#Hashtags, Tweets and Posts in the format of TV programs

In the past years, the TV format industry has become a global trade worth billions of euros per year; formatted brands exist in all TV genres and reach almost every country in the world.[1] It’s not easy to put a clear definition on the concept of a ‘format’; whereas some define a format simply as ‘any show that anyone is willing to pay for’, others, like the Format Recognition and Protection Association (FRAPA), see it as a more complex concept and define it in this way: ‘In the making of a television program, in the ordering of the television elements such as that a distinctive narrative progression is created’.[2] In the article of Chalaby it is said that a format must have a distinctive narrative dimension. An example of such a distinctive dimension is the use of trigger moments, produced by unexpected twists or nomination nights.[3] Another example of a successful format element that is being used in many programs is voting, like in the program Super Star, in which the outcomes of the competition have been heavily linked to voting technology.[4]

Besides these examples, there are many more strategies that are being used in formatting in order to create a successful television program. In this essay, we want to focus on one particular element in television formats, namely the use of social media in live television programs. With social media, we mean ‘the collective of online communications channels dedicated to community-based input, interaction, content-sharing and collaboration’.[5] Examples of social media are Youtube, Twitter and Facebook.

 
Nowadays, networks and producers begin to further embed social media initiatives into their content and programming strategies.[6] Think for example of the popular tv show The Voice of Holland, in which the Red Room app gives the audience the opportunity to get more information about the candidates or listen to the The Voice of Holland music. Or Dancing With the Stars, where a Facebook page is included in the format, which gives the audience the opportunity to share their thoughts and vote online for their favourite candidate. Furthermore, a rising amount of programs use #hashtags - like #TVOH - so the audience can refer to the program when writing about it on social media. 

But why exactly do producers use social media in their television program formats? How might social media affect and change television programs, and the audience who watch it? Harrington et al.[7] state that ‘social media like Twitter does not necessarily replace existing media channels, but often complements them, providing its users with alternative opportunities to contribute more actively to the wider media sphere.’ Furthermore, recent market research suggests that viewers now use social media with considerable enthusiasm to engage with television programs, particularly where there are explicit on-screen prompts, such as dedicated hashtags.[8]

Used in the format of television programs, Harrington et al. argue that ‘Twitter and services alike, become a kind of virtual loungeroom, connecting the active audiences of specific TV shows at an unprecedented scale. For audiences with access to social media on a second screen, the experience of watching television thus becomes an even more communal one’.[9] This is for example the case in The Voice of Holland, in which tweets and posts of audiences online are screened and read out loud by the show hosts in the Red Room, which includes the audience on a whole new level. The voices of the audience are actually incorporated in the program and social media does not only function as a backchannel for the show, but becomes a part of the show itself. Furthermore, by looking at the comments made on social media, the program gets an ‘instant audience feedback’[10], originally intended for other viewers but also highly useful for program makers, in order to see what the audience thinks of the program and how it may be improved to meet the wishes of the audience better. In this way, social media can be a place of reflection for program makers.

    The increased use of social media alongside television - as a simple backchannel, or in more sophisticated, transmedia contexts - may add a new dimension to the experience of being ‘an audience’ for television.[11] In the current scientific debate, two roles for the audience are distinguished: the audience as an active viewer and the audience as an interactive viewer. The (inter)active audience is an audience that actively looks for the programs that fit their preferences and interact with the program, for example by voting on candidates via their telephone. With the integration of social media in television programs, however, the role of the audience can even go a step further, namely, in the direction of a ‘creating audience’. In her article, Plasman argues that the integration of new media in television programs can possibly create three new roles for the viewer, which all contain a ‘creating function’: the semi-creating viewer, the co-creating viewer and the creating viewer.[12] The semi-creating viewer is subject to a sort of ‘fake creation’: the viewer gets invited to actively shape the content of the program, but in fact the producers still have much influence, for example by only viewing positive social media tweets and posts in the program. The co-creating viewer gets a more objective and bigger influence role; the social media users are at the basis of all the program elements and the viewer proposes options for the makers to work with in the broadcast. An example of this is a pilot of a BNN show called Not So Lonely Planet, in which the social media user decides where show host Dennis Storm is about to travel and what his travel schedule will look like.[13] Third, the viewer can become the main creator of the program; the makers of the programs have less influence than the social media using audience; the viewer has nearly all the power over the content.[14] Anno 2015, the audience probably can be placed in the role of a semi or co-creating viewer.

    As we have seen, the integration of social media in the format of live television programs caused some noteworthy changes. First of all, the audience has become more involved and their role may change from an interactive one, to a creating one. If the audience will ever be full creators, however, is in our opinion rather doubtful. Is it likely that the producers will fully let go of their power over the content? In the example of Not So Lonely Planet, what if the viewer would send Dennis Storm to highly expensive places? Or boring places everyone knows already? How would that effect the program financially and what would it mean for the audience ratings? Probably, producers will always to some extent keep hold of the reins itself, but the fact that the audience gets more and more power is undeniable.

For program makers, the use of social media in their programming means that, by looking at the tweets and posts of the viewers, they can have a better picture of what the audience thinks of their programs and what their wishes are. Furthermore, it may more closely attach the audience to the program when they feel like they are being heard, which can influence the audience ratings for the better. According to Harrington et al.[15] the use of social media in live television programs ‘raise the potential of making television a more interactive, dialogical experience. However, the extent to which such interactivity might be incorporated into live television formats, has yet to be explored in full. Indeed, entirely new television formats may arise to leverage such interactivity more effectively.[16]

Proposition

In the future, how probable do you think it is that the audience will eventually become a ‘creating viewer’, like Plasman writes about in her article? 

AvdB, VM, JP.

[1] Chalaby, 2011: 293.

[2] Chalaby, 2011: 294.

[3] Chalaby, 2011: 294.

[4] Meizel, 2010: 207.

[5] http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/social-media

[6] Harrington et al., 2013: 408.

[7] Harrington et al., 2013: 405.

[8] Harrington et al., 2013: 405.

[9] Harrington et al., 2013: 405.

[10] Harrington et al., 2013: 406.

[11] Harrington et al., 2013: 405.

[12] Plasman, 2011: 46.

[13] Plasman, 2011: 40.

[14] Plasman, 2011: 45.

[15] Harrington et al., 2013: 407.

[16] Harrington et al., 2013: 407.

References

Chalaby, J. (2011) ‘The making of an entertainment revolution: How the TV format trade became a global industry’, in: European Journal of Communication, 26 (4): 293-308.

Harrington, S., Highfield, T. & Bruns, A. (2013) ‘More than a backchannel: Twitter and television’, in: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 10 (1): 405-409.

Meizel, K. (2010) ‘The United Nations of Pop: Global Franchise and Geopolitics’, in: Idolized: Music, Media, and Identity in American Idol. Bloomington: Indiana University Press: 192-219.

Plasman, Y. (2011) ‘Creërende kijkers: Een onderzoek naar de veranderende rol van de kijker door de integratie van sociale media in televisieprogramma’s’. Faculty of Humanities: University of Utrecht.