Published on Tuesday, 03 August 2010 13:43
Some interesting thoughts can be found in an excellent article on Fast Company
Show creator and writer Tim Kring elaborates on the show Heroes, his new show and transmedia.
It got me thinking, do we have a chicken and egg dilemma when we relate this type of process to Social TV?
Let me highlight the most interesting parts of the article:
With regard to the series Heroes
, Tim explains:
Off the TV screen was Heroes Evolutions, a digital extension that enabled fans to explore the show's mythology. It also existed in magazines, games, mobile webisodes, and interactive Web sites. Viewers could read graphic novels and e-comics, use wireless iTV interactivity, and check out more original content online. In other words, Heroes used "transmedia."
Transmedia is a way to tell stories across multiple platforms, with different entry-points to the story.
Think of the movie the Matrix as well, you can play the game very well without having seen the movie.
Next he elaborates on how the show concept is leading instead of the platform:
Shows should no longer be designed around a platform; instead, platforms ought to be designed around a show. "You have to take the concept and put it at the center of the paradigm," he says. "You have to say: This is an idea. Part of it can live on television, but part of it isn't designed to be a television show.
This is important, not only for transmedia and new concepts, but also for the acceptation, diffusion and incorporation of Television 2.0/Social TV.
Are new technology opportunities (with regard to TV 2.0) enough?
In order for the television industry to survive, "you have to use every part of the buffalo--there is no wasted story," Kring says. "If you're going into a studio or a network to pitch a TV show, and you haven't thought at all about how it's going to live anywhere else, on any other platform," he explains, "you're really missing the boat. I totally believe [transmedia] is where we're heading."
Applications and software development around Social TV will have the same customization as the abovementioned. A correct and enticing application of Social TV means on the concepts, not vice versa. In a previous article "Dynamics of Interaction and Social TV Experience Architecture
" this process of thought is been noted. The concept itself is of even bigger importance for relevant deployment of Social TV or any other medium for that matter.
The last paragraph which is interesting to take into account is:
Clearly, consumers are connecting more than ever through multiple platforms, but is that enough to justify transmedia becoming the norm? Studies have shown, for example, that Internet usage still significantly trails television consumption. And we've seen the dreadful results when, say, Twitter gets in the way of the action on a popular show. Is it still too early for networks to unhinge television as the central platform of consumption?
To give my answer on the question which is posed in the quoted paragraph, why would the television be unhinged as central platform?
It depends on the type of concept/content
, as elaborated in the article "Can Event-Based Social Networks further diffuse Social TV?
It depends on the purpose of each medium/screen
and where it fits in, from a transmedia point of view.
It depends on the wanted action
by the viewers (active, lean-back) that then relates back to the medium that can effectuate this and qualitatively can achieve this at best.
The latter is important, because it describes the challenge were facing, transferring content/concepts or actions (i.e. networking, chatting, searching for information) in a crossmedial way is not sufficient.
First, because the discrepancy between medium and purpose creates a less qualitative experience (expectation-experience gap).
Secondly, because each medium has its own unique advantages and disadvantages, not every technology and type of application can be applied on each and every medium.
The best example would be the difference between the Web and the Mobile Web and the differences in execution when it comes to design, content and purposes.
The first (crossmedial) concepts simply copied the concept to the mobile device, ending with low quality experiences.
This challenge and evolution will apply as well to Social TV.
Arrived at my first question in this article, do we have a chicken and egg dilemma?
What needs to be evolve first, concepts or the technology?
The show is the starting point, as pointed out by mr. Kring, thus technology simply suffices the needs of concepts.
Then again, from a realistic point of view, technologies evolve as they're being used and applied. There’s more than one way to skin a cat
, maybe that's the outcome, but which one is the most effective and profitable and retaining?
What's your thought on this?