Research Question: Considering the development in other media industries through remediation over the years, how will users affect the future of the television industry?
—
Background
Throughout the past decade, the human race has developed in a world that is permeated by technological innovation and we have grown alongside the influential advent of the World Wide Web that has consequently transformed the way that we interact and engage with each other and the environment around us. With the explosion of online and digital media content paired with the momentous influence of social media platforms, the conventional Broadcast Television method and business model is seemingly challenged by a more personalised, participatory and multi- dimensional one, where audience viewership has become so much more complex than the traditional networked consumption model. This rapid transformation inturn poses all Television networks to drastically remodel and adapt to the vast expansion of consumption trends to maintain their relevance and success in the future of media culture.
The apparent takeover of modern broadcast mediums alongside the implications of social media on television culture has influenced the following report to explore the ever evolving climate of the television industry, and meticulously analyse the points of change that have encouraged the influx of user participation and interaction with Television content. This exploration is guided by the following question:
Considering the development in other media industries through remediation over the years, how will users affect the future of the television industry?
Let it be noted that the term ‘remediation’ referred to throughout the report alludes to the definition that comes from the stem word “remedy” and refers to the ‘incorporation or representation of one medium in another’ (Bolter, 1999).
The following research is divided into an investigation of various sections that explore the relevant facets of Television culture and the way in which user participation and interactivity have become seemingly more apparent and significant to the platform as it stands today. These sections of interest explore the History of Television and screen media & the ideological points of development, Audiences & how they have become increasingly more active and relevant as users and an analysis of the Political power audiences of television have obtained through this new culture. The research basis is a product of empirical evidence of scholarly articles, AFI documentation from the Rmit library, local case studies and surveys.
Ultimately the report intends to comprehend the points of remedial change within Televisions culture as well as assess the increasing participatory demands of the new age television audience. Although there is no way of accurately predicting exactly what the future holds for television users, the research obtained that can be used as a guide to gain prospective insight into the mechanisms of the ever-evolving Television industry.
History of Television
Between the end of the 20th century and the beginning of a new era in the 21st century, media has journeyed through a change that has transformed the way we participate in media. The genesis of the Internet, although was slow at first, has allowed for more platforms in the past decade for audiences to interact more effectively and widespread with the traditional media form of television (as well as a remediation of other forms of traditional media), forming an omniscient community that is widespread across the globe. This community is able to share, create and distribute amongst the online environment and in turn this participation has helped shape the remediation of established traditional media forms and produced a user-controlled landscape that is spread across the media industry.
Nonetheless, it is important to note that although there is a process of remediation of traditional media forms to compete and take advantage of online, they are still lacking larger and creating holes for themselves with using an old business model of using the audience as mere products and instead transitioning into an asset.
Traditional media forms are going through a period of upheaval and it is interesting to see how the well-established forms respond to the introduction and growth of the digital landscape. These traditional media forms include print, television and radio, three forms that have been the larger demographic of the world’s first point of contact when it comes to information, entertainment and relaxation and at the turn of the century have had to begin adapting to the digital and online environment and that same demographic shifting their attention to the latter.
Print media appears to be the traditional form that is facing the biggest risk of reaching an end and it is mainly thanks to its business model, the physical wares of print media seem unable to maintain or remediate itself to compete with the new digital model of online news and print and because of the transition of audiences being influenced by the introduction of the digital and online environment and therefore changing their active interaction with media (Jarvis, J. 2008). Print media require a revaluation on how to incorporate this social change in audiences having more control in what they want to see, read or watch.
In Australia 1923 there were approximately 26 metropolitan newspapers that were owned by 21 different companies, over the next century that number dwindled down to a mere 8 metropolitan newspapers that were owned by 3 companies, with the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Fairfax media. This limitation in control and the introduction of the Internet combined with it’s time-irrelevant entity of information and hypermediacy for the people accessing their websites has had a huge effect on these physical print companies, audiences don’t wish to pay for information when it is so accessible online for free, the print media reflects a linear viewpoint on information distribution where it does not allow for growth within the network that is the relationship between audiences and media and creates a sedentary sense for the future of print.
The print media are making small steps into adapting to the changing market trends with the likes of Rupert Murdoch’s production transferring online to provide hypermediation for it’s readers and state that although paper circulation is declining an average of 15.46% on a year to year basis, it’s digital subscriptions are increasing by 8% on a year to year basis which offsets from a business perspective (Mumbrella, 2013). However, newsprint media needs to also take into account the immediacy of the Internet and the increasing popularity of online blogging, an online service that allows the average person to archive, annotate, recreate and recirculate media (Norris, P. 2001). News Corps research suggests with the support of new audience measurement readership figures, that multiple platforms such as mobile or tablet are capturing younger readers 14 years and older, proposing that distribution and production may be changing due to what platforms people are using rather than the actually industry completely being doomed.
The Internet has not transformed society in a utopian sense where there is complete civic engagement and information is virtually unlimited around the globe, but in its adolescence at its core there is a capacity for audiences to participate with media forms which flows further, faster, and with fewer intermediaries (Nessymon, 2009) without displacing traditional media.
Radio has been a longstanding participatory culture with its most popular programs being talkback radio and later with the introduction of FM frequency, music radio. Talkback radio depended on getting listeners to call the studio and have the opportunity to disclose their opinions on any given topic to provide for balanced discussions between presenters, which usually and still does have a political undertone to the discussion, whilst music radio allowed for requests for your favourite songs or artists to be played. This participatory aspect of the radio setting hasn’t changed drastically however the challenge that contemporary radio stations (as does television) face is how to adapt to the change in how people use the medium in the digital age when presented with so many ways to access the same entertainment or education through online capabilities.
Over the past couple of decades as technology progressed, programs such as Napster, LimeWire and other illegal music download software became an issue not only for copyright infringement for the people producing and releasing the music but also for radio stations playing these songs, because having a song debut around the nation when half the nation may have already heard it from downloading it cannot be good for sales. In response to the pirating issue around the globe, in 2008 launched one of the largest online music streaming applications in the world which allows listeners to create playlists of a large variety of artists or albums, the application offers recommendations based on music you stream frequently and if you pay for the premium package you can listen advertisement free. Radio’s response to music streaming sites such as Spotify is to provide less variety; based on research that people are more likely to stay tuned if they recognise the song as opposed to a song they were unfamiliar with (Karpp, H. 2014).
With the introduction of mobile technologies that offer instant messaging and online browsing capabilities, more and more people were calling less, and tuning in less to hear the news report for the day, or the traffic or even what the time is which is a usual part of the radio dialogue schedule because it was unnecessary, all the information is within the palm of your hand because of smartphone technology (Suits and Sneakers, 2015). Although this isn’t to say that radio is irrelevant in the digital age, however quite the opposite, a study conducted by Audienscope found that almost 70% of people would listen to the radio as means of companionship, to keep informed and to relax (Audienscope, 2015). Therefore the structural aspect of radio may need to change and is slowly incorporating a stronger relationship between program and listener through social media and smartphone applications.
This does create some difficulties for radio stations to create engaging content for their shows, however radio stations such as Melbourne’s Fox FM have a program that is in cooperation with the smartphone application ShaZam, a music discovery program where people are able to use their smartphone to track any particular song that could be playing anywhere they are throughout the day and it will list the name of the song, artist and album and then ranks the top most “shazammed” songs throughout the day and play them on the radio. David Cameron said in an interview that with using a technology like Shazam that everyone is previously familiar with it puts the control back in the smartphone users hands, in other words what David is saying is that the program aims at transferring that control of a standard countdown structure back in listeners hands in a new and interactive way.
All these examples of remediation in other areas of media also reflect the transition period television is currently having, the means of access, distribution and content are changing in the television environment due to users taking participatory action to change the way television delivers their content.
Television was first introduced to the people of Australia in a slow roll out across the nation, first in New South Wales and Victoria in 1956, and followed later by Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia in 1959 and finally the Australian Capital Territory, and since the technology of television and the content it has produced has played an integral role in Australian culture over the past 50 years.
This transition isn’t the demise of the old as a result of the new, as Karl Marx states “The state will eventually wither away after the establishment of a classless society”, (Tandon, S. 2010) it’s not so much as withering but the landscape is changing networks and media companies are having to adapt from a one-way broadcast model to a networked model that reflects the digital age the world is currently living in.
The first real challenge to television as it was came first in the form of subscription television or pay tv, it was first recommended by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal in 1982 that it be made available to Australian audiences (some twenty years after the U.S). It’s intention was to provide a larger variety in programs available but because of concerns about the local production industry and public interest it was delayed 13 years. The first pay TV operators in Australia entered the market in 1995 and gave Australian television audiences access to ‘global’ programming. However, subscription services suffered greatly due to regulation when it came to the rights to air live sport. Whilst Telstra and Foxtel own 50% of the rights to sporting matches they remain on free-to-air television, which sport being a major audience engager had a major affect on subscription television’s popularity, also the development of DVD technology meant that the film channels offered on subscription television would decline as an enticement for prospective audiences or consumers. Foxtel ex-CEO Tom Mockridge predicted that subscription television would be installed in three-quarters of Australian homes, which turns out to be wildly incorrect according to recent statistics run by stockbroking firm CCZ Statton Enquities, in 2009 the number of households with subscription television is one of the lowest relates in the developed world at 28% and due to the same tough anti-siphoning laws Foxtel and other providers are unable to expand their content that freeview and free-to-air television broadcast (Knott, M. 2012).
In a sense Television in the conventional way hasn’t made a great transition to it’s adolescent self; homes have increased ten fold with an average of 2.2 television sets per household and a staggering 18.7 million working sets around the country (ACMA, 2012). These statistics meaning that networks still hold most control in terms of deciding on what and when content is broadcast. The really challenge networks are facing is how the transition in mid-2011 from analogue to digital has and will affect how audiences use the platform and with new platforms such as VoD which allows people to time-shift what content they wish to engage in, the Internet and digital opportunities with television allow for a new matrix in the media environment.
With this shift to digital and the capabilities of time-shifting and ad-skipping provided, television face financial disruption by means of advertising revenue trends having an overall negative outlook since 2005-06 which is driven by the emergence of new technology, the Internet and the average household multi-tasking and multi-screening throughout their television consumption and in addition according to OZTAM, Regional TAM and Nielson, the proportion of Australian households with an internet connected television increased from 11% to 21% over the period of a year (OZTAM, 2013). Changing consumer and audience preferences are driving fundamental changes in how content is being delivered by communication providers in Australia. A recent report by Australian Communications and Media Authority stated that growth in online participation is disruptive, which presents both challenges and opportunity for the industry.
Historic trends for content in Australia show that television is still the most predominant source for content however networks can witness a gradual decline of physical consumption and a sizeable growth in digital consumption with broadband penetration, device proliferation, media convergence and the growth in user-generated content. Australians are now consuming this audiovisual content not just from traditional sources such as broadcast television services but content on websites and blogs, social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter, and media players such as Google, Vevo, Apple and YouTube. Most households around the nation have smart devices with recording capability which allows for the average person to upload and share their own content online with these media player services, and this relationship between user controlled content being distributed both online by the producer of the content and then being transferred to broadcast television video clip programs. With programmes such as Ridiculousness or Australia’s Funniest Home Videos, posting your own content has undergone remediation through the help of online services such as YouTube, these shows may have existed before this emergence but it has transformed into a show that continues to stay constant because of the popularity of video clip series online.
With the development of this online video services ACMA believes that the growth of professionally produced online video content services is a key example of the internet forcing the evolution of existing approaches to delivery. In 2014 Fairfax Media who owns Nine Network founded online streaming services Stan to compete with streaming giant Netflix, the streaming service purchasing rights to many prime time series that would make it more difficult to operate in the Australian market with Stan monopolising peak time series.
There is a rapid sense of remediation where traditional media forms are trying to confirm their status in the digital world and because of this endeavour, television itself will never disappear; it is only due to audience and how the audience use the service that affects television and drive the traditional model to reimagine its distribution, production and engagement structure to involve a far more participatory culture that is a result of the digital and online emergence.
Audience Interactivity and its Influence
As user controlled platforms such as Facebook and Twitter continue to make their way into mainstream communications -aiding remediated services like Spotify and YouTube- they also develop a stronger presence in the television industry.
Let it be noted that consumers of television have not simply moved from passive viewers to active viewers. Consumers have always been interactive; sport fans yell at the screen, soap opera fans make side comments aloud in their living room and television consumers regularly discuss television events within their social circles. What has been the major change in user interactivity however, are the various online platforms in which users are able to interact and contribute. The determining factor between using an online platform and not, is that feedback that was usually kept private within the living room is now available to post to the public on forums such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, where anyone with internet access can view and respond to said feedback. In doing so, these online platforms create what is known as a “public sphere”. As Boeder (2005) cites from Hinton (1998), the public sphere should not be seen as a physical entity, but rather “an abstract forum for dialogue and ideology-free public opinion, a lively debate on multiple levels within society”. By opening up a digital platform for viewers to share their comments and opinions with other viewers with similar interests, the public sphere allows the formation of virtual communities in which viewers with similar television interests can create real-time discourse regarding particular TV shows or episodes. It is then also suggested by Boeder that the Internet is a “shallow substitute” for “authentic discourse” (2005). While this statement suggests that communication which is not face to face is inauthentic or synthetic, it is a point to make that “51% of [people] believe the time we spend with ‘friends’ on social media is as valuable as the time spent with them in person” (Higgins, 2015). This statement can be confirmed through Fernback and Thompson (1995): “It seems most likely that the virtual public sphere brought about by [computer-mediated communication] will serve a cathartic role, allowing the public to feel involved rather than to advance actual participation”. The Internet has since established itself as an authentic, real-time platform for discourse within the public sphere; allowing consumers of television to share their views with people outside of their living room, without having to leave it. The availability and accessibility of this type of interactivity opens up an abundance of opportunity for fans all over the world to connect with one another and create relationships with one another.
Anderson’s concept, “imagined communities” (1991) refers to the idea that a community is imagined because it does not involve any physical interactions between members. Finding similarities in identifying as being part of a “nation”, a community is imagined through social construction by people who perceive themselves to be part of that group or community based on a common thread. In the case of a television show, the common thread would be an interest in a television programme. “It is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow members, meet them, or even hear them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (Anderson, 1991). While fans from around the world of a particular television programme may never meet or even speak with one another, they perceive themselves to be part of a larger community. Anderson’s concept can be applied to fandoms, and it is evident that despite the Internet and digital media allowing stronger public discourse, a fandom is still considered an “imagined community” as it is a social construct rather than a physical interaction. Comic-Con, an internationally recognised non-profit which celebrates comics and related popular art forms, can be considered a platform for imagined communities. Fans from all over the world attend various Comic-Con events to celebrate their love for comics and television shows, with many attendees dressing in costume to express their passion. While these people may never speak to each other, or meet, they share a common interest and believe themselves a valuable part of a larger community by being a part of a discussion and acknowledging other fans around them.
Ever-present and celebrated for its dedicated fan following is popular sci-fi programme, “Star Trek”. American network NBC first ran the Original Series in 1966, and after one season, the show’s ratings began to decline (Chapman, 2013). After word spread of a possible cancellation, fans began to campaign to get the following seasons green lit while Season 2’s ratings continued to decline. Star Trek was one of the first success stories in fan-campaigning; the process included a “colossal letter writing campaign” (Woerner, 2012) and physical protesting as well outside NBC Studios in Burbank, California. After heavy campaigning, the show was green lit for a third season in 1969 but unfortunately did not make a third. Declines were reported to be a result of undesirable time-slots such as late Friday nights. The off-peak time-slot affected the primary target demographic mostly consisting of younger viewers, for whom television was not a typical activity at that time. Other shows that were successfully fan-campaigned included “Jericho”, “Reaper”, “Quantam Leap”, “Kim Possible” and “Firefly” (Woerner, 2012). Throughout television history, television audiences have used fandoms and imagined communities as a platform to band together to express their views and influence the industry. As time, technology and society progresses, the potential power that users have also increases exponentially, as viewers begin to use new media to share their views globally and communicate more easily with one another.
It is by analysing television concept theories such as “imagined communities” and “time-shifting”, that the changes between the user-platform relationship become clearer. Television, while it is still a staple entertainment system in a household much like a radio, was introduced as a family activity. After dinner, families would gather around the television to view their favourite scheduled TV shows before bed. As discussed previously, the introduction of the VCR into homes brought many changes to home media by “expanding people’s flexibility and range of programming options” (Eyal & Rubin, 2002). While live broadcasted events such as news and sports stay relevant on television schedules, this change to household media also brought “time-shifting” (Eyal & Rubin, 2002). Time-shifters referred to viewers who recorded televised programmes to view at a later time. The major feature which consumers took advantage of was the ability to avoid clashes between conflicting scheduled programmes on different channels. Viewers were able to record one program while watching another, and also record shows to view a second time, at their own leisure. VCR studies by Morgan and Shanahan (1991) suggested that the VCR was an “expanded delivery system for pre-existing types of messages”. This statement can also be applied to the introduction of new-media, as second screens and digital replaying are also simply put, newer platforms to broadcast pre-existing messages, being television shows, or videos intended for consumer viewing (Bryant and Oliver, 2002). To clarify, Bolter’s definition of “remediation” comes from the stem word “remedy” and refers to the incorporation or representation of one medium in another (1999). As broadcast television is remediated, VCR and time-shifting capacities allow television to be incorporated through a different medium, and the same can be said with new media.
In recent years, Video on demand has increased dramatically, with video on demand service revenue projected to double from 2014 to 2018 (Statista, 2015). With the introduction of Foxtel, premium services were made available to consumers- more channels were offered as well as Foxtel IQ providing time-shifting features which allowed to viewer to pause, rewind and fast-forward while watching live. Additionally, with streaming services being introduced such as Netflix and Stan, streaming video on demand offers a range more channels without scheduled programming, meaning consumers have increased accessibility choosing what they watch, and when they watch. Unfortunately both Netflix and Stan are required to license television shows to have them on their service, thus keeping illegal streaming evident as it bears no cost to viewers if they do not get caught.
YouTube is another form of Video On Demand. While it is not specifically tailored for television viewing, it does contain television material. YouTube is a web-video platform originally created to share amateur, user made videos. It has since adapted to the changes in the television industry and the rise of new media and after being bought over by Google in 2006, YouTube is now used not only by amateur videographers but also companies and individuals looking to promote themselves or a brand. Many YouTubers also have their own individual or group channels, introducing Vlogging and Web-series to the world. Its success can be measured in reports that YouTube consumed as much bandwidth in 2007 than the entire Internet in 2000 (The Telegraph, 2008). This unofficial form of television has opened up viewing habits of the general television consumer by providing an abundance of free entertainment material as well as news recaps, music videos, candid video, sporting events and highlights, and other forms of video.
Popular web-series turned network television show Broad City is an example of the impact users have on the development of television now through new media. As the two Actor/Comedians Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer produced and released more of their show Broad City on YouTube, the web-series built up a strong fan following and a boost in views and popularity. It was through audience interactivity within the public sphere including likes, shares and comments that the show was noticed by esteemed Comedian/Producer Amy Poehler, who took the girls under her wing to mentor them and executive produce their show. The show then got picked up by the Comedy Central network and has been wildly successful, with a strong 8.5 rating on IMDB (IMDB Website, 2015) and 98 % on Rotten Tomatoes (Rotten Tomatoes Website, 2015). These rating platforms too, are avenues for users to interact within the public sphere, contributing to user-reviews which can be accessed globally, even by those outside of the “imagined community”.
According to Jenkins (2006), this notion of “participatory culture” is “intended to contrast with older notions of media spectatorship”. As previously discussed, the development of technology since the introduction of television has forced society to alter our methods of spectatorship. With the introduction of mobile devices with Internet access, networks and television programmes have been able to seamlessly work their content into other platforms, converging new media and old, which is referred to by Jenkins (2006) as “convergence culture”. Jenkins’ definition of convergence culture refers to the “flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behaviour of media audiences who would go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experience they wanted”. Programmes that rely on user contribution in order to progress through a season such as The Voice do this exceptionally well. By acknowledging the change in audience behaviour from private family viewing with a strong focus to the use of second screens and public broadcast of opinions while viewing, The Voice makes use of these behavioural changes by incorporating them into the viewing process of their programme. Advertisement breaks and promotional scripting encourages viewers to use second screens while viewing or during ad breaks to comment and contribute votes. Additionally, the Channel 9 produced show also encourages use of their channel website where viewers can time-shift and re-view previously broadcasted content. Moreover, Channel 9 has developed an app which entices viewers by offering real-time interaction through the app which is displayed during the television broadcast, access exclusive backstage content and free votes during live shows which are normally charged at $0.55 per vote. (The Voice Website, 2015). The interaction between user and the progress of “The Voice” demonstrates society’s growing desire for immediacy. As users can interact through different stimuli on a real-time basis, allowing direct and instant involvement between user and content, giving rise to a sense of urgency or excitement and this is reflected in the mode of address of “The Voice” when people are voted in or out based on viewer participation in a live broadcast. While this content can be time-shifted and viewed at a later time on another platform via new media, the programme is edited in a way to replicate, strengthen and emphasise the suspenseful atmosphere.
As many consumers fear society’s growing dependence on technology may not have a strong return on investment, Williams (1989) recounted the access to books “contributed to the structuring of a hierarchical social order” and thus the effective use of new technologies “yielded returns which could be reinvested to further advantage”. He also noted, “The relations between a technology and its most general institutions became the ground, first, of specific social differentiations and later, inevitably, of social conflict. This statement suggests that the introduction of new technology impacts society in such a way that alters its very being. The concept of “technological determinism” vs. “social determinism” questions the relationship of technology and society, asking whether society drives technology, or whether technology drives society. “Technological determinism” suggests that technology is self-controlling, self-functioning and self-expanding. Technology is seen to be out of human control, simply shaping society with no foresight (Chandler, 2001), the absolution of this statement implying that the independence of technology requires no need for society’s use of the service. It can be argued with more confidence that “social determinism” is a more relevant concept, suggesting that it is society and social culture that drives the development of technology. Instead of technology evolving on its own, technology is evolved by societal intervention in order to make it more convenient and efficient for the benefit of others. As societal values shift, technology is created and recreated in order to fit in with social and cultural norms. This is evident through the remediation of entertainment media such as radio to television, television to online video, and online video to mobile phone. While the desired content stays the same (i.e. sports, news and entertainment), multiple platforms can be used to access the content, and features from the previous medium can be seen in the newer medium. As confirmed by social determinism, it is users who drive changes in technology and remediation, and while not having complete control of the television industry, have a significant impact on its drive and its future.
Social, Cultural and Political Evaluation
Bryant & Oliver (2002) argue that, after becoming an institution of everyday information in the public sphere, television has consequently created a common reality shared through otherwise varied communities. This reality involves the user viewing similar stories & events that validate their position in the world around them. The reality is called “mainstreaming”. Most cultures around the world are made up of many sub-cultures that align with a prevailing set of ideologies, values and expectations. This “mainstream” is the “most general, functional and stable” way of life; Bryant & Oliver suggest that television’s role in society, particularly Western cultures, is purely to reflect the mainstream (2002). Though this can currently be considered as true, the rise of digital media & its integration with television seems to allow cultivation of a more complex reality. Program viewing still reflects their overall lifestyle, but the television user now experiences less constraints.
As has been discussed previously, television has seen its audiences gain an ever-growing & expanding role in its existence as a media platform. Their increasing activity has seen them take on this new mantle of “user” through their participation. Much of this participation is for personal satisfaction, but within the last few decades there has been exponential growth in the use of television as a political device. Users of television are engaging with the government via filmed protests & debating in live studio audiences. They participate online by commenting, blogging, Tweeting at & on media released by news corporations. They form communities through the shared appreciation of television shows & organise events to celebrate their common ideals. They use the political leanings of commercial & public service channels to choose how they educate themselves, their peers & their families. Through their developing interactions with television, audiences are forming new ways to connect with those who share their political ideologies (Abercrombie & Longhurst, 1998).
While becoming aware of places and events far from the direct experience of our daily lives, we have given up much of our capacity to confirm what we think we know.
(McLeod and Chaffee, 1972)
This quote comes from the peak of the broadcast era where audiences had little to no direct interaction with television. Nevertheless, it is appropriate in a modern-day context as users rely on television & other media to provide ideological direction more heavily than ever. One of the first examples of an audience transforming to active using television’s political potential is in the Kennedy-Nixon debates. This event is most famous for being the first ever televised presidential debate and can be suggested as a key point in the relationship between politics & television. What supposedly swung the debate in Kennedy’s favour was the presentation of both candidates on screen. Even the former president of CBS, the channel that hosted the event, later stated that “Kennedy was bronzed beautifully…Nixon looked like death.” (Minow and LaMay, 2008). Televising the event led to widely held belief that Nixon’s dismal appearance led to his loss though he may have prepared superior arguments. It is also suggested that those who preferred Nixon’s candidacy were radio listeners; this demographic was of rural America, mostly Protestant & wary of Kennedy’s youthful ideals.
Druckman’s 2003 study on different mediums’ effects on an audience provides evidence that appearances really do matter. The study replicates the circumstances of the Kennedy-Nixon debate with participants being exposed to either the audio or the video version for the first time. Druckman makes the distinction between “sophisticates” and “non-sophisticates” in levels of political education; he hypothesises that television enhances learning in lower level demographics more so than higher ones. The study confirms this theory, and puts forth the idea that political representation on television is mostly superficial. However, it should be considered that Kennedy might have realised the political potential of audience interaction and acted accordingly whilst Nixon clung to the broadcast era.
The Kennedy-Nixon debates paved the way for new forms of televised debates and has allowed the audience to grow as users of a political platform. Here in Australia, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is well known for its controversial political talk program Q&A. The show began in May 2008 as an attempt to bring a more approachable political discourse to television. It seems that Q&A has been modelled off the British Broadcasting Corporation’s (BBC) Question Time, which features conversation between both the panel guests & the audience. Q&A generally invites prominent figures in the Australian political & media society to become panel guests but also extended invitations to lesser-known members of the public who have input in current topics of discussion.
Q&A accepts the new age of the television user by promoting their role in political conversation. Even describing itself as “interactive”, the program began by inviting its viewers to submit videos of themselves asking questions of the guests, and running fan-made “mash-ups” of political recordings over the credits at the end of the show. From this, Q&A then moved forwards to integrate the digital culture growing alongside television. A Twitter stream with the hashtag #qanda was already thriving online after two years of the show’s operation; the ABC saw an opportunity to open the floor further to its audience by incorporating the tweets into the live broadcast. Audience members could respond to the discussions by tweeting with the hashtag and producers would then select pertinent comments to publicly broadcast across the bottom of the screen.
This idea took off and remains as one of Q&A’s most recognisable features, with tweets composed by home viewers now being shared as a way to broaden the show’s community. The integration between political debate and digital culture can be described using Jenkin’s concept of “convergence culture”; this ideology suggests the traditional media outlets’ move towards a digital future can be achieved by celebrating & utilising their fans’ ideas for content (Jenkins, 2006). Indeed, the fan culture behind Q&A is so completely attached to the broadcasting practice that it is now expected that enthusiastic viewers immediately unpick each episode after the credits roll. The most dedicated users will discuss topics even during ad breaks in a way that can be described as a demonstration of “the timeliness and responsiveness of their devotion.” (Hills, 2002)
This is just the discussion of the topics. When considering the Twitter stream, Q&A is subject to real-time commentary as are broadcasts of Australian politics. These amateur annotations combine trending issues & arguments with politicians’ performances on screen to create an immediate, relevant & occasionally humorous public discussion. It is this example of online media becoming a part of television that truly highlights the evolution of the political audience. However, it is important to note that, particularly in Australia, this group of users is somewhat a minority (Wilson, 2011).
In the process, fans cease simply to be an audience for popular texts. Instead they become active participants in the construction and circulation of textual meaning. (Jenkins, 1992: 22–24)
Continuing on the thought of niche audiences, we may also consider the role of the traditional television fan. Jenkins (1992) details how active fans usually have some sort of influence over those partaking in the production of a television show. Many members of shows often observe the digital happenings of their fan clubs; as a product of this, the fans opinion that their feedback is important is reinforced and recycled (Harrington & Bielby, 1995). It can be seen that many audiences are using their time to contemplate shows online. An example of this is the Star Trek fan-base, as was previously discussed. These fans, well known as one of the most active fan communities, assume an identity as a “Trekkie”, dressing up in costumes and avidly knowing the most complex workings of the Star Trek world.
It is this Star Trek fan culture that demonstrates how users have begun to use their common interests as a way to open discourse on social inequality. In the original Star Trek, the notions of race, class and even species were consistently challenged in the attempt to portray humankind’s future. Unfortunately, this did not extend to gender roles. Traditional views of masculine men and feminine women were displayed frequently on screen; the male cohort was reasonable, logical, dominating, whilst their female counterparts were relegated to sexually-implicit outfits, emotional outpourings and submission to the higher male order. These conventions were presented as natural order, undeserving of discussion or explanation. With impractical outfits and “pink collar” professions, the women in the original Star Trek did little more than fulfil the desires of the subsequent male-centric fan culture.
This on-screen sexism may soon see its end though. As Jenkins discusses the mainstreaming of fan culture in his work Textual Poachers (1992), the concept of the “fan boy auteur” is summoned to describe the new relationship between producer & audience. Primarily, this role consists of a show’s producer using blogs, behind-the-scenes content, convention appearances etc. to emphasise their support of a participative audience (Jenkins, 2015). By providing this avenue for conversation (which has been demonstrated by more recent Star Trek seasons) and legitimising the role of the fan in television show production, it opens the door to more serious discussion of social inequalities both on and off-screen. The San Diego Comic-Con, a fan convention that celebrates the world of science fiction, has seen a rise in female attendance in recent years. With the inclusion of “female-friendly” television shows such as TrueBlood, and the new dialogue between fans & creators, the San Diego Comic-Con is now a meeting place for fans that wish to further social equality via their common interests. It represents the next generation of fans and a departure from the old acceptance of –isms.
The rise of the user has also witnessed some more passive approaches to political television. As television continues towards its future of only fast entertainment, genres once quite separate of each other have begun to connect. The political satire star’s age has come with programs like The Daily Show & The Colbert Report thriving on public television, particularly within youth culture (Kohut, 2012). It can be suggested that satirical news, once a little-employed genre, is one of the most prominent devices used to understand politics in a 21st century context. In fact, as shows like these wisely incorporate digital media into their production, satirical news has given audiences the chance to actively participate in a virtual democracy.
Both The Daily Show and The Colbert Report (and similar programs) have prompted those in the communications and politics worlds to study the impact of satirical news in the public sphere. In Australia, shows like The Weekly and to a lesser degree, The Project, seem to have been inspired by the structure & success of these programs. Studies have shown that political satire benefits democracy; younger demographics are participating in politics more by following the campaigns across various media channels, as satirical news is presented in an easily understandable manner (Becker & Waisanen, 2013). This external participation is more likely to occur after viewing political interviews via satire shows rather than regular news programs; the users’ demand for light entertainment combined with political education is a strong example of a change in audience attitude (Becker, 2013, Cao, 2008).
These political satire shows have changed the way news can be presented and ingested. Television was once seen as detrimental to the portrayal of public issues but is now a strong channel for social & political discourse. The Daily Show & The Colbert Report are hybrids of comedy & politics that are reshaping engagement with democracy. It is clear that the effect on audiences is both physical & mental, and that this genre has had particular influence on the younger generations.
Though the political satire genre is popular amongst youth culture, fast entertainment as whole is not warmly received, particularly on public service channels. The public service channels in Australia are the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) and the Australia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). These channels have been important in the development of Australian television, representing the diversity of Australian audiences and celebrating cultural groups within Australian society. However, these channels have risen to the forefront of public scrutiny within the last few years. The issue at hand is the changing purpose of public service broadcasting and how best to represent the many cultures within Australia.
SBS, as one of the last few organisations that truly celebrates multiculturalism, found itself in hot water in 2005. The Australian Government appears to have moved away from cultural policies of equity and instead focused on producing a more centralist, “lump-sum” structure. Since then, SBS has aligned itself with the Australian Government’s new values in order to survive. This move has included completely outsourcing all production bar news & sport, having a heavier involvement with sponsors, and the introduction of breaks within programs; this last change was controversial as it made SBS seem like a commercial channel. It can be suggested that SBS’s changes were due to a “crisis of legitimation”; audiences, particularly younger ones, are choosing personal media over public broadcasting more frequently, forcing public service channels to compromise on once-strong values (Jakubowicz, 2007).
Incidents like these have seen public service channel purists claim that the public and the commercial are becoming one (De Bens, 2007). The homogenisation of these corporations is upsetting much of the Australian public that has grown up with culturally-diverse channels. While SBS has already made its changes, lobby groups such as Friends of the ABC are afraid that the other public service channels will follow. Friends of the ABC supports the ABC as the national broadcaster and has been rather vocal after the channel announced it would be outsourcing more of its production. This organised fan group opposes the public service broadcasters’ decisions to engage in commercial ventures, claiming that “community support for public broadcasting will decline” as a result (Independent Australia, 2011). From the point of view of the public, the Australian Government will cut funding to the ABC & SBS as they explore advertising & sponsorship options because they will soon be indistinguishable from commercial channel programming.
However, both public service channels have argued that they must be allowed to adapt to the new environments set by an increasingly digital culture; a truly multicultural Australia would be constantly changing, and much of the younger members of this diverse society are uninspired by old methods of cultural celebration. This challenge to stay relevant, the “crisis of legitimation”, is one experienced by public service channels around the world. It would seem television users are moving with rapidly developing societies whilst these channels struggle to let go their ideas of cultural representation. It raises a question – are we witnessing the death of television as we know it or the birth of a new integrated medium?
Predictions and Foresight
From the various research documents, academic articles and statistical data collated for this report, all facts elude to a prediction consensus that the television industry will be markedly affected by its audiences viewership habits and the in the future. As the traditional model of broadcast television is already transfiguring to embrace participatory culture, interactivity and user generated content, all facets of the television industry will be compelled to come up with even more innovative concepts to cater to this new interactive audience demographic.
With the adoption of new age portable and accessible technology, television’s audience participation is becoming increasingly prominent due to the ‘second screen’ nature of its viewership. The rapid consumer intake of technology such as laptops, iphones and tablets coupled with the widespread availability of high-speed wireless Internet notes today’s viewing experience being more interactive, more consumable and far more shareable than ever before. According to former UK Channel 4 executive Matt Locke, statistics display that 60% of UK viewers now have a laptop or tablet computer running while they are watching television and are very often commenting on the show unfolding. “There has been a big consumer uptake of tablets and iPhones; we started noticing people talking about shows while watching them.” (Adler, 2012.)
This participatory viewership mode of ingesting media whilst simultaneously interacting and responding to it, has revolutionised not only the way in which we watch television but the way in which industry professionals produce television content. Rather than talking about television producers and consumers as occupying separate roles this new ‘participatory culture’ encourages the roles to collide ‘according to a new set of rules that nobody understands’ . (Jenkins, 2006). Jenkins suggests that the nature of our current generation allows for a rapid influx of Television content on any given topic and ‘there is an added incentive for us to talk among ourselves about the media we consume’.(2006)
With the recurring expansion of technology paired with the exponential growth of social media platforms, convergent culture will only continue to be a developing concept of the future. This new age multi dimensional way of user interaction through television facilitated material will continue to thrive and transform the way television is watched and the way it is designed to be watched.
With the rapid expansion of Television content, digital networks and online content, audiences are being exposed to a seemingly infinite amount of programs at any given time. Due to the large capacity of content out there in this day and age there has been a sizeable opening in the television market to facilitate this overload and create measures to personalize the content being given to users taking their individual interests and preferences into account. ‘Collaborative filtering’ is a term that describes this process of catering information to users and allowing them to shape the content on their screens and personalize their viewing experience. Collaborative filtering requires that the user is encouraged to actively rate the programs they are watching. It is then, ‘the ranking profiles are collected in a central server and clustered to identify people having similar tastes. When somebody asks for a recommendation, the system suggests those items that have been positively rated by the users with the most similar profiles’ (Ardissono, Kobsa, Maybury, 2004). This process has been apparent and in use since the most fundamental user catered viewership models have been available for example the television streaming service TiVo (2002).
With the introduction and notable success of new digital media television platforms such as Netflix, video on demand, hulu and online streaming platforms such as YouTube and vimeo, it is clear that Television culture is becoming vastly more complex and convergent in its nature, applying traditional ‘collaborative filtering’ methods in a more complex and systematic manner. Allowing audiences to personalise their viewership experiences fragments a once not as active audience into separate demographics, engaging in selective content and becoming more physically involved in the process of locating shows that suit their personal genre and narrative style preferences.
Netflix is a successful result of remediation, that allows for a personalised user interactive experience. It is the current video streaming colossus that not only allows for TV shows and movies to be streamed, but also creates its own original programming. Netflix has had an overwhelming growth of subscribers in 2015 having 3.3 million users subscribe by this July quarter (Stevenson, 2015). Its success can be directly attributed to consistent refinements that implement user’s responses. CEO of Netflix Reed Hastings stated “We are just a learning machine. Every time we put out a new show, we are analysing it, figuring out what worked and what didn’t so we get better next time,”. (Stevenson, 2006).
These newly developed viewing platforms such as Netflix encourage commercial, private and public television content creators to consider a future that strives for innovation. This is a future that must make allowances for direct interactivity within a shows program and opportunities for online conversation around its content. This has the potential to break down the barrier between the producer and their audience, fabricating a possibility for the future of television content to be predominantly user generated.
Although the more traditional definition of ‘watching broadcast television’ is quickly becoming replaced by a more interactive participatory medium, evidence suggest that this does not necessarily signify a decline in the future of employment and profiting from content. Alternatively this remediation opens up the potential of multiplying existing methods of standard financing of shows by restructuring and implementing user interaction facets, and finding profit opportunities within a new convergent media market.
Alternatively, the one industry that is currently un disputed by the introduction of the unscheduled nature of new broadcast models is Live event Television that include key sporting events national celebrations etc. This area has a strong future in regards to keeping large audiences tuning in at scheduled time slots. This raises the question of what platform will be used to mount live content whilst allowing the adaption of modernized participatory models of broadcast. It is suggested that the viewing of events of such national & global significance creates an unparalleled experience for an audience allowing ‘distinctive and powerful attractions to the broadcast model’ to continue to exist within the future of the industry. (Turner, 2009).
Conclusive insights
From the research we have accumulated, sets of conclusions have emerged as a result of our exploration of the original question.
Although there has been a dramatic remedial transformation of traditional media forms, there are still holes in their application of the old business model; using audiences as products rather than assets to heighten the industry. Print media being one of the more traditional forms, require a future revelation on how to incorporate the transformation of their viewers in having more control of the content they are ingesting much like the current remediation of the television broadcast model. Radio as a media form has always possessed ‘participatory culture’ within its structure with concepts such as talk back radio, however the medium is now challenged (similarly to television) as a platform, to adapt to the digital age as audiences are presented with many other infinite alternatives of accessing the same entertainment and educational content online. The media platform of radio is in constant battle with the accessibility and convenience of new technology particularly smartphones. The way in which radio encourages its audiences to be dependant on one platform is becoming increasingly unnecessary, as a new online digital culture and source of information is arising. Melbourne Radio station Fox FM’s listeners being encouraged to use the popular mobile application ‘ShaZam’, is an example of the adaption of listener/user participation to allow their station to keep with a new interactive culture. The understanding of remediation in other media platforms is important in the analysis of Television culture, as their techniques of transformation are relatively similar.
The traditional networked model of television is in current threat to adapt to digital consumption trends that allow varying online platforms to converge instigate the growth of user generated content. This remediation does not see the death of television but rather a transformation of its audiences; one that will drive the traditional model to re envisage its distribution to involve the digital and online emergence of participatory culture.
Although audiences of television haven’t necessarily been completely passive in their viewership habits in the past, there has been an influx of online platforms that have heightened user interactivity exponentially. The introduction online platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have becomingly served as a virtual ‘public sphere’ (Boeder, 2005) allowing the formation of virtual communities in which viewers can generate online conversation regarding particular Television shows or episodes. Although online platforms were originally perceived as ‘inauthentic’ and ‘shallow substitutes’’ for a ‘public sphere’ (2005), in a generation noted for its emergence into the online world, these online platforms open up an abundance of opportunity for fans of television shows to connect, and interact with each other without having to leave the comfort of their living room.
Despite the Internet’s power to construct fandoms and strong public discourse in regards to television content, communities of the sought are still considered as ‘imagined communities’ (Anderson, 1991) as the interactivity of users at play are simply not physical and is merely a social construct. Although the nature of a ‘fandom’ may not necessarily be physical, their power as a collective group of users can be quite influential. Fan campaigning has been an extremely successful activity for fans of particular shows to band together, express their views and impact the industry. This notion has been evident in ability of Fandoms of prevent series’ ‘Star Trek’, ‘Jericho’, ‘Reaper’ and ‘Kim Possible from cancellation.
The way in which ‘new media’ has brought on the application of concepts such as ‘second screening’ allowing users to incorporate television through a new type of medium, can be similarly compared to the remediation that occurred from Broadcast Television to VCR and its industry changing ‘Time shifting’ capabilities. (Eyal & Rubin, 2002). With the introduction of Video on demand being the inaugural concept of non – scheduled television , users have increased their accessibility choosing what content they want to watch when they want to watch it. This concept applies with the launch and success of the video streaming platform Youtube. Although it is technically an unofficial distribution of Television content, it has opened up an array viewership habits providing an infinite amount of free entertainment material. The way in which a user is able to actively rate and review content on these newly developed platforms opens up even more avenues within the public sphere for interaction, which furthermore influences the content generated in the Television industry.
The convergent culture that is now patently prominent in the viewership of Television can be attributed to the rapid intake of technology such as iphones and laptops paired with accessibility to the internet. The way in which this allows programs such as the ‘Voice’ to seamlessly work their content into alternative online platforms is a new media convergence technique that subconsciously strengthens user following (Jenkins, 2006). As confirmed by the term ‘social determinism’ (Chandler, 2001), it is clear that users do in fact drive changes in technology and remediation and whilst not having complete control over the Television content being created, users do have a substantial impact on the future of the industry.
The distribution of television has a particular role in society, typically in western cultures to purely reflect a ‘mainstream’ type of reality (Bryant and Oliver, 2002). This reality is shared through communities created within the ‘public sphere’ that follow a series of shared stories & events that validate their position in society. The rising of a convergent television culture gives birth to an even more complex version of reality that enables less constraints, and works as a political device. Audiences can now participate and connect with those who share their political ideologies through television-aired events such as protests and live studio debates. Online platforms associated with such events that allow users to interact via commenting, blogging & tweeting, diligently create small political communities within television viewership. Examples of how communities derived from television, have had a direct effect on politics can be traced all the way back to The Kennedy Nixon debate. Studies have shown that even though political representation on television can be superficial, audiences responses to television content can essentially sculpt a select part of a nation’s views.
ABC’s political panel show Q&A is another example that promotes viewers to have a role in political discourse, integrating digital convergent culture in its viewership and utilising their fans’ ideas for content (Jenkins, 2006). Meticulous observation of the traditional ‘television fan’ and the transformation of its expressionistic roles is quite important in the analysis of television culture. Fan communities such as the ‘Star Trek’ Fandom have demonstrated the extensive abilities active users can have on issues such as social inequality in public discourse as well shaping future content of the show. Political satirical news programs have also had quite a large effect on the public audience, particularly youth culture giving users a chance to actively respond to the shows content thus creating a virtual democracy. Television was once perceived as detrimental to its users portrayal of public issues, however is now quite a convenient channel for social and political discourse.
There has recent change of pace in Australian public service channels such as the ABC and SBS in regards to multiculturalism and diversity. This change of pace is due to the perceived purpose of these types of channels and how to best represent the many cultures within Australia. This has forced public service channels to represent a more commercial and ‘mainstream’ reflection within its content. This homogenisation of public and commercial television can be attributed to adoptions of external advertisements and sponsorship as well as television users demanding more light entertainment and satire in its content.
By and large, the future of the television industry is ineluctably going to be markedly affected by the audience that views its content. The young concept of Participatory ‘second screening’ media culture paired with further advancements in technology will allow television viewers to flourish into a user facilitated television movement, where audience participation and responsive activity will have a vital influence on the content being created. With further remediation of concepts that involve a more complex adaptation of collaborative filtering and personalised user viewership, the future of the way in which audience watches television will become even more user facilitated . Live Sport however will be unlikely to steer away from its scheduled nature of its viewership, and a component of the traditional broadcast model will indelibly live on.
In the end, the industry needs to continue to strive for innovation and find a way of embracing platforms that involve and consider its user within its fundamental production framework. An obvious distinguished amount of success has emerged from modern convergent and participatory cultures within Television. This success combined with a metamorphosis of current technology, sees an exciting future for the television industry.
REFERENCE:
ACMA 2012, Television Sets in Australian Households, Australian Communications and Media Authority
Abercrombie, N., & Longhurst, B. J. (1998). Audiences: A sociological theory of performance and imagination. Sage.
Adler, T.(2012). A Nation Of Audience Participation. Sheffield Doc Fest 2012 – Destination docs, The Guardian. 1 (1), 1.
Anderon, B. 1991, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Rev. and extended ed. London, New York, p. 1-7
Ardissono, L, Kobsa, A, Maybury, M. (2004). Personalized Digital Television: Targeting Programs to Individual Viewers. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers . 3-4 .
Audienscope 2015, Radio: Batting Above Average [ONLINE]. Available at:https://www.gfk.com/au/Solutions/audience-measurement-and-insights/Documents/Infographic/2015/gfk_radio2015_V7.pdf Accessed 14 October 15
Becker, A. B. 2013. What about those interviews? The impact of exposure to political comedy and cable news on factual recall and anticipated political expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(3), 344-356.
Becker, A. B., & Waisanen, D. J. 2013. From funny features to entertaining effects: Connecting approaches to communication research on political comedy. Review of Communication, 13(3), 161-183.
Boeder, P. 2005, Habermas’ heritage: The future of the public sphere in the network society, First Monday, Vol. 10 No. 9, p. 3-13
Bolter, David J. 1999, Remediation: understanding new media. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 216.
Broad City, 2015, Broad City Website, http://www.broadcitytheshow.com/ accessed 05 October 2015
Bryant, J., & Oliver, M. B. (Eds.). 2009. Media effects: Advances in theory and research. Routledge
Carter, L. 2008, Web Could Collapse as Video Demand Soars, The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1584230/Web-could-collapse-as-video-demand-soars.html, accessed 16 September 2015
Cao, X., & Brewer, P. R. 2008. Political comedy shows and public participation in politics. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 90–99
Chandler, D. 2001, Technological or Media Determinism. Retrieved September 10, 2012, from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tdet06.html
Chapman, B. 2013, Star Trek: The Real Reason Why NBM Cancelled The Original Series Revealed?, What Culture, http://whatculture.com/tv/star-trek-real-reason-nbc-cancelled-original-series-revealed.php accessed 16 September 2015
Druckman, J. N., 2003, The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited. Journal of Politics, 65: 559–571. doi: 10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00015
Eyal, K., Rubin, A. 2002, The Videocassette Recorder in the Home Media Environment, Cresskill, New Jersey, Hampton Press Inc., p. 329-345
Fernback, J., Thompson, B. 1995. “Virtual communities: Abort, retry, failure?” at http://www.well.com/user/hlr/texts/VCcivil.html, accessed 24 August 2005 (cited via Boeder 2005)
Higgins, R. 2015, Revision Lecture, Advertising Media, RMIT Blackboard, p. 40
Hills, M, 2002, Fan Cultures. London: Routledge.
Hinton, S. 1998. “The potential of the latent public sphere,” at http://www.anu.edu.au/~e951611/papers/potential.html, accessed 6 July 2000 (cited via Boeder, 2005)
IMDB, 2015, Broad City, IMDB, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2578560/, accessed 05 October
Independent Australia, 2011. Friends of the ABC wants inquiry into the ABC. Retrieved 18 October 2015, from https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/friends-of-the-abc-wants-inquiry-into-the-abc,3566
Jarvis, J. 2008, The Print Media are Doomed. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2008/12/the_print_media_are_doomed.html, Accessed 15 October 15
Jenkins, H, 1992, Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. London: Routledge.
Jenkins, H, 2006, Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York University Press, New York
Jenkins, H, 2015, Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. Routledge.
Jones, J. P, 2005, Entertaining Politics: New Political Television and Civic Culture (New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers).
Karpp, H. 2014, Radio’s Answer to Spotify? Less Variety. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303754404579313150485141672, Accessed 14 October 15
Kohut, A., Doherty, C., Dimock, M., & Keeter, S. 2012. In changing news landscape, even television is vulnerable. Pew Center for the People and the Press.
McLeod, J M. and S R. Chaffee 1972, “The Construction of Social Reality,” in The Social Influence Process, ed. J. T. Tedeschi, Chicago: Aldine Atherton, 50-99.
Minow, N. N., & LaMay, C. L. 2008. Inside the presidential debates: Their improbable past and promising future. University of Chicago Press.
Morgan, M., Shanahan, J. 1991, Do VCRs change the TV picture? VCRs and the Cultivation Process, American Behavioural Scientist p. 122-135 (cited via Eyal & Rubin 2002)
Mumbrella 2013, ABCs: Newspapers see more double digit declines. [ONLINE] Available at:http://mumbrella.com.au/abcs-newspapers-3-188553. Accessed 13 October 15
Nessymon 2009, Remediation. [ONLINE] Available at: http://nessymon.com/writings/college-writing/remediation, Accessed 15 October 15
Norris, P, 2001, Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and Internet Worldwide. 1st ed. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
OzTAM, Regional TAM and Nielsen 2013, Australian Multi-Screen Report, Q1 2013, available at: http://www.OzTAM.com.au/documents/Other/Australian%20Multi%20Screen%20Report%20Q1%202013_FINAL.pdf.
Rotten Tomatoes, 2015, Broad City, Rotten Tomatoes, http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/broad-city/, accessed 05 October
Statista 2015, Video on demand service revenue worldwide from 2014 to 2018, http://www.statista.com/statistics/266000/global-vod-service-revenue/, accessed 28 September 2015
Suits and Sneakers 2015, Gareth Cliff: How the medium of radio has changed. [Online Video]. 03 August. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41hhFrXpjNA. [Accessed: 14 October 2015].
Tandon, S. 2010, The Future of Print News Media: Adapting to Change. Journal of Global Media Studies, 2, 41.
The Voice 2015, The Voice Australia Voting FAQ, The Voice, http://www.9jumpin.com.au/show/thevoice/about/voting-faq/ , accessed 17 September 2015
Turner, G (2009). Television Studies After TV: Understanding Television in the Post-Broadcast Era. 2nd ed. London & New York: Routledge. 62-63.
Williams, R. 1989, “Communications, Technologies and Social Institutions” What I came to say, London: Hutchinson Radius, 1989, p. 172-186
Wilson, J. 2011. Playing with politics: Political fans and Twitter faking in post-broadcast democracy. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 17(4), 445-461.
Woerner, M. 2012, Fan Campaigns That Actually Saved TV Shows, io9, http://io9.com/5875356/fan-campaigns-throughout-history-that-saved-scifi-and-fantasy-tv-shows, accessed 23 September 2015