CASE STUDY: iVIEW
Taking a closer look at the ABC’s online time-shifting portal, iView, there is still much room for development. Yes, it was designed specifically and exclusively as a ‘catch up service’, and was never intended to rival broadcast television as a primary media source. Yet the potential is there for something much bigger than simply a back-up provider; it has the opportunity to secure an audience that rarely watches broadcast television, an audience that possesses a decidedly modern taste for watching programs on the go, as soon as possible - even illegally.
There is the chance to provide television for a generation who would prefer to watch an entire series on an online platform, never caring to view the program on the format it was originally created for. This trend has been present in the world of radio for some time, as podcasting has allowed audio content to transcend the radio medium. It is now possible for avid listeners to tune into a podcast of a popular radio segment and never actually hear the show broadcast live. Some listeners may not even be aware that the radio program can be heard elsewhere (Winter, 2012). This is now happening with television, as broadcast content is being watched on literally any screen that can process it. Computers, mobiles and tablets are encroaching on the capabilities of the television, yet broadcasters appear nonplussed. Online streaming is being embraced as a primary source of content and younger demographics are engaging themselves with or without the content distributor’s consent. |
iView plays an important role in weaning audiences off their dependence on scheduling, which has long been entrenched as the only reception method available for Australian television viewers. Despite its intention as the facilitator of missed viewing sessions, iView has inevitably evolved into a viewing platform that is somewhat independent from its broadcast counterpart. For instance, a recent series of Doctor Who became available on iView before its premiere on Australian television on ABC1 (ABC TV Blog, 2010). If this were simply a catch-up service, new offerings would never make their screen debut via streaming; there is clearly a movement underway from mere time-shifting to exclusive, first viewing on-demand content.
The official ABC TV blog claims that the decision to premiere Doctor Who on their online platform two days before traditional broadcast would “provide incentive for more viewers to discover iView, and experience how convenient and easy-to-use it is” (ABC TV Blog, 2010). Yet considering its success, (over 112,000 people watched the new episode on iView) one wonders why the practice has taken this long to gain traction (Broughall, 2010). The move from purely catch-up to ‘specialty programming’ was confirmed by ABC’s Director of Television, Kim Dalton, in his announcement that following Doctor Who’s success, shows such as Spicks and Specks would also be available first online (Knox, 2010). User comments on the ABC TV blog accurately summarise the limitations of the iView portal, pinpointing poor picture quality, delayed release of anticipated titles and the poor capacity of local internet connections. It is highly unfortunate that such criticism can be given to Australia’s leading free online television service, as the current commercial offerings: Plus7, ninemsn video, and Channel 10’s self titled video player all perform at a much less satisfactory level. The only other comparison for iView is, unsurprisingly, SBS On Demand, operated by the other government owned station, SBS. Audiences have voiced anger over the long delays between US and UK air dates to those offered here in Australia, where distributors are infamous for holding off on popular content until the local ratings season begins. This delay can last months, and often plot information or narrative ‘spoilers’ from overseas become impossible for viewers to avoid online. One blog commenter succinctly defined the phenomenon, stating that Australians “want to watch programs as soon as they are available and at a time convenient to them” (ABC TV Blog, 2010). Another said it was “great to see that the ABC has finally done right by fans and will screen the new series of Doctor Who with a minimal delay” (ABC TV Blog, 2010). |
However, the platform receives a fair amount of criticism regarding the quality of picture, which one must agree, is currently subpar. Described by a particularly vitriolic user as “blocky, laggy niche delivery” (Knox, 2010), the compression and pixilation of some iView videos is so extreme that it challenges even the most committed viewer. In a video environment where high definition is the norm, watching content that is of a poorer quality than even standard definition, it poses a deal breaker for television purists. Of course, offering greater image resolution simply compounds the problem of limited bandwidth, and thus, distributors easily find themselves in an expensive catch twenty-two.
What seems obvious, though, is that viewers are willing to forgive broadcasters for low-fidelity images if the narrative is delivered in a timely fashion - as many users are not simply watching for the picture, but the story it facilitates. iView statistics show that hundreds of thousands of Australians would rather be up to date with the leading countries in the world so that they too, can join in on the conversations occurring online, and more actively participate in fan culture. Viewers are willing to compromise on viewing quality for a chance to not be late to the party; a feeling Australian audiences know all too well. But how is this changing the form of the content being produced? New reception methods (and locations) will surely trigger a change in the way this type of media appears. One benefit of on-demand video services is that they are better able to calculate who is watching what. This ability precedes the natural next step in television interactivity; tailored viewing experiences, where advertising and content is altered depending on how or when it is viewed. A commercial response to iView would require some form of advertising to remain profitable, and what better way to target a certain demographic than collecting and profiling user information during their access to video portals. Not unlike YouTube’s ability to offer ‘recommended’ or ‘similar’ content, television portals can intelligently determine what a particular viewer has already seen, or may like to see. By actively tracking what a viewer is watching, the service can ensure that a television series is watched in correct episodic sequential order, and the need for repeat viewings would likely decrease. Today’s television dramas often contain heavy exposition, necessary to refresh infrequent viewers or to help bring new viewers up to speed. Using a catch-up service like iView, viewers could access episodes from the beginning of the series instead of jumping straight into the middle. Narratives would no longer need to accommodate so generously for the awkward rehashing of previous action because viewers would be more aware of an individual episode’s context within a seasonal arc, and have the choice to view the narrative in order if desired. |