Wednesday, 27 March 2024

Legacy Media and Social Platforms Can Peacefully Coexist (Really!)

NAB

Fresh research from Deloitte shows that younger audiences are increasingly gravitating towards long-form social media content compared with older generations.

article here

An NAB Show session, “A Return to Long-Form: The Convergence of Legacy Entertainment & Social Media,” led by Dennis Ortiz of Deloitte Consulting’s Technology, Media and Telecommunications (TMT) practice unpacks the research and highlights strategies broadcasters should deploy in order to capitalize on this trend. 

“The emergence of social platforms is driving a lot more competition for eyeballs but the crux of our debate at NAB is that legacy media and social media can coexist — provided the right strategy is in place,” says Ortiz, who leads all Deloitte’s advertising, publishing and social media platforms practice in the US.

One difference between the two from the consumer’s point of view is that legacy media tends to be more immersive. “It’s more about the experience whereas social media is really viewed as convenient but also driving connection and community. So there are different reasons as to why consumers or viewers gravity towards each.”

Legacy media can and should take advantage of these content consumption trends to effectively compete for the same viewers.

Deloitte will share pointers on this too. Drawing on its latest (18th) Digital Media Trends Survey published in April and the second edition of “The Creator Economy in 3D,” Ortiz shares insight into the intersections of legacy media, social platforms and content creators.

For example, its research suggests that more than 40% of Gen Zs actually prefer long-form over short-form content. “There’s this notion that Gen Z must love short-form because they are on Insta or TikTok but the reality is that they’re actually starting to prefer long-form content (defined as greater than 10 minutes).”

This dichotomy between short- and long-form content is not necessarily a competition. They coexist and serve different entertainment purposes in everyday consumers’ lives.

Ortiz will also highlight what these viewing patterns mean for advertisers and content providers with ad-led services. A key here is the role that creators play in driving connection to brands.

Deloitte research indicates that three out of five consumers are likely to engage with a brand or purchase from a brand if their favorite creator recommends it. That supports the idea of the strength of connection that viewers have with certain creators.

“Advertisers can target audiences with social and reach the mass audience with legacy media,” he says.

Ortiz will dive into this with speaking guests representing both legacy (long form) and social (short-form) and discuss the resulting convergence of legacy entertainment and social media.

His overall prognosis for traditional media is positive. “I don’t think legacy media is going to go away. It will coexist with social. For legacy media it comes to down to changing the strategy by really understanding how consumers use various types of media. With that insight they can create cross platform strategies. An example from our research is that 54 percent of consumers start watching new shows or movies due to recommendations that they get from social media. The relationship between social and legacy is symbiotic relationship.”

BBC looks to post-license fee future with ads in the mix

StreamTV Insider

The BBC is looking to seal more commercial arrangements with media and entertainment partners, even toying with ad funded content, as it looks to prop up hugely depleted revenue from its license fee – and prepare for a future with no license fee at all.

article here

The UK public broadcaster is largely funded by the license fee (unlike private broadcaster ITV which is funded by commercial revenue or Sky, which collects commercial and subscription revenue). This is a mandatory annual payment required by any household with a TV set in the UK, which was first introduced in 1946 and is collected by the UK government on the BBC’s behalf. In 2023 revenue from the license fee reached over £3.7 billion (about $4.67 billion), accounting for about 65% of the BBC’s total income.

Money from the license fee pays for BBC shows and services, including TV, radio, the BBC website, podcasts, iPlayer and apps.

However, consumers do not need to pay a TV license if they only watch streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ or on-demand TV through services like All 4, ITVX and Amazon Prime Video.

In his regular keynote to the industry ahead of the broadcaster’s annual report, BBC Director General Tim Davie addressed the “future direction of the BBC and its role for the UK.”

He outlined how to use “limited resources” to best serve the audience, “to rapidly modernise” and “transform the value we provide for everyone.”

Davie said the broadcaster intends to move its content spend “towards streaming value and away from broadcast-only output” to target younger audiences.

“We will [do this] by focusing all our commissioning, marketing and social media activity on BBC iPlayer,” rather than through linear youth channel BBC Three.

Income from the license fee fell to £3.74 billion last year as fewer households pay the fee. Although the annual license fee will rise to £169.50 (around $213) from £159 next month, the BBC argues its budget has been effectively slashed by 30% over more than a decade due to license fee freezes.

The BBC will have to negotiate with the government over an entirely new funding model when the final license fee funding deal expires in 2027 – with potential options including a subscription service, part-privatization, or direct government funding.

Out of necessity, Davie acknowledged that the BBC would be open to exploring new models. The Corporation has to find new ways of raising revenue if it is to survive.

In an eye-catching move this includes experimenting for the first time with advertising by introducing ads around audio content distributed on non-BBC platforms such as Spotify and Apple podcasts.

“It is the thin-end of a thick wedge,” Phil Riley, co-founder, Boom Radio told the Today news program on BBC Radio 4 Tuesday, March 26.

The concern is not exclusive to the commercial radio sector. Riley’s criticism could be applied across the UK media landscape as the prospect of an increasingly ad-funded Corporation raises alarm bells.

“If wholly or partly funded by advertising that is a completely different BBC to the one we have today. It would upset the BBC and the whole of the commercial industry in the UK too,” Riley said. “It would fundamentally break the ecosystem in the UK. There is not an infinite pot of ad revenue. If the BBC steps into that market and takes revenue away from commercial operators it will suffocate innovation.”

Defending the BBC, former BBC Trustee and a Controller of Radio 4, Mark Damazer said, “The BBC is forever caught between two arguments. One is that it is lazy, not entrepreneurial or innovative enough and that it needs to wean itself off the license fee. The other is that the BBC is an elephant that tramples over everybody in the room squeezing out profitably from the commercial sector.”

Damazer acknowledged that if the BBC were to saturate its channels with ad-funded content that would be a concern. “No-one is saying we’re suddenly going to switch on ads on BBC One.  This is about exploring entrepreneurial opportunities to make more out of BBC IP by balancing public value and the interest of license payers versus the commercial industry.”

He continued, “I don’t think it follows that market size for advertising is finite and it could be that the market actually grows [for everyone] which is exactly what happened when the BBC launched iPlayer and grew the market for streamed content.”

The BBC argues that the corporation has fallen behind global streaming rivals. Davie cited the lack of powerful personalization and recommendation algorithms on iPlayer, which the BBC intends to rectify by using AI to deliver a more personalized service.

BBC Studios, its commercial content studio and media & streaming business, would invest in stronger DTC services globally, including relaunching BBC.com (the widest-read English language news website) and the BBC app internationally, with appropriate commercialization” to help “build our position as the number one English online news brand online, globally”.

The aim is to double BBC Studios’ revenues to over £3.2 billion (about $4 billion) by 2027-28 through international expansion.

Earlier this month BBC Studios took full ownership of streamer BritBox International, acquiring ITV’s 50% share for £255 million (around $322 million).

We can also expect more co-production deals like the one struck in 2022 with Disney Branded Television for Doctor Who. Outside of the UK, the long running sci-fi drama is exclusive to Disney+, with new episodes dropping on iPlayer in the UK and Disney+, internationally, at the same time.

Davie’s speech comes on the heels of a new report from Ampere Analysis that revealed an 18% decline last year in the UK’s market for scripted TV commissions as major UK broadcasters cut spend and most global SVODs trimmed investment in international content.

The BBC has already cut 1,000 hours of original programming (including long-running medical soaps Holby City and Doctors, quiz show Question of Sport and comedy quiz Mock The Week) and trimmed spending on original content but still managed to up its share of UK produced scripted TV to 50% in 2023 primarily because leading commercial broadcaster ITV has struggled due to the economic downturn and also slashed commissioning

In terms of content, Davie said that to counter the influence of global streamers where UK content was a minor part of the selection of offer, the BBC would double down on making “authentic British stories.”

He said that the BBC would have to create its own AI algorithms to enable it to continue to fulfill its mission to inform, educate and entertain in a way that brought UK society together.

“As we move to an internet-only world, we can shape this tipping point to act for the benefit of the British public,” he said. “We can choose not to rely solely on U.S and Chinese tech companies who may not have the interests of a shared British culture and our democratic, tolerant society at their heart. This will require us to create unique algorithms to serve our values, for good. Algorithms and AI that bring us closer, not drive us apart. Personalization, of course, but not driven by a narrow commercial return."

Monday, 25 March 2024

Don’t Put Profit Before Ethics, SMPTE’s Renard Jenkins Warns AI Developers

NAB

article here

SMPTE president Renard T. Jenkins has flagged concerns about bias in development of AI tools and says diversity among decision makers is a practical means to prevent it.

“We should be fighting against bias in everything that we build and the best way I believe for us to do that is through inclusive innovation,” he told the Curious Refuge Podcast. “If your team looks like the world that you intend to serve, and to develop these tools for, then they’re going to notice when something is biased towards them or towards others.”

Jenkins expressed concern that the proliferation and sophistication of large language models are being inbuilt with bias, unconscious or otherwise.

He suggests that bias is not inherently a bad thing because certain forms of bias are there for our protection.

“As a child you learned very, very early not to put your hand on the stove because it’s hot. You develop a bias towards putting your hand on hot things. That’s good. That helps protects us as human beings. So there is that innate ‘bias’ that is born in us to protect us. The problem is when that bias is led by fear and inaccurate understanding of individuals or cultures That’s what leads to the bad side of things.”

That goes for AI as well. Fear or misunderstanding of others can actually make its way into the development of a tool, he said, and once it makes its way in, it’s very hard to get it out.

He advocates a system of “good bias” that is not going to be xenophobic, misogynistic, racist, or homophobic. “I want all systems to be that way,” he said. “But I also believe that it can’t go into hyper overdrive because then it’s going to harm us. That’s why we have to understand bias and we have to remove bad bias from these algorithms.”

Aside from inclusive innovation, removing bias requires “sourcing ethically, cleaning [data] and monitoring your data,” Jenkins said. “That’s how we get to the point where we can hopefully one day not have to worry about the bad bias because it’s sort of been wiped out. That’s my goal.”

The problem is, as moderator Caleb Ward points out, the competing pressure to make money from AI product risks ethically sources models being relegated behind the drive to monetize. Not even new AI regulation in Europe or the US might be sufficient to stop it.

“It’s an arms race right now,” Jenkins agreed. “There’s a lot of money being thrown around and that sometimes drives product that it not ready for primetime, without being fully vetted for what their impact will be. It’s not just about the tool in itself in the sense of helping the creative, it really is about the impact that it has on the user and on our society as a whole. That should be one of the primary things that all of these companies take into account when they’re doing this.”

Jenkins says he is saying to executives that there’s a way for them to continue to make “all of the wonderful financial gains that you’re making and for you to continue to create phenomenal tools, but there’s also a way for you to protect users.

“Because in truth, if you’re doing something that’s harming your users, that’s bad business. You know it’s bad business because over time you you’re going to run out of users.”

Everybody in media and business generally from the C-Suite on down needs to be educated about AI risk and reward.

“The more that you’re educated about it the more that you’ll understand. When you see something that could actually go in the wrong direction then you have the responsibility to say ‘let’s slow this down’ and try and make sure that we’re helping,” he says.

“You got to protect the people and truly you shouldn’t be creating anything that’s going to cause harm.”

FOX CTO Melody Hildebrandt: Why Broadcasters Need to Take the Lead With AI

NAB

article here

Melody Hildebrandt began her career designing war games for the Department of Defense. Almost two decades later, as chief technology officer at FOX, she is leading a major initiative to combat the threat of deepfakes and AI-generated misinformation.

It’s a fight that media needs to take to Big Tech, says Hildebrandt. During her presentation at the NAB Show, “AI Revolution in Entertainment: One Year On…,” she will call on broadcasters to unite, fight back and flourish in the new AI economy.  

“It’s time for broadcasters to actually take the lead in the technical conversation by defining the core architecture about how our industry is going to run in the future.”

The media industry needs to take defensive and offensive positions to manage AI, she asserts.

“We are in the ‘AI optimistic’ camp. We are bullish on the new capabilities and economic opportunities. But we also believe publishers should control how their intellectual property is used and commercialized within AI models — whether that is LLM training or real-time Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) via chatbots.”

“In this age of AI-generated media abundance the content coming from trusted brands like ours is going to be more important than ever. Consumers are going to rely on brands like FOX to help them navigate the information space in front of them. But trust is going to be exploited in this new information space. So, to thrive in this new area there are certain guardrails to put in place.”

Hildebrandt is the company’s lead on Verify, a project that sets out the technical foundations for proving the provenance of media that FOX publishes. Development started a year ago and the tech is already out of the gate.

Every single piece of content that is published online by FOX News or FOX Sports or from any one of its local stations, is now cryptographically signed with Verify.

“The moment content goes online it gets simultaneously written on the blockchain and can be verified using the tool,” she says.

Prior to becoming CTO, Hildebrandt was president of FOX subsidiary Blockchain Creative Labs, leading the broadcaster’s information security program. Now she is running seven strategic AI projects for the company.

Her team approached the challenge as both problem and opportunity. On the one hand, FOX content is valuable and there is an opportunity to derive revenue by licensing it to LLMs. On the other, there’s a need to combat misinformation and mitigate the threat of reputational damage.

She cites a post by a Twitter (now known as X) user with more than a million followers that purported to be a repost of a FOX News story falsely stating that Saudi Arabia had entered the war in Israel.

“How are consumers going to navigate this information space and know that the content that proports to be from FOX is in fact from us? As we explore these technologies we have to make sure that we preserve our brand and don’t do things to undermine the trust that our consumers have with us.”Bringing both business and consumer problems together resulted in Verify.

“We think the solution is fundamentally the same which is to create a cryptographic hash of an image on publication and store that on the chain. Users can then compare that to another image by a simple drag and drop and tell if they’re actually the same. We thought that was the right way to tackle the problem, at least on this version one of release.”

Verify would seem to diverge from that of the C2PA, a similar content credentials initiative backed by Adobe, The New York Times, the BBC and OpenAI. In fact, FOX supports C2PA too.

The C2PA standard is part of the Verify manifest. The C2PA has worked to embed metadata in content straight from camera to the moment of publishing, tracking all the ways it has been transformed as well as labelling that for anyone to check. Verify essentially picks up from the moment of publication to offer a way for publishers to monetize their authenticated content.

“We believe an open source, publicly verifiable and legitimate method of content ingestion from trusted sources is the better, safer way for models to be trained and to reference published content,” Hildebrandt says. “This is what we hope is a productive first step, an open source starting point grounded in technical solutions.”

She says LLM developers like OpenAI have been receptive. Since LLMs need data to train their AI models “they recognize that they’re going to need to start paying for content. I think that’s where this is going and where standards are interesting.”

Hildebrandt continues, “A company like OpenAI would say they can’t interact with thousands of publications and do bespoke integrations with all of them. But we can offer Verify as a common standard that facilitates that interaction. OpenAI benefits. Thousands of publisher’s benefit.”

An example: The Des Moines Register could use Verify to licence its content while LLM developers won’t have to create a bespoke technical integration in order to legally access, and pay for, the paper’s content.

She says this differs from the problem that C2PA is trying to solve. “The work of the C2PA is super important but doesn’t solve the business problem of how it applies to LLMs.”

Licensing Verified content offers FOX upsides in terms of “the business guardrails that we can impose and when we want to negotiate deals for our content with large language models.”

No company today has the ability to scour the internet or social platforms for every misuse of its content let alone enforce take-downs, but Verify will there for adjudication in case of dispute.

“The most important thing is that we have now the proof. If there’s a downstream piece of content that we see has been manipulated, or used without license, then we actually have the evidence on the chain. It’s a tamper proof record. We can see exactly when we signed it, in the exact context. It’s a line in the sand. But can we scan the internet to find every misuse of our licensed content? I don’t think anyone has solved that yet.”

FOX is among media groups helping to educate politicians and legislators about the threats of AI and how media would like to see it regulated. “We’re part of that conversation and my observation is that the Hill would very much like to see a market driven solution for the business problem,” Hildebrandt says. “That’s one reason that we’re excited to put Verify out there.”

She makes the analogy of trying to move the industry from Napster to iTunes. “It’s a kind of Wild West in the beginning but the technologies are maturing to the extent that, with Verify, we can offer a way for users of AI to pay for content the licensed way.”

She will tell NAB, “As a community of broadcasters we need to think about licensing and protecting our content and helping consumers to navigate that information space.”
“At FOX, we’re hoping to build a coalition to build on this protocol. We’re assembling an initial founding group of publishers who want to help shape the future of the protocol. They might want to input into features they want to see developed. Because Verify is open source anyone can contribute to the project and anyone can build their own extensions to it.

“This is an area we think we should all collaborate on. We may compete on the substance but we should collaborate on the technical infrastructure because otherwise Big Tech will impose its infrastructure onto us. It’s a moment for us to take a stand.”

Five Minutes With Dana E. Glauberman, ACE

interview and copy written for Sohonet

article here

Dana E. Glauberman, ACE is one of the most successful editors working in the business today. She has enjoyed a fruitful collaboration with director Jason Reitman on seven feature films, including Juno, Up in the Air and Ghostbusters: Afterlife. Throughout her career she has refused to be pigeonholed into a particular genre having cut everything from comedy to drama to satire and sci-fi.

After graduating college with a degree in film, Dana honed her skills working as an assistant editor on TV series including Northern Exposure and Dr.Quinn, Medicine Woman, and feature films such as The Birdcage and Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, to name just a few. Thank You for Smoking put her on the map and launched her career as a solo editor, however she is one of three on Creed II, and an additional editor on both Mark Waters’ Mean Girls, and Todd Phillips’ War Dogs.

Her work on The Mandalorian landed her a fifth ACE Eddie nomination, along with a Primetime Emmy nomination, and led to further shows in the Star Wars universe including The Book of Boba Fett and the recent Ahsoka, for which she earned a sixth ACE Eddie nomination for “Part 4, Fallen Jedi”.

We are delighted that Dana shares time with us to talk about how she works, her fears for the future of AI and advice for editors wanting to follow in her path.

You’ve had a great career – can you tell us what inspired your journey to being an editor?

As a kid I loved doing jigsaw puzzles. I would lay all the pieces out on our dining room table and get lost putting them together. As a teenager, I found photography which led indirectly to pursuing a degree in Film Studies at UC Santa Barbara. In the one film production class that I took, we would do everything from write and cast, to direct and produce Super8mm movies, but what I loved the most was editing. It really just reminded me of my childhood with putting a jigsaw puzzle together. Because of that, I followed my heart so after graduating, I cold called a bunch of different production companies, finally landing work as a Production Assistant at Hearst Entertainment in Los Angeles. During many months there running errands all over town, I met many people who helped me along the way to become an assistant editor. I feel so lucky to have met and been mentored by the late great Arthur Schmidt, ACE on several films, as well as Sheldon Kahn, ACE and Wendy Greene Bricmont, ACE for whom I assisted on many Ivan Reitman movies.

Through my experience on the Ivan Reitman projects, I met Jason Reitman, who hired me to edit his directorial debut Thank You for Smoking (2005) which he also adapted as a screenplay. That was the film that launched my editing career and landed me an agent.

Were you at all daunted or challenged by an industry which was and arguably remains male dominated?

As a teenager, a friend of the family warned me that cinematography was a more male dominated part of the industry, and it did scare me a bit going that route. When I got into the business, there were plenty of both male and female editors but it did seem that there were some stereotypes, such as a man was more likely to be hired for action movies or huge budgeted shows. Thankfully that has changed, as there have been positive strides over the years toward greater diversity and inclusion in all the guilds. 

I think there is a genuine understanding that everyone is hired to tell a story whether it’s action, comedy, drama, musical, etc. Filmmaking in general is a collaborative art. But a key to being an editor is to enjoy spending many hours a day in a room with someone. You have to like, trust, and respect the people you are collaborating with, as you are often spending more time with these people than your own family.

You mentioned jigsaws but of course there is only one way to put that puzzle together and there could be hundreds of ways to cut a movie or TV show. What is your process at arriving at the final picture?

There is no right or wrong way to cut a scene, or an entire show or movie for that matter. But the process is ultimately a collaborative one where we are trying to bring the director’s vision to the screen. My process is to look at every frame of footage of every single take. Back in the days of shooting on film, only selected - or circled - takes were given to editorial because of the cost of printing. But with shooting digitally, we usually get every take that was shot. You can call me old school but I try and look at it all. Where some might focus on the last couple of takes to use, there are often beautiful nuances within a performance that you can find and use from take 3, for example, that you don’t necessarily have in take 7. It could be a reaction, a twitch or sparkle in the eye, a smirk, or even a line that was delivered a little differently. So, I assemble the scene or the movie in the best way I see fitting the story. 

But the most enjoyable part of the process for me is to sit with and collaborate with the director, as that is our time to get as close as we can to his or her

vision. And the most satisfying part is seeing the final product and releasing it for the world to see, whether on the big screen for a feature film, or the smaller screen with an episodic show.

Do you think working remotely has an impact on the creative process? (For better or worse)

I personally prefer going to an edit room for a number of reasons. First, I appreciate the separation of work from home. And second, the pandemic was very isolating for so many and I just like being around people. I want to be able to call my assistant into the room and get feedback face to face. It is much harder to read the room when you are streaming the session.

That said, I am in favor of a hybrid work pattern. There are definite advantages to working from home in terms of work/life balance. Assembly is generally a solo process and could be done remotely. But when you want to show somebody a cut, I find the experience more real when doing so in person, rather than when staring at somebody on a computer. I also like the buffer of the commute, driving home in particular, during which time I can decompress from the day. Working from home has never given me a true feeling of separation when my home office is under the same roof as where I live.

How do you feel about the role that Generative-AI might AI fit into your work or that of your peers going forward?

AI scares me on a number of levels, namely the threat of taking jobs away from people. As far as the editorial process is concerned I do not see how AI can help. I’ve had many conversations with people who say that AI could help speed up the assembly process - which might be true for some. But even so, I am not sure how a computer can beat a human’s sensibilities and the skill of an editor in choosing the right performances, the right beats, and the pace of the storytelling. Even if AI could be prompted to spit out a dozen different versions of a scene in seconds, I feel that it would take way more time to review those versions and to fix things, than it would for me to watch every take and use my own judgment.

Creative talent and diligence are at the heart of a successful career in editing. Do you have any advice for those who aspire to a career in editing?

Be honest, be truthful, be patient, be a collaborator. Show interest in what you want to do and don’t be scared to take ‘no’ for an answer. There is a lot of rejection in this industry and you must be strong enough to understand, and to deal with that.

You can follow your favorite editors on social media and reach out to them. Our work often goes unnoticed, and in many ways, that’s how it’s supposed to be. But don’t hesitate to reach out to your favorite editor - whether through social media or through their agent - and tell them what you aspire to do, and what you enjoy about their work. It will be very much appreciated, and you might just hear back.

I also believe in the importance of starting at an entry level position and working your way up the ladder. Many think that by having editing tools on their laptops, and being able to edit short videos for various social media platforms makes them an editor. But there is a lot more to editing than cutting pieces of video together. Being an editorial/post production PA in a live edit room is an important route to getting where you want to be because you can learn so much. I’ve been in this business for many, many years and I still learn new things on every project that I work on.

I have had a few people start as Production Assistants in my edit room and move up the ladder to assistant editor and now have successful careers as editors as well as visual effects editors. Some of those names include Harry Yoon, ACE, Maria Gonzales, Omar Hassan-Reep, and Erika Robbins, just to name a few. They all went above and beyond while working for me, and proved that they deserved the promotions. And in turn, deserve much continued success in their careers.

Good luck to everyone!

 


Superfan Connections are Key to the New Creator Economy, Contends Patreon’s Jack Conte

NAB

The internet may have started as a platform that democratized creative distribution for creators who could build legions of followers, but Patreon CEO Jack Conte says that model is broken. Rather than stand by witnessing the demise of the follower, platforms like his are offering a new way for creators and fans to connect in deeper, more fulfilling online communities.

article here

“The next decade of professional creativity on the internet will be organized around the concept of the true follower in an effort to build a better way that art can exist on the Web,” Conte said in a presentation at SXSW.

Once upon a time creators could upload their work to platforms like YouTube and immediately have it accessible to millions of people. After that came the “subscribe” button, which enabled creators to go beyond reach. Now they could build a following and find their true fans who would support them to build a creative business.

But with the rise of platform-focused algorithms (Facebook’s ranking, TikTok’s “for you” curation), creators cannot reach their following and true fans. This shift has had a devastating impact on creators’ creativity and ability to support themselves doing what they love.

“Ranking was great for Facebook’s business, and people started spending even more time on the platform, so the other platforms had to compete. Now I think of the 2010s as the decade when the original promise of the creator-led community, the true follower, was broken,” Conte said.

“What it meant for creators was that your followers might not necessarily see your posts. It’s not really a direct true connection between a creator and their fans if the channel of distribution is broken.”

TikTok’s arrival shifted eyeballs from Facebook but didn’t fundamentally alter the broken fan-creator contract, in Conte’s view.

“TikTok’s algorithm ‘chose’ what videos to serve you in your feed and completely abandoned the concept of the follower,” he said.

But it worked, and TikTok hit a billion users by 2021. As traffic started flowing away from legacy social companies and toward TikTok, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter have been forced to launch their version of shorts, reels, or feeds to compete.

The result, said Conte, is that “the whole system of organization for the internet, the creator-led community, started to fade into the past.”

Conte started out as a creator himself. The result is that “my fans don’t see as much of my stuff anymore. It’s harder to sell tickets to a show. It’s harder to reach people with my new work. It’s harder to build community. It’s harder to build a business. It’s harder to energize my fans,” he said.

“The single most important problem that faces creative people today is the weakening of creator led communities of our distribution channels. To our fans, this is the hardest, most challenging and most painful issue threatening the present, and the future of creativity on the internet.”

Conte doesn’t actually believe that the “death of the follower” will happen because there are a new breed of creator-led social platforms coming to the rescue. These include Discord, Kajabi, Fourthwall and Gumroad, but it should come as no surprise that he positions Patreon as the leader of the pack.

Conte said the hallmark strategy of these businesses is the focus on deeper connections, as opposed to just more connections.

“The follower is too important, too valuable to ignore so the next wave of internet and media technology companies are going to try to solve this problem. The incumbent social platforms are not gonna be able to fight it because their revenue relies on maximizing attention to drive their businesses. They are being forced towards discovery, towards reach, personalization and algorithmic curation. These are the levers that drive attention and therefore drives their strategies.”

He argued that real value for creators is to be found in the real fan, or super fan. Just 5% of these fans drive 90% of the community. “This is a direct to fan business. This is an ads business. This is about depth of connection, about maximizing attention. This is about deeper fans,” he said.

“Creators just need a thousand true fans who really connect with you and believe in you. This is different than just reaching people. It’s even deeper than followers. These are super fans, true fans, real fans,” he continued.

“The idea is that this group of people is your core. If ‘reach’ means people see it, and ‘follower’ means people want to see more, then ‘true fans’ are the people who go to the shows and buy the merch and download the record and pay for the course and get the live stream tickets. This idea really resonated with me.”

To that end, Conte said the next decade of creative and media technology companies will focus on building direct to fan connections and community strength.

“As creators, we still need the social platforms for discovery and reach. But those companies will be one component of the many tools that we have as creative people to help us run our communities and businesses.”

Patreon was founded in 2013 and now employs 400 people and supports more than 250,000 creators, who have made over $3.5 billion dollars on the platform, according to Conte.

He says he longer thinks of Patreon as a membership platform but more of a “true fan company, a creator company, where we’re building a better way for art and community to exist on the internet.”

Perhaps it is subscription fatigue or financial squeeze, but he says that many fans no longer want to pay to subscribe to content on his site.

“Rather than having those true fans leave the creator we want to give creators a way to start forming deeper connections with those fans to build businesses.”

It now offers a way for creators to sell digital products like videos, podcast episodes, images, and other files directly to customers, whether they’re a member or not.

“Fans can now participate in the creator’s business and community while the creator can build an awesome business along the way. The logic is very similar for free membership.”

 


How Broadcasters Can (Will) Get With the Social Program

NAB

If broadcasters are going to grow their audiences — attracting younger generations — they can learn from leading content creators. NAB Show brings the worlds of TV and social together for networking and conference sessions designed to spark ideas and partnerships.

article here

“Part of the problem that linear television is suffering from is that it has got stuck in a rut of moribund thinking,” explains Michael Depp, chief content officer and editor at NewsCheckMedia and curator of the Programming Everywhere track at NAB Show. “The premise of Programming Everywhere — now in its second year — is to convene a varied group of people across the media industry to talk about content production in a holistic way,” Depp says.

“Typically people in media and in television particularly stay in their lanes,” he continues. “Those lanes could be syndicated programming, sports, news, or they could be distribution on platforms like streaming, FAST channels, social media or digital.

“The industry’s problems may have been greatly accelerated by the fragmentation of media and the proliferation of streaming channels but broadcast execs need to begin to think about their programming needs in a more expansive way.”

Instead of revisiting “the same peer group sitting on the same panels across a typical conference day,” he says, “what we wanted to do was expose different constituencies to each other, to mix these people up and try to spur some new thinking about how to fill the many, many hours of daily programming that they now need to attend to.”

Broadcaster programming needs have expanded because their distribution channels have now expanded. Aside from linear channels, broadcasters all have streaming services such as digital catch-up or free ad-supported versions of linear stations.

Last year, Programming Everywhere convened executive decisionmakers from pretty much every US broadcasting company and layered onto that a good number of content creators, show runners, producers, talent and technologists.

This year at NAB Show, these an additional layer of content creators who are native to social media and who have built huge audiences and successful businesses.

“They’ve made an end-run around the whole gatekeeper process of television and brought their video content directly to audiences via platforms like YouTube, Instagram, TikTok. These are mostly very young people who are simply passionate about something that they want to share,” says Depp.

“I thought it was very important to bring people who come from that mindset and generation and put them in the same room as the people who work in conventional television. The idea is to shake things up and put front and center the kind of out-of-the-box thinking that creators are practicing and broadcaster claim they want to embrace.”

Technologists are an important part of the conversation, too. They can share insight into how to boosting efficiencies in the production process since everyone needs to make more programming with less money.

The “Social Media/Streaming Stars on Growing Niches Into Audiences” panel Depp is moderating showcases four extremely diverse talents from very different subject areas and different backgrounds. They will share insights into why they gravitated to their particular niche; how they developed a content creation regimen that they stick to; how they continually calibrate that based on metrics about audiences; and then how they maintain that relationship with their audiences.

“Whether they represent national companies or local stations TV executives will find something to learn from the people making media in this way. Now is the time that they need to lean in and pay attention to this mindset and this way of producing content,” says Depp.

“No one expects broadcasters to lift a content creator and just plonk them into TV. It’s been tried and failed too many times. But there could well be new ideas to be mined and if you don’t at least have an open mind you will never find out.”

The speakers on this panel include Jacklyn Dallas, who, like many content creators, began producing content as a teenager. Just finishing her undergraduate degree, Dallas creates how-to tech videos to energize and educate her Gen-Z audience on how technology impacts their daily lives and the most important trends to watch. Dallas does so with such success that she was invited to Google HQ to interview CEO Sundar Pichai.

“Jacklyn is very clear, very well-informed with remarkable access to major tech leaders,” says Depp. “Her content is accessible to a broad audience and she’s an extremely enthusiastic personality.”

Representing another side of the popular tech subject on social is Quinn Nelson. He presents consumer tech reviews on his channel Snazzy Media. Like all of the panelists, he’s a smart, articulate person with a strong social following. Quinn will speak to the ongoing process of calibrating content around the very granular metrics that you get from platforms like YouTube.

Travel is a major subject area on social and obvious broadcast programming overlap. You can hear best practices for the “video hustle” from professional content creator Juliana “TravelingJules” Broste. The winner of 12 Heartland Emmys, Broste can speak with experience about how to create content that cuts through in the competitive lifestyle/travel space.

Last but by no means least, the fourth panelist on this session is Sean Sotaridona, popularly known as Sean Does Magic. The Dutch-American magician and TikTok star is famous for posting magic-related videos. “With an incredible 33 million followers, Sean is a rock star creator who performs street magic with the global fanbase of David Copperfield. And he’s only 21,” says Depp.

While those in TV should listen to the content creators, it is not as if this is a one-way street. “The thing is that the content creators are also interested in television,” he explains. “In many cases — and this is a kind of a key point to get across here — because the NAB Show is trying to evolve and get outside of broadcast parameters and become more of a content creation space. Broadcast and social are media for content creators (or producers, writers and directors in traditional broadcast parlance) and NAB is an ideal place for them both to mix.”

Depp says, “Content creators should think of seriously about coming to NAB to get in the same room with the decision makers in television because those people who make programming decisions are looking for something new that they haven’t seen before.”

If that wasn’t incentive enough then the axe hanging over TikTok is a warning that no distribution platform is forever.

“It points to the precariousness of the creator’s position where they’re dependent on a few prime distribution platforms,” Depp says. “Anytime there’s an algorithmic tweak that has implications for their reach and now there’s something more existential like TikTok being forced to cease of sell.
“If a creator’s aim is to be distributed as widely as possible then why shouldn’t television and TV’s digital channels be part of that mix?”