Why the connected experience revolution is yet to be televised
Imagine watching TV with your family and friends and effortlessly being able to see who an actor is, or what else they were in, without trekking around the web looking for the info. Or taking part in a quiz show, voting for Man of the Match or giving your opinion to a TV pundit, without having to pick up the phone or write an email. How about doing something really useful with the ads like requesting a sample for a new cereal or winning Tesco’s vouchers? Or taking a breakfast news feature with you on your morning commute, so you can watch the rest of it?
Not everybody wants to do any of this, but an increasingly large number of us do, and at this point, everyone should be able to. It would benefit consumers, broadcasters, device manufacturers, retailers and media agencies. Yet the connected experience, where it appears, offers only disconnected fragments of the vision above.
Connected experiences which seamlessly fuse second screens and connected TVs have been ‘the future of TV’ for so long it almost feels like a returning series. Despite the enablers and technology being in place this seismic shift in the viewing experience stubbornly refuses to mainstream. Why is this?
There are three dimensions to the failure of connected TV and second screen to live up to the excitement and visions they have generated: the consumer, the broadcast industry and connected device technology.
Consumers lag behind the broadcast industry in their behaviours and understanding, which leads to low uptake for connected entertainment experiences with a TV focus, though it is increasing. The broadcast industry lags behind the current capabilities of connected device technology and the agencies that understand it. Established linear formats and commissioning practices form obstacles that need to be overcome. Connected device technology itself undermines its own potential through a lack of standards, fragmentation of platforms, poor performance and poor usability. Fluxx’s white paper examines these dimensions in depth.
Here at Fluxx we believe there are great opportunities ahead for courageous clients to unlock the unrealised value of the connected dream, despite the issues. If you doubt this, consider just one aspect of the connected experience: Social TV. Nielsen – a global information and measurement company – and Twitter agreed a new metric in December 2012 for Social TV audience measurement, the Nielsen Twitter TV Rating. In addition, Facebook is working in partnership with Nielsen to develop Nielsen Online Campaign ratings. These developments indicate a serious and credible intent to pursue TV advertising as a revenue stream. Establishing Social TV metrics and unlocking advertising dollars would ignite the second screen sector.
The white paper explores the issues that underpin the fragmented reality, the steps needed to accelerate progress and what’s required to live the dream. It has been drawn up for broadcasters, content producers, agencies, device manufacturers, brands and retailers with media interests.
There is a great opportunity in this space right now to experiment with new models and test these with consumers. Ease of use and supporting familiar behaviours will be essential elements of a successful outcome, and the quality of the consumer experience will be as important as the effectiveness of the technological execution for mass adoption. Fluxx can support clients in developing multiscreen strategies and product innovation to realise the connected dream.
The future looks rewarding, the future is connected.
I have been in Interactive Digital TV since 2000 and the Future of TV has little to do with the TV technology industry but more to do with the people working in this domain. Especially their inability to work together for the good of the industry and the consumer. I have seen many a company representative overly complicate initiatives, work negatively in consortia so that initiatives fail, create situations that inhibit harmonisation, becasue they have a proprietary solution that they want to sell ahead of all others and I have seen corporations get greedy when it comes to IPR and obtaining their slice of the pie to the detriment of these harmonisation initiatives. All the technologies are in place to day for a successful interactive, 2nd screen market but people are unable to make it happen. Broadcasters want to go it alone, Operators want to control it all, Vendors believe they have the winning technology, Advertisers are late to the game. The Interactive Companion Screen jigsaw is being put together by people wearing blindfolds. If you can align the people you can create the environment and head in the right direction with the right technology. The latest round of attempts with Tablets and Smart-phones are failing miserably as everyone invents a new mousetrap and interactive TV history repeats itself.
Thanks Anthony for sharing your thoughts and experience, and apologies for the delayed response.
“All the technologies are in place today for a successful interactive, 2nd screen market but people are unable to make it happen.”
I absolutely agree with you that we have everything we need in terms of technologies. I would add that we also have everything we need in terms of understanding the user experience. Second screen’s experimental phase should really be over now. There is enough collective experience to establish best practice guidelines and create engaging products for the consumer.
As you say, there are a lot of vested interests which resist harmonisaton initiatives and sustain fragmentation. Perhaps the way to align people is to appeal to their self-interest by developing second screen business models and highlighting the opportunity cost of maintaining the status quo.
Nicely cogent summary of where this medium is at, Tony.
I’d challenge one assumption that runs throughout the piece, though: the lack “a serious and credible intent to pursue TV advertising as a revenue stream”. Why would anyone bother? TV advertising has a questionable future (despite the short-term statistical evidence that TV industry boosters keep coming up with, for starters.
But, more critically, if you are creating a ‘blended’ medium, why would you build a business model around the part that’s in decline, rather than around the bit that’s taking off? And no – give me credit, please, I’m not talking about online advertising.
For a sense of a more promising direction, look no further that the dynamic relationships the more savvy e-commerce brands are forging between high quality content, products and transactions. They’re just one example, but they show how real innovation, which embraces the entire media/brand ecosystem, can succeed.
Here’s the ‘final’ tidied-up version!
Nicely cogent summary of where this medium is at, Tony.
I’d challenge one assumption that runs throughout the piece, though: the lack of “a serious and credible intent to pursue TV advertising as a revenue stream”. Why would anyone bother? TV advertising has a questionable future (despite the short-term statistical evidence that TV industry boosters keep coming up with)
But, more critically, if you are creating a ‘blended’ medium, why would you build a business model around the part that’s in decline, rather than around the bit that’s taking off? And no – give me credit, please, I’m not talking about online advertising.
For a sense of a more promising direction, look no further that the dynamic relationships the more savvy e-commerce brands are forging between high quality content, products and transactions. They’re just one example, but they show how real innovation, which embraces the entire media/brand ecosystem, can succeed.
Thanks for your thoughts Steve, tidy and untidy!
Just to be clear, you’re saying that one assumption in the piece, that there is significant revenue to be generated through connected experiences which provide targeted, integrated opportunities for brands, is the wrong route to explore as TV advertising is arguably in decline? And there are more innovative approaches evolving out there to learn from?
Great paper, Tony, congrats. In my opinion we are experiencing an exciting moment where user habits are changing when talking about consuming TV. Broadcasters, who have always been the powerful players in the TV ecosystem, need to change the way they´ve been doing TV, which more and more is changing from pasive to active. In order to do so, technology companies´ role is vital, which will allow viewers/users to comment, vote, participate in real-time and purchase while watching TV. Advertisers, on the other hand, can´t stay away, and they are introducing themselves into this new exciting context by becoming their brands interactive (i.e Shazam) or broadcasting their spots simultaneously on the second screen(as Zeebox has started to do). Connected experiences are already here, and they’ll stay with us in the future. We just need to think the best way to keep audience interested on them.
[...] to developing second screen applications to fulfil the full potential of advanced advertising which our white paper explores in detail, and also solutions. So if your media agency isn’t discussing second screen [...]