How to engage the 'on demand' generation
andys corner
Posts: 1,664 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Hopefully this can yield some interesting perspectives.
For the first time we have truly on demand technology, we have services that show us films when we want to see them, tv shows that we can watch as if we recorded them ourselves and a marketplace that is not just tv channels. We don't even need a tv to experience all this technology.
In order to attract this generation of viewers and to ensure support for a tv license, or to make the maximum advertising revenue, it would be expected that there should be masses of tv shows and content aimed at these viewers, but that isnt the case.
What do you think should be done to engage these viewers, as they are most likely the ones that will decide they do not want a license fee and have the technology to maximise their use of on demand
For the first time we have truly on demand technology, we have services that show us films when we want to see them, tv shows that we can watch as if we recorded them ourselves and a marketplace that is not just tv channels. We don't even need a tv to experience all this technology.
In order to attract this generation of viewers and to ensure support for a tv license, or to make the maximum advertising revenue, it would be expected that there should be masses of tv shows and content aimed at these viewers, but that isnt the case.
What do you think should be done to engage these viewers, as they are most likely the ones that will decide they do not want a license fee and have the technology to maximise their use of on demand
0
Comments
The problem is already solved! You can't expect everyone to pay for the TVL AND then some paying for BBC programming in other ways!
So how do we close that gap, between what TV is showing and what is available 'out there'?
So BBC iplayer, 5 on demand etc has helped. Although there are still restriction on how long you can keep a downloaded programme and how long it is available to view. So what sort of resources and commitment would be required to keep everything available for ever? Beyond huge I imagine, so the major channels cannot expect to have a monopoly on what they show unless of course they are willing to commit to a gigantic investment. Which they won't be I suspect.
So what's next, for those who have finally caught up with Breaking Bad, or have succombed to the lure of Game of Thrones? There are enough on demand sources to purchase these shows and the likes of Sky are to be commended for the commitment, but we are expected to pay as should be so.
What about the good stuff from the U.S. that with the best will in the world we are always going to be somewhat behind, well again Sky are pretty good at being as close to current as can be, mostly. But there are sources where these programmes can be viewed immediately, not all of them legitimate. So what do TV companies do? Demand action on illegal downloads, lobby the authorities to prevent this crime and expecting the government to cough up the cost out of our taxes for policing the entire internet.
Have these TV companies not thought about it. They probably have but come up with the wrong solution. They are still thinking of national boundaries in a world where the boundaries mean nothing.
When NCIS is broadcast in the state it is immediately available to purchase to download from legitimate sources everywhere throughout the world. And the cost to import these shows to TV channels in the UK and elsewhere should reflect that it has been available to download, so reducing broadcast costs to these 'old fashioned' viewers. Maybe then TV viewers would be more tolerant to limited time downloads from BBC iplayer or Sky whatever it's called, because that would be available as part of their broadcast package (license fee or whatever pay TV you have)
Maybe this model is available some where but I haven't met it and doubtless many will rebuff my ideas with legal issues or just having a go because it's stupid and idealistic and not very clever, but it's just some random thoughts.
What I would say is that in this Utopian model the viewer/downloader/purchaser, has a responsibility too, and this of course is where it all falls down, we cannot expect to view anything for nothing. Yes if you want to see the very latest episode of Person of Interest, then you are going to have to buy or rent it at the going rate and not spend hours on line chasing an illegal free source. If you don't want to pay well you'll have to wait till channel 5 or whoever is willing to show it, an 18 month wait at the moment.
One final point is, someone is bound to point out about legal contracts and rights issues and repeat fees and syndication deals. OK I agree this is an issue to those involved in TV etc. what I would say is that downloading has been around how long? Are there still that many archaic contracts out there and if new deals are being set up with antiquated ideas of rights with no acceptance of the modern issues, well sorry that's the fault of the rights holders to site it out.
However, isn't it rather nice that, instead of them just (metaphorically) "sitting on a shelf", their re-sale is actually making some extra money for the LF-funded BBC?
Also, good post Hamlet77.