social tv roundtable · 2014-08-12 · 46 september-october 2012 social tv roundtable the onset of...

ww

w.c

sim

agaz

ine.

com

Social TV roundtable

socialtv-rt_sept-oct12.indd 1 16/08/2012 11:18:03

46 September-October 2012 www.csimagazine.com

Social TV roundtableThe onset of the internet and companion devices is bringing about new levels of interactivity, which in turn is fuelling new forms of social TV. But where are the biggest opportunities, who will benefi t and where is the mon-ey to be found? This roundtable answered these questions and more.


Future roundtables: CSI will be staging roundtable discussions on Shifting viewing habits; Satellite broadband, Cable CCAP and CDNs among others. For speaker/sponsorship opportunities contact Tiro Bestonso at [email protected] or +44 20 7562 2427

Chairman: Simon Gauntlett,

technology director, DTG

Simon is responsible for setting the

organisation’s strategic technical vision,

directing the group’s technical programme

and managing the DTG’s technology team.

Since joining the DTG in 2006, Simon has

edited and published three updated versions of the D-Book - the

technical specification for DTT in the UK. Prior to working for the

DTG, Simon spent seven years at the BBC’s R&D department.

Paul Robinson, president of international

for A Squared Elxsi (A2E2)

A2E2 is a creator, producer and

distributor of media entertainment for

children, and prior to joining the company

this year, Paul founded kids TV channel

KidsCo in 2005. He has also worked for

BBC Radio One and Walt Disney Company, where he still acts as a

media consultant.

Katy Howell, managing director,

immediate future

Katy helps brands like Sony, BBC and

HSBC adopt, integrate, and deploy social

media. With over eight years’ social media

experience and 25 years in marketing, she

advises companies: creating robust and

measureable strategies, working with a team of consultants.

Mark Christie, CTO, KIT digital

Mark has over 15 years experience in

engineering and technology roles, and

currently spearheads innovative and

highly customised solutions for customer

deployments. Prior to joining KIT, Mark

was the CEO of Ioko and co-founded the

business in 1996, before it was acquired by KIT in April 2011.

Andy Hooper, director, converged

experiences, home business, Motorola

Mobility EMEA

In his role, Andy is involved with his team

in many leading edge discussions with

cable, satellite and IPTV service

providers, and is advising clients how to

win in the multi-screen world. Andy has worked at Motorola for six

years, and has a 16 year career in consulting and software sales, pre-

sales and product management.

Andy Eardley, co-founder, TV App Agency

Andy’s involvement in TV App Agency

follows 25 years experience building

businesses in the technology and software

sectors. He worked with firms including

Apple, HP, IBM and then moved into the

software sector. The TV AA was launched

in 2011 to provide TV app development and app store submission,

enabling companies to get onto connected TV.

Pa

nel

lists

: Soc Sociial TV roundtableal TV roundtable


www.csimagazine.com September-October 2012 47

Chairman: I guess we should start in trying to

understand what is social TV? Can we put a box

around it? Is it about changing the way we watch

and interact with TV?

Andy Eardley (AE): You’ve got two types of social:

you’ve got the private social TV (STV) and the

public social TV. Private STV has always been in

our living rooms where we share with our families

and people within those walls. And then you have

public STV which goes potentially across the

globe. It could be commenting about a show

together. It could also be a difference between

social and anti-social TV. You can see Twitter and

Facebook (FB) apps on TV but do you want to

see someone else’s Twitter feed on your TV?

Katie Howell (KH): I’d say it’s even broader than

that. We had the same debate six years ago about

social media, asking what it is. From a marketeers’

perspective it’s about being social. It’s any

interaction between a community that is

connected and talking abut TV programmes or

broadcasters. That would be my definition. It’s

about connected communities as opposed to the

device, which is just a facilitator.

AE: But there is a most appropriate device for

what’s going on. Sharing it with a friend on

Twitter or Facebook shouldn’t appear on your TV.

It can appear on smartphones or tablets which is

the appropriate place for it.

KH: Audiences will wonder on and off devices

they are using, they will happily jump form one to

another, expecting a seamless experience but

blending the standards of Facebook and Twitter

with unique propositions quite happily.

Chair: Is there an interest in what Joe Bloggs is

talking about or more about the trends associated

with a particular programme?

KH: I think it’s a bit of everything. You get a

mixture of arguments and opinion and expression.

You get more consolidated social conversation

usually a few days after the show is broadcast.

Understanding that flow is part of every

programmes definition of social analytics.

Chair: Are the content makers and producers

starting to use STV more?

Paul Robinson (PR): I think the answer is yes.

Before digital came along we had very little supply

of channels and audiences were large as a result

of that, watching the same thing, they didn’t need

other means of engagement with those shows. As

we’ve got more supply, there’s been more

fragmentation of viewing and technology has

enabled us to re-engage people back and continue

to keep TV as a talking point. So I think as a TV

content creator that’s a great thing because the

big risk for us is that TV would not play the same

role in peoples lives. We want people to talk about

TV and I see social media as being about keeping

TV salient and a topic of conversation. But it’s

also a means of discovery; in a world with more

choice it becomes more difficult to find new

things, it becomes harder to break down silos and

find out about things you don’t know. Even

recommendation engines only tell you about

programmes they know you like.

To answer your question, we are now thinking

very careful about how to construct storylines and

alternative end games that will enable people to

talk about your product versus someone else’s. If

you can build brand awareness through a Twitter

stream that’s good business. Do we know all the

tricks yet? Absolutely not. It’s still early days.

Chair: Is it all about live, or is it about the long tail

too?

AE: Look at the numbers from Netflix. They just

streamed over one billion hours of VoD in June,

which is bigger than a lot of cable operators.

Andy Hooper (AH): One of the ways they drive

that amount of take up is through their Facebook

integration. The amount of people who are

connecting their FB accounts to these apps for

OD content periodically do help them find

content to watch. It is about OD and live but it’s a

different type of engagement.

KH: It’s wider than just that live programme. It’s

about extending the conversation to provide more

opportunities for more monetisation of the

content. So how can I take that programme and

episode it across the week or broaden it using

social interaction? You see programmes like Mad

Men grab the social consciousness and people are

creating their bits around it, almost co-create with

the programme. It’s that kind of broader thinking

that will come into play with social and connected

audiences.

AE: The second screen has allowed TV to be a

broadcast medium in the house but your

personalised experiences are kept there, doing

your social interactions while watching the TV

with other people.

PR: That’s exactly what happens now. Everyone is

watching the TV but have their own individual

second device doing their own thing. What is

interesting is that research I’ve seen suggests

that most of that activity is not directly related

to what’s happening on TV. It’s actually people

checking their FB accounts, emailing etc.

Maybe 20% might be related to television. That’s

why there is no real money at the moment

because you can’t engage that audience, there’s

not enough of them.

Mark Christie (MC): So it’s a multi-tasking

model. There is an argument to say that having

lots of interactivity when watching a programme

takes the value off it because you’re not

concentrating. That’s different depending on

genre, eg live shows like X-Factor and movies.

PR: A great example of a programme that did try

to design itself that you could have a second



screen experience is Channel 4’s Million Pound

Drop, where the engagement was around 25% of

the total viewing audience which I think is the

highest percentage of any programme in the UK.

They actually built in pauses so you had time to

answer questions on the second screen without

missing what was happening on the main screen.

They even took feedback from online players to

determine the order. That’s an example where live

allows you to really add value and integrate the

social experience.

MC: That’s a great innovative example of what

you can do with the medium. I think the tablet

has created this idea about this ability to create an

app which has social features but opens up this

second screen space to additional or enhanced

content about what you are watching or

monetisation opportunities with interactive

adverts. It’s about that call to action you can do

on a personalised basis within the broadcast

medium. I’m seeing people commissioning things

on a one off basis to see what works. We’re still in

the learning phase. But even now production

companies are looking for that interactive

experience. From our side we are interested in the

technology you need to build that ecosystem. For

example what kind of metadata can we help

create to drive the interactive elements of the

second screen to make it a more compelling

viewing experience?

AE: That is the reality today. All of these are

disconnected islands of technology connected by

the consumer and they are in their infancy.

Million Pound Drop is not without its hiccups.

AH: One of the things that we are seeing is the

infancy is definitely there in terms of programme

data it gets delivered to service providers, it

doesn’t have the richness of connective

information the hyperlinks if you like between the

programme metadata and the actual apps that

exist on the devices. What it will facilitate when it

matures is a much more immersive experience

and one which doesn’t have that cliff you almost

have to climb over as a consumer. That points to

the direction in which we will go. At some point

as we resolve the platforms, there is enough scale

to make it easy to use and frictionless. It becomes

quite incredible from an advertising

perspective too.

Chair: You need to give people a compelling reason

to connect their products, which will then create a

mass market for advertisers to monetise.

KH: It’s quite complex still just to try make your

devices hooked up.

AH: Ultimately today, what’s the aggregation

point? You generally need to install an app per

TV programme. You can get app fatigue quite

quickly. So is it at the level of the service provider

or national set of standards? That’s a level of

infancy too we are nowhere near to

underst5anding how that plays out. Though there

will be vast and varied commercial interests that

will drive that.

KH: It will be driven by commercial intention as

well. The other thing that is missing that will

come in the next year or two, on the social side

you see brands saying we have to build social in

from the ground up. I wonder whether or not

content wise there is an appetite for that.

PR: We are doing a new show with the creator of

Spiderman, Stan Lee, his first animated feature.

He’s set up a YouTube site to build his brand

around that hub. He believes that will differentiate

him from other content creators.

MC: There’s also an extension to that in being

able to have apps that add another dimension on

how you interact with those movies. It creates a

new medium in some ways, where users drive the

story through feedback.

PR: I think going forward genuine alternative

endings is exactly where we will go.

KH: It plays on something else, which is the

marketing and brand industry has moved on in

social to the point where you can’t but miss that

brands will try be broadcasters and media is

playing large part in way they work in social. One

issue that worries me from a marketing point of

view about STV and monetisation point of view is

that it just relies on advertising with a little

interactive thing in the middle. I think you will

see marketers and the monetisation of this

coming from brands wanting to create content

that’s episodal and plays out in the social space,

that continues what’s been on TV, almost brand

owned content layed on top of this. That might

create some friction.

As broadcasters look to monetise STV they will

find themselves against a wall when it comes to

social because there is only so much they can play

the advertising sponsorship card. Righst issues

come into play here.

AE: The broadcaster has been the gatekeeper, as

has been the set-top box manufactures. They’ve

bee the gatekeeper in getting to the living room.

When actually the content owner really wants to

get out to the world, you own the rights. And

make them as simple as possible. But you have to




go through artificial silos of country based

broadcasters that is expensive for content owners.

This will change with the internet, which is a huge

disruptor.

PR: You’re totally right about gatekeepers and

right that the whole gatekeeper model will change.

FTA broadcasters and payTV providers are

challenges by OTT players like Netlfix. I think the

other side of that coin is to what extend will

consumers want somebody to help them guide

them through all this as a trusted destination. Will

there be gatekeepers of a different sort? Will it be

Google maybe? Zero gatekeepers is not realistic

abut there will be a different relationship,

economics and new players coming in.

Chair: Is that where the social media community

would then come in?

KH: Curated communities; you can see around

various programmes or content channels and I

suspect Google will make a massive play for it.

AE: IPTV will fundamentally change how we

interact with our TV and how we do that socially.

TV has been social from day 1 but it will change

how we connect devices.

AH: One of the things that concerns me as a user

of these services, when you think about the layers,

whosever app you are using, it comes down to

identity too. Who are am I trusting with my

identity, the permissions I’m granting to that

entity or organisation I’m allowing to make use of

my data? Will I allow it to know anything

personal about me before it suggests and

recommends to me? Who are the big

organisations you trust with your identity? Is it

Facebook and Google? The owners we trust to

curate our identity for us, potentially they are the

ones who win longer term here.

PR: I think you’re right but I would cite examples

of connections to FB that have had a dramatic

impact of the volumes of use to a particular

application. Spotify’s usage almost doubled when

they linked to FB. We have to understand that is

the reality. We have to accept that TV is not the

only route to market and TV is not the panacea

now. It’s not the only way to build a brand.

KH: If you can tap into the passions and interests

of your community that you create something that

will resonate with the community. I think the

biggest killer of social is the fickleness of the

consumer and the privacy issues. Things like

having to ‘Like’ something become barriers to

entry just like filling in forms.

PR: Communications have become a lot less

formal and FB, Twitter and text are all acceptable

ways of talking business as well as personal, so

you’re right.

Chair: If part of the social is about getting more

engagement in content, how do people monetise

that?

AE: There’s a whole lot of ways of monetising.

The world of mobile has taught us that you can

offer apps for free to get people engaged and then

give them a premium version with no disruptions.

You can deliver apps to TV with no pre roll, mid

roll and post roll ads for example. Or you can

deliver first part of content for free and expect

them to pay for subsequent programmes. This is a

lot more than just advertising but it is a huge

bucket, especially for TV. You then also think of

all the retail opportunities, in-app purchases, and

the monetisation is incredible.

MC: It seems to me that content owners like the

fragmented market of rights based geographies

because they are selling the same thing over and

over again with different rights and there must be

a tipping point. Take the Simpsons, when would it

make commercial sense to go direct to consumer

as opposed to the rights negotiations they do at

the moment? Or would this just be another

opportunity for content distribution alongside

existing models?

PR: Multiple organisations selling content is great

for us because it drives up prices but it also

creates different economic windows which you

want to try take your content through, including

Netlfix and YouTube which is incidentally

fantastic for building a brand. You now have all

these different platforms which is a positive

attribute but the complexity is the rights issues

and there is a lot of legacy here.

AE: The whole new world of social TV is about

going direct to consumer.

PR: Communities is a fantastic model but the

challenge is there is an expectation on the web

that people won’t pay for stuff, which you have to

manage because at the end of the day good

content takes money.

AH: I would argue against that. The FB games

market is growing and there is money in that.

PR: You are giving away a huge amount of that

pie to FB though for that scale.

MC: You can almost imagine a single app which


www.csimagazine.com September-Octover 2012 49


is a social EPG and any interactivity on the

broadcast is delivered to the single app and then

shown and loaded on the app. Zeebox have gone

over the top of any value chains in terms of the

broadcast to monetise the second screen by doing

that and that’s an interesting business model.

Broadcasters are stuck with a limited inventory in

terms of a number of ads they can show within an

hour of TV and the only way they can increase

their revenues is by doing that interactive app and

taking it to the advertisers to push up the price

and volumes. Zeebox is a great service but will

ad-funded broadcasters see them encroaching on

their territory?

AH: Zeebox have other distribution and

partnership deals launching in other countries. In

terms of their route to market for their social

experience is to launch as an app first, get some

traction and usage. Almost to show the TV

companies and ad agencies and aggregators they

have an audience of their own OTT and then go

back to broadcasters and say “You should partner

with us and bring our own social audience.” It’s

amazing the amount of small cable and telcos

we’ve talked to who didn’t think they could

launch a social experience into the marketplace

and Zeebox has changed this perception.

AE: it’s hard to call with technologies like Zeebox

and Shazam. Technologies get successful often

because there are solving a particular pain point.

FB and Twitter got a groundswell of being really

cool and caught on. It’s very hard to build a

successful business case from the start. There’s a

whole load of other companies that haven’t made

it to ride the tide.

PR: Let’s not forget also that sometimes Twitter

and other social media can damage reputations

and ruin programmes, companies and so on.

What worries me about that will a new gatekeeper

come along that can moderate that discussion?

We will see.

Chair: To round up, what’s the future going to be

and where would you put your money?

KH: This is a young and immature market,

however I think the big opportunity for everyone

in the TV industry is that social has already

accelerated the monetisation of brands. Brands

will be much more receptive to the idea of

funding content because the volumes are already

out there. STV is here and the future is bright.

MC: Is it really about STV or about technologies

like tablets that improve the viewing experience

and social is just a sub-component of that? Is it

just an element of an enhanced viewing

experience and are the gatekeepers of the future

those that get that right in terms of taking

Zeebox, social EPGs, FB and Twitter functions

with great content and packaging that?

AE: TV has kind of disappeared off the map as

new devices have appeared and we have gotten

distracted by other things. Now the opportunity is

there for TV to be social again because you can

stream content to it. Broadcasters as gatekeepers

have stopped it from advancing as much as it

could have. The internet has disrupted many

industries and it’s now simple to connect TVs. It’s

bringing all this content to where it’s best shown.

This whole fragmentation will exist for some time

because it’s not in everyone’s interest to

consolidate on one platform and where we bet

our money is on solving the issue of getting

content across multiple devices.

PR: STV is an opportunity to keep video

entertainment salient. Eventually I think all video

will be consumed by the internet and broadcast

will cease to exist – that’s the end game I think.

What it does do is change relatively positions of

different people in the value chain. While I do

think the gatekeepers will break down there will

still be gatekeepers, but ultimately there will be

more power moving to content owners.

AH: What’s been quite telling for me is that we

have spent a lot of time talking about what might

not be directly related to what we might put in the

box of STV because it’s one facet of a very fast

evolving area of entertainment and

communications industry, which goes back to the

original topic of discussion. Every brand is a

media channel now which is the key to what STV

is enabling; it’s enabling people to reach

consumers in new ways. Privacy will be hugely

telling in how things evolve and where the power

shift and balance of power will lie.



This roundtable took place at the DTG’s

headquarters in London. Situated on the banks

of the Thames with views of Parliament and the

London Eye, the DTG’s modern conference

centre, meeting facilities and state-of-the-art

digital TV demonstration room are available free

of charge to DTG members and can be hired by

non-members for corporate events.


social tv roundtable · 2014-08-12 · 46 september-october 2012 social tv roundtable the onset of...

Documents