How online content creators can break into the TV news business

 

At the MIPTV conference in Cannes during the first week of April, online content was right at the center of the annual TV programming market. Dozens of online content producers were in Cannes, explaining what they do, who is watching and who is buying.

One of the most interesting sessions for news people introduced creators of “second screen applications” – online content for mobile devices designed specifically to enhance the television viewing experience, one of the hottest trends in online content development.

News and factual programming seem ripe for second screen applications. Here are a few thoughts for creators of online content who are thinking of pitching their idea to news organizations. As potential clients, news programs have some "special" characteristics, unique from the requirements of fiction, sports, reality and game show programming where second screen applications are already well established.

First of all, there definitely is a market among broadcast news organizations (both public service broadcasters and private stations, television and radio) for these types of applications. All the broadcasters are seeking, naturally, to increase their audience share and this remains a primary focus, something they are working on constantly. This is particularly important now, in an era of increasingly fragmented market shares.

The rollout of all-digital television in Germany in 2012, for example, with 100+ new channels, adversely and dramatically affected the market share of all the biggest players in Europe’s largest television market. Some of the majors saw program ratings drop by as much as 1/3 after the digital rollout, while very other small, previously invisible channels showed a dramatic increase in their audiences. Eventually the quality of the programs and how they are promoted will even things out, but there is a lot of concern about the changing dynamics in audience share right now.

The bottom line is anything that increases (or has the potential to increase) the market share of news and factual programming will be looked at with a lot of interest, especially anything that seems to attract younger, more educated and more affluent audiences, and for sure that's how online content creators should present their services to news organizations initially.

However, online content companies should also recognize that news organizations have certain characteristics which set them apart from other types of potential clients. Doing news is a source of a lot of pride within most parent companies, giving legitimacy and credibility in a way game shows, reality programs, entertainment, sports and advertising never could. Successful news organizations consistently draw large audiences and can be significant profit centers for their parent companies and, by reporting on issues of significance, provide real value to audiences and pride for their parent companies.

Key market success factors in news include a combination of credible, compelling content and talent, a relentlessly competitive attitude and a strong focus on promotion. The producers of news and factual programming are good at what they do. It's why, despite diminishing audience share every year, television remains the dominant medium for news and factual programming worldwide, why the bulk of advertising dollars still goes to TV, and why the source of so much content online is actually television.

One of the things that makes news a tough market for the new generation of digital / online content is that many news organizations are frankly not convinced of its real value. Definitely they all know they have to be there and they are doing it just like everyone else, but because the numbers they see are not particularly persuasive, for now they are not putting many resources into it.

The online units of many of the top tier broadcast news organizations are small, with few people working on it; the budgets for online content are usually a fraction of the overall news budget. The reason is obvious. While broadcasters recognize the phenomenal growth in online users over the past few years, which they can't ignore, overall the numbers for online are still disappointing compared with their traditional platforms. Lower numbers, less resources, it’s that simple.

So, while it's important to be there, for now online content remains a sideshow for the biggest news organizations. A common perception is that online content can increase audience share marginally in the direction of younger audiences, but not as something that helps their broadcast platforms, which have far bigger audiences and which are the main source of their revenue and profitability.

Decision-makers in news are tough, skeptical people. They do a lot of audience research and understand exactly what audience share is, where it comes from and what it means to their businesses. That's good news for online content providers, who will find a receptive audience for precise numbers-driven analysis, despite the perception that many of the top television executives are conservative people unwilling to move away from what they see as their "core businesses."

But there is a disconnect between what news people hear about online content and what they can see. Many of the fabulous claims providers of online content and data services make about what they are delivering seem like rhetoric and hype to experienced news executives. For example, the fact that Twitter right now is the heart of most second screen applications could be a challenge. When people from Twitter cite a number like "3.3 billion Twitter impressions" it may not be particularly impressive to buyers in news. Many news people simply don't understand what that means, or how it could possibly be useful to their business model. The fact that the Oscars 2014 selfie (which was an advertisement organized by Samsung) was the most tweeted image of all time says a lot about Twitter, and does not necessarily enhance Twitter's credibility as a serious news source. 

More importantly, the hot new trend of "seamlessly blending" factual content and advertising into what is known as branded content and native advertising, particularly online, is anathema to top news organizations. They have battled for years with advertisers, owners and general managers who wanted to integrate ad content into news programming. Today advertising is always "fenced off" in broadcast news, and the result is the most dominant news medium the world has ever seen. Broadcasters have spent many years building the reputations they enjoy (and the audience share and profits that go with it) and know how easily those reputations could be destroyed. They will always be cautious to use any content that has advertising embedded in it. In the case of many of Europe's public service broadcasters, the practice is actually illegal, violating their mandate to serve the public transparently.

The challenge to reach these buyers will be to show news organizations how online content can build audience share on their traditional broadcast platforms. That growth can be expressed in raw numbers, or potentially even more interesting, by bringing in a new, younger demographic to broadcast platforms via online engagement. Giving broadcasters the tools, via a second screen application for example, to do this would definitely be something they would look at.

My suggestions for online content producers who want to successfully develop clients in news and factual programming include:

- Make your potential buyers understand how second screen applications are not a mirror of television but indeed a totally different experience than TV; that it enhances the viewing experience without drawing audience away from it.

- Educate them about how to value and evaluate success in the online medium; for example, explain how "engagement" - now defined as number of hits/views + time of interaction - is a deeper metric and why it important for the specific demographics they are trying to reach. Explain that value in online content is no longer only about the number of unique views.

- The fact that the content of a second screen application could be "moderated" by a journalist will be very attractive to news organizations. This will go a long way toward defusing the concerns about commercialism/branded content in something that will be associated with a news product.

- Be clear about the numbers; audience share, demographics and trends. Positive growth comparisons are good (this year vs last year, broadcast vs online, etc.) Don't worry about small numbers overall; the important thing will be to focus on growth and the potential for that, particularly among younger users and the users of mobile devices.

- Be up front and transparent about the role ad content plays in your offer. Obviously news organizations are not against advertising, indeed they are largely dependent on it, but ads associated with a news or factual program need to be clearly labelled. Assure the client you are sensitive to how transparency about ad content works in relation to the particular application they are buying.

And here's the "holy grail" – if you can show potential clients in news how a second screen application would direct a significant number or demographic back to the broadcast platform, that would be absolutely epic. If this can be demonstrated consistently and very importantly, with the numbers to back it up, you could be looking at a huge breakthrough in developing clients in news.

My sense is that most news organizations not only want this type of service for their audiences, but are starting to realize that they cannot do this themselves. More and more they are recognizing they need real experts in online content development to make it happen for them; to show them what's out there and to show them how it can be done.

When it comes to providing online content and second screen applications, the interest and the desire is there in every news organization. But the value versus the costs need to be clearly expressed, as well as an understanding of how news organizations work to both serve their audiences and be profitable.

The new "Chaplin" era

The old "nobody knows anything" attitude about the web is giving way to increasing recognition that emotional, compelling content and storytelling is proving to be decisive in drawing audiences online.

The story “structures” will be different (as television is from radio, as cinema is from print, print is from online) but structures will be found.

We are still in the “Charlie Chaplin era” of a new medium, but the Chaplin figures are out there trying to understand and write the rules right now.

Some early patterns show promise in attracting and engaging audiences online.

Successful online content producers:

Think a lot about the user experience and design content and platforms based on that.

Actively engage with their audiences and build infrastructures for that to happen.

Change program elements quickly in response to selected audience comments.

Budget more on distribution and promoting content, less on production values.

Have a solid understanding of how search drives audience to content.

Are moving away from online display ads and more toward paid subscriptions.

Seek creative partnerships with corporations and funders, not just “sponsors.”

While TV is as big as it ever was, more people are watching it the way they want to, on their computers and small screens.

The challenge for content creators and those who fund them is to identify the patterns and rules that work best to express content in the new online medium, especially for smaller screens as PCs begin to fade from the scene.

How to build an audience online

Demoralized online content creators who see "The Toilet Flushing Cat" racking up millions of hits and getting more every day should take heart... remember it's just one video.

Successfully getting audiences to consistently engage with your content online is no accident, and there are specific things you can do to build an audience online, including: 

"Easy entry" is essential. There should be no context necessary for the viewer to engage with your content. Each of your videos should be able to stand on its own: easily understandable and immediately compelling.

Minimize branding and opening credits. Get right to the action.

Short chapters engage audiences.

"Topical" works. This is especially good news for news people and news organizations. Consider what people are searching for every day. What's happening right now, what's relevant, what's new, unusual and breaking stereotypes are what people are constantly looking for and sharing online. 

Cross promotion builds audience share. Give your target audiences as many opportunities as possible to find and share your content. Have a presence and playlist on as many video platforms as possible, including YouTube, DailyMotion and Vimeo. Create a dedicted Facebook page, Twitter feed and Instagram site specifially about your content. When you have created something new, update each site with your new content simultaneously.

Seek subscribers. People are 20% more likely to view new content if they subscribe to it. Alert your subsciber base each time you add new content to your site.

  

Optimize for search. Use lots of tags and metadata. Invest time and energy into thumbnails, keywords and especially provacative, intuitively searchable titles and headlines. Make it easy for the audience to find you.

Use analytics to show who was watching and for how long; identify patterns; why are some of your videos rising ("trending") or falling off in your ratings?

What makes a YouTube star?

A YouTube star is not a celebrity but “a friend” to the audience.

  

An “authentic” personality who speaks about ordinary human experience.

Uses low production values...
 
Is intensely focused on distribution... 

Has a subscriber base..

 

...and actively cross-promotes content on multiple social platforms.
 

For example...

Jenna Marbles is a self-described “blogger and entertainer” who has uploaded about 200 of her homemade videos since 2010. According to the New York Times she is one of the few content creators to reach more than one billion hits on YouTube and twelve million subscribers.

She is not a celebrity (well, she is now) and she writes and shoots most of her videos herself in her apartment using her laptop; very low production values. 

But: she is talented and funny (and uses a lot of profanity); she is “a friend” to the audience, an authentic personality who speaks about ordinary human experiences in a very amusing way; her weekly topics include: "Interrupting Adele" (10 million views); Drunk Makeup Tutorial" (17 million); "What Girls Do in the Bathroom in the Morning" (25 million); "What Girls Do in Cars" (32 million).

She actively cross-promotes her weekly content, promoting it on multiple social platforms including Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and gets around 1 million views a day. 

As of 2013 (estimated by Comscore) YouTube has paid Jenna Marbles about $350,000 dollars for her videos.

Why the new golden age of TV is not on TV

People who say they never watch TV, especially young people, are actually huge consumers of TV programs, but they watch on computers, tablets and smartphones, getting the TV experience the way they want it.

The web medium is new, and it's a completely different experience for the user, as unique as television is from radio, as cinema is from print.

Just like "traditional" media, online content has its own rules for engaging audiences... and they are still being discovered, especially about the behavior of online audiences.

It turns out audiences are very particular about what they will watch online.

Online audiences...

...will engage only with intuitively usable platforms and content. Will not engage with platforms that don’t give them the experience they want.

...want content that is emotional, personality driven and “authentic” ( not “polished” like broadcast.)

...will share content if it reaches them emotionally.

...want their input to be a) heard and b) integrated into their favorite shows online.

...are fiercely passionate – true fans who are very loyal and knowledgeable about “their” content online.

The bottom line for online content creators? Keep in mind your audience fully expects a specific experience online - content that is easy to find, to view and interact with, to comment on and to share.

"Chaos Storytelling"

During a recent project for factual television producers, one of the participants asked if there was any way to "break out" of the same old beginning / middle / end - character/conflict/resolution story structure that has held away for producers and their audiences since Aristotle first articulated it all those years ago.  He wanted to know if there is something he called "chaos storytelling" - a way to tell stories for television which don't always have the rigid character/conflict structure and a neat and complete ending.

For me, the best place to start thinking more about the idea of "chaos storytelling" (as opposed to "structured" storytelling) would be to read Erich Auerbach's famous essay "Odysseus' Scar" from his book "Memesis: the representation of reality in Western Literature." Auerbach explains the origins of Aristotle's idea, and how, back then, he had a rival who was equally influential, with exactly the opposite approach to storytelling.

Ovid's "Metamorphosis" is a good example of how memorable stories can be told without any kind of definitive ending or structure. In Ovid's approach, stories are about "continuous transformation" - from the grotesque to the beautiful to the shocking to the reassuring, etc. etc. etc. There's no end to it, and that's what the Metamorphosis was all about. Ovid's "message" is there is no clear "resolution" to stories (and in life)... we just keep changing.

The ancient Indian epic "The Mahabharata" follows a similar pattern to Ovid; there are few clear winners and losers in its incredible collection of stories. And deeply connected to the Mahabharata are the fantastic Indonesian shadow puppet plays known as the "Wayang." The art of storytelling in the Wayang is fascinating (everything is told in shadow and seen through smoke, which represents desire and human failings); it is very deep and has profound things to say about human stories. Again, like Ovid and the great Indian epics, the Wayang has no clear winners, losers or final resolutions.

My colleague's question made me think - could "chaos" and Ovid's ideas about impermanence and change be the key to storytelling for a completely new medium that is all about continuous transformation... the web?

Telling your science story on film and video

I do a lot of work with scientists and researchers, and many of them want to know how to make a short film about their research for their presentations, the websites of their institutions and research centers and for online platforms.

My message to scientists is: telling the story of your research in a short film or video is possible. It’s a LOT of work and it takes a lot of time. But it is a fun process, and helps you think differently about your work (which is good). Your audience will respond.

First, answer the most basic question of all: who is your film “for?” Your film is for an audience. That means, you have to express your ideas about your research in a way that your audience understands. That's an easy concept to understand but much more difficult to execute properly.

For example, audiences within your scientific discipline might have one expectation for your film. People in science, but outside the discipline might have another expectation. And the general public has another expectation altogether. So it's tricky. It is essential that you keep your target audience in mind when you think about how you want to tell your story film or video.

The two key structures we use to explain scientific research in the medium of film or television are:

• Processes

• Character driven stories

A "process" is simply describing step-by-step, in a logical way, to your audience how a certain result was reached. Obviously because that matches your work process, it's an ideal structure for expressing scientific research on video. But what's essential is the process is explained clearly and understandably for your audience. "Processes" in films about science are quite common and usually quite effective.

Process: animation

The most basic approaches involve simple computer animation. Some creative scientists have taken animation a step further, to tell a short story about their research:

Proteins Protagonistes by Ignasi Buch and Inés Navarro

Process: live action

The next level of telling your science story using a process involves live-action and “real people.” It's a step above simple animation, but the principle of showing a process is still very clear. Here is an example of a process using live action. This one uses a very technical, step-by-step approach. Videos like this are quite common in science today:

Gene Transfer to the Developing Mouse Inner Ear by Oregon Hearing Research Center

Process: visual metaphors

The next step up in making your process more interesting for audiences is using a “visual metaphor” to explain your process. What's most important is that the metaphor is a simple one, easy for your audience to understand. That also makes it easier to visualize (shoot.)

Chemical Party by EC EU Science

Alcohol Consumption during Pregnancy by Susana Eva Martinez PRBB Intervals Programme

The Epigenetics of Identical Twins by LearnGenetics

Character-driven stories

Now the next level up from "process” stories are what are called "character-driven stories." A character-driven story is the "gold standard" for storytelling in film and television, because audiences respond extremely well, if they are done well. But there’s a big drawback: process stories are easy, character driven stories are very, very hard to do well.

The topic has to be strong enough to support a character driven structure with enough built-in, ever worsening conflicts to keep the audience with you, and the character, and what is happening to them, has to be strongly compelling for the audience.

That's a tall order and obviously means not every scientific or research theme is suitable for a character-driven story. But when everything comes together there are few structures more powerful for audiences:

Bicycle Spoon Apple by Carlos Bosch

If you want to do a character-driven film about your research, here are the key points to consider when it comes to structuring and planning your idea:

• Who is affected (your “character”)?

• The stakes have to be the highest possible for the character (the loss of life, by the way, is the highest)

• You don't tell what happens, until the end

“Sense of wonder”

This is quite possibly why a lot of researchers got into science in the first place. It is the "sense of wonder" about scientific research, and the challenge of visualizing that on film.

This is perhaps the most famous example of inspiring a “sense of wonder” about science in audiences.

Powers of 10 by Charles and Ray Eames

Millions of people have seen “Powers of 10” since it was made in the 1960s. It is directly responsible for inspiring tens of thousands of young people around the world to pursue a career in science. That's not a bad goal for your own film about your research!