medium has been taken over by charlatans. But we ought to acknowledge that parts of it are in danger of losing their redeeming virtues. We need to be open. We need to admit when we make mistakes. We need treat our viewers with respect, to be frank with them about how and why programmes were made, to be transparent.
We need, in short, to rediscover a sense of purpose.”
A great 3rd day at Milia and a much broader spectrum of issues discussed around the many Milia halls. It started with the worldÃ¢Â€Â™s most advanced broadband nation with Dr. Hyun-Oh Yoo giving us a rare insight into the worlds most culturally integrated social network Ã¢Â€Â“ Cyworld in South Korea. This was the first time he had shared some of this information with a European audience (almost dwarfing the impact from and Asian perspective, Peter LiÃ¢Â€Â™s IPTV talk later in the day). Fighting through a hay fever Dr. Yoo talked in a gravelly voice about the ubiquitous infrastructure, and how it allows Cyworld to be accessible across the super-broadband fiber pipes and always-on wireless networks. The figures surrounding the service, particularly penetration make MySpace look like a niche activity, well not quite. But here goes:
20 million subscribers
40% of TOTAL population
96% of 20-29 year olds use Cyworld regularly
20 billion monthly page views and 22 mill monthly unique visitors
$300 000 in sales of digital items daily
100 000 video uploads daily
210 million songs sold, currently 6 mill per month
That last figure makes it second only to iTunes for volume of music sales Ã¢Â€Â“ who says social networks donÃ¢Â€Â™t have business models. Dr Yoo also presented a slide that compared the service to some of our more recognisable web 2.0 brands Ã¢Â€Â“ it is interesting how Second Life is up there with YouTube and flickr, more so as the Cyworld virtual reality is extremely Habbo in style vs true 3D.
A refreshing follow-up to this talk was an uncomfortably titled Ã¢Â€ÂœThe Future of Interactive TVÃ¢Â€Â. Eloquently steered and captained by Brian Seth-Hurst (who is also the key enabler also for the International Interactive Emmy Awards of courseÃ¢Â€Â“ see later) it became apparent that labelling TV services that have an interactive component as Interactive TV is now too limiting and emphasises TV too much Ã¢Â€Â“ perhaps if the service ‘Â€Â˜only’Â€Â™ appeared on the one (TV) screen and all interaction took place there fine, but these are really in the minority and most are via mobile sms, telephony, stretched out across many platforms (TV is a part of the mix) or synchronised with online. There were some great new kid on the block examples of iTV and ones that started to merge media . Kim Lindholm from Motion Avenue in Finland showed something on the edge of my Ã¢Â€Âœmixed realityÃ¢Â€Â continuum (a soon to be published post) a game/quiz show from Vietnam that has viewers appear as avatars in a virtual audience who get knocked out if they get answers wrong Ã¢Â€Â“ of course the audience pays per question. He was followed by the grandfather of iTV Robert Chua who presented a more philosophical view of iTV. He questioned the definition of iTV as a relevant term when the same type of services are controlled by or fed to PC, mobile and TV via broadband pipes. The second panel in this session looked at enablers like Microsoft and OpenTV who themselves appear to be struggling with the melding of broadcast and broadband, games and linear.
Then a day of pitching started. Top and tailed by commercial entities that sandwiched a swathe of public service BBC 360 panels. My LAMP friend and colleague Jackie Turnure was pitching in the most defined session being Cross-Platform Brand Marketing. The three propositions trying to fulful a tight brief from Ogilvy and American Express were in brief terms, 1) an amazing race clone, 2) a chroma key Ã¢Â€Â˜card rideÃ¢Â€Â™ and 3) an Alternate Reality Game. Without showing any bias I personally thought the ARG from Jackie the much stronger in terms of reach and originality but more importantly having a story (we shall see tomorrow who won).
These and many of the pitches that followed from the BBC panels seemed very light on narrative and most were function over form, without clearly defined structure or focus. There is a sense that many ad agencies and traditional broadcasters (as I said in the last post) are seeing Emerged Media as a way to allow users to participate, sometimes I feel to the detriment of the actual integrity of the proposition. We may be creating too many empty shells for viewers to fill without really drawing them in first with a great story. Frank Boyd again led key BBC folk though some less than enticing pitches. I thought the first two panels one on 360 docs and the second on 360 participation actually seemed interchangeable. All the doc props involved viewer input and the community ones were themed around documentary topics like the environment. So more blurring of labels as form, function and genre meld.
By the afternoon I was suffering from conference fatique, that moment when panels and panellists start to blur into one another. Luckily the IPTV vs Internet TV was a great idea and Justin Hewlett and others showed off a great cross section of the new walled garden TV, data and telephony services. After a while though all the badly designed interfaces started to blur into each other too. It became apparent in these sessions that penetration for many pockets of services around the world in the 50-100 thousand audience range is still very low and not significant due to two key things:
1 You can get most of the IPTV offerings via traditional TV distribution channels, so nothing really new to entice viewers (it was cited that 50% of subs were actually for the telephony and data elements and not the TV!)
2 The topic of the panel, the wild west internet is now delivering a much broader and compelling range of audio, video content.
The panel topic echoed a talk I gave to an IPTV Ã¢Â€Â˜hypedÃ¢Â€Â™ audience in Sydney nearly two years ago (and cited on a few IPTV info sites) Ã¢Â€Â“ the main premise being, the cats out of the bag, Internet TV (or broadband TV as I called it), the wild west way to get your TV morsels means IPTV may only have another 12 months or so to deliver on its promise, or be gone for good. As mentioned earlier I found Peter Li, the VP from BesTV in China illuminating if only for the stats he presented as context to IPTV potential in China.
CNNIC report for China July 2006 Internet users 130m. 40% growth for past 6 years Broadband users 80m Youth: 18.5 hrs/wek online vs 6.7 hrs/wk on TV Over 220 online video portals, 500 000 clips uploaded daily Concurrancy of viewers watching video online 500 000. ADSL 2.0+ goes to over 10 million users
The keynote of the day, after I managed to rush out and get my glad rags from the dry cleaners, was Jana Bennett and Ashley Highfield. I would like to give this more time and the awards so will leave that until the next post. For now though a taster shot of the BBC keynoters.
I was lucky to be a judge again at the Interactive International Emmy Awards and invited to the splendid evening session at the Carlton Ballroom. Only three awards up for grabs (and a special prize this year to BskyB -Â€Â“ well done). The event was excellently organised in the tradition of all the A-list ceremonies and I was lucky to be on one of the front tables, with the interactive programme folk. Also managed to grab a chat with Phil Rosedale who leads Linden Lab (Second Life) in the pre-award cocktails, which was a treat for me 😉
To the awards. Great to see the BBC finally win for their BBCi all emcompassing eTV and 24/7 service (I remember the days when it was called Digital Text Ã¢Â€Â“ but wont go there now!). Great to see my old cohorts Nick Cohen and Phil Jay with big grins on their faces for the rest of the evening. Canada took the second award, Interactive Channel, for BITE Television a slightly anarchistic, irrelevant channel. The most exciting award of the evening though for me was the interactive programme award and I was siting between two of the nominees on a distinctly Canadian table 8. Three of the four nominees were Canadian! But I had Aaron from the Zimmer Twins on one side and Patrick Crowe from Regenesis on the other (Zinc Roe Design and Xenophile respective companies) Ã¢Â€Â“ and it was a surprise to all, that they both won! Yes a two-way tie and a table creaking later with the weight of two Emmys 😉 As one would expect both teams were delighted and it was wonderful both for Canada (and the Bell fund that partly helped Regenesis) but also for the interactive form as both services are innovative and pushing the envelope. But will write more later (congrats to Evan Jones and Tony Walsh also who were major parts of Regensis) Ã¢Â€Â“ for now a picture I took of the double winners. A busy and even more exciting day tomorrow (well actually today now as I finish this).