Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

One Media Unconference Book

VIEWS: 422 PAGES: 74

  • pg 1
									November 2008

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

1

This book is a compilation of conversations, ideas and passions from all the participants over two days from the first Onemedia unconference, held at Nesta in November 2008. The goal of the unconference was for the participants to set the agenda to find the cross industry business opportunities that mattered to them, to increase their revenue and develop their business model. Participants came from film, TV, games, mobile, web, software, interactive media, arts and design to see how they could collaborate and share. The theme for the unconference was ‘Creating a new blueprint for media businesses.’ Each participant had the opportunity to suggest a session that they would like to run. Notes were taken and then collated together to create this book. Over 30 sessions were created and run. Each session is written in the participants’ own words and is the start of a longer conversation. Sometimes after much debate, a session has finished with more questions, sometimes a solution or further action planning has been suggested. Opinions, suggestions and ideas written up in this document are those of individuals not Onemedia and credit should be given to the individuals and groups concerned. The paragraphs in red at the top of each session are a snapshot of that session. A special thank you to the Steering committee aka the ‘Dream Team’ suitably named for their ability to vision/dream that an event like this could happen, with an unconventional format, across all the industries, and with an unknown outcome! To all our Partners, without your support this would not have happened. Thank you. This book is released under a Creative Commons ‘Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike License’. Mel Norman Director of Onemedia and Media-Sauce.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

2

Table of contents.

Do we need new job roles to do new business? Action plan: / Do we need new job roles to do real business? How do we support new development Clusters? In a changing world how do we teach young people the skills they need to be successful? Producing new forms of branded content. How do we change the culture of commissioning to broaden the supply base? Public Service – Non Broadcast. It’s just content. Mapping the production processes Action plan: / Mapping the production processes * Film *TV *Web Cross platform documentary session If all the worlds content is available, how do you decide what to watch/listen to?

5 8 9 11 14 16 19 23 25 27 29

From script writing to world building, how do we create cohesive worlds that truly work across multiple platforms? 30 If everything is free how do we get paid? 33

How does a license look like that allows sharing IP, control over IP for artists that have ideas and want to make money? 36 What comes first, money, finance or business models? What is the Kung-fu of virtual world? Digital Distribution Music Measuring Engagement: New Metrics needed! Action Plan / Measuring Engagement: New Metrics needed! Collaboration and protecting IP – Best practice Can different media bring different income streams? How can multi media businesses flourish in a recession? How should television production and mobile industries be collaborating together? How do we deliver the new skills needed by Media Businesses?
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

38 39 40 45 47 48 49 51 53 55

3

Private use of public data Does One media equal Google? New participative open models for media commissioning. Narrative and Storytelling Action plan: / Narrative and Storytelling

56 58 60 61 63

How can we balance public demand for creative content and the need to reward content providers?65 Action Plan: / How can we balance public demand for creative content and the need to reward content providers? 66 Sustainable business models for digital distribution Action Plan: /Sustainable business models for digital distribution How do we stop the Big Boys grabbing all the value? How is user experience relevant across the media industries? Action plan / Where next for Onemedia? List of contributors Steering committee 67 68 69 70 71 72 74

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

4

Session name: / Do we need new job roles to do new business?
Day One / Group A Time: 1115 - 1230 Convener’s name: Mandy Berry Notetaker’s name: Paul Bennum Participants: Sylvia Baumgart; Tara Solesbury; Liz Rosenthal; Brian Condon; Rachel Baker; Edi Smockum Is there a need for a new job role which would have a bird’s eye view of all the media sectors? Production management and project management are the most important level -- the delivery layer is where things go wrong and have to be fixed. Eg at BBC there's no exec-level person that is genuinely thinking in a cross-platform way. Who would want to take on the role of mediator / XP-mentor. Someone with a passion for bringing ideas and peoples together; a connector We've had producers before, but do we need something new now? In industry (according to Skillset), the issues and challenges point to the fact there's a need for a mechanism for someone / thing with a bird's-eye view of the sector . IP / collaborative partnerships / funding models ... someone who understands production across a variety of platforms / sectors. Translating language across sectors is also important. 1) The connection between the creator and the audience 2) The connection between the creator and business 3) The connection between the creator and platforms But then again all the boxes are being smashed -- is this boxy way of doing it the right way? Collaboration is the way of the future ... audience / business / creators can always be, themselves, collaborators. Is there a role of a mediator -- helicopter view -- mentor with a very broad range of knowledge, language, skills including funding, finance, rights, ideas, platforms; translator, broker. In the art world, artists and curators have started to share roles ... eg Jeremy Deller Power to the Pixel Need production skills more then anything else ... works in an area where there are not many rules ... has always straddled biz and creative. The issue is you need an overview of so many things ... there are too many boxes (film industry being the worst) but these barriers are breaking down. How do you get the bird's-eye view though? There's no creative media MBA in the UK ... training aside, it's personality types that lead people to this. In film academy, the models being taught are traditional models -- there is no cross-media training or education. --Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

5

Somethin' Else just broke down the boundaries to adopt a genre-based role. In Germany the education model at the equivalent of degree level is such that people can move around, experiment, and try new things; it's much more wide and broad. People can get stuck in education but when they leave they have a broad range of skills. They can combine education with work simultaneously; this gives many practical and skill-based upsides. The German system (according to our German friends) is awesome. Production management and project management are the most important level -- the delivery layer is where things go wrong and have to be fixed. Eg at BBC there's no exec-level person that is genuinely thinking in a cross-platform way. There's a suspicion that broad-based skills are considered a bit weak; specialization is considered 'kosher.' In Higher Education this is where it starts, and industry we need core SKILLS but a wider understanding of where the different. One of the issues is the re-configurability of content propositions / teams inside the organisation. In the creation of building a network, people resort to a software-driven approach. ACE has a funding model which doesn't fit too well with software. It's either about project based (story telling; linear films) but in the new area you're funding other types of thing such as on-going networks or projects. Finding people that can communicate between a funding body and a project in a consensual media project (hierarchy goes) is an issue. Horizontal software-driven projects are hard to fund. Creative elements are easy to 'sell' but the negotiation becomes more difficult. Everyone's passing the buck; "this isn't my department," they say. Press-wise the press try and put things in boxes resulting in something not having a box at all! Same is true in just about all funding bodies or commissioning bodies. -There's a need to give the role a name because then it'll be real! It may not be one person but could well be a team. From the world of product development things were built around 'practices' like 'technology management,' also 'product designers,' 'software design' etc. But there was a matrix design over the top where teams would be taken from the practices. Teams were brought from a T-shaped project. A project manager would ensure the tops of the T overlapped. One project had a "Fix-It Team;" a "Wizard's Team" thinking whizzy things (who clashed, of course). But why isn't that happening? "I am a new media mediator." Media is very hierarchical; product design agencies are very different and this works in those environments. There's still a need for certain people to have this overview however ... -Where do you find the cross-platform folks? Well ... there aren't many of them. Some film-makers have millions of audience members; but very few. The rest of the film industry is a little bit old-school. --

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

6

Who would want to take on the role of mediator / XP-mentor. Someone with a passion for bringing ideas and peoples together; a connector. EG if you have a passion for music you can see the issues from music you can apply them to other media. But being able to talk about the finance is also important. (is the need for passion in the implementation area ... people in eg new media don't understand people in tell). Got to start from the audience. EG films aren't films but stories which will be used by audiences. This person is more of an anthropologist or sociologist then anything else -- someone who really, really understands audience needs and habits. We either map things backwards, or to platforms -- but there's a 3rd dimension -- mapping to audience demand. The old ways of doing this are done ... you can't look at old-school individual metrics but the new ones are hard to measure. For example, Chris Anderson trying to measure 'value.' Is it 'attention,' 'authenticity.' This also relates to the way the long tail works. We define media in terms of generic metrics, but these aren't appropriate. Understood the audience and you understand the platforms. This information is hard to find, but PwC etc. are doing the research. It's out there, although sometimes expensive. Ofcom produces a report every year which looks at the communications market. As for international stuff this is more tricky. An effective way of doing this is user testing -- cheap and effective at every stage of development. Just get people in and talk to them. This is useful at different stages of the process; service design and then later, as part of an iterative process to get user interface working properly. Eg business that exists flogging DVD's at older bloke demographics. They look at the clip online and then buy the DVD. Eg monetising music content; someone found 100 Depeche Mode fans and sold £500 each for a load of concerts. Eg rick-rolling; MTV award went to Rick Astley for 'Best Artist of All Time.' There is a lot of sophistication in places like marketing agencies but in the broadcasters there's a bigger problem. (The negative side is that broadcasters are audience focused but consider it in terms of ratings which is not so helpful). Turning things round. -OK -- so you understand the audience. What then? What things need to be done to produce the extreme audience focus that's being advocated? -Audience is important; a role of someone that understands audiences and a wide range of skills and understandings. There may be two roles: 1) Service design 2) Delivery

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

7

Action plan: / Do we need new job roles to do real business?
What are the related issues: Someone who mediates content – money broker mentor A conductor- Someone who sits above producers. How they get paid – freelance? Paid in the same way exec producers? Percentage of. No win no fee.? Some people in industry say they’re doing it already – probably not in a cross platform way. Eg joint ventures in film – but not multi platform. Could there be public funding – Skillset? To develop skills packages? Action: We here could help support Skillset in taking this forward. This could role could help small SME units to get to commissioners ahead of the ‘Endemol’s’. Suggested research with broadcasters – will you support it.? • Nick PACT – Skillset will. • Steering group with broadcasters and non-broadcasters as well. • Stuart Cosgrave channel 4 • Krishen Arora BBC – nations and regions • 4IP • Cross platform business labs. Next step: ACTION is to ask Skillset to take this forward. (find the partners, scope the skills and fund the skills) Looking at three routes for training: 1 some time – embedding skills into postgrad learning. HE 2 now and immediate – a cpd for people in the industry 3 mentoring role Run all three, parallel, all at the same time. PACT support business framework PACT pilot TIGA? Crossover Digital Britain Higher level skills strategy HEFCE employer engagement. Job title: mediator, strategic producer Mapping key job activities, deliverables, accountability, competences

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

8

Session name: / How do we support new development Clusters?
Day one Time11.00 – 12.15 Convener's name: Phil Parker Notetakers name: William Wong Participants: Nick Ware Simon Philips Mel Norman Jeremy Silver, Nick Underhill Sofia Mustafa Rachel Baker Suggested that the Special Purpose Vehicle(SPV) model for ownership which is used in film could be the basis of participatory rights based deals between the different collaborators on a project. MIT Media lab and the notion of incubator spaces for new work which could be then taken on for further development/distribution across the various platforms. This model could work if participatory rights were integrated into development and combined with a transparent distribution chain.

Discussion touched on two radically different notions of clusters A Creatives working together on projects B Regional creative industry clusters A. Creatives working

Definition of development clusters Two forms based upon either a. ideas or b. business These are interdependent Discussion focused initially on PACT collaboration agreements and the impact of public funds which avoid IP discussions, while the film studio model sees all creatives as ‘for hire’. Suggested that the Special Purpose Vehicle(SPV) model for ownership which is used in film could be the basis of participatory rights based deals between the different collaborators on a project. This was suggested in response to the criticism from creatives that the current legal/business frameworks were too producer/end product orientated. The initial PACT agreement is a one pager – very simple, and NyAC , Phil’s company, operates a 50/50 split with writers in creating new projects. Question of creating a working space which is platform neutral, without being specifically end user orientated, and without the cultural hierarchy of film above TV above, games above web series etc.. again. The matrix of games, TV series, Web, movies, music exists but very little is actually developed for genuine cross platform operations. Issue of consumers also being participants - prosumers Reference made to development session eg Crossover, being an example of how public funds are
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

9

currently used to support early stage development, but it has a history of churning talent, who do not go on to provide sustainable activity/businesses. MIT Media lab and the notion of incubator spaces for new work which could be then taken on for further development/distribution across the various platforms. This model could work if participatory rights were integrated into development and combined with a transparent distribution chain. ‘We lack the spaces and infrastructure to fire creatives up’. ‘The current structure act as a barrier to original work being made’ You Tube can be seen as a cluster and the issue of feedback is critical in the web-based communities. Discussion of various film models eg ‘Greenlight’ – Matt Damon/Ben Affleck – where peer review voted on work, and this lead to support for a project which would be eventually funded. ‘Swarm of Angels’ – raising funds through small investor network – which to date has failed to raise enough money. Indigogo – raising small sums for docs, and pilots in the US via the web. Need to review the crossover between public and private money in the development of new material/IP. Identified the problem of the talent following the grant trail and ending up in a box which did not suit their work but at least they were being funded for something!

B.

Creative Industries

Note on why did an American company join a digital hub in Brighton? Answer mostly life style, and access to skilled workers. Attempts to build clusters in Barcelona, Dubai, and Hong Kong will be watched with interest as governments attempt to build media clusters in specific cities.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

10

Session name: / In a changing world how do we teach young people
the skills they need to be successful?
Day one Time: 11:15am Convener's name: Emily Shenton Notetakers name: Juliet Tzabar Participants: David Eccles, Mark Brill, Tim Fenton, Patrick Tower, Jackie Doyle, Mike Flood Page, Pierre Valla, Henry Playfoot Fiddian Warnes, Robin Cramp Of today’s 16 year olds 40% will enter the jobs market in jobs that have not yet been created. 1) What is the difference between hard and soft skills? What are we missing? 2) How do we get young people to gain the skills they need? 3) What is the way in which these qualities can be codified? 4) Challenge-based learning was identified as a possible way forward – this was about identifying teachers as mentors and enabling more collaborative means of learning. Everyone introduced themselves and then expressed why they were attending the session. There was a wealth of experience and people detailed useful case studies and examples of work they had completed that would be useful to this session. E.g. • One participant had been doing work in schools about the benefits of behavioral training – what are the benefits of one behavior over another? • Another participant had been working with educational organizations about the creation of a “finishing school” which was looking into the gap between graduate and professional • Another participant had worked with young people to create news broadcasts to create media literacy and fix the skills gap. • One participant worked in an arts organisation which has started a youth broadcasting platform to overcome lack of confidence and barriers to entry. • Another participant had recently produced a report that involved talking to young people in business about “what is an effective education for employment”. This was a worldwide report and interestingly highlighted common issues: value on communication, innovation, creativity, and adaptability. • One participant had been developing open-ended online tools to get young people communicating and collaborating online. The following objectives emerged: • That the education system is stacked against group working? People don’t come out of education knowing how to work in a group. • That we should clarify what skills we want to see in the work place. • One participant was interested in training within her own department and how she might change it to make the most of new talent. • That there was an “understanding gap” – young graduates didn’t understand what the roles were in the media. • How do you tap into the creativity of an individual and adapt education for that outcome? FACT: Of today’s 16 year olds 40% will enter the jobs market in jobs that have not yet been created.
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

11

Emily summarized all the introductions into the following 3 points: 5) What is the difference between hard and soft skills? What are we missing? 6) How do we get young people to gain the skills they need? 7) What is the way in which these qualities can be codified? Challenge-based learning was identified as a possible way forward – this was about identifying teachers as mentors and enabling more collaborative means of learning. Patrick said that he’d like to see more self-leadership and that this was an important quality. It’s the ability to see the direction that you want to move in – working with young people to identify a way forward for their whole lives: professional and personal and to look at the concept of vocation as opposed to career. The other important factor was to educate young people in using a design process as a tool for their ambitions and to employ this across many different contexts. Leadership modeling was also identified as being important. In workplace leadership schemes people are encouraged to identify current leaders as role models. Are teachers in the correct position to do this? What is frustrating about the current skills that are emerging? That graphic design courses aren’t teaching the language of commerce. Why can’t graphic design undergraduates work with business studies undergraduates on collaborative projects? Employers were keen on taking people on who took responsibility for their lives – how are these people different? Usually they have lots of projects on the go outside of their work lives. Fidian told a story about a group of work experience students who set up a Facebook group and the communication director was questioning why he didn’t do that himself. We then talked around metrics and how you measure a degree? Does it make people suitable for a particular job role? Jackie suggested that it was important in her organisation that the people she took on influenced upwards. That people shouldn’t assume that there was someone above them who know what they’re doing and that they should have the confidence to chip in and express for themselves. Adaptability and confidence are both important skills but how do you teach that to someone? Our education systems are built so that failure is no longer acceptable yet failure builds confidence. It was felt that some of this could be achieved through challenge-based learning. There’s a real mismatch between what’s being taught in schools and what takes place outside the classroom. One of the crucial absent skills is literacy. No-one knows grammar or punctuation these days and also there are plenty of young people around the world who do! Emily said that young people lack confidence with their language skills. We think it’s really important that teachers act as facilitators or mentors and identify a competencybased curriculum. We then talked about whether CVs were useful. How do you get a candidate to demonstrate their skills? Soda has created a ‘sodafolio’ where people put what they’re doing onto a web-based timeline and add attributes to their achievements. Quite often people don’t actually know what attributes they actually have. They have a false notion of the skills that they have and have acquired outside the workplace. People seem to be unaware of the structures and rules for writing.
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

12

BT have come up with some interview tips for young people but failed to ask how the tips/skills actually help their organisation. There was emphasis placed on project-based learning – this is happening in primary schools and increasingly in unis but the method gets lost in the middle. We then talked about competency-based interviewing and breaking down job roles into key competencies. This was a very successful way of recruiting. What about professional development beyond starter level. Patrick informed us about Gardner’s multiple intelligences and Alistair Manz’s Intelligent leadership. Emotional intelligence is a vitally important skill. We then talked about parenting and how this comes into the equation. How do we educate parents as well as kids? Or do we blame them too much? Parents are asking for demystification on what their kids are doing. But as digital literacy infiltrates how long will this gap last? Is it a transient issue or does the existence of an internet underclass mean that this will always be an issue? There was an identification that many skills can only be learnt on the job. Ultimately you have to recognize this and only look for potential or hire people based on intuition. One possible route to recruitment is to identify your organisations core values and get your candidates to come up with examples that match them. We then talked about diagonal thinking skills that were being employed by ad agencies to get a more diverse workforce. Finally, we concluded with the following: How do we get people to identify the skills that they have? How do we plug the understanding gap between teachers, parents and young people?

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

13

Session name: / Producing new forms of branded content.
Day one Time: 11.15 – 12.30 Convener's name: Justin Kelly Notetakers name: Anthony Alleyne (typed by Susi O’Neill) Other participants in group: Pollyanna Lindley, Paula le Dieu, Tim Furby, Andy Green, John Parnell, Niki Strange, Anthony Alleyne, Seamus Bennett, Tom de Grunwald, Jane Lucy, Simon Walker, Susi O’Neill, Peter Gerard There are three issues for independent producers: exploitation, ownership and rights – you need to fight for your corner and approach advertising agencies. Another idea is to let the brands come to you – be DIY and develop prototypes of your ideas and content – establish it on the big networks (MySpace, YouTube etc.) and keep the rights and build your own relationships directly with an audience. There are now more big players in this space – but also less clarity in these relationships compared to knowing who the Commissioners are at the main platforms like BBC and Channel 4. There is a risk that producers sit sandwiched between heavy-hitters in a maze of marketing departments for brands, media agencies, media buyers, ad agencies and aggregators Justin Kelly chaired the session, he’s an IP Lawyer and producer of ‘How to Be’ films – shorts and features. Justin is looking to new business models for features films and how to think about branded content in the future, e.g. Sean Meadows film sponsored by Eurostar, Gap Year (Endemol and Bebo). Group member John Parnell’s response was that this way of integrating branding with content is nothing new – content has always been funded by brands and advertising either directly or indirectly. There are three issues for independent producers: exploitation, ownership and rights – you need to fight for your corner and approach advertising agencies. One way is to get your content commissioned first – there are new platforms and opportunities like MySpace and Bebo who are commissioning 6 series of factual and drama for their online social network in 2009 – making them nearly as significant a commissioning opportunity as Channel 4. Bebo has mainly worked with ad agencies – though they are s now opening up their network via the ‘open platform’ for independent producers to distribute content and work on 50/50 revenue share deals with advertisers. There are now more big players in this space – but also less clarity in these relationships compared to knowing who the Commissioners are at the main platforms like BBC and Channel 4. There is a risk that producers sit sandwiched between heavy-hitters in a maze of marketing departments for brands, media agencies, media buyers, ad agencies and aggregators. Advertisers use agencies to find facilitators. You have to be hard on your own position – they don’t need indie producers or to deal with lots of small relationships. The big brands are open to contact for new ideas but it has to fit with their existing way of doing business. PR Agencies may be open to more ‘sexy’ film/media ideas. Mobile excites advertisers, but in reality the diversity of platforms/handsets has prohibited growth. In the future younger users may be open to receiving advertising through handsets, e.g. Bluetooth and other location technologies for targeted geo-specific advertising.
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

14

Another idea is to let the brands come to you – be DIY and develop prototypes of your ideas and content – establish it on the big networks (MySpace, YouTube etc.) and keep the rights and build your own relationships directly with an audience. John Parnell developed ‘England Allstars’ with marionette puppets of footballers for a modest budget – recouped through mobile, online ads, product sales but importantly gained profile and the content was licensed/commissioned by ITV for the World Cup. Madmen – a drama film about the advertising industry was high quality content but ripe for product placement. Katz Kiely (Just B Productions) – They are opening up opportunities with advertisers by brokering relationships with advertisers and digital producers and helping the producers to pitch and understand the language and drivers of advertisers. Advertising in niche – and more conservative than TV and film, it’s hard to identify the right people and gatekeepers – and those open to new ideas. How do you meet these people? Hang around bars near their offices? Go to cross-platform conferences or advertising conferences? Use Twitter, LinkedIn or connect with bloggers in industry open to new ideas? Advertisers are disconnected from the creative process – Magic Lantern cut out the middle men in the sales chain and pitched interactive ideas directly to brand marketing execs – appealing to their creative vanity and reducing budgets. ‘Meet the Joneses’ – Imagination and Ford partnership – gave the creative agencies all the budget to work with comedy producers Baby Cow to produce an online comedy series, created under Creative Commons (now licensed to Sky for TV broadcast). Think small and grow big – remember that Coronation Street was originally only scheduled for 5 weeks. It’s important to get the metrics/analytics set up for the project. How is success measured? Is it eyeballs or brand perceptions (the latter is easier to achieve). This needs advance agreement and planning. Groove Armada and Bacardi relationship – the brand funded the album and a tour of 40 shows, with Bacardi sponsoring the show and bar. There are new ways of connecting the proliferation of artists with audiences e.g. Pandora, Last.fm – but many business models and issues to navigate this territory.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

15

Session name: / How do we change the culture of commissioning to broaden the supply base?
Day one Time: 1.00 Convener's name: Juliet Tzabur Notetakers name: Pollyanna Lindley Other participants in group: Nick Underhill, John Parnell, Seamus Barnett, George Stamkosi, Peter Gerard, Andy Green, Mandy Berry. Are co-productions between online/new media companies and television producers the way forward? All Broadcasters should have innovation labs and protect IP. Especially becomes an issue with the growth of platforms and the quality of the experiences there in. In order to encourage Commissioners to work with consortium of micro providers: such as Producers/streaming companies/new media companies, there could be a “360 producer role” which sits above all the companies assuring delivery to schedule and on time. This was likened to an Orchestra Director possible titles suggested included Project Director or Strategic Producer It was felt that there should be a move by companies such as PACT and SKILLSET to be proactive in educating commissioners to understand new audiences and production processes work Endemol, Talk Back and Hatrick all have great relationships with commissioners but how do we get commissioners to broaden their supply chain and ideas base? Commissioning editors feel more comfortable commissioning from traditional broadcast producers or larger scale indies. Are co-productions between online/new media companies and television producers the way forward? With a 50/50 rights split? Endemol don’t let you share the IP but let you share revenue. PACT have worked with NESTA to create a one pager which both parties can sign before you sit down with a partner to establish a share in rights. Called a “Simple collaborative Agreement” which is available to download on the NESTA website. Some micro producers are working to form consortiums to approach commissioners. It was agreed that track records was essential to commissioners. However Mandy pointed out that there is no money currently to prove concepts in an online world. How do you measure impact of non broadcast content? What is the business model for broadcasters online? Well new technology scares commissioners but Endemol for example, have seemed a safe pair of hands. As another example BBC Innovation is feeling the pulse of the indie community. But it’s still early days and the BBC is not commissioning adventurous interactive work. Broadcasters need to look at creating longer term popular destination sites/platforms, which will generate significant numbers of audiences over a long time.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

16

An example of excellence in cross platform commissioning was BBC Jam projects, where significant money was invested in the project but they were never seen because it was closed down under anti competitive legislation. It was estimated that the BBC have circa 100,000,000 to invest in cross platform commissioning and £32,000,000 of that for independent suppliers. BBC will pay you to develop your IP and licenses it back to you which was seen as a good deal. One problem is that commissioners often move quickly onto other jobs. Montarosa (sp?) Game “Run” was commissioned by the BBC television after being turned down 6 times when initially pitched. After partnering with a television production company they pitched the game again as a TV show with online game, it was commissioned finally but the TV commissioner decided to commission as a game only. The lesson from this was seen to be that if you have a good idea keep trying to pitch it in different ways and partnerships and to different commissioners. New Media companies need to look at how they pitch themselves clarifying the skills and services that you can offer. Being more precise than ‘we can do websites’. It was felt that there should be a move by companies such as PACT and SKILLSET to be proactive in educating commissioners to understand new audiences and production processes work. Some commissioners such as Matt Locke has a good grasp of audience but others don’t. The BBC approved supplier list helps to select top suppliers but commissioners still pick the suppliers that they recognize. Broadcasters may be missing out on more innovative projects because they are playing safe. The arguments need to be put to them about what they are missing out on if they don’t work with micro indies. Such as creativities and cost savings. Commissioners are increasingly and need to look at commissioning events such as music concerts which can provide exciting opportunities for online and interactive services. What is happening about the 50+ audience who watch TV and use the internet. The unexplored potential of the grey market. All Broadcasters should have innovation labs and protect IP. Especially becomes an issue with the growth of platforms and the quality of the experiences there in. It was felt that many commissioners felt that as long as they have a website and chat site then they are happy. A lot of commissioners are now working on rolling commissioning schedules which offers more flexibility to a broader range of suppliers. The importance of being well prepared for your pitch, with the idea presented to its best advantage, with talent attached was seen as the best way of encouraging the commissioner to go with you. And not “co-opt” the idea! Also if you have elements that you can copyright or pieces of software it was recommended that you do that. In order to encourage Commissioners to work with consortium of micro providers: such as Producers/streaming companies/new media companies, there could be a “360 producer role” which sits above all the companies assuring delivery to schedule and on time. This was likened to an
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

17

Orchestra Director possible titles suggested included Project Director or Strategic Producer. This was seen as a high level role which managed the partners and could create relationships of trust with the commissioners based on track records. Could we look at something like the Olympics to provide us with a model of managing multiple delivery partners, budgets and timescales?

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

18

Session name: / Public Service – Non Broadcast. It’s just content.
Day one Time: 1.00 Convener’s name. Patrick Towell Notetaker’s name Rachel Baker Sustaining Talent beyond ‘hobbyism’. Public service is currently institutionally-driven. Government tend to over-invest in national museums experiments in digital media and create an unfortunate imbalance. How to fund distributed software driven Voluntary networks – who takes responsibility? Transparency? Argument for kitemark of quality i.e. soil association, stamp of quality public service. What public goods could interactive media support? Discussion 4 questions relating to Ofcom’s Public Service Broadcaster review 1) psb and relation to new audiences 2) innovation risk excellence 3) talent 4) sustainability 4IP criteria has areas of overlap with psb = encouraging new talent, digital media literacy, First round of psb ignored the channel, the medium. But content is the wrong question 4ip is about tools, access, information Ofcom – towns (nouns) 4ip – roads, routes (verbs) false dichotomy? 4ip is about how to access/make yourself/share PSB attempt to think about new public service media online = open media network Peter Bazalgette’s ‘Boggle’. Question: What public goods could interactive media support? 2xmodes - AS ‘citizen’, looking for commercial-free online experiences. - Traditional engagement i.e. creative discussion that informs me, storytelling e-government is public service but media services are different.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

19

Google-search – public service? Social intelligence and social media powerful tool for making sense of abundance. Empowering the citizen. ‘Ofcom competition with Free Our Data campaign – ‘power Of Information’. Making businesses out of public data. Council services –i.e. recycling Public Media Service i.e. Freecycle MySociety.Org Gov., citizens, private, public Kent.TV produced as tenAlps product but paid for by Council – the Voice of Council. No transparency. PSP, PSS, PSM Independence, a more useful term or Social Entrepreneur. What about stuff that doesn’t make money but has social value e.g walk.it.com, a routes info public service. BBC charter evolved its definition of public service to include media literacy, etc. but took out ‘social action’. Social Action didn’t succeed at the BBC because the BBC is not the right context. How to fund distributed software driven Voluntary networks – who takes responsibility? Transparency? Freecycle, open source volunteer-run, self-elected local reps. Would cash investment have created problems? Has its own rule-set. The rule set is the product. Trust economies. Ebay started out as a voluntary exercise. All of these enterprises are dependent on the user for success i.e very user-driven. Craigslist. Some use existing technologies (Yahoo) Cost = organisational Wisdom Exchange linking retirees with young people. Very hard to find investment. Funding driven by policy deliverables. Korean model – never grant, always invest. Fairtrade went niche to mainstream through business investment. And application of the brand. BBC dependent on brand-trust. Argument for kitemark of quality i.e soil association, stamp of quality public service. Micro-payments for quality brand
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

20

Insurance schemes, or traditional ticketing. Pornography tax. How to make and fulfill public value and not commercialize it. Create self-evident value. BBC has defined Public Services silos genres, how to redefine. Language is part of the problem. Sustaining Talent beyond ‘hobbyism’. Public service is currently institutionally-driven. Government tend to over-invest in national museums experiments in digital media and create an unfortunate imbalance. Need to take away their ability to dominate. E.g FlickrCommons used by SMITHSONIAN – annotated content by users. User control vs institutional control. Concept of the pubic domain – NPG teaches children ‘ these photos are yours’.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

21

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

22

Session name: / Mapping the production processes
Day One Time: 1:00 pm Convener’s name: Fiona Killkelly, Skillset Notetaker’s name: Edi Smockum, NFTS Other participants in group: Niki Strange Cogapp, Phil Parker, Brian Condon, Complexity Partners, Tara Solesbury, Freelance Consultant, Simon Phillips, Tools of Directing There is one difference between Web design with other industries. – iteration rather than linear (may be phased development; there may be software that is proprietary) then we abandoned this process and tried to organize it into stages:

Mapping the production in various media: Interactive (Web Design)
Starts with client/brief tender (pqq’s for public sector/private more straight forward but driven by creative) BRIAN – requirements capture – really understanding what the users REALLY want to do with the software…comes first (audience research often comes first.) wider content,

– – Tech & creative response – going back to client (testing is often repeated –eg 5x user-testing with client)

Build stage – Creating the product

Delivery (often Maintenance thereafter – i.e. Service Level Agreement) There is one difference between Web design with other industries. – iteration rather than linear (may be phased development; there may be software that is proprietary) then we abandoned this process and tried to organize it into stages:

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

23

Stages/ Sectors PRE Commission /STAGE 1

Film
Three ways of starting: *Commissioning body (i.e. if it’s public money) puts out brief & people submit ideas *Producer options rights to existing IP – e.g. script, book, theatre production *Writers generating their own scripts as a starting point (owning their own rights) packaging (in case where producer has bought work) – above the line team (writer might have got some money!) *Public sector (small team already in place)

TV
*Commissioning brief (similar to tender)

Interactive
**Public: PQQ, Private tender invite to meet

Stage II

*Key members of team (director, presenter/talent, series producer, exec etc); *Treatment, proposal, script (creative input), possibly some taster tapes *Possibly some development money

response to brief (several companies tech/creative) – software (initial requirement/ gathering) *Can be dependent on creative team

Stage III

*Chasing finance;
producer leading i.e. looking for money (a form of audience research) *Publicly-financed films would be in preproduction

*Discovery phase
(requirements, stakeholder research, user st research) 1 stage build – no coding at this stage, modeling/deeper level spec *production – *marketing & distribution

Stage IV: Production Phase

*deliverables must be fulfilled

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

24

Action plan: / Mapping the production processes * Film *TV *Web
Need to think about the potential of opportunities of the mapping process Filmmaking: linear process. Director’s vision. Testing, exploring would disturb project, would be destructive. Web: “jumpy”. Going back and forth. Testing. Exploring. Assuming. Cross platform, different sectors influence other sectors, TV: branding Web: first branding then web stuff Different platform: reformatting, different format for different platforms, Different services, sectors Need to think about the potential of opportunities of the mapping process Methodology Interactive- web Issues: how do we scope the issue, project Methodology/ first step: Defining. Single project productions, not directing Issues: complexity of mapping. What’s the scope? What’s your criteria? What’s the meaning of the project regarding different sectors intersecting? Each sector needs to define the project. Web: could be collection of projects. Roles, objectives of the project?  clarifying the objectives  define business case? Rational. The Reason. Why do we consider the different channels?  Clarifying timeframe, consider appropriate timeframe, cost  Establish who is in charge of the overall direction of project  Testing Software: requirements. What we need is research. Discovery. launch. Where do sectors intersect? Film: you don’t have budget frame TV: you have a budget limit. That’s your frame. Difficulty: compare web to film: very similar, but: different criteria: Time, money. What can be done in parallel? Found out by discovery. Project management is the base of projects. Defines. Manages. Coordinates. Coordinated funding.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

25

Someone has/ must have control over the budget. Cross platform stuff Mobile TV- TV-web Guidelines needed. Visual checklist. “roadmap” There is such a “roadmap” (Tim Furby) A software-checklist. Web. Searchmarketing. Identifying the hotspots. Where do things start to go wrong? Bringing people in. when? BBC- stakeholder management. Tim Furby: Add rich media. Flash. Director. Producer. Editor. The 3 meet every week. Try linear media. Key things: Clients. You need people that really “own” a project. That have control. Assumptions behind decision making process. Expose them. Test assumptions! Scope them. Agile. BUT in filmmaking: that’s not the way. Process Film/ Web: Filmmaking: linear process. Director’s vision. Testing, exploring would disturb project, would be destructive. Web: “jumpy”. Going back and forth. Testing. Exploring. Assuming. Project manager: SET DIRECTION, OVERALL RESPONSIBILITY. Software. Creating software that implements the production process.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

26

Session name: / Cross platform documentary session
Convener’s name:Sofia Mostafa, Yenmo Participants: Nick Ware, Seamus Bennett, Edi Smockum, Jane Lucy and Susi O’Neill Sofia asked the question if there is a way of linking campaign documentaries and advertising by developing an “ethical Which” type Internet company that would send relevant information (advertising that matters) to prosumers phones while they are shopping to help them make a choice of which product to choose Jane from Keo films talked about her project “Landshare”. They are not yet doing anything with mobile phones but are looking into what we might be able to do, for example we are looking at asking people to “spot” potential land We began to talk about raising money through social networks based on an issue and passion to change or improve a situation. The members on this network would actively be involved in developing the film/campaign, raising money, and finally also in the distribution. Sofia asked the question if there is a way of linking campaign documentaries and advertising by developing an “ethical Which” type Internet company that would send relevant information (advertising that matters) to prosumers phones while they are shopping to help them make a choice of which product to choose. You would utilise mobiles to read bar-codes when shopping which would then deliver content concerning ethics and origins of product and people who manufactured. By doing this you could encourage companies to be ethical rather than shaming those who aren’t. This evolved into conversation about the London Games Fringe GPS mapping project of SOHO, Soho Stories, which would ping info as you passed sites of interest – Bluetooth acceptance required. We discussed using mobile to educate on social issues such as land which is lying dormant. Again, GPS pinging people that land is dormant and teaching one how to access information to reclaim – especially relevant in today’s environment. Jane from Keo films talked about her project “Landshare”. They are not yet doing anything with mobile phones but are looking into what we might be able to do, for example we are looking at asking people to “spot” potential land. Could it be feasible for people to take photos on their mobile and send them in to us and we can make enquiries of whether the land could be suitable to add to the Landshare database? Jane said it’s an idea to look into... There was then some discussion on how our project could be expanded to not just make unused land available for public use but also empty buildings. Jane also spoke about our www.chickenout.tv project and how this was an example of raising money from the public (we raised monies to pay a £88k bill in less than 48 hours). It was also an example of a successful partnership with a non-profit (CIWF) to help do this (we did an online auction and they took straight donations). The conclusion was that there is a niche market for a Which type ethical company. The technology exists to enable both the website and pinging information/adverts to people from bar-codes.
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

27

A collaboration between an web design company, a production company and a mobile phone company could make this service a possibility.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

28

Session name: / If all the worlds content is available, how do you decide what to watch/listen to?
Day one Time: 13:00 Convener’s name: Jeremy Silver Notetaker’s name: Mark Brill Other participants in group: Simon Philips, Anthony (Screen South), Pierre (Space), Will Dower, Kirsten Donaldson (Pact). Given that everything is out there through the internet and mobile, how do we choose the content we consume? If you are a content provider how do people find that content? What will happen to film and TV will probably follow what happened to music. On demand is an important factor for film and TV. There is a role for taste makers whether personal or software. Music is a good metaphor for how we consume content. We tend to compartmentalize, get recommendations from friends. Spread of content seems to have broadened our attitude to music and different genres. How do we choose what we watch or listen to? Personal recommendations play an important part, but also search engines, software (Digit and Miro) are also available to help narrow that search. Film and television is moving in a similar direction with file sharing sites offering almost every film, even unreleased ones. Three key words that are coming up are ‘stumble’,’ browse’ and ‘search’. These are different forms of filtering. There is an issue with ‘free’ and ‘monitized’ content as it affects the way that we find or download it. Convenience may be a big factor in our choices – it may be on the sites that we frequent the most. There may be more money in the search than the content itself – look at Google which aside from it’s own advertising places other banners. There are also other industries such as Search Engine Optimisation that have grown up on the back of it. Where content is protected, the cost of this is effectively carried by the consumer. What will happen to film and TV will probably follow what happened to music. On demand is an important factor for film and TV. There is a role for taste makers whether personal or software. Mobile may again change the way we choose – people don’t use ‘search’ in the same way as the internet. Typical pattern is to download onto one phone then share over Bluetooth with peers. So personal recommendation has become a significant factor in our choice once again. Social networks have shown that it is a good way to share recommendations, but technology will become a lot more organic.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

29

Session name: / From script writing to world building, how do we create cohesive worlds that truly work across multiple platforms?
Group E 1300 - 1415 Convener’s name: David Eccles Notestaker’s name: Paul Bennun Participants: Sophia Mostafa, Jacqui Johnson, Dani Salvadori, Justin Kelly William Wong, Susi O'Neill, Robin Cramp, Simon Walker The difference is if we have the same story on different platforms, or whether the channels tell different parts of the story. Appropriate to that platform. Are we using the channels to their benefits? Is there a way to form the worlds before we start thinking about a script? You need to provide people a combination of what they want and what they might not realize what they want -- this is true for all media creation. Sometimes the audience created worlds can become more important then the 'dramatist' created world.

How do we create cohesive world across multiple platforms? Traditionally this is from a script-writing perspective but nowadays the interactive platforms are intrinsically important. Is there a way to form the worlds before we start thinking about a script? Think about the rules of the world; what defines it first. Think of things such as the Lost Experience etc. The Matrix franchise worked by getting the best writers of comics around and then made them write within the context of the Matrix world -- but not tell them a thing about how or what they should create beyond that. -Where in people's experience do creative narrative worlds start? Is it with TV? With a script? How? Creatively, it starts with a passion. Character, belief, an idea. In film, a director has an idea; commission a writer (in the film world) but the non-linear stuff comes later. But what if this starts at the same time with all the different platform folks at the same time? "Story is everything." The difference is if we have the same story on different platforms, or whether the channels tell different parts of the story. Appropriate to that platform. Are we using the channels to their benefits? In the past, projects are ported to different platforms for the sake of it without any upside to moving it across. Things have to be driven by the need for the platforms. There's a distinction with grass-roots stuff created ground-up for interactive platforms. Artists tend to
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

30

drive the development of these ideas. Brands are doing this already -- they're telling stories about the brand across multiple platforms. The environment in which a story is told defines the nature of the story. There's an interesting issue with IPR related to multiplatform projects when original IP is brought to a brand; offers new opportunities for creatives. In what point does the process does the interactive platform usage start? You have to consider the audience first -- the platform choice comes from that. In film -- audience is important; you have to start there, too. You have the itch (director's vision etc.) but then you have to think about the audience again. -The web is a great platform to create and experiment for; it's free and open. A great place to beta test something. You can put things out earlier and use SNS's to cook half-baked ideas. You can get things funded when you can show something works because it's got an audience through early prototyping. There's a role for brands in this world; e.g. Somers Town has some support from Eurostar and was commissioned by Mother. Didn't hurt the film. The Sony Walkman 1G was clunky and iPod is cool but it's the same product in many ways. There's a role for the creative process in the creation of service design and audience consultation. You need to provide people a combination of what they want and what they might not realise what they want -- this is true for all media creation. -Writers and directors will work things through early; is there a way to get round some of the issues related to interactive writers through collaboration? Something like Lost is a successful interactive drama; TV plus an interactive world. The audience can augment the world and flesh it out ... harnessing the power the crowd is a very important and interesting direction. With Lost, the audience created world was harnessed and then used by dramatists to confound the expectations of the audiences. Sometimes the audience created worlds can become more important then the 'dramatist' created world. -Is it a producer's job to get these types of discussions done? Wrangle who should be in the room. The group increasingly thinks that it could well the producer's job to ensure consistency across a variety of platforms with a common artistic / creative base. Even more then the writer perhaps. Ensuring the creative and financial worlds work perfectly. Being a producer has always meant a creative role -- the job is to get the most creativity out of the team. Protect them to a certain degree but you're responsible the ship is sailing in the right direction and that people are going to get paid etc. The producer has final cut very often -- unless the creative / director is a formidable person. The same is true for the multiplatform world.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

31

-The answer depends on where you start -- if you're an artist you'll start from a different point; if you're a commercial person you'll start from somewhere else. ITV are looking at exploiting projects across different platforms - EG This Morning pulling people from books, website people, etc. to make something work. They treat the programme as if it's a brand and then go off in different directions to maximise the value they can get out of it monetarily. -You almost need a methodical way to do this; you need to start from the beginnings (a la BBC) to create a cross-platform project. But the broadcast-window nature of how programmes exist cause problems to creative service design. -It's also different depending on the genre you're creating for ... drama versus factual are very different ... creating different places for advertising. Are there models from different agencies? Yes -- nick things from advertising agencies / marketing companies etc. -Who should be at the table when you're doing initial design of a creative service / multiplatform thingamy? People that know the platforms, have grown up with them and actually use them; give them freedom. (It would take a lot of creative resource for an individual company to do this ... ) How are you going to fund it? How are you going to measure milestones? Film world's take on -"Yeah, great -- but how are they going to get paid and participate in the exploitation of the idea?". Could be abut distributing stakes in product to people that are creating it.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

32

Session name: / If everything is free how do we get paid?
Day One Time: Convener's name: Jeremy Silver Notetakers name: Nick Underhill Participants: Simon Walker Peter Gerard Jeremy Silver (Convener) Nick Underhill (notes) Radiohead model has created interest in whole industry but as a large, rich band we all recognise that they have more options than smaller or unknown musicians. We wondered can these be translated across media sectors - are the issues the same? Access to content – conversations between music and ISPs about how to monetise both legal and illegal distribution – add cost to ISP subscription that could be passed on to music industry. Simon: If the music industry model happens more broadly – decline of CD greater than CD sales – then what options are there for new business models in the film and TV sector? Plenty of free and illegal downloads still happening and bigger than sales, changes have been handled badly as legal actions against consumers created bad PR. Music business now looking at alternatives inc DRM (Digital Rights Management) downloads ‘doesn’t really matter’ slang for DRM. Unlocked files now widely used and sales but as much in free and unpaid space. Recognition that giving away music has a value and has shifted control of IP and recordings to artists (producers) Radiohead model has created interest in whole industry but as a large, rich band we all recognise that they have more options than smaller or unknown musicians. Other models – Justin Hawkins and Rock Star soundtrack and freedowns We wondered can these be translated across media sectors - are the issues the same? What are the production costs in different industries and will they affect models? TV model with advertising – spiral, frog and we 7- free to users but Ads included.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

33

Cost of producing an album as come down – recording, distribution etc Subscription models – Nokia – comes with music – buy a handset and get 2 year contract with music bundle that allows ‘free downloads’ restricted to phone and PC – feels free Not a free download as Nokia new handset not operating system – super market, loss leader, model Net Result – privacy protection, live sports footage etc – So Tube in China, games illegally uploaded for worldwide viewing – NR take it down www.just-in.tv – live (illegal) streaming of sports based in India All happening now, for UK audience Interestingly, if Napster had been allowed to develop and been taken in by music labels the business model could be very different. Kangaroo – VOD service worldwide – TV and C4 – on demand worldwide – tied up with rights issues at moment by competition commission as unfair to commercial competitors as they will have all content and influence on the whole chain and market VOD more broadly tied up on rights issues for producers as TV often have rights for 4 years + Model in graphics online by developing templates distributed for small fee – need to build community to support this. Podcasts – free expertise teaser with premium version costing user a few dollars, successful US model at moment (Simon) Problem for SMEs and sole traders in alternative models is the time and legal issues that may cause problems Pan European movement currently setting up VOD film services with profits returning to producer – kept rights in commissioning process TV companies in UK haven’t needed to deal with rights and marketing but at the moment no interest Example: Producers tend to have no interest in new business models, could make money on You Tube and make IP work but short-termism rules – they would prefer cheques and bonuses not the currently small revenue streams that online offers Access to content – conversations between music and ISPs about how to monetise both legal and illegal distribution – add cost to ISP subscription that could be passed on to music industry. Public service model – paying for music like you pay for TV – but ISP model could block music downloads if you don’t pay for music. Is there value in curate content you could subscribe to a curated music or media selection e.g.: Meltdown Festival? Amazon and Last FM models for selecting content – the more content the more need for curation. How to stop illegal downloads with new generation – it’s been free, is still free and most experts feel
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

34

that the tech savvy will manage to keep it free. What part does tech play in relation with free content – hacking Play station as example of consumers taking control. Conclusions There are plenty of interesting new business models and opportunities but ‘no one fits all’ solution. We need to learn from other sectors Innovation and risk taking important in new markets It’s hard to make money from content!

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

35

Session name: / How does a license look like that allows sharing IP, control over IP for artists that have ideas and want to make money?
Day One Time: 2.15pm to 3.30pm Convener's name: Silvia Baumgart Notetakers name: Silvia Baumgart Participants: Paula Le Dieu, Simon Walker, Henry Playfoot, The boundaries between amateurs and professionals are increasingly blurry. We discussed other ways of income generation and new business models that are not so dependent on the sale of individual ready made works. Visual creators need to shift from seeing value in their already existing creations but in the value of their reputation and the creative process itself. Creative Commons already allows sharing IP with others and a CC license defines exactly how it can be used. However, it is very rarely used commercially as it creates a complicated system of copyright owners. This is difficult for lawyers to deal with (i.e. open source) in contracts. Creative Commons acknowledges the author and signposts to others that the work can be developed, shared, used and encourages collaboration. The value of sharing is not as much in the value of the creation itself but in making it available to others. Using the system the creator can Promote his/her work to others Be associated with the image/brand value of others and therefore, building their own image as a creator (this is especially true for open source developers in the games industry) We acknowledged that websites such as Flickr allow users/clients to search for work they would want to use in projects and due to the high volume of work available and the development of technology this work is not necessarily of lesser quality than the work by professionals. This means, the boundaries between amateurs and professionals are increasingly blurry. And while amateurs are happy to share and let others use their IP for free commercial artists are very protective of their creations because they are still dependent on the income these individual works can generate (but less and less). This however becomes increasingly difficult considering the digital environment they are working in and we discussed other ways of income generation and new business models that are not so dependent on the sale of individual ready made works. We identified that value is in the creative process itself and communication of this process to users/clients. Artists need to articulate their ideas and transfer ideas into work collaborating with others to create the vision of their clients. Bespoke work of high quality will still be valued higher than mass production. Perhaps contracts between designers and their clients need to change, not hourly rates but
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

36

risk sharing through royalty contracts where designers are paid depending on the success of the product they design, i.e. a logo. Websites such as CCMixer.com (music clip website) allow user community to mix, sample, combine other people’s work and even develop a commercial product that attracts producers/labels. Members were able to make names for themselves and this transferred into tangible commercial contracts. Artists for example could develop templates/characters for others to use and make money through simple licensing contracts – value could be created through the volume of users. Conclusion: Visual creators need to shift from seeing value in their already existing creations but in the value of their reputation and the creative process itself. The better they can communicate with their customers, delivering bespoke service and translating their ideas into creative work (and communicate this), the more likely it is that they are able to make money from their work. We thought that the question is not as much about how a license for visual creators should look like that creates a balance between sharing/collaborating and commercial needs but rather how they can change their attitude towards protecting their individual work towards an emphasis on collaboration and the creative process itself.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

37

Session name: / What comes first, money, finance or business models?
Day Two Time: 10.30am Convener's name: Mandy Berry Notetakers name: S Baumgart, John Parnell Participants: Katz Kiely, Dani Salvadori, Silvia Baumgart, John Parnell Realise that the online market is completely different from the traditional broadcast – market is complex and there are currently no categories to measure engagement of the audience (traditional site metrics don’t necessarily capture the true value of engagement of the audience). Questions to ask when thinking about a digital media enterprise: - Where is the customer? How can we understand the customer’s motivation to buy? - Knowing what the buyer wants is essential to understand before anything else. - Tailor the proposal accordingly. - There are many good ideas but most fail because there is no need. Realise that the online market is completely different from the traditional broadcast – market is complex and there are currently no categories to measure engagement of the audience (traditional site metrics don’t necessarily capture the true value of engagement of the audience). Online platforms need continuous maintenance and evolution to maintain audience interest, which requires ongoing investment rather then one-off funding/budgeting. This is counterculture to the way traditional broadcast commissions are financed. Therefore, with online opportunities, new funding approaches need to be developed or taken into account when considering starting an Internet based enterprise. The skill set of the buyer/commissioner needs to change to reflect challenges of cross platform development. There are examples of good new media and traditional media buying but they are not found in one person. The traditional instincts of the market tend to stifle the more progressive new media buying approach, for example Channel 4’s Matt Locke. Conclusions: - Study the market - Understand the buyer’s needs and identify their problems - Respond by addressing these needs and having a clear business case mapped out. - Build in monetizing opportunities upfront and consider - Highlight the benefits of an agile approach to development in order to manage risk.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

38

Session name: / What is the Kung-fu of virtual world?
Day One Time: 2:15 Convener's name: Simon Phillips Notetakers name: Rohit Jain Participants: Jeremy Silver, Simon Phillips, Rohit Jain, John, Bryan Demonstrating strength doesn’t necessarily means muscle. It is mainly about the technique Demonstrating strength doesn’t necessarily means muscle. Live kung-fu exercise was demonstrated. Reason for this was force is not important in every case. It is mainly about the technique. Then the group defined essence of kung-fu as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Belief Training Flow (Performance) Tools Control

Then we defined what the essence of the online world amounted to in a similar way. We looked at the small could overpower the strong online for e.g. a small independent/individual company making it bigtime online. We then discussed how more recently with the liberation of content, those who control the data are in a position of strength. However this strength and position is entirely dependent on text based data. By applying kung fu methodology we could potentially develop a non text based data control model that completely bypasses the current power base of control giving back power to the small.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

39

Session name: / Digital Distribution/ Music
Day one Time: Convener's name: Susi O’Neill Notetakers name: Peter Gerard Participants: Rachel Baker, Dani Salvador, Pierre Vella (Space), Mandy Berry, Andy Green, Seamus Bennett, Will Doward, David Eccles, George Stamkoski, Nick Wave, Justin Kelly Music is 3 years ahead of TV/film. Now TV/film are looking for new business models for funding, Brands, audience funding. Could learn from music, computer games, etc. “This will be the year a lot of business models are made. Next year 8 out of 10 will fail.” Musicians are writing songs for games. Aerosmith made more money from Guitar Hero than albums in 3 years. 4% of signed bands on big record companies actually make serious money and subsidise the rest. That figure probably applies across platforms. 6% of novelists, for example. £4k is average income for novelist. Screenwriters need 7 scripts out before they’ll get one made. 92% of UK films don’t make their money back. So who is making money and how?? In 2000, Susi was a musician and a new media marketing person for a music company. The group recorded that the music industry is vulnerable to digital distribution- from Napster for example. However it also provides new ways for artists to reach market- via MySpace etc. Musicians are starting to make money from these new distribution opportunities. Industry accepted failure of present system and are now in grey area where illegal distribution is easier than legal. DRM crunches the situation further. In theory the new platforms allow all artists to reach markets. But really, can they? What about intermediaries? Success stories are generally still related to the ‘big names’. Music is 3 years ahead of TV/film. Now TV/film are looking for new business models for funding, Brands, audience funding. Could learn from music, computer games, etc. Drama production are proprietary about sharing ideas. Where music industry are more open to sharing ideas. Film/TV more afraid of stealing. New generation are consuming and disposing music. Group member Will Doward spoke about a project he was involved with looking at business models in
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

40

music industry. Value Chain. Changed from traditional physical model (which is dead). Napster changed landscape. Digital space creates idea that music is free. How do you monetise music that people don’t pay for? Record companies are trying to get revenue from other artist activities (merchandise, live, etc.). Balance of power is shifting. Music is growing. Power of Rec. Industry is less. They realize they’ve missed the boat and are trying to catch up. Embracing many models. “This will be the year a lot of business models are made. Next year 8 out of 10 will fail.” Deals with mobiles, record companies taking equity in myspace. Artists going straight to fans. Gaming industry looking forward to recession. Musicians are writing songs for games. Aerosmith made more money from Guitar Hero than albums in 3 years. Musicians aren’t typically business-savvy. Lack of people who understand business models. People can’t make money from digital distribution. Myspace is trying monetize through downloads, ticket sales, sponsorships. Creative arts work in service-based model rather than IP-based model (fashion for example). Could creative arts (music) go to a service-model where they are commissioned by commercial experts. Danger of just being paid by sponsors? E.g. Bacardi and Groove Armada. Technology is supposed to be level playing field, for artist to develop direct relationships with consumers. But big companies have more muscle to find workable business models. Big companies have been struggling to find an adaptable business model, but they will find it. Maybe through streaming? Downloads will always be crack-able. Deezer already allows loads of free on-demand streaming. Can work on all devices. So is there a way to protect IP? There are always people who will steal/share music, etc. Locks only keep honest people from stealing. Quality of service is possibly the edge? Useful services (like recommendations) DRM has failed (for example Wal-Mart shutting down and making your music worthless). Adding quality to DVDs, increase experience to increase people’s desire to buy. Too much branding will turn off customers. Prince gave away free CD with Daily Mail, but made money off sell-out shows. Box office is like gravy. Don’t make money there. People pay £150 for Madonna show even though they could buy all here CDs for the same. Personalise purchase experience? If you purchase legally then you have access to exclusive information. People want close relationships with purchasing from the people rather than a big label? Communities of interest, online peer-to-peer communities share content (many illegal). Young people build friend groups around music. Last.fm for film? IMDB is trying this? People watch TV with other people, shared experience. VOD loses the simultaneous mass-viewing. People are sharing asynchronously now. A business (jotta.com) is individuals uploading 2D portfolios and talking together to find potential partners. Recent graduates, etc. Graphics Designers. Musicians should pirate their own music to get known. Lateral producing, build reputation through one thing, but make money doing something else. (like DJs who give away illegal remixes but make money doing parties). Piper won’t play if the piper doesn’t get paid. If you don’t get paid, you stop playing.
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

41

Trent Reznor works with Top Spin Media. Gives away most music but has high-level quality elitist goods. Fashion designers all want to be a brand and make lots of money. They don’t make money out of garments, but off of perfume and other branded goods. Different sources of income only when you’re big enough to be a brand. Touring band in Latin America have a private jet. They give street kids free CDs to distribute for free several weeks before they come to play a show. So they sell out the stadiums. Successful business model. With Myspace it is hard to connect with people on a local level. The physical space works better. Arctic Monkeys did very well through social-networks. Live performance is more successful than ever. Selling vinyl at shows. Finding niche and treating customers with respect. They pay for high quality and the human relationship. The connection with your journey. Models of documentary-makers becoming part of their niche markets (see Robert Greenwald and Peter Broderick). Christian filmmakers have their own filmmaking networks, selling amongst themselves. They want to pay. People want to support people they identify with. When someone believes in it, (religiousness) they will support it. Any special interest group. Niche publishing flourishes in magazines as well. (didn’t exist 25 years ago) Intermediaries support creative process. If you’re by yourself you make a lot of crap. A&R people would help jig things around and effectively curate the music. Do we still need these people? Probably we do – there are 2 million bands on Myspace. How do you find what you want to listen to? Last.fm’s recommendations (bought by CBS). Bands are trying to be album bands again, so they don’t just sell a cheap single and instead sell a whole album. That’s what singles were. The problem today is oversupply – too much music available. Do computer/TV/film people feel vulnerable because of Bit Torrent? Nintendo has been tracking BTs and people are getting taken to court. There’s always a way to rip games… As content producers should we be proprietary or embracing Creative Commons licenses? Computer Game mod-ing community embraces this, by allowing users to create levels and worlds for the game. But as film producers, we need to give money back to our investors. If we fund differently, we could be happy to give it out. Once you’ve made your money and profit then you might feel happy that lots of people see it so you’ll get more work. Need a balance. Hard to get noticed. People want to consume all the time. Lots of propaganda – people don’t buy CDs because they think the artists won’t get the money. But it’s not true. Bands don’t make money. 4% of signed bands on big record companies actually make serious money and subsidise the rest. That figure probably applies across platforms. 6% of novelists, for example. £4k is average income for novelist. Screenwriters need 7 scripts out before they’ll get one made. 92% of UK films don’t make their money back. So who is making money and how?? People who make money are distribution companies, intermediary companies, marketing/media
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

42

companies, software companies. Creative Industries includes software. Companies developing own IP or doing things for service are not growing or making money. Economic patterns are skewed. In music market, intermediaries are shifting to new intermediaries. Companies that guide us through the content are the ones making money. Record Industries are not understanding this model. No risk in Last.fm or itunes. If you’re at the front of the food chain, you have the money. Control means of production, control the means of distribution, then control the means of information. Have independent producers benefited from this? Have to invest to make money… How can the producer make money? You can’t recoup. Signed your back-end away just to fund the film. No business model yet. Market is unwilling to pay for that type of product. Need large amounts of money to launch and make money. Distributors spend up-front cash on advertising/marketing. Producer does not have this money. New technologies – producers need to make content that they know where the audience is. Then they can start to cut out the middlemen. They need to know the audience, and know the publicity. And they can avoid the expense of middlemen. In France, they stop advertising spend from foreign films on Thursdays and Fridays to support the domestic industry. Cultural investment. France has a much stronger industry. Also have huge subsidies for cinema chains. But that type of ideology is not likely in the UK. Producer Tax Credit can be recouped by producer on feature films. But not first position. Arctic Monkeys live at the Apollo Manchester. Richard (?) made a film of it and the management paid for it as a DVD. They hired (four-walled) cinemas for one night to show the film. Hope to break even that day to stimulate marketing for the DVD. How realistic is it to raise donation-based funding? Robert Greenwald, Franny Armstrong. Different levels of donation got you different benefits and credits. Could work in other industries. Get people to be part of what you’re producing. People feel involved. Franny Armstrong raised £400,000 for The Age of Stupid through crowd-funding. But it’s harder in a fiction (non-issue) film. Allow people to contribute to what the film becomes. 100 films made in the UK each year, 90% make no money and no one gets paid. Like an elaborate hobby. Not a good business model and a waist of talent. 10 years ago, people wrote scripts. Now they just make movies. Problem is not production. The problem is quality. Quality is critical. Difference between music industry is cheaper barriers to entry. Can record an album for next-tonothing. A low-budget feature (with people getting remotely paid) is going to cost £300k. Very hard to get the money back.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

43

A quality film that might work, you need at least £1million. Even harder to get your money back. Examples like The Age of Stupid and other social documentaries are encouraging successes. But when it comes to fiction and new talent, the barriers to entry are massive. We’re nowhere near a working business model for the web/digital platforms. Have to look at different digital platforms and do deals as P&A on different platforms. In Europe, producers sweat blood on one film, with no money for P&A and it dies. In Europe last year, we made 1,200 films that went into distribution.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

44

Session name: / Measuring Engagement: New Metrics needed!
Day one Time: Convener's name: David Eccles Notetakers name: David Eccles Participants: Nick, Henry Playfoot, Mark Brill Edi Smockum, Tim Furby Is it possible to measure ‘engagement’ in a quantitative way, by measuring key ‘consumer engagement acts’, such as blogging about a product, tearing and embedding content etc? We need to find a way to measure emotional engagement with media and brands online, so that campaigns can be compared against each other and ROE (return on engagement) can be measured and quantified. As we’re all searching for consumer engagement with either our IP or working on behalf of our commercial clients, is it possible to measure ‘engagement’ in a quantitative way, by measuring key ‘consumer engagement acts’, such as blogging about a product, tearing and embedding content etc? Traditional analytical metrics of measuring user engagement, such as views, recalls and web based page impressions are not very effective at measuring how much a person actually ‘cares’ about what they are viewing. We need to find a way to measure emotional engagement with media and brands online, so that campaigns can be compared against each other and ROE (return on engagement) can be measured and quantified. Brands want/ require effectiveness metrics On-Demand viewing data is now being included with TV ratings figures, but there is still no combining with data from show related web/mobile content to create a ‘360’ rating per programme. Web analytics measures crude ‘hits’ rather than engagement. Mobile also doesn’t have a mature analytics platform. In TV, most qualitative research happens post campaign or post transmission. The problem with a single unit of engagement is that different projects may engage in different ways. Some group members mooted that it would make more sense to setup Key Engagement Indicators specifically for the project. For example, achieving a certain number of positive blog posts from consumers about a product or a service would indicate a success in engagement on consumer generated media channels; whilst having someone take branded content and embed it on the MySpace profile would also indicate engagement with the brand. The group began to explore the notion of 'The Engageatron': which would produce a result from
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

45

comparing these different types of engagement. The Engageatron would begin to answer significant queries re: Who is more engaged- a consumer who blogs, or a consumer who takes and embeds content? Mapping engagement around the AIDAS model which maps the cognitive process consumers go through before they engage with a brand: Attention, Interest, Desire, Action, Satisfaction (advocacy and recommendation). We talked about how Apple consumers become 'fans' and advocate the brand to people they meet, defending it where necessary. (We also decided this can be very annoying….) The importance of building brands and products around the user or consumer, adopting a User Centered Design process to ensure engagement. We discussed the use of focus groups and how they can be very effective, but also can be dangerous and can sometimes quash innovation or encourage design by committee. The 1,9,90 model of engagement was discussed, whereby 90% of users are passive consumers, 9% contribute sporadically, and 1% are regular contributors to the community. We discussed whether this is a personality trait of the users i.e. are the 1% extroverts who love to publish and 'perform' or is this an accurate reflection of how well a brand or piece of content is engaging it's users. So the conclusion was that yes, we do need to find a way to measure engagement, but in all likelihood this will not be a universal measure such as the Engageatron, but rather Key Engagement Indicators that are set up at the start of each project.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

46

Action Plan / Measuring Engagement: New Metrics needed!
Related issues and opportunities: • • • • • • How do we define engagement in a participatory culture- what value do actions have associated with them? The possibility/desirability of setting up a business to challenge Nielson NR Learning from previous projects Linear media completion i.e.: Youtube videos Define touch points- assign engagement value x by number of users Segmentation of demographic and engagement

Next Steps: • • • • • • • Research media research companies e.g.: Thinkbox; Freshminds Be able to benchmark against an industry norm for campaigns/sector types Define formula/mechanism Find organisation/body to develop these ideas and fund them eg: COI/IAB Think about how agencies would define touchpoints and assign value Set up a company Identify touchpoints

Co-Conspirators: Nick Ware; Dave Eccles, Luke Razzell

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

47

Session name: / Collaboration and protecting IP – Best practise
Day One Session Time: 3.30 Convener's name: Tom de Grunwald Notetakers name: John Parnell The scope of this session was to identify levels of protection we could put easily into place at various levels and stages in the ideas generation and creative development process. PACT and NESTA have subsequent stages and areas covered really well in ‘free’ documents concerning multiplatform co-production; links to be added in due course (‘Convergence’). The scope of this session was to identify levels of protection we could put easily into place at various levels and stages in the ideas generation and creative development process. We agreed that to open up very early on and share a creative idea as a discussion without the other party has to happen on the basis of mutual trust and that it is not always appropriate to ask for NDAs etc. at this early stage. With more developed ideas, ideas that have been worked up as storyboards, treatments, schematics etc, then yes it makes sense to ensure the ownership of that expression of the idea is understood and protected by both/all parties signing the necessary documentation. We agreed that collaborating over idea generation and having a shared sense of protection around that session or sessions makes sense where there is a clear end client/commissioner in view, or just speculatively, and a real brief that both sides are brainstorming over and in this context a 50/50 IP ownership agreement makes sense, as does a mutual NDA agreement. PACT and NESTA have subsequent stages and areas covered really well in ‘free’ documents concerning multiplatform co-production; links to be added in due course (‘Convergence’).

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

48

Session name: / Can different media bring different income streams?
Day two 10.30 - 11.30 Convener’s name - Jane Lucy Notestaker’s name - Tom de Grunwald TV producers seem to be increasingly needing to act as a central point of contact for multimedia projects. It was noted that the music industry had had results with tiered releases - free download, premium DRM free download, physical release (CD), limited edition CD with book, signed limited edition CD with book and prints etc.. It was noted how, perhaps because of TV's relative centrality in popular culture, TV producers seem to be increasingly needing to act as a central point of contact for multimedia projects. It was also speculated that this may be because broadcasters are the most established channels of finance, and TV producers have developed their skills at pitching. In a multimedia world, they may need to drop the 'TV' from their job titles. This may be changing however, we asked if there are examples of say, advertising agencies originating a project and sourcing production companies to deliver them. 'Where are the Joneses?' is an interesting case, Ford being very much central to the project throughout. Brands as direct sources of finance are long established and look set to become more important as time goes on. The danger of something more subliminal and dangerous than product placement was however noted. Other examples of project origination illustrate the shifting sands of media production. Magic Lantern exist on the edges of broadcast media, and have brought game projects to TV. Mel has had experience of selling a web and mobile application to the National Film Board of Canada at MIPCOM. Other projects originated by new media companies have employed producers to develop a pitch, which can take a lot of work. We asked who holds pursestrings? An in exhaustive, brainstormed list: - Broadcasters - Brands - Platforms eg Bebo, Sony PSP, Nokia, o2 - Telcos? - The edges of broadcasters - eg the BBC R&D department etc - Consumers themselves It was noted that the music industry had had results with tiered releases - free download, premium DRM free download, physical release (CD), limited edition CD with book, signed limited edition CD with book and prints etc..
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

49

- Self funding activist communities Jane Lucy from Keo films brought her inspiring experience of the 'Chicken Out' project where the community brought together by the project's website contributed £88K - within two days! - to cover a bill presented to the project by Tesco to cover postage/ publicity of the shareholder resolution in time for the AGM. It was decided that the surplus funds raised in excess of the bill should fund further work on the campaign - which ended up being in part further web development by the producers. It was noted that funds for media innovations for social good are an emerging and significant development. - Unltd. - Pioneers of Change - The Good Pitch (at Sheffield doc fest - which was britdoc) Lastly, given the similarity in type of user experience, it was noted that emerging immersive media forms; such as a 3D internet space which has been doing the rounds at picnics (!), and PBS' gaming channel, promise further potential income streams for producers of (tele)visual content.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

50

Session name: / How can multi media businesses flourish in a recession?
Day two Time: 10:30 am Convener's name: Justin Kelly Notetakers name: Dominic Minns and Justin Kelly Participants: Peter Gerard, Andy Green, Sofia Mostafa, Brian Condon, Seamus Bennett, Simon Walker, Will Doward, George Stamkoski and David Eccles Businesses should consider innovative ways of billing the client: such as only being paid a portion up front and then taking the risk that they will only get the rest subject to the client valuing the service and paying for potential enhancements. Try to shorten the time it takes to get paid to avoid deals going wrong and not getting paid. Focusing on companies that are not doing well in a recession: helping them save money. What is a recession? Two quarters of contracting GDP usually with a cut in interest rates to stimulate borrowing/spending, eg Japan in the 1990s which had 0% rate of interest. Which businesses do well in a recession? Anything to do with people saving money eg: take away food deliveries at home, home entertainment such as DVDs, internet media, national tourism, repairers, low budget supermarkets and goods, public sectors, gambling, price comparisons, paint balling and on line shopping. Multi media businesses should consider showing companies that are doing well how you have helped other companies in the past. Demonstrate how you can help them to better communicate with their target market. Consider how best to develop their target community eg: Tourist Republic www.touristr.com and Trip Adviser www.tripadvisor.com re increasing feed back, user generated content and network. You can help companies better understand their client and their clients’ needs. Avoid hard sell to businesses or to consumers, find narrative ways to promote yourself or your client’s business. Re: increase in home entertainment: there was a question whether the 60% UK broadband penetration will fair well when a lot of people are demanding on it. Multi channels creates a demand for niche media content. Maturity in digital media means a more robust industry with potentially higher production values for creators Focusing on companies that are not doing well in a recession: helping them save money. In recession loyalty is all the more important as people start to shop around for better deals. Businesses should consider innovative ways of billing the client: such as only being paid a portion up
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

51

front and then taking the risk that they will only get the rest subject to the client valuing the service and paying for potential enhancements. Don’t expect to get paid to learn about the client’s business/problems. Try to shorten the time it takes to get paid to avoid deals going wrong and not getting paid. The group noted the increasing use of freelancers. Some group members identified pitfalls regarding freelancers being more expensive and potential for them not being in house style or available. Teach others what you do so you can better persuade potential client that you know your stuff. Looked at www.pluginmedia.net belonging to Dominic Minns And he mentioned www.littleloud.com/

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

52

Session name: / How should television production and mobile industries be collaborating together?
Day Two Participants: Jane Lucy of Keo Films and Mark Brill of Formation .Create a mobile WAP site SMS or operator portal Direct to consumers (DTC) Mark outlined 3 main ways that content producers can distribute via mobile: 1. Create a mobile WAP site

Build your own site, upload your content and let people download it. Pros = cheap, requires little tech knowledge Cons = no revenue model, no marketing – how will people find it as no one searches on mobile? no handset optimization, nil IP protection 2. SMS or operator portal

Except for O2, operator portals are run by third party companies and not by the operators themselves. Player X is a content distribution company that operates some of the operator portals. They can distribute your content to 3 UK portals and 20 international portals. They do the coding and provide IP protection. Cons = if a consumer pays £1, Player X gets 55p, you get 26p, rest is VAT. Also, unless your content is shown on the ‘top deck’ of what consumers see as available content to download, the click through rate is virtually nil. You have no control of what gets put on the top deck and how your content is positioned on other pages. Top deck has things like James Bond content and “Check My Tits”… Win Plc is another company that offers services but is more of an aggregator than Player X. An aggregator = deals only with SMS and MMS rather than content. They provide gateways to mobile networks i.e. for one number they spread it to others, but rarely provide a platform to deliver it. A third party platform would be required. 3. Direct to consumers (DTC)

Web placed platforms such as www.immedia24.com where content is grouped into galleries and you attach a premium SMS number to it and a key word, that then delivers content via SMS to consumer. Biggest file size recommend is 1.2-1.5mb i.e. 2-3 mins of content. If WAP system, theoretically there is no file size limit but it depends on different mobile handsets as to what they can handle.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

53

SMS better than MMS as MMS is very costly and also limits file size to 250k. Service includes handset optimization. Data charges – these can be relevant in deciding file size as people who don’t have flat rate contracts will pay per mb. But most people are starting to have flat rate contracts. Speed can be effected by networks being legally obliged to give priority traffic to phone conversations over their network. Revenue model = consumer pays £1.50, 24p is VAT, networks take 36-37p, Immedia take 5-6p, content owner gets about 82p per download. Con = still no marketing provided to help people become aware of your content Is the ability to bring in sponsorship and branding to your content in this platform/ distribution model. Can also embed the relevant page on your website. You can also package multiple clips for cheaper price etc. Additional info It’s possible to do both models 2 and 3 at the same time as portals do not always require exclusive rights. Possible to do live events on mobile. Other technologies, such as QR allow users to take a picture of a barcode triggering events such as payment, mobile web access or content download.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

54

Session name: / How do we deliver the new skills needed by Media Businesses?
Day Two Convener’s name: Pollyanna Lindley Participants: Henry Playfoot, Tim Furby, Suzy, Simon Phillips, Edi Smockum Could there be a model in facilitating people within companies to teach each other skills? Mentoring sector specialists in adjacent sectors (eg TV execs on interactive) is still very necessary The attributes that people need are not primarily technical but a deeper understanding of creative process, brand culture etc Are 2-3 day courses effective way to extend skills? Should degree courses etc be equipping people with relevant skills in the first place? Universities are teaching great technical skills, but not the thinking around how to use those skills in business. Craft and art: what are the distinctions? Traditionally, film making was a tradition passed on as a "secret language" from master to pupil. But there is no place for this approach now - new approaches needed. Film schools are struggling to attract students - people are going direct to YouTube. The attributes that people need are not primarily technical but a deeper understanding of creative process, brand culture etc Surface effects can mask lack of deeper creativity. Witness success of raw YouTube videos by talented kids with minimal tech. TV has become pretty formulaic in the way it is made: anecdote of a BBC director having to get special clearance from Commissioning Producer to change angle of a shot! Passion about story itself is key to motivating people to master the skills to communicate that story effectively. Story-telling and narrative is relevant beyond the film industry - eg, user journeys through websites By packaging courses etc as being about the "tools" (methodologies: eg, how to create mystery and suspense), it's easier to get people to participate No substitute for being embedded in real situations when it comes to learning "emotional intelligence" for creativity.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

55

Giving space for failure is important too. Is literacy important? Yes, in client facing roles. Not so much for, eg, a pure designer. If software was made better (by designers who understood User Experience issues), people wouldn't need so much training to learn how to use it! Mentoring sector specialists in adjacent sectors (eg TV execs on interactive) is still very necessary.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

56

Session name: / Private use of public data
Convener: Patrick Towell

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

57

Session name: / Does One media equal Google?
Convener’s name: Simon Philips Note taker’s name: Simon Walker Participants: Nicki Strange, Tara Solesbury Is there ever going to be a move against Google? What will public service broadcasters look like? How do we search more efficiently? It’s not the content that’s valuable, it’s the data around the content that matters. The head of YouTube recently said that There is no new media, just media". Every day 16 hours of video are upload to YouTube. By 2010, it’s estimated that there will be 1billion videos online The new issue is how do we find stuff? Is Google going to dominate forever? Are there any other models that we might use? Is there ever going to be a move against Google? What will public service broadcasters look like? How do we search more efficiently? Should Google start to segment to classify areas of information, to help filter information? There are two aspects to tracking data and data analysed from web searches; how well Google works and its public service obligation. Are .ORG domains ranked higher because of their public service aspect? Google’s ability to rank searches is the reason for its success. Should we be worried about Google getting so big. Should we be starting a competitor? If public service is going to come to fruition, who is responsible for the remit? It’s not the content that’s valuable, its the data around the content that matters. Does the increase of web video mean Google = video? Advertising is moving more and more budget to online video, especially as its more targetable. The quantum leap is to be able to search video. New technologies mean that voice recognition and different ways to add
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

58

more metadata to video clips are becoming more prevalent. Who is responsible for censorship? Who controls the metadata? If video is free, how can we monetise the metadata? As commissioning budget shrink, it drives the need for searchable archive material. Are the traditional broadcasters limited by their public service restrictions and therefore at a competitive disadvantage? Where does Google stand on PS responsibility? New Media = One Media = Digital Media = Media Media isn’t new, it’s the distribution that’ s new.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

59

Session name: / New participative open models for media commissioning.
Day 2 Time 11.45 Convener’s name: Fiddian Warman, Soda Notetakers name Tim Harrison Participants: Luke Razzill, Weaverluke Solutions Pierre Vella – Space, Mandy Berry Potential for ‘Agile’ Funding Processes requires investment from partner and stakeholders Models of agile commission Is there is need for initials organisation to broaden relationship between the solution needed and a solution providers? Start from needs rather than specific questions and objectives. Big Media commissions tended to be unwieldy and unsuccessful.l Need for practical research Fleet of foot researcher methodologies ‘agile’ approaches: Not working from single starting point through to single solution Wide group of different skillsets and invested individuals working in open way to define questions, bits can fail and no mess on whole project. Potential for ‘Agile’ Funding Processes requires investment from partner and stakeholders but not depended on equal homogerious level of investment. See open business Start from needs rather than specific questions and objectives. Perceived risks – no sure what outcomes will be scalable ‘light-touch’ process can be adapted for smaller or larger projects. Models of agile commission Breaking process down some elements will benefit from some bits but not others so investment could come in bits for sections if research and development not looking for big pot of cash. Does public sector need advice from auditors to be confined in commissioning process? Agile Lab run courses / processes using agile methods with agencies that need software and management and creative solutions have worked on major government procurement processes Working more on project to project bases Bringing together team of the necessary people/ perspectives Other benefits involves wide range of stakeholders Audiences / agencies/ artists/ venues / public/ council
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

60

Necessity of integrity and sense that input coming from participants in the process is listed to and has some impact on the outcomes, cannot have secret agenda that ultimately dictates the outcomes. This sad, starting point needs clear point clear sense of why the process is wappening who is defining the need? Is there is need for initials organisation to broaden relationship between the solution needed and a solution providers?

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

61

Session name: / Narrative and Storytelling
Day Two Time: 11.15 Convener's name: Henry Playfoot Notetakers name: Henry Playfoot Participants: David Eccles Paul Dornan John Parnell Dominic Minns Brian Condon Justin Kelly There are now different ways of telling stories afforded by digital media – no longer a single narrative voice/multiple writers. All agreed narrative and storytelling capacity essential in increasingly complex, information/content filled world. Narrative important in all areas/spheres – political, social, cultural/creative and in the One Media context eg gaming. There are now different ways of telling stories afforded by digital media – no longer a single narrative voice/multiple writers. Transition from storyteller to storytellers significant shift and has profound implications for what a story/narrative is/can be. BUT still an appetite for straightforward, one voice stories, which meet deep human needs ref ‘Seven Essential Plots’, and BBC’s ‘In The Night Garden’ and Broadstairs Folk Festival. Related Refs: • • • • Skins, Bow Street Runner and Dead Ends (Part of Disarming Britain series) Channel 4 We Tell Stories - Penguin Science of Life A World Without Oil

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

62

Action plan: / Narrative and Storytelling
Day Two Convener’s name; Henry Playfoot Not everything is a story but do we need to invest more time/effort in getting people to develop their storytelling and narrative skills? If you started with the (say) twelve story archetypes use them as a filter/ explore/evaluate/distilling for discussing the efficacy/value of media content. Get the web monkeys and TV jockeys to go back to basics and think about how what they do could be changed/improved by re-visiting the fundamentals of narrative storytelling. Related Issues: Whilst we didn’t get very far in the discussion of this theme during the day- it was oddly surprising that this was so popular when people came to vote at the end of the day. Why was that? What is about ‘The Story’ that resonates and is so important to people? What is the story now? Stories still connect with people- it goes to the root of people’s emotions. Not everything is a story but do we need to invest more time/effort in getting people to develop their storytelling and narrative skills? Where are people getting their storytelling techniques? Content is not an abstract thing. With online gaming etc there is no longer one storyteller- there are multiple storytellers. Who is the protagonist/ who is the narrator? The role online keeps shifting. Everyone can be protagonist and everyone narrator. We need stories. We need authorative voices that do tell one story. In the emerging Web 3.0 we need someone eg (but not) the BBC / an authoritative and AUTHENTIC voice to help make sense of the world and the vast amount of noise/content. Business communities are beginning to talk about storytelling. We all know that great business leaders and educators are great storytellers. They cut through the crap. How can we use stories to cut through the noise? Next Steps: If you started with the (say) twelve story archetypes use them as a filter/ explore/evaluate/distilling for discussing the efficacy/value of media content. Get the web monkeys and TV jockeys to go back to basics and think about how what they do could be changed/improved by re-visiting the fundamentals of narrative storytelling. Nesta eg- integrating storytelling skills into their offer to the sector. We are asking to provide us with Merlin and come into central London and share skills with the monkeys and jockeys. Can they fund research projects that go and apply some of this thinking to real projects? We are
Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

63

convinced that we would get some real insights and that there would be hard economic benefits. We are also convinced that sharing these skills would support the integrating of new people into the sector eg: new graduates. Makes a sense of what they are trying to do. There are people doing this in Wales- Henry knows of some Professor back in Uni of (somewhere in Wales) looking at the impact of good narrative etc. DEMOS also looking at the role of blogging/self narrating to support literacy (see recent report). Co-Conspirators: Henry Playfoot, Brian Condon, Tim Furby, Paul Dorman, George Stamkoski

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

64

Session name: / How can we balance public demand for creative content and the need to reward content providers?
Time: Friday 11.45-1.00 Convener's name: Silvia Baumgart Notetakers name: Andrew Green Participants Peter Gerard, Davi Salvadori, Dom Pates. Why do the screen industries not use the levy systems used by the music industry, MCPS and within the publishing industry? We need an action plan to understand the diverse ways we gain revenue through subscription and online, based on rights liquidation.

A general discussion around rights protection and exploitation has raised a couple of key questions and conclusions. Why do the screen industries not use the levy systems used by the music industry, MCPS and within the publishing industry? We must educate an audience into understanding media comes at a cost and if quality is important to them – the content provider must be able to make a sustainable business by maintaining rights and profiting from them. A levy or licensing system must benefit the content provider and come from a diverse range of content types. The niche customer is willing to support the provider by purchase of licensed product this should extend to online and maintain this loyalty through subscription. It is necessary for producers to understand what dividend is available through blank media taxation. Who gets this money? We need an action plan to understand the diverse ways we gain revenue through subscription and online, based on rights liquidation. Streaming content will protect rights. What effect does sponsorship have on creative decisions?

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

65

Action Plan: / How can we balance public demand for creative content and the need to reward content providers?
Time: Friday 11.45-1.00 Related issues and opportunities: • • • • • • • Contribution Collecting societies/tax for creators DRM Rethinking our interpretation of copyright Creative Commons Rethinking remuneration- different systems and business models There are companies there to support Producers financially- like banks/commissions; now Producers have the content rights

Next Steps: 1. Self education: We are aware that some professionals- such as illustrators, graphic designers and scriptwriters don’t know how to price a service. 2. A Union: should be put in place for scriptwriters/graphic designers and illustrators as they have no union representation. Employers should also be educated to respect the skillset of illustrators. 3. Be Creative: meet the audience’s demands. 4. Change and adapt: we need to get rid of business models which make one too dependent on one product. 5. Content is freely available online via forums such as Youtube and Facebook. The opportunity for people to select you via Facebook is countered by the potential risks of having your work ‘nicked’. 6. More discussion about self regulation and government regulation. Co-Conspirators: Silvia

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

66

Session name: /Sustainable business models for digital distribution
Day two Time: 1330 Convener's name: Peter Gerard Notetakers name: Tim Fenton Participants : Silvia Baumgart, Nick Ware, Andrew Green, Susi O’Neill, Pierre Valla, Dom Pates. Brand building still the key. Barriers to entry to Hollywood type business very high due to large scale vertical and horizontal integration. Main focus of discussion around Joining the Dots.tv – with which Nick is involved. Company aims to distribute documentary films online via subscription or pay per download. Other monetization models – advertising? Amazon funded films that had products placed within them. The market – concern at big players like Amazon buying up vast amounts of content. Room for niche publisher? – like a record label or book publisher. The value is added for the end user when he or she is led from something they know to something they don’t know. Are ‘pipe-owners’ (BT) too powerful? Yes but bad at managing content. Brand building still the key. Barriers to entry to Hollywood type business very high due to large scale vertical and horizontal integration. Word of mouth model important – US examples of home screenings. Social marketing theory now offering some guide to this. Swarm Tribe work done by NESTA. Nike using child influencers. But over-supply (eg short films in UK) still a problem.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

67

Action Plan: /Sustainable business models for digital distribution
Related issues and opportunities: • Platforms- user experience • Online/DVD/Theatrical • Knowing the audience and audience trusting ‘your’ content • Non-traditional marketing • User sponsorship (non-commercial) • Set-top boxes (i.e.: Apple TV; BT Vision) • Face recognition for metadata • Scene recognition for AD-insert • Voice Text Auto Conversion for search • Kangaroo Next Steps Test this group: ask the unconference who watches what and where? Establish seeded peer-group fans Quality word-of-mouth (Trust) Find reliable technology Curation/Meta data/User ratings Control your user-data ADVETISING!!! Pre-roll, Pop-up, Active Area Self torrent w/ads Thumbnail and Trailer (soon necessary) - automated Case by case model- content/audience Porn? GO TO THE PUB! Co-Conspirators: Peter Gerard; Tim Harrison (Arts Council); Jane Lucy; Seamus Bennett; Simon Phillips and Andy Green

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

68

Session name: / How do we stop the Big Boys grabbing all the value?
Day Two Time: Convener's name: Brian Condon Notetakers name: John Parnell Participants: Simon Phillips, Will Dorman and Simon Walker The groups felt there were perceived difficulties for smaller players to promote themselves fully into deals, specifically Joint Ventures with the Big Boys. How do the Smaller Players avoid being the lesser or least important part of the Joint Venture? The Big Boys are the large incumbent broadcasters, TV companies, studios, media owners and distributors. Despite all the changes taking place, it seems that the number and size of the Big Boys remains the same. There are good and bad aspects to consider about these Big Boys- on the positive they do help to create standards, drive demand and make the market tick but, conversely, they also place restrictions and burdens on the smaller players (by not accepting alternative formats etc possibly nicking original ideas and doing it themselves etc). Maybe the best way to beat them therefore is to play their game- to get ever savvier with your selling and pitching, in the drafting of contracts and in having the confidence to make demands of them. The groups felt there were perceived difficulties for smaller players to promote themselves fully into deals, specifically Joint Ventures with the Big Boys. How do the Smaller Players avoid being the lesser or least important part of the Joint Venture? An example was shared amongst the group where one of our members spoke of his desire to enter into a Joint Venture agreement as a principal in the venture, not just as a consultant, but felt ‘trapped’ by the status and relative power of his Big Boy partner. How do you ensure that you negotiate your just desserts in this situation- when your partner is the Big Boy?

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

69

Session name: / How is user experience relevant across the media industries?
Day two Convener’s name: Luke Razzill Note taker’s name: Tim Harrison Participants: David Eccles Justin Kelly , George Stamkoski Moving from posting a message to being responsive to users/audience Time and Space specificity of digital user experience, How do you extend scope of user experience beyond website? Idea of experience of Digital media as event Various different versions of experience commercially ___ website/ product./ TV Arts -- Links between Gallery / off sites Digital Installation / website How are these linked meaningfully? Appropriateness to the ‘Location’ online, offline and Linking online experience to physical location experience.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

70

Action plan: / Onemedia where next?
We discussed where to take the Onemedia brand next. Suggestions included: Creating an annunal event, each with a different theme across different sectors. Running events in different parts of the country which would help unite the different industries in specific regions. Building to the already functioning community each time, each event. Creating a newsletter with community updates to build relationships and collaborations across industries and participants. Having spin off events on a specific topic that people had contributed a session and action plan on that would need workshoping or further development. Targeting specific industry slices i.e funding bodies, post production etc.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

71

List of contributors
Rachel Silvia Seamus Paul Mandy Mark Robin Tom Paul William Jacqui Tim Tim Peter Andrew Joe Katz Paula Sofia Phil John Dom Simon Luke Dani Emily Jeremy Edi George Susie Baker Baumgart Bennett Bennun Berry Brill Cramp de Grunwald Dornan Doward Doyle Fenton Furby Gerard Green Kennard Kiely Le dieu Mostafa Parker Parnell Pates Phillips Razzell Salvadori Shenton Silver Smockum Stamkoski O’Neill Visual Arts Officer, Media Art and Moving Image Lead Officer Marketing executive Director Director CEO Sector Development Officer - Interactive Media Head of Development Writer & Creative Consultant Director Head of Production Consultant Director Producer/Director Video Editor/Producer Managing Director Managing Director Producer/Advisor Cross-platform Producer/Director Director Business Development Director Project Manager Associate Director Director Director of Enterprise & Innovation Managing Director Ceo Head, Short Courses@nfts Writer, Producer & DVDirector Arts Council, England Own-it enterprise Ireland Somethin' Else 01zero-one Formation Screen Yorkshire Isis Productions The Dept of Now Start-up ITV Studios 001east Timfurbymedia Accidental Media Accidental Media Purple Media Just-b. Productions Just Me Yenmo NyAC Head London Sounds Phenomenal Tools of Directing Weaverluke Solutions Ltd Central Saint Martins Arrival Education Mediaclarity National Film & Television School N.A. White Room Consultancy

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

72

Niki

Strange

Head of Business Development Head of Enterprise and Innovation Chief Executive Production Director Media Arts Producer Editor, trainer, designer Director Director Clore Fellow Partner Producer Director Managing Director Managing Director Editorial Director Digital Media Consultant Interactive Media Manager Head of Skills and Innovation New Media Executive Board member IT Project manager Director Director Director Creative Director

Cogapp Ravensbourne Golant Films Plug-in Media Ltd SPACE Freelance Aster Soda Ltd Clore Leadership Programme Complexity Partners llp Keo Films How To Films Ltd. White Loop Numiko Illumina Tara Solesbury Skillset 01zero-one Pact Screen South Pact Power to the Pixel Media sauce and Onemedia Unexpected Media Plug in Media Arts Council

Chris Patrick Juliet Pierre Simon Nick Fiddian William Brian Jane Justin Henry David Mike Tara Fiona Pollyanna Nick Anthony Kristin Liz Mel Frank Dom Tim

Thompson Towell Tzabar Vella Walker Ware Warman Wong Condon Lucy Kelly Playfoot Eccles Flood Page Solesbury Killkelly Lindley Underhill Alleyne Donaldson Rosenthal Norman Boyd Minns Harrison

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

73

Steering Committee
A big thank you to everyone who supported the Onemedia Unconference from the beginning. Your suggestions, ideas and constructive feedback helped build the best event we could.

Mandy Berry Gill Henderson Fiona Killkelly Tara Solesbury Frank Boyd Nick Underhill Jon Kingsbury Chris Thorpe Richard Ayres Liz Rosenthal Pollyanna Lindley Paula Le Dieu Mel Norman

01zero-one Create Kx Skillset Tara Solesbury Unexpected Media Pact Nesta Jaggeree and Myspace Power to the Pixel 01zero-one Media Sauce and Onemedia

And an extra special thank you to Jo Nolan from Screen South for your sponsoring of the drinks evening, Jason Wiltshire for your tireless marketing and managing, Bridget Eadie for your management of the news room, Fiddian Warman for your technology help, Chris Thorpe for the logo and Rohit and Annabella for donating your time over the two days.

We would also like to thank all the trade organisations and regional, screen agencies and blogs that supported us by promoting the event, we could not have reached so many industry sectors without you.

Onemedia Unconference November 2008 www.one-media.org

74


								
To top