interlace

Churches Media Conference

The key question is how do you engineer competition for quality. The BBC as the only public service broadcaster would not work. PSB should not be built around failures of the market (types of broadcasting that can't be met by the market).

The opening session was with Tim Gardam who offered a personal view supported by OFCOM statistics. I'll leave you to look up his credentials, but will say that he has held some of the most senior and influential positions in broadcast journalism. He went down the well trodden path of reminding everyone that the media world has changed - a fact of which we must be aware by now.

TV, he said, used to be special, but in the crowded media market place, asked if it was still so. He thinks it is special and can help us embrace ideas that are personally and publically useful, understanding difference and changing the way we think.

The media is changing at a greater rate than culture - there is a mismatch here, he said.
Accademic values must not remain in the academy
Distribution economy has been replaced by attention economy

Changes to the media are eroding authority which relied on one shared conversation (not sure what I think about this - perhaps authorty feels insecure because fewer people are excluded from the "shared" conversation).

TV looks outward, the web is more personal and about people with similar interests. (Actually I think the web broadens our outlook as well, so not as simple as he suggests.)

He said that people go to the internet for basic information but go to the TV for news. In the same set of statistics he pointed to the fact that Local and Regional news was loss making - he must have meant that the public goes to network tv news. Perhaps the research was conducted in London and referes only to network programmes?  News is hugely popular on ITV Local and is often available faster than broadcast news.

The internet is not for entertainment! Yes, he did say this (or at lease the statistics did). This seems quite unbelievable when I see the range of gaming, movies, competitions that are driving interest in the web right now.

He said that TV (as oppsed to the web) alows you to meet people you would never otherwise encounter. I think: Surely the web has given us access to countles people we would never have otherwise met, and often in a more authentic and uncontrolled way. TV has been notoriously the victim of spin doctors, on occasions, and so the word "meet" is used perhaps inaccurately.

TV has never understood the audience as individuals. Other than Sky, TV has never had a one to one customer relationaship with its viewers. I think this is a London perspective; out in the regions there is an impressive relationship with the audience as individuals exemplified in BBC Local Radio.

The key question is how do you engineer competition for quality. The BBC as the only public service broadcaster would not work. PSB should not be built around failures of the market - types of broadcasting that can't be met by the market.

My comment:

All in all I felt that lalk was based heavily on statistics which didn't ring true for me - at least where I am in Yorkshire. I think news in the regions and particularly on the internet in the regions has huge potential which has not yet been properly realised or encouraged. I think the web represents a threat to traditional broadcasters and forms of broadcasting which are often controlled from London. The BBC and ITV as brands have to find a way of protecting their brands and creating a unique environment while at the same time immersing themselves in the dangerous word networks, links and partnerships.

isolated existence?

"in this post-modern world the hunger to belong has rarely been more intense, more urgent. With many of the ancient, traditional shelters now in ruins, it is as if society has lost the art of fostering community. Consumerism propels us towards an ever-more lonely and isolated existence - although technology pretends to unite us, more often than not all it delivers are simulated images that distance us from our lives”.
John O'Donohue

Before your very eyes

I want to suggest that live broadcasting via the internet may offer a more compelling experience than selecting clips from a list or menu.  Unexpected twists and turns, a build to an exciting climax are lost in the world of clips. Something is missing when we fill our basket full of ingredients without experiencing the actual meal. Nibbling at carrots is not the same thing as enjoying the stew served at a table full of guests (sorry, I'm getting carried away).

Story telling is so much a human requirement that watching live can act as a release from the imprisonment of living in fragmented pockets of experience.

Why is live TV so important?  Who cares if something is pre-recorded or not? Is there an importance in sharing a moment in time with other viewers simultaneously not knowing the final outcome?

Clearly in a news context you would not want to imagine that the bulletin was prepared the night before, otherwise we'd wonder if anything had superseded the recording. 

LIVE (and I'll use capitals because we like to shout it) is a selling point. LIVE by satellite was all the rage once.  Indeed the whole point of inventing television was so we could see LIVE pictures. Up until TV was widely available, cinema newsreels could fulfill the need for pre-recorded reports. Of course, video gathering and processing has reduced the turn-around times, but never the less it is it is an important for us to know that news is happening, (and I'll use capitals again) BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES.

LIVE is immediate and fresh, anything could happen, LIVE is not as common as pre-recorded, it is dynamic, exciting and risky. LIVE is also a mark of being BIG. Generally, only the big boys can afford to set up a LIVE broadcast with all its links and paraphernalia.

There are undoubtedly psychological aspects to LIVE. Recently as a plane came into land without its wheels properly engaged a news network carried the pictures of the landing in which there was a strong possibility  that all the occupants of the aircraft could be killed. I have included a recorded version of this below.

Undoubtedly LIVE is an important element in the broadcasting mix. LIVE was the supreme advantage TV had over cinema, together with the fact that it could be delivered where you are - BROUGHT TO YOU, LIVE IN YOUR OWN HOME, as the early promos might have said.

The early years of the internet seem to have seen a backward step. As you know, there is an abundance of out or date material cluttering up this space which makes finding anything fresh and of value a major task.  As an aside, the humble egg timer has re-emerge as an icon of our times. I always find it humbling to see this simple and enduring device whenever there is a clog-up in the system.

So what can the internet learn from television's original selling points? Can "live in your own home" become, LIVE FROM ANYWHERE AND TO ANYWHERE.

Filxwaggon and others now offer the facility to broadcast live from your mobile phone. Much of the content will be trivial and there is the potential for voyeurism, displays of danger and jeopardy, shock and surprise - offerings which will undoubtedly prove addictive.

My bet for the future will be that LIVE will become important for the web just as LIVE was important for TV, together with its supreme portability. We have chosen to sell the web on the basis of non linearity and choice - video on demand and so on.  Might it be that some people will turn their backs on non-linearity and choice in favor of LIVE story telling where anything could happen, chosen or not - a kind of continuing Big Brother.

"Live in fragments no longer. Only connect, and the beast and the monk, robbed of the isolation that is life to either, will die." - E.M. Forster

Now watch this, a plane with landing gear problems is about to make an emergency landing. Imagine if you were a relative of one of the passengers watching this in the airport lounge?

Radiowaves

The activity of putting together a news report, or mulitimedia presentation of any sort, involves a lot of different skills and teamwork. There's no doubt that schools can use media creation as a means of engaging children who find traditionall classroom schooling difficult. 

Radiowaves is an impressive venture which has managed to create a valuable resource for children to play with emerging media forms in a way that only they can. Here's a link to their introduction page
it includes a helpful video.

Know thy medium

As you may know, I am interested in how broadcasters are forging new partnerships with community groups and others who have been their audiences.

In the old world, the audience gathered round and absorbed what the broadcasters told them – today the audiences insists on being involved.

My view is that the submission of randomly gathered user generated content does not constitute a relationship and is not particularly revolutionary; the deal has to run a little deeper than that.

The BBC in Leeds is planning a new series of music shows, ‘Graham Liver Introduces’ which demonstrate that they are looking to develop production partnerships with communities and groups.

The show is a production collaboration between four groups – Leeds College of Music, Leeds Metropolitan University's School of Graphic Design, local musicians and the BBC. I can’t imagine that much cash has exchanged hands, but the project will appeals to those groups because they are genuinely passionate about their respective contributions and are being recognised by the BBC – which of course is good for the CV.

The media of radio, TV, the internet and live music performances are all different spaces with distinctive cultures and creative opportunities. The success of any creative media project is often dependent on how well the produces have understood and worked within that particular space. For decades radio and tv production units have never really seen eye to eye and have consistently misunderstood how each other works. The integration of TV, radio and the web into common newsrooms, for example, has been quite painful (as far as I have see); each group claims a different way of working. I think this springs form the fact that each medium presents its own creative opportunities. Know thy medium, is perhaps the call.

The proposed show appears to be a radio show adapted for TV and broadcast on the internet (a point made by one of my team members). So, what makes and internet show specifically? How can it be distinctive and true to the medium? We shall be interested to see how this show adapts to the space. I’m sure it will be a great success. (Mark W)

You can read about this project here

More than fires, floods and explosions?

I'd like to pick up from an earlier point I made about the there only being a narrow range of UGC offerings to broadcasters - namely fires, floods and explosions. 

This type of material fits well into broadcast news programmes where one of the objectives is to be first with the news. Breaking news before anyone else and with pictures, has long been a mark of a good news service. Footage of breaking news supplied by the public can be a springboard to success for a broadcaster in this respect.

Broadcasters can build authoritative reports around this kind of footage while retaining some kind of ownership and still managing to achieve differentiation between themselves and other services. Perhaps to broaden the range of public UGC used may be to hand over some ownership, especially if they enter into a more collaborative partnership.  In doing so the broadcaster may risk losing some control.

Look North from Leeds has been running a series of one minute films which are part of a film-making competition. Interestingly, for a whole minute, you wouldn't know you are watching Look North - no branding, no familiar presenters, different style. If you switched on the output at the start of the film you may be confused about whose service you are watching. This is a brave step.

In my time at the BBC, I saw the it move from being a producer led organisation to a marketing led organisation. High levels of creative control required to keep the output 'on message'. Every world, every piece of design, every film has to subscribe to the values  and rules of the brand.

My thinking is that broadcasters who really want to embrace a production relationship with the public have to address this issue of control. To carefully control the work being produced is to employ free slave labour for a corporate end. For a broadcaster to open the door to fresh and creative expressions might be to risk unusual, 'off message' voices access to their brand.   

If the broadcaster is to produce a brand that is resilient to public access brand pollution, it will have to embrace a production partnership with the public as part of its brand image. This will require a major investment and will not be cheap option, it should be seen simply as a cost cutting strategy.

So can we as broadcaster make this access - this open door hospitality - an essential part of our brand image?  Can we go into a genuinely creative partnership with the public where it is more than fires, floods and explosions? (Mark W)

East Leeds FM

Community radio for East Leeds is proving popular with listeners and is a great way for young people to get involved with the media. I had the pleasure of giving some of the volunteers a guided tour of the ITV Calendar studios and boy were they keen.

As part of the visit they produced a podcast in which they asked me a number of probing questions about ITV Local Yorkshire, and so I shall provide this link. (Mark W)

Have you got the nerve TV

Here's a refreshing idea. Mark Bowness behind Tribewanted has come up with an idea for a new kind of production company. For a modest sum you can become one of 3000 executive producers - people looking for adventure, people with ideas and people with production skills.  He promises that all the participants will share in the success of the specific projects he is proposing.

Whichever way you look at it, this is another way of pulling together and managing the undoubted talents that exist in bedrooms, garages and sheds everywhere. Quite how they will interact I'm not completely sure; What will be the nature of their working relationship?  If the whole production process can be contained within this virtual workspace it will be revolutionary. (Mark W)

Have you got the nerve TV

But is it a revolution?

Whenever we talk about user generated content, the subject of July 7 usually comes up. At the time of the bombings it is said that one BBC executive sat at home watching the user generated images streaming onto the news and declared, "this is a revolution".  But what kind of revolution is it?

Back in the late 1970s I was a teenager contributing to my BBC local radio station output. Along with a number of other citizens, I would take my tape recorder out and capture anything that might be of interest. BBC Radio Leeds, my station, also employed the talents or Harry Gration as sports reporter and Frank Pagden as religious  producer among other "citizens" (most of whom became professional).

We used to make full use of the radio car - it would be out on the streets everyday and whenever a story  broke the reporter would round up citizen eye witnesses who would describe what they saw or experienced.

My point is that the excitement around user generated content, expressed by the aforementioned BBC executive, is a very London centric response. My esteemed network colleagues seems less aware than most that UGC has been the lifeblood of local broadcasting for a very long time.

Viewers who send in footage are doing so by way of an eye witness account; Instead of describing what they witnessed, they are now able to show what they witnessed. But I don't think this is a quantum leap. I also think that the range of material offered in this way is very narrow - focusing, as it does, on fires, floods and explosions.

This is not to say that what we are seeing isn't revolutionary. It is true that whenever  something happens there will most likely be a citizen to record it - such has been the impact of technology. The professionals to feel the impact of this shift most are probably the news camera teams who may not be the first on the scene. (Mark W)

Natural intimacy

I was talking with someone today who runs a voluntary city radio station. This person made some comparisons between the small community based operation and the larger "professional" countywide station.

It seemed that the stories to come through the community based station were far more original, exciting and in tune with the community than the larger station. Even though the journalists on the larger station had more experience, they often struggled to find contributors on any given topic (or indeed find the stories in the first place). 

There is a sense in which being professional somehow takes you one step away from the action. The community of volunteers have all got day jobs which provide valuable connections throughout the city. Being professional citizens (as opposed to professional broadcasters) means that they are embedded within community life.

Added to this natural intimacy, the patch is smaller and more manageable.  The net result is that the community volunteers has a very immediate and real presence among the people they are serving.

This intimacy also has the effect of challenging conventional news values. The smalltime citizen journalists will often make surprising choices - extending into areas not normally covered by the main broadcasters. And where the choices are the same, the citizen journalist may have better information than the professional.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the big boys of the broadcasting world will hurry to embrace the informed, creative and above all economical approach of these emerging storytellers. (Mark W)