Is Broadcast TV dying?/What do we mean by dying?
Dave James, (Techradar 2015), mentioned choice. The public has a larger choice now than they ever have.
James agrees that broadcast TV is dying and says he will “struggle always having to make an active choice over what [he] watches”, and that free-to-air/traditional TV makes him a passive participant in what he watches. He has not chosen himself what content he individually wants to view.
So does this mean that free-to-air TV is for a ‘passive viewer’ OR someone who prefers curated content? A viewer who wants to experience what is put out there without directly searching for it themselves: the ‘lean-back approach’ – they are open to the ‘choices’ hand picked for them. Or are the viewers who want to choose the content they want to view - more are actively involved in the creative content?
According to data from media Agency ZenithOptimedia, (Digital TV Europe 2015), (Melbourne based) – between 2010 and 2014, TV’s share of overall consumption fell from 42.4% to 37.9%. Also according to Zaneith’s projections, it will shrink to a further 34.7% by 2017. And according to Neilsen – the overall time American household spent watching TV was 151 hours and 33 minutes per month, which is down by 7 and a half hours from the previous year. This report also states that youth, as a whole, are watching less TV – in 2014 individuals aged between 18-24 have gone from watching 3 hrs and 15 mins per day to now 2.5 hours.
Technology has been plugged as creating this ‘information revolution’, (Asia-Pacific Institute for Broadcast Development, hereon AIBD) – “the nature of the relationship between the broadcaster and its audience is changing”. There are so many different platforms for entertainment and ‘television’ to be viewed.
Brian Robbins, the chief executive of multi-channel network (MCN for short) of AwesomenessTV, says that ‘everyone knows that traditional TV viewing for teens and tweens is dead. Not dying. Dead’. He then goes on to state that content consumption has moved to Youtube, online and mobile (70% of his audience are mobile viewers). He states that ‘in the US alone, networks like MTV and Nickelodeon have lost their core audience that have traditionally kept them afloat’. Although – the method for some companies, such as AwesomenessTV, is to still try and sell to these networks (as TV budgets are still ‘beefier’ than advertising revenues on YouYube.) AwesomenessTV programs 25 shows a week including dramas and reality shows – while also running a network of 90,000 vloggers. Robbins states that he is ‘hyper-focused on audience’ – especially teens/tweens of the GEN Z (“as they are the most influential audience ever”) stating that they are changing the way content is consumed. Therefore, Robbins admits that he must be on the frontline of trends and innovation. His company now also makes shows for Nickelodeon and Netflix. A film created by AwesomenessTV, Expelled (filmed over 22 days staring online star Cameron Dallas) topped the charts in December 2014.
Robbins truly believes it’s the audience shaping how the media is consumed – stating that they are the “trailblazers”. Is this due to Gen Z having more CHOICE in what they watch? That myriad content is more readily available to them than in the past? – or that due to technologies, more content is being created; and therefore there is more to be received? Younger people have become accustomed to “new media” (networkable, dense, compressible, interactive and impartial - (ABID) – and allows for “easy” pathways for information seekers via internet terminals – for example, on their smartphone. This creates “no need” for these individuals to “wait” for live-to-air TV/ traditional broadcast media.
The ‘old’ viewer of traditional media, (Broadcast Television of the Network Era), was a different type of viewer than today. Traditional media was linear - ‘the viewer had to watch scheduled TV programs at a particular time, and on the particular channel it was presented on. It was also non-interactive television. In the Multi-Channel transition phase, watching television has become more of an interactive experience – more than just using a remote to change the channel. Audience members are now able to participate within the experience, and don’t ‘just watch’. Social Media platforms, such as Twitter, have allowed an audience member to ‘tweet’ in their view – live tweeting (Australian X-Factor for example). This allows for traditional ways of watching broadcast media to blend with new media. This blend of consumer/producer interaction brings up the prosumer/journalist debate. Now any viewer/audience member, can become a ‘journalist’. Information posted onto social media can be reached globally – and most individuals have access to these platforms. The impact of people being able to post ‘news’ themselves, update people around them, inform, review and acknowledge anything they want, and be able to reach a global audience with new media – allows people access to a larger information system than was ever offered before. There is less of a need to switch on the television and be updated on the daily news when the individual has already read the weekly news on an app or within their newsfeed.
Television is evolving to keep up with technology; (which is continuously changing and extremely fast paced). James, (Techradar 2015), also makes mention that the audience who prefers linear television (not having an active choice on what you watch) is somewhat lazy – as there is ‘too much’ to be offered and we can’t make the choice on what to watch at that exact moment. We are suffering from content overexposure.
On-demand TV is providing more options to watch broadcast TV. Android TV is going to be delivering channels to the platform – broadcast channels will soon be available for download next to the streaming apps. James also makes mention that this is ‘blurring the lines’ between traditional and new media. Google has partnered with video streaming sites such as TED to show live streams on content selected – the viewer being able to switch between the two and experience both roles of the different types of viewer (‘passive’ and active).
Audiences are able to be more specific in choice – and this is resulting in positive outcomes for minority audiences – content that a huge majority of people does not watch. There are a host of niche streaming sites popping up delivering specific content for fan bases. Traditional practice was to release DVD’s to rental stores (their main source of revenue). Connection with audience was lost – but due to online, they are now able to connect with a specific content viewer. Such as horror films, sites such Screambox and Frightpix deliver horror films only a minority of individuals would watch. Although examples for film, the point to take away is that content online can be more targeted than older distribution methods. Watching TV, outside the broadcast schedule (before ‘new media’), involved the audience going to a rental store / buying the box set in hard copy / or waiting for the television re-runs. Now, as the changing platform evolves, less viewers make the physical trip to the remaining rental stores as the shows they want to watch are accessible on distributors the most viewers already own: smartTV, phone, ipad) This ‘digital storefront’ distributes the content which can be played on all devices. Michael Idato (SMH) states “new tv and movie streaming services… will radically reshape… the Australian media landscape’ and the consensus is, “the consumer is going to win”, Craig White (CEO OF Access Digital Entertainment.
Before 2015 – the digital and streaming space was occupied by companies EzyFlix, Fetch TV, free-to-air playback platforms, (ABC’s iview for example), streaming and DVD rental and Pay TV (Foxtel for example). Earlier in the year three “new players” arrived on Australian screens – Stan (The Nine Network and Fairfax joint venture), Netflix (US owned) and Presto (Foxtel and Seven West Media joint venture). More ways of watching varieties of content have allowed the viewer not only to have more choice in what they watch – but who they ‘watch with’, (making this a competitive market but a large choice for the audience/viewer/consumer). According to Idato, these companies base their prices on US markets ‘key players’ Netflix and Hulu Plus (owned by Fox Broadcasting, NBCUniversal Television and Disney-ABC Television) – which is equivalent to US$10 a month. Since Netflix’s launch in Australia, competitors will “lift their game for the digital dollar (Cliff Edwards, the director of corporate communications and technology for Netflix) – and this will all end up benefiting the consumer.
For the consumer, choosing what pay-tv they want to choose has become an important decision – and until the launch of these three platforms, according to Ros Page, the Australian viewer needed to pay expensive rates to watch the programs they desired, ‘boxed out of’ the market by their overseas compadres.
With the online market ‘booming’; competing and establishing within itself – linear TV is perhaps ‘less affected’ than people think. Sean James (Director Foxtel-owned Presto) believes that the two; free-to-air and Pay TV, are “sufficiently different” – he notes that traditional broadcast is - “the other end of the spectrum”. The debate identifies that free-to-air tv still dominates in prime time and has ‘high advertising rate times by news, sport, current affairs and locally produced reality television’ – as people still want to watch what is happening locally, nationally and internationally within prime parts of the day.