Canned Goods

Alert!

Like a lot of people I have Google Alerts set to gather anything with my name(s) in it.  The results are one reason I've made that move to deleting my "c".  Most of what was coming in was for Toby Macquire playing Rick Hunter in the live-action film version of Robotech or info from obscure places on the Fred Dryer (Rick Hunter) show from the 80s, HUNTER.  Deleting the "c" takes care of a lot of that, so searches for "Rik Hunter" bring up me rather than the fictional characters, and, further, there are a lot of real-world Rick Hunter's too.  All this is a long intro to finding myself quoted and linked on the MIT Convergence Culture Consortium blog last night.

It was a bit unsettling. Really.  I don't expect more than a handful of people (mostly from UW) to be reading my blog -- except for the random hits I love to see from people doing searches for "canned goods." But I knew it was always possible for anyone, of course, to read something I wrote.  I remember Scot telling me about a similar experience.

I just wish, in this case, I took more time and care with my notes -- or just had better ones. 1) I can't type well, so getting good notes is difficult. 2) I knew they sessions would all be podcast eventually, so the notes were mainly for me (and Alice).  3) I dont poofread my pasts unles I see soemthing diring the publishing process or latter becaus 4) I write them in a short sitting and hit post.

Anyway, thanks to Sam Ford for citing my blog.  I really appreciate that he read my blog and pulled out the only coherent prose and all the work he and everyone else is doing at CMS/C3.  Maybe traffic will pick up here, too.  And if you're interested in any of the sessions (the first day is up), I promise I haven't seen better discussions at any conference I've been to.  I subscribe thru iTunes.

Notes posted

I had just enough time and internet access during the break to get my notes from FoE2 up.  So, I'll just add a note here saying that they may be a bit cryptic since I'm not the fastest or most accurate typist [Oh! I felt so inadequate sitting next to the guy who seemed to be typing everything out verbatim :( ].  Anyway, it was a great conference, and it was so nice to be able to just sit down and enjoy it and not worry about making my own presentation.

What I found very "engaging" was that each session was a conversation. The panelists talked with each other, with the moderator, with the audience.  Maybe this is something we can think about for comp-rhet/writing studies cons [i.e., the old read paper vs talking debate is tired, though everlasting; how about talking to each other, prompted by smart questions from the moderator?].  But I recognize how difficult it may be to pull off. For one, I'm a student (still) with expertise, but limited expertise. And so any panel of "students" may be trickier than a panel of the old guard.  But I could see myself fitting in nicely on a panel discussing fan-labor such as fan fiction and art, machinima, and wikis.

Also, what was clear was that the entertainment industry, always in search of ways to "engage" audiences and consumers, wants to develop better ways of tracking, gauging, measuring "engagement."  And work in fan studies does just this.  So, this conference may be the most visible site where the entertainment industry and media academics cross paths. It appears that each party wants to collaborate on some level, but there's a lot of work to be done.  In part, this is why I'm excited about my project: maybe it has more currency than merely within writing studies.

Cult Media (Transmedia Storytelling)

Panelists: Danny Bilson, Transmedia Creator; Jeff Gomez, Starlight Runner; Jesse Alexander, Heroes (on "Facebook" also Alias and Lost); Gordon Tichell, Walden Media

Some Keywords: Cult, media, niche entertainment; engagement entertainment; "Creatives"; Transmedia: getting small pieces of a bigger story and extending that story.

+The growth of B entertainment in to A spaces/entertainment attributable to humanizing  characters/ stories and bringing A level drama to traditionally B level content.

+Would Heroes still be on TV, with its large production budget, since its numbers are down this season, of it didn't have DVDs, iTunes/Amazon, and other revenue streams?

+Push to build a hard-core fanbase, the “early-adopters.”
JA: that strategy is very important, but also build in things that are accessible to the general audience. JG: characters involved with powerful emotions plus the transmedia resources that were official are what enable "deep" engagement.

Guiding transmedia practice: What we are doing in this room is reverse engineering.  The rationalization of what was an emotional practice (DB: Do what you as a producer want to see as your guide, or "get out of show business" (David Lean).); they can use what academics do to create a meta-level awareness of their practices (DB and JA).

My question (got asked by Henry from the BigBoard): So far, only "officially" produced transmedia experiences have been discussed. Does fan generated transmedia content, with Heroes or other media objects, fit into the equation? How are their efforts supported -- or suppressed? 
JA: There is the heroes “Create a Hero.” JA: Yes, but we have to protect the canon, the property, the brand. So we'll create new characters for you to fuck around with.  DB: Sure, but there will clearly be official and unofficial content.

Another question from the board: "What will it take to move the industry past the notion that transmedia is still essentially a clever way of advertising products or content, and toward treating transmedia content as its own viable product?"

A: The suits are still holding the purse strings. // JA: use the tools you have for DIY.
DB: fan-GC is a form of feedbak, actually a feedback loop. 
GT seems to think people are reading less because of other media, easier media -- but Harry Potter books and other forms of traditional print are being produced and consumed. (Alice & Jason Mitchell nearly let from their seats, through down their laptops, and rushed the stage).

Advertising and Convergence Culture

Panelists: Mike Rubenstein, The Barbarian Group; Baba Shetty, Hill/Holliday; Tina Wells, Buzz Marketing Group; Faris Yakob, Naked Communications; Bill Fox, Fidelity Investments

Big issue in branding: adding value and using new media but controlling how your media mixes with other media -- the context (of consumption).  So marketers need to accept the lack of control.

"Direct marketing" TW: "Advitorial" - "The Hills" "Hampton High" on MTV(?): made it clear how to be an engaged audience member (building easily accessible ads, marketing campaigns as part of everyday online consumptive experience.

FY: tries to get clients to get over idea of control, and appropriation makes it all more interesting to audiences, and does it work to increase branding ("Skins" ads? <http://www.channel4.com/entertainment/tv/microsites/S/skins/index.html>)

"The more advertising shapeshifts into entertainment, how "qualified" is the audience as potential customers? e.g. I love Bud.TV's "Swear Jar" video, but I wouldn't drink Budweiser if they paid me." Josh: are people just consuming this as another form of entertainment content? Does it generate consumption?

Adverts now invade content because audiences can evade it.

FY: We can show that people like some stuff (entertaining ads) and that some buy some stuff, but it's hard to tie the two together.  // [All this advertising comes down to brand recognition in the store.].

BF: Look for a balance between entertainment and info about the product.
FY: But the Cadbury chocolate Ape Phil Collins commercial breaks the mold/model because it generated a lot of sales from its creativity. [[me: the intermixing influences of the emotional and rational responses to media objects.]]: SubservientChicken: BS: there was the return to "Have it you way" and rather than imprinting it on everything, just give everyone a subservient chicken.

? from Josh: How is the value measured?  MR: Sure, numbers of users.  And does that equate to more sales? from a cool factor?

"In the early days of Television, shows were "owned" and branded by Philco, Texaco, GE, etc. How will branded entertainment be different, or is it the same thing?"

TW: "Mindset marketing" e.g., urban consumer (culture) // Don't we see this in Heroes with the Nissan Versa.  And then in the Office this product placement happens.

How do you counter negative buzz? BS: give consumers ways/channels to contact producers, participate, using social media. Social media empowers consumers in ways that force producer/marketers to respond and are nervous about putting things out there.

How do you deal with “user-generated content” (UGC)? MR: we want it but don't know how to or want to deal with it; it can be good for you but also bad. [[how to limit UGC, then?]] FY: Ask for modulation of content rather than original content (remixing) -- has more currency than firing your ad agency. Getting buying during process like with commercial and releasing shooting location so buzz is created.

How do agencies reconcile the idea that young, sought-after audiences are also the most resistant to big corporate advertising?
TW: Misconception based on her experience. Teens don't like being talked down to or stupid ads.  It's about making lives easier and offering valuable information.  And can work for Tide, cars, and tampons.
BF: give it to me and make it relevant, and they are more educated and skeptical, but they know what brands they want  . . . .
FY: based on socially recognizable objects/meanings.
TW: brand loyalty = identity = brand loyalty. 
MB: Communicate to people on their level.

TW: b4 product creation research the needs and desires of market and then create a product to fit the market.  Listen and stop over-marketing.  Focus on the science of finding out what people want.

Saturday, Nov. 17 -- Opening Remarks

Jason Mitchell, Middlebury College (Blog); Jonathan Gray, Fordham University (Blog); Lee Harrington (soaps), Miami University.

JG: Barthes and the work and the text (a work becomes a _meaningful_ text when people engage with it) -- How do we foster the better creation of texts? Peripherals like the Star Wars toys // transmedia storytelling; these texts add to the engagement in the core text. "Passion Points" (from yesterday) [JG's blog]. Using qualitative measures can be best because metrics can't get at certain data.  Passion points may be best got at from doing qualitative evaluations rather than quantitative.

LH: 1) what's the value of user-gen content to other users, for example? How could we measure answers to this question.

2) Access costs // scarcity of time // who wants to access it? // and who does industry want to access these media
+Age: too much time spent on millenials (or the 18-49 year olds), although economically sound, perhaps, but older folks do want to be marketed to by things other than big pharm;

How do we implement meaningful qualitative methods on a mass-audience scale? LH:Qualitative is slower than mass metrics
JG: and there seems to be hostility between academia and industry. But we can offer industry a great deal, although
JM: the qualitative isn't thought of as generalizable.  --> But we can ask how we can share these findings with industry<--
JG: qualitative research means you should go into things open for surprise, but that works academia, and industry isn't comfortable with this.
SF: mentions that industry still sees qualitative research in terms of focus groups. 
JM: Qualitative gets at media consumption as contextual, tied to an interpretive community; focus groups don't do this. 
JG: We need move beyond focus groups, and online groups/communities allow for more accurate qualitative results.

JM: skeptism regarding academia creating ties to industry as selling out; but hopeful for new researchers breaking this down;
SF: what's the value of our research to industry?; LH: it can work, but we need to write accessible texts for industry.

Also, move beyond millennials to "transgenerational" viewing model and "surplus audiences", for example:

JM: drug dealers using the WIRE on HBO as a model for criminal activity (the surplus audience), while being targeted for middle-class, white guy HBO subscribers.

Fan Labor

Panelists: Mark Deuze, Indiana University; Catherine Tosenberger, University of Florida; Jordan Greenhall, DivX; Elizabeth Osder, Buzznet; Raph Koster, Areae

Of interest were that many are wondering what kinds of revenue sharing should or could exist when companies turn a profit based on the unpaid labor of their consumers.

EO: vertically focused social network on music and culture // trying to create experiences that engage prosumers // building incentive systems and trying to understand motivation of consumption.

RK: Web 2.0 built on controlling/owning others content and profiting. // difference between some fans and professionals: being in the right place at the right time and knowing the right people. // Shakespeare was the Michael Bay/Steven Spielberg of his day

Good question: When do fan groups move from love to business (the fan space scales in order): business needs taking primary role?

HJ: However, many fans don't want monetary incentives for their cultural production.

Yet, social/reputational currency rules in these spaces.

So, there is a tension between cultural and economic production.

"Usertising": using fans to connect your professional production with other fans.

Metrics and Measurement

Panelists: Bruce Leichtman, Leichtman Research Group; Stacey Lynn Schulman, Turner Broadcasting; Maury Giles, GSD&M Idea City; Jim Nail, Symphony

What I began to as interesting was how my dissertation research could be of importance to those wanting to count and categorize consumers.  Apparently, measuring audiences isn’t easy and certainly far from an exact science. 

“Engagement” was probably the buzzword of the conference. Some of the questions the panel said they were asking were: how can you account for various forms and qualities of engagement. Over the past several years, a range of different companies have proposed alternative systems for measuring engagement. What are the strengths and limits of these competing models? What aspects of audience activity do they account for? What value do they place on different forms of engagement? "Passion Points"!

Debate over appointment viewing // tracking consumption // can there be a metric that crosses media platforms? // companies tracking conversations about TV online - who's watching what, where, qualitative -- for LOST, it was #2-3 of all shows being discussed online before it even aired.  And V. Mars / Jericho were big in buzz online but not with tradition metrics.

JN: Viewers react emotionally first, rationally second, then purchase.  So, how to hit viewers in the gut? But it's really hard to measure, so it doesn't have solid “currency.”

SLS: We used to look at points of contact with particular media content -- how many ways a consumer connects to a show, for example.
_____

Nonetheless, the panel did speak of the measurements they had made:

BL spoke of the being conservative for the time being because we are still in a transitional period.  The mean avg. is 6 minutes per user of online video viewing, so why put all your shows online and bust your revenue model?

Also, BL: But “pull” isn't always the way it works, “push” works too: DVRs weren't big until they were put into a satellite box, and then a cable box and cableHD box.  But interest in DVRs has stayed constant (And many of these folks don't/didn't even know they had a DVR in their boxes).  He predicts 15% in coming years for all viewing times, much more conservative than others.

That's Entertainment

I got in to Boston last night after a 45 minutes of being stuck in the plane and on the tarmac in Cleavland; we apparently missed our "wheels in the well" time and had to wait for the next.

Eventually I made it to the Media Lab for the first event (pre-event) for the Futures of Entertainment Conference, with 30 minutes left to go:

Jesse Alexander and Mark Warshaw in conversation with Henry Jenkins about Heroes and the changes taking place in the TV landscape. NBC's Heroes: "Appointment TV" to "Engagement TV"?

I caught part of the discussion of Heroes' new promotion Create Your Hero.  I saw the brief promo during this week's episode, and I, at first, thought anyone could sit at home, working at their desk to create a superhero and then submit it to Heroes. Then, you might find they have chosen your hero to include in the show.  I was wrong. 

If you check out the site, you'll see that they were much smarter about engaging the audience to participate than I, although this participation is more limited.  You visit the site each week, choose some attributes for the hero.  Essentially, you are voting for what the character will be like.  So, this week, for instance, you can choose between place of birth, appearance, and build.

This not only enables participation but also forces you to visit Heroes' website each week and vote for your hero build.

Anyway, there's the rest of the con . . . .

I'm particularly interested in the fan labor panel, for obvious reasons, but all except maybe the mobile media relate to my dissertation project.