This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
February 2014

TVBEurope 27 Second Screen Forum

or match starts, sometimes earlier. Rights holders have an interest in using the second screen to provide additional content or advertisements. For instance, Channel 4’s HorseTracker app for the Grand National was precisely synchronised to the race, allowing viewers to follow their favourite horse.

Alex Terpstra, Civolution

Will the ongoing developments in second screen have a major impact on the way traditional TV is made?

Anthony Rose, Zeebox

other genres. Sports is crying out for more — live auctioning of players kits, team v team based games and activities, chat, instant user controlled replays, instant data. Rose: Game shows and

X Factor voting and polling play- alongs are obvious candidates, but with a little imagination it’s clear that opportunities are vast. Sports stats, action replays, multi camera angles, chatting with celebrities in TV rooms, using maps to follow action — and those are just examples of enhancements readily created for an existing show. But think about new show formats, where the audience can be part of the programme. The possibilities are endless — and those new forms of entertainment, where you’re part of a crowd experience, those are the ones that really excite me. Terpstra: Sports fans take to social media as soon as a race

Cowley: I don’t think second screen activity will radically change the way programmes are made until the usage of second screens around TV shows becomes significant. That said, producers will definitely take into account second screen activity. Spirit has been managing the social media around a TV drama and the producers have adapted the storylines based upon the popular characters. Dukker:Yes, but the

development is a lot slower than some people expect. The television world is very conservative — producers and broadcasters behave like dinosaurs when it comes to the internet. Advertisers will drive the change. At some moment in time they will force producers and broadcasters to give them far better return on their money. Flynn: Second screen has already had a major impact

on live programming and the delivery of live data on screen. Twitter provides a simple way for viewers to have their voices heard on a show, and creating the right tools to control and editorialise this content is key. Grant: Ultimately yes —

producers will create formats and shows which take advantage of the interactive nature of the opportunity. We bring ShowPal interactions — poll numbers, for example — into our shows, but it is just the beginning. McDonnell: Absolutely.

We predict a divergence of programming, with event TV forming a major part of the future of broadcast, and the inclusion of social, highly integrated interaction being a core component. The key is giving producers the ability to do this themselves without long development and testing times — and, of course, without the high price tag. Missul: Second screen technology already has had a major impact on the way traditional television is made. First of all, broadcasters have to think about the interactivity and the bonus they want to provide to complete the viewer experience. The content alone is no longer enough. Second screen applications also need a great deal of editing. On the technical side, they need a perfect synchronisation between the live channel and the content on the second screen. This point is key. And they need to deliver all the content flawlessly. Plunkett: Potentially, yes,

but it is too early to tell. There is something of a chicken and egg situation today where the production community, in general, do not see sufficient audience interest in the second screen to dedicate meaningful resources to it. However, the level of second screen audience engagement could increase significantly if the experience was better aligned

with, and complementary to, the programming. Rose: Undoubtedly. Although

to be realistic I’m not holding my breath for a fundamental change anytime soon, at least not from new interactive shows. What will happen is that we’ll see an increasing number of shows with social and interactive propositions added, like a veneer, to existing show formats. And then it will be broadcasters — and very importantly online show makers and platforms — experimenting with new interactive formats. There’ll be lots of failures of course, but as soon as one sticks, well — television loves to copy successful formats! Schroeter: Yes. Not so much on the programme itself, but rather on the business model.

The second screen draws the viewer’s attention away from the TV and thereby the ad money spent on TV. So, traditional television needs to find a way of getting people involved again. Take a look at the hugely popular casting shows where people are involved by voting, tweeting and calling in.

Is investment in second screen content likely to divert resources away from first screen programming?

Stephen Grant, TV3 Group

Clay: It is imperative that it doesn’t. The second screen experience starts, if it does start, because of the first screen. Undermining the quality of the cause to improve the experience of a potential effect doesn’t make sense. Also, you’d be harming the experience of the majority who aren’t multi-screening for the sake of the minority who are. More importantly, TV is proven to be the most effective form of advertising due, in part, to the immensely high quality of linear content. Advertisers would not thank you for jeopardising that to service multi-screening, which is a secondary behaviour for a minority of viewers. Investment in the second screen should either be new money from the forms of marketing opportunity it is replacing, like elements of direct mail and PR. Terpstra: This is about holistic

Tom McDonnell, Monterosa

experiences. A second screen app is more engaging if it is tied and well-synchronised to the

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60