But, to Monique De Haas’ horror I’m sure they just don’t address all the issues. I guess how can they really? Here are some of the highlights:
They talk about how young people are on the Internet rather than watching TV. Therefore, they say, ‘[b]roadcasters are looking for new ways to grab their audi-
ence and Â“immerseÂ” them in the way that computer and console games do. That leads to increased demand for interactivity Â– getting audiences to lean forward.’ (p.96)
I love that: ‘lean forward’.
They also discussed ‘interactivity’:
Â· Broadcasters like interactivity. The red button is appears more and more frequently. There is evidence to show that people like to vote. For instance, in the UK :
Â· Olympics – 10 million viewers accessed the service.
Â· Wimbledon last year – 4.2 million Sky viewers accessed the service.
Â· Test the Nation (actually a Dutch format from BNN) Â– I million
Â· Big Brother Â– 700,00- viewers paid 25p for enhanced NTL/Telewest service. (p.100)
And another point about the effect of technology on creation:
All this new technology is certainly having an effect on content and style of new programmes seen on TV:
Â· TV drama moving further away from strict realism to incorporate games and interactive styles (e.g. Green Wing).
Â· Sports (Olympics, Wimbledon) offer more alternative pathways through experience.
Â· Reality Shows (Big Brother) dependent on voting
Â· News channels mimic Â“WindowsÂ” approach of the Internet. (p.101)
They do mention ‘cross-media’ near the end:
There need to be platforms where professionals from all walks of life can think Â“out of the boxÂ” and where general concepts can be discussed in various scenarios. The Club of Amsterdam plays an important role, not only for the discussion of present day challenges but primarily for the cross-media future that is just beginning to dawn. (p.171)
Monique, they needed you!