In search of the Holy Grail: what is the TV equivalent of Breaking News?
When pondering the future of broadcasting, different pundits reveal their personal opinions. The truth is the answer to that question is the keystone of the building we want to build. Dailies were asking themselves the same question and their answer and methodology can shed some light to TV channels.
At first, newspaper sites were mere reflections of the printed product. Updated just once a day, they offered as many sections as the printed product, conceptually in the same old way. Soon afterward, they learned that the two media are basically different, with different internal logics, rules, codes, visual treatment, and language. That's why they must be treated differently.
It took them some time to strike the right key. Given that their brand was perceived as credible with regard to news, they realized that the users wanted more of their core activity and they started to invest in the Breaking News section of their news sites, which allowed them to remain relevant. Strategically speaking, breaking news represents the wider section of the funnel in their ‘funnel strategy’ and allows them to channel users to other online products and properties. It didn’t come natural for them to move from a single daily rendez-vous with the audience to a 24X7 approach. The leaders of the pack have even organized their workflow as an information engine as I described in my previous blog "25 Tips for a Modern Newsroom".
Fixed Schedules
Fixed schedules are being torn asunder by ‘users-watchers’. Users will only accept them when justified by something happening in real time, such as a sports event or breaking news story (and even then, they want to watch them later at their convenience). We all know DVRs, TiVos and VOD increasingly are facilitating the time-shifting of content: Ofcom reports that 34 % of UK households now own a TiVo-like device! (up from 23% two years ago).
Understanding and accepting this single truth will be paramount to broadcasters and will represent the real start of the journey, as it was important for newspapers to understand that ‘once a day delivery’ (another form of fixed schedule) no longer was enough for many news consumers. Only then, the transformation started and news once a day with coffee and croissant became just one of several interactions with the audience.
I feel that what I just wrote is VERY obvious but Randy Covington, who spent a career in print reporting and TV news management and now heads the IFRA Newsplex at the University of South Carolina, told me recently that he was amazed at how many TVs "remain confident about the future of broadcasting and believe they are different from newspapers and will not be affected bt the same tsunami that started to affect newspapers 10 years ago."
Video specific tools. One example from ABC.com
Editors had to adapt the right tools for their websites and similarly, broadcasters have to explore the Web and choose those tools that are appropriate to their needs. Broadcasters cannot depend on Youtube to do the job for them, since it has different business objectives.
There is a good example of adapting tools. It’s the innovative ‘Episode Commentary’ feature of ABC.com, which in order to create traction and retention to the remake of “V,” has started to offer qualified commentaries to the episodes by the show’s experts. Producers, writers, directors, costume designers…and any other talent related to the show offer comments as the episode is being shown and they refer to particular sequences to highlight what they consider relevant. These generally juicy comments are shown to the left of the screen, usually pertain to a specific scene and do not interfere with the show.
This extra layer of content makes the episode richer and more “sticky” and is an excellent tool to create groups of interests. Series-centered communities will soon have the right tool to comment on any detail of every single scene in every episode. It goes without saying that some advertisers ready to adapt to the medium will try to profit from this type of tool (e.g. the garment designer who dressed the protagonist). This is one of the best adapted tools for video I have seen because it adds real content to a series and diminishes the value of a lower quality, pirated download. It relies on the differential value of the larger broadcasters, who often have access to production houses and even to the talent involved in the creative and production process.
Watching video will be the main driver for TV portals/mobile, but users also care about comments made by others. When a relevant video is shown on TV, it is not uncommon for users to go to YouTube to see the comments. That’s why any tools that facilitate interaction and expression of the audience will go in the right direction of adapting the visual experience to the real soul of the Internet. This last layer of interaction cannot be bought. You have to generate it yourself!
Video player options
To develop a video player or to use an established platform? Developing a video player is always a long process, not cheap and then it can get messy. Relying on existing video platforms allows for much faster implementation, but it has limitations as to how far you can go in molding your ideas later. The BBC’s struggles with its own development is a good example. It’s price tag, whether £6M or £20M, as well as the long time it took to develop, make it the wrong example for any for profit organization (although the iPlayer is undoubtedly a platform any broadcaster would like to own). Perhaps a good solution for some broadcasters is to experiment with a third party’s video platform and only later start working a RFP based on lessons learned.
Video platforms remind me of early CMS (content management systems) or WMS (web management systems) as they are called now. They were expensive and not very flexible. Nowadays prices are much lower, open source options are available for smaller or more ‘handy’ editors. They may include search, video, social tools…etc. You can use them to their full possibilities or choose more agile existing alternatives for blogs, for instance. The same is happening with video.
As a contribution to the above comment, Forrester has published an evaluation of existing video platforms. Their report (which ignores players like Kit Digital’s in The Sun) concludes that “Brightcove and Ooyala lead the pack… VMIX and Kaltura follow closely behind with what Forrester calls "comprehensive offerings" from "strong performers," while Twistage and Fliqz are considered to serve more narrow segments of the market…Basic media management, player capabilities, and publishing capabilities are now table stakes for all of the video platform providers, and most differentiate along their capabilities in user-generated video, distribution, monetization, and analytics”.
The importance of a good video platform: the case of BBC’s iPlayer
When editors could not find a way to automate their XML generation and to exploit the advantages of sophisticated WMS their hands were tied up and they couldn’t excel in their new version of their old métier. Again, one notes the similarity with broadcasters who are in many cases struggling with two of the most important pieces of software: a WMS and a proper video platform.
In the UK the percentage of advertising has been the greatest for some years. The UK is also the Western country where more people watch web TV, 29 % of all online Brits, and most of them, 27%, use the iPlayer. Of course the BBC is, according to its website, the “largest broadcasting corporation in the world” and it is a public service funded by a license fee that is paid by UK households. That may begin to explain it but without a proper and sophisticated video platform the situation would probably be different, as it’s different in continental Europe where TV watching online is less popular. Janko Roettgers compares the UK figure with Germany where “around 62 %of all Internet users are watching online video, but only around 4 %regularly, while some 17 %occasionally frequent the media sites set up by TV networks.” What comes clear to me is that having a proper player is fundamental to a good video experience which will attract viewers ‘en masse.’ A quick visit to Alexa shows that the BBC leads the pack in terms of traffic and is only second to hulu in terms of page views per user. Proper technology and content are two sides to the same coin. (End of part 2)
You are free to use this article in your publication as long as you credit the author Fernando Samaniego
Comments