The October 12 issue of B&T Magazine published an article on the attempts of television networks to dominate 'second screening' by consumers. The story, The Social TV Race (pp14-19) by Lucy Clark explains that people are now using their smart phones or tablets whilst simultaneously watching television. An occurence labelled second screening. In Australia, their is a push by TV networks to create the first social TV app widely used by consumers. Fango was the first to establish itself in collaboration with Channel 7 in November 2011, followed by Jump-in owned by Ninemsn just prior to the 2012 Olympics. Zeebox, in partnership with Network 10 was launched in Australia in October 2012. The idea is for these apps to work not only as digital avenues to access information regarding television programs, but for them to facilitate interaction between viewers who can share their questions, comments and passion for particular shows in a shared space.
But do these social TV apps really offer consumers anything new? Do they provide value for consumers? And can the improvement of these apps translate into network loyalty/profitability for their creators?
Let's first address the initial question. Is this anything new? I would argue no. Anyone has the potential to check program scheduling in a number of ways (whether it be in a newspaper or online). And more importantly, social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook, which already have gigantic followings, enable users to question, post and share with friends their queries, thoughts and suggestions.
Do these apps provide any real value for consumers? All information about certain shows can be accessed on or through these apps granting consumers the convenience of having all data in the same place. However, will a comparatively low number of users (Fango has just over 500, 000) when compared with the likes of Twitter, their is little for consumers to gain out of sharing their experiences with others on these apps.
Obviously there are a significant number of people second screening whilst watching telly on the couch, and there are loads of people who get a kick out of sharing their love for one or many TV shows with like-minded others online. But will set ups like Jump-in and Zeebox actually equate to improved ratings for broadcasters? I doubt it. "The more people that use [these apps], the more valuable they are" (p18) so reaching a critical mass is important. The issue is that the need for posting online about what an individual is watching is already being met.
Television networks are trying hard to get a share of the market of consumers second screening to boost their ratings, loyalty and revenue streams. I'm just not convinced this is the way to go about it.
If social apps like Fango could offer more for their users and boost the number of people who use them regularly, they could be beneficial to the television companies. Any ideas of how they could do this?
But do these social TV apps really offer consumers anything new? Do they provide value for consumers? And can the improvement of these apps translate into network loyalty/profitability for their creators?
Let's first address the initial question. Is this anything new? I would argue no. Anyone has the potential to check program scheduling in a number of ways (whether it be in a newspaper or online). And more importantly, social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook, which already have gigantic followings, enable users to question, post and share with friends their queries, thoughts and suggestions.
Do these apps provide any real value for consumers? All information about certain shows can be accessed on or through these apps granting consumers the convenience of having all data in the same place. However, will a comparatively low number of users (Fango has just over 500, 000) when compared with the likes of Twitter, their is little for consumers to gain out of sharing their experiences with others on these apps.
Obviously there are a significant number of people second screening whilst watching telly on the couch, and there are loads of people who get a kick out of sharing their love for one or many TV shows with like-minded others online. But will set ups like Jump-in and Zeebox actually equate to improved ratings for broadcasters? I doubt it. "The more people that use [these apps], the more valuable they are" (p18) so reaching a critical mass is important. The issue is that the need for posting online about what an individual is watching is already being met.
Television networks are trying hard to get a share of the market of consumers second screening to boost their ratings, loyalty and revenue streams. I'm just not convinced this is the way to go about it.
If social apps like Fango could offer more for their users and boost the number of people who use them regularly, they could be beneficial to the television companies. Any ideas of how they could do this?
No comments:
Post a Comment