»English Article (via: Online Media Daily)
In its success, however, lie the seeds of value destruction for its TV network creators… The report derives the figure of $920 per viewer lost to Hulu by estimating that Hulu runs four ads each hour at a $50 CPM compared to 32 ads during each hour of programming on TV at a $35 CPM. ($1,120-$200 = $920). Hulu has not disclosed actual ad sales or ad rates.
The convergence of TV and web is a dilemma in itself. While the Internet can provide contents at lower cost and higher convenience, the only reason why services such as Hulu can attract users is because of the programs that they provide. If the current business model sustains and therefore revenues from TV commercials continues to decline, with all else held constant, the quality of any given show will diminish due to simply budget cuts. As long as the industry continues to be on board with the current business model, only those who can provide popular shows will survive and the rest will be history. “Survival of the fittest,” I guess.
How do we break this negative spiral? How can we create a win-win situation for both TV and Internet? I think the first step is to carefully analyze the differences of those two media. TV is a public medium, where as the Internet is very private. TV is capable of sending mass messages whereas the Internet is better at sending targeted messages. TV has a time constraint in which one can view a show, whereas the Internet is capable of on-demand streaming. TV shows and commercials generate higher cost and revenue than that of Internet videos.
Perhaps a good strategy is to use the Internet as a place of experimentation, which is commonly seen by amateur creators on YouTube and other video sharing websites. Professional productions should move to the Internet as a forum of experimenting new entertainment. The low-cost-low-risk environment coupled with a great potential of buzz creation makes Internet an ideal “playground” for creators to innovate. After such experimentation, those that seem to work can be broadcasted on air to cause wider awareness to a more general audience. This will not only push the creative limits of existing TV entertainment, but also will contribute in providing a continuous flow of fresh and unseen forms of entertainment, giving viewers a reason not to abandon their TV sets and cable contracts.
A very good example of this is BeeTV, a Japanese mobile-based movie streaming service. By paying a monthly fee of roughly $4, users gain access to a variety of original programs (that are not re-runs or existing programs distributed by external vendors, conglomerates and cable TV stations) on their mobile phone. There are many experimental programs being distributed through this service, and because more Japanese consumers access the Internet through their mobile phones than computers, the number of registered users are in a rapid increase.
Another extremely interesting and unique case of CGM is Nico Nico Douga, a popular Japanese video sharing website. The uniquess of this website comes from the high degree of user involvement. The most distinguishing feature of this website is that any user can anonymously comment on the uploaded videos, and every user can view comments of one another. An example can be seen here. This is one of the popular MAD videos that remixes an anime opening with Ronald McDonald. The letters the flowing from the right to the left are archived user comments (or annotations). The entertainment is not created when the video is uploaded. In fact, that is merely the first step in Nico Nico Douga. User comments constitute a large part of entertainment of each video, and therefore this annotation feature creates a high degree of consumer involvement in creating a constantly-evolving entertainment media.
Although neither of the above have succeeded in providing their successful contents to TV media, they themselves have been successful in creating buzz and revenue from their own experimental contents production.
It’s now time for creators to stop panicking, take a step back, and analyze what can be best done in each of the tools that they have access to in order to create the best value for both the industry and their consumers.
————————————————————————————–
凄いデータだね。テレビ番組のネット配信がどれだけの脅威かを物語っている気がする。
ただ、Huluのような、第三者団体が行うテレビ番組のネット配信にはジレンマがある。それは、彼らのようなサービスが出現することによってテレビ局の広告収入が減り、そのせいで個々の番組の質が下がり、最終的には放送できる番組の絶対数をも脅かしてしまう事。つまり、結果的には配信できる番組の質とバラエティーが減っちゃうんだよね。これでは共倒れ。意味が無い。
では、どうすればいいのだろう。この点に関しては、日本はアメリカよりも相当進んでいる気がする。日本では既にテレビとネットの相関性というか「位置づけ」が、ビジネスの側面からはっきり捉えられている傾向があると思う。例えばBeeTVとかはその良い例で、携帯動画配信というプラットフォームを使って、比較的少ない予算で実験的な番組を多く配信している。ネット配信だとミランカとかが良い例かも。これらで実験的に制作された作品の中からうまくいったモノを地上波に持っていけば、あたるか外れるか分からない博打のような番組制作をしなくても良くなるし、実験的なベースから新しいテレビ番組が作られていくので、常に視聴者に新しいエンターテイメントを提供できる気がする。
あと、日本のコンテンツ市場の更に秀逸な部分は、ニッチではあるけども、ニコニコ動画のようなかなり濃いユーザーベースを持ったコミュニティーが存在するという所。最近のニコニコは刺激に欠けるし、まだビジネスモデルを模索している状態ではあるけれども、数多くのMADや初音ミクなど、今までに比類の無い形のエンターテイメントを数々のユーザーが一つのムーブメントとして作り上げている。これほどまでにユーザーが自分の欲求を満たす為だけにモノ作りに励むコミュニティーは、絶対に珍しいし、大切にしなければ行けないと思う。
