Thank You Nigel, I have been saying just the same but with a less eloquent style.
Category: Uncategorized
Interactive TV, SocialTV, Companion Screen Technology Fragmentation
The marriage of many parties in the Interactive TV systems has always been the Achilles heel for a fully integrated homogenous interactive environment. We have had other pre-2nd screen (i.e. 2nd-Window) systems since the 1990s that have suffered from the same issues described in this article cited below. Programme/TV Show/Film producers (Pre-Production and Post Production) are still unable to have a “write-once” for a “read-anywhere” business plan due to competing (proprietary/standardised) technologies that are all designed for the same job of Value Added Services. There were, and still are, proprietary and standardised CMS systems available but that still did not answer the age old problem of incompatibility across broadcasters, operators selection of technology in the global TV eco-systems. The DVB Consortium made something that tried to answer this early on with something called DVB-PCF (Transcoding across different VAS systems) which the BBC worked heavily on. It never saw the light of day.
Creating and franchising an interactive TV show using a SocialTV / Companion Screen technology and single back-office system is seen as a pre-requisite in the conquering of this Value Added Service arena. E.g. The popular reality show ‘The Voice’ out of Holland was successful using Social TV (VAS by Ex-Machina I believe) but this cannot be sold worldwide “as-a-package” into Belgium, UK, LATAM, USA for example for the simple reason of techno-political-business reasons. This oft then leads to Buisness Plan ROI questions as per all interactive TV systems including the BBC’s Red-Button initiative, which has been heavily scaled back in recent years.
So we see that 2nd Screen technology technology fragmentation is the same issue as in ALL previous Interactive TV middleware attempts over the last 20 years. Then add to this new Non-TV Technologies (i.e. designed for the Internet all trying to latch on to the TV eco-system). Fragmentation and Fit-For-Purpose is an issue that also dogs the new TV eco-system. Different Social TV and Companion Screen offerings now numbers in their 30s with Civolution, Egonocast, Ex-Machina, Shazam, WyWy, ZeeBox etc. integrating on-screen, 2nd-window, off-programme and full dual-screen synchronisation.
There are lots of other things that are around in the new world of TV Tech – the failed 3DTV and now UHDTV and 4K etc. that are at least keeping us occupied along with Multi-Screen, DRM, CAS, PayTV, OTT and so on and so forth…
Gobbledygook
This is what a friend of mine expressed as his latest discussion in the into the world of buying a new TV and ‘Connected TV Service’ in a well known Electronic Retailer: “Anthony, it was a bunch of Gobbledygook…In the end I didn’t buy anything”.
Ouch! The TV Industry are Snake Oil Salesman – A Consumer Point of View
Powerbud (A consumer) – You touched on something very quickly that I, as a consumer and owner of a “SmartTV” would like to offer one (mine) opinion on. Your industry seems to be rocketing towards the likes of the stereotypical used car salesman approach to hawking their wares. What the mfr’s seem to be doing is fabricating meaningless “features” in order to B.S. potential buyers into purchasing their specific brand. Let’s reference “refresh rates” for instance. How many of the so-called “major” brands now have their own terminology that they’ve fabricated with their sales pitch that every other brands terminology, or even “Hz” as being inaccurate? Answer: All of them. I happen to have a Vizio. I watch sports a lot which needs a fast refresh rate to reduce blur of the moving objects. Vizio isn’t the only guilty manufacturer who fabricated their own term “SPS” to fool buyers into thinking they’re getting something they’re not. And I fell for it. Sony does it, Panasonic, all of them. The industry as a whole is turning into a band of snake oil salesmen and they’re puzzled when we don’t buy their latest song and dance about what their tv does. The only thing that surprises me, is that people like you and the so-called “industry experts”, marketing and sales exec’s at the manufacturers still seem to believe that you know better what I want than I do as a buyer/consumer. It’s not rocket science as they say. I want a tv that I can view all sorts of images on, easily, without annoying and constant SW updates to be downloaded every time I turn the thing on. I want it to last for more than a couple years; I want a live person who speaks English fluently when I call Tech Spt. Those are the basics, but surprisingly few tv manufacturers seem to grasp these basic consumer needs. I recently bought a smaller tv for my bedroom. It’s an LG, 32″, 60hz, 720p. It actually starts up in a 5th of the time that my 47″ Vizio does and I can’t tell the difference between Vizio’s 240 “SPS” and LG’s 60Hz refresh rates. That tells me that SPS is nothing more than B.S., just like Sony’s version or anybody else’s version for refresh rate measurements. So, if I don’t TRUST the company making the product, why would I care who makes it?
Your industry keeps pumping out stuff that most people don’t care about, but their response is always the same: The consumer doesn’t know what they want, so we have to tell them. No, we know what we want. Your industry just seems unwilling or incapable of hearing or understanding their (potential) customer base.
The original Article: http://readwrite.com/2013/05/03/why-innovation-is-moving-outside-the-tv#comment-888379846
(My Response) – Dear PowerBud – I am really glad to hear from someone who is not specifically a TV technology evangelist, as in most TV debates or forums they normally are of course. It is nice to get something clear and direct and I sympathise with you. I sympathise with you because I am both a TV technologist and a Consumer and am, in fact, a victim of the hype and bluff and bluster surrounding CE TV manufacturing. I need a new TV and I am reluctant to buy anything at the moment because of the many things that you raise. Actually we have ‘Gadgets’ across the board that are sold to us everyday that have little or no real benefit to those we are actually replacing. Look at the iPhone and Android fiasco and the mountains of perfectly usable tablets & phones we discard on a daily basis…Alas this is consumerism.
All CE Companies saw TV arrive at a plateau – Black & White, Colour, SD, HD, then…..3D and now… SmartTV…to which they added CE TV Portals and only Fragmentation and False Promises. They are creating hype in order to sell and yes in many instances it is feature-sets that cannot be classified as a major shift in technology – it is just new icing on the same cake. I certainly have been trying to moderate in our TV world and have blogged negatively about the fluff that the TV industry puts out…I was called “Ant the Rant” by a Trade Journalist for a while as my opinions were all contrary to those that hype up out TV Technology land…i.e. 3D was my pet hate – I blogged against it for years and was even close to the main protagonists but they drove it forward relentlessly. It is a failure and should not be sold in my humble opinion but it is being forced upon us. (my blog is at http://www.tvangelist.wordpress.com).
So right now the CE Manufacturers are straddled across the traditional Broadcast World of TV (Cable, Satellite, Terrestrial & IPTV) and the Over The Top World of TV (WebTV, InternetTV, IPTV, OTT). You might notice that IPTV features in both sections because they are moving from Broadcasting to Delivery of OTT content which is different) – The whole world of TV Technologists are paid to make the business turn and at the moment it is around Smart TVs, Portals, Apps and the belief that the TV will act as the Funnel of all things TV entertainment onto your average 36″ screen via the internet. (That is the average screen size sold in most of the world). The Consumer world of Retail TV is fragmented, confused and in a very ragged state that is not good for the consumer that is certain. On the other hand a good PayTV Operator who gets the hybrid mix right will certainly offer you a great service at reasonable costs, they will be responsible for Quality of Service and Provision but they will not please all the people all the time.
People are the Problem in Connected TV, Companion Screen TV, NOT the Technology
Fluxx Connected TV White Paper (link below) is a supposed guide that explains how the industry can solve the Connected-Companion Screen buiness. Page 18 highlights exactly why there is a problem and does not give a credible solution, it merely points out technologies and what technology punters need to marry, fix or invent. For example the IPG – OK an IPG and Search – Which IPG, Which Search Engine there are lots of them and they are all different and they all claim to do the job! The UI/UX has been the fight of 2011 with NDS, TIVO, Inview, Espial, and many others all claiming they have the best system. A one size fits all is what is needed – harmonised, standardised system…but human beings will never allow that to happen. You can have any colour you want sir as long as it is black! Hahah!
I have been in Interactive Digital TV since 2000 and the Future of TV has little to do with the TV technology industry but more to do with the people working in this industry and their inate inability to work together for the good of the industry and the consumer. I have seen many a company representative overly complicate initiatives, work negatively in consortia so that initiatives fail, create situations that inhibit harmonisation, becasue they have a proprietary solution or preferred partner that they want to sell ahead of all others…and I have seen corporations get greedy when it comes to IPR and obtaining their slice of the pie to the detriment of these harmonisation initiatives. All the available technologies are iready for today’s successful interactive, 2nd screen market, however people are unable to make it happen. CE Manufaturers want to go it alone, Broadcasters want to go it alone, Operators want to control it all, Vendors believe they have the winning technology, Programme makers and Advertisers are lcaught in the quagmire of technology gurus all claiming they have the answer.
The Interactive Companion Screen jigsaw is being put together by people who are blinkered by their company loyalty. Only an independent, neutral technology body could ever harmonise the future of TV. If we can align the people we can create the environment and head in the right direction with the right technology. The latest round of attempts with Tablets and Smart-phones interactivity are failing miserably as everyone invents a new mousetrap and the interactive TV mess repeats itself once again…this is one phrase fluxx managed to get spot on.
What is likely to happen is that a dominat force a lot like Apple will be selected over all others as happened in the digital Music industry download debacle. However it may be someone unexpected such as Intel Media who are gathering the right minds to put the right strategy together for this particularly complex subject.
http://fluxx.uk.com/2013/03/why-the-connected-experience-revolution-is-yet-to-be-televised/
Twitter is THE Fastest Growing Social Media Platform
Study Says Twitter Is Fastest-Growing Social Platform in the World http://mashable.com/2013/01/29/twitter-fastest-growing-social-platform/ via @mashable
Playing into the CFOs hands with Quantifiable Digital Marketing – ROI
Playing into the CFOs Hands with Quantifiable Digital Marketing – ROI
People are hailing ‘Digital Marketing’ as the new paradigm for Marcomms. The inevitable search for quantifiable marketing results in companies that want to make sense of their marketing spend is clear. I will however argue that Digital Marketing has already started to ‘expose’ the marketing theories of the world’s digital marketing gurus and the plethora of Social Media experts who are committing to it with all of their might, even boldly claiming Traditional Marketing is dead! They are merely all shooting themselves in the foot because the truth about marketing ROI is perhaps best left buried under the carpet. Sometimes it is better not to ask for quantifiable results because you may soon find out that you are exposing yourself to unwanted CFO scrutiny, followed by budget slashing and potential job loss. When it comes to tangibles in finance nearly ALL CFOs are heartless and cold towards the world of Marketing (a certain intangible). With measurement comes accountability and as such you are all playing into the CFOs hands with your fabulous Marketing ROI claims. Cutting the marketing budget is the first thing that happens when Revenue drops n’est ce pas, fighting for marketing budget each year is an uphill battle isn’t it? I have read many an article on the work lifespan of a modern CMO, which is now, on average, 2 years,…why? Perhaps it is due to modern marketing accountability!
In this saturated digital media world the majority of digital marketing campaigns fall on stony ground. OK some will be successful but the % is tiny…ROI is generally negative. Studies of Facebook campaigns and ‘Likes’ highlights this and it is only the tip of the iceberg. If you were to use finance driven Project Indicators, Rates of Return, NPV, IRR and Payback calculations in Marketing you would soon stop all projects before they start. ( The PI > 1).
Digital Marketing can be equated to our attempts at the introduction of Digital Interactive Television – i.e. Not many people really cared and did not click on the buttons as we first expected. I suggest that the ‘new’ Social Media gurus do a psychology and sociology course as part of any marketing course in order to understand human beings. Why? Because people are actually NOT interested in this ‘engagement’ aspect in the main, as you are interfering with the task in hand (Surfing the web, looking for something, facebooking, blogging etc.). In digital TV we were/are able to monitor, gathering deep information from this Digital system long before it was called Social TV. Analytics was our new business, or was it? We actually buried the results across the industry (still do) because whilst it is obviously the way we are all heading in Digital Media it is unjustifiable in terms of spend. Yes it will grow, change, and we will see positivity but not for many years to come. Interactivity/Engagement = Perseverance and Re-Education (Changing Habits).
What people fail to understand is the bigger picture in Marketing. The fundamentals of any Corporate Marketing initiative is ‘Presence’ and that should embrace both Traditional and Digital Marketing. Traditional message generation or Brand Exposure is only a brainwashing of the masses who are in general doing ‘other things’ when you offer up your Brand. Making them engage when they are in Facebook is not what you should be trying as it is distracting from the fun of Facebook so the mental state of the recipient is not tuned in. The need for ‘presence’ in the market is paramount and a marketing cornerstone for all the marketing mix. So what if 1000 people click on your Ad, so what if a 1000 people send a tweet does it really matter? It is only a miniscule % of the amount of people who have probably consciously and subconsciously registered your ‘presence’ without interaction, which therefore does not mean that you have failed in your campaign. It does however if you do the math’s.
Here is something you can convince the CFO to do as a Marketing ROI exercise – Stop your Traditional Marketing and see where you head – I know that your Company will suffer and lose market share, possibly fold and collapse. Presence is primordial! I also suggest that Social Media gurus work in Companies where ONLY Digital Marketing is done to see how long they last…I furthermore suggest that they stop telling us that Traditional Marketing is dead because they do not know what they are talking about!
The VCR/PVR was supposed to kill advertising … it didn’t! TV killed the radio star… it didn’t! Just remember this: Web Pop Ups which annoyed people so much and disappeared were the sign that Digital Marketing is in the main an interruptive, distracting nuisance that is heavily ignored. All Digital Ads are just a new form of popups that I have called Popins. Uninvited guests!
Take a Pill to Escape the Tablet Headache
It was quite a few years ago now since I worked at a Polish Tech Company who had already designed a PAD with Windows on it (was early 2000s). It was always considered innovative by us but just a skunk RnD project. After all it would never take off now would it – who wants to use a device like that we said – Years later we have Tablets a go-go and here is a full review and worth looking at http://tablets-review.toptenreviews.com/
What I Really Think About Facebook
If you live in a city of a 1,000,000 plus your actual ‘contact’ with people is limited to the epi-centre (i.e. where you live) and a radius of some mile/kilometer or so around you – In effect creating a village in that large city; and reality says that a small % of that million inhabitants are your real contacts…each person has a different village some constituents overlap as in Facebook, Twitter et al! So PLEASE STOP pretending that we have access to Billions of people in Social Media because WE DON’T! There are many villages in FB/Twitter/LinkedIn and of course a few larger towns and a city or two that get created (as per all social media sites) and you have to realise this before you waste your money on advertising and sponsored media in those domains. Social media reflects life, reflects business and is a parallell universe to our everyday existence. Open your mind to the reality and ignore the hype…Think about it!
Lets talk Facebook
First, I’m not recommending to any of my companies that we leave facebook. I am recommending that we de-emphasize pushing consumers or partners to like us on FB and focus on building up our followings across all existing social media platforms and to evaluate those that we feel can grow a material following. In the past we put FB first, twitter second. FB has been moved to the bottom of a longer list.
At the core of the issues I have with FB is how FB thinks about itself .
This is from their page on Newsfeed, Engagement and Promoted Posts : “In this way, we can keep news feed an engaging service where people come to get the information that is most interesting to them.” FB believes that their news feed is an engaging information source. They seem to really, really want to…
View original post 1,531 more words
Un-Sociable Media and Your Money!
If you live in a city of a 1,000,000 plus your actual ‘contact’ with people is limited to the epi-centre (i.e. where you live) and a radius of some mile/kilometer or so around you – In effect creating a village in that large city; and reality says that a small % of that million inhabitants are your real contacts…each person has a different village some constituents overlap as in Facebook, Twitter et al! So PLEASE STOP pretending that we have access to Billions of people in Social Media because WE DON’T! There are many villages in FB/Twitter/LinkedIn and of course a few larger towns and a city or two that get created (as per all social media sites) and you have to realise this before you waste your money on advertising and sponsored media in those domains. Social media reflects life, reflects business and is a parallell universe to our everyday existence. Open your mind to the reality and ignore the hype…Think about it!
Tvangelist 