In an age of information overload people get bombarded with information and entertainment all the time. The overload takes on such immense forms, that they don’t bother to make any choice at all. Barry Schwartz has written extensively about the stress people experience when they have to choose between a multitude of options in his book ‘The Paradox of Choice‘.
In any other form of media, the space you have to convey your message is limited. A TV-channel only has that much hours, a magazine only so much pages, etc. But online, the space is infinite. As Chris Anderson has argued, that unlimited shelf space can be used, to make money even from the stuff, that hardly sells in a brick and morter environment. But that doesn’t mean, that should put it all out there, just because you can.
If you are in the entertainment business, your goal is to entertain your audience (or is that community?). Entertainment doesn’t derive from having access to all the content available. Entertainment, drama, excitement, and everything else that goes with that, comes from a dramatic structure. From you telling a story. And telling it in a specific rhythm.
What fun is there in starting with the last episode of Idols? Will you still watch the previous ones? So why put them all online then? Do you start with the last episode of Lost, or do you want to follow what happens from the beginning?
So, even in an online environment, think about rhythm. What is the story you are going to tell to your audience? How are you going to engage them? Where do you begin to tell the story? Would you rather have loads of people on 1 day that will then be chased away by the overload of information, or are you going to guide them through your environment on a journey that makes them come back and engage with you?
Image
You’re hitting the nail on the head here. I think a lot of online presences lack engagement. Somehow though (social) networks seem to know how to keep a story going. Maybe it’s because the message flow starts as soon as something extraordinary happens. Put otherwise: people can’t wait to tell about something and want to involve others (well before the conclusion of e.g. Idols is reached). Also the good habit of referencing allows you to ‘reconstruct’ a story afterwards reasonably well. So maybe the Internet does have a rhythm of it’s own…
Your comment on the activity in a social network, is a great example. Because it illustrates that a climax is being created with all the people discussing about who should win an who not (in the Idols example). That would be absent if all the episodes were released at once. So there’s great value in that.
Interesting thought on the reconstruction of a story after the fact. I think that would be a valid argument to keep an archive of some sort. And it could even be the way to give access to such an archive.
But then agian, I do wonder about the ‘missing’ part. Meaning is also created by the stuff you don’t see. Missing an episode of something might increase the engagement and the need for people to start having a conversation. Could that be a reason not to have an archive? So what I’m trying to say: the reconstruction without the referencing might in fact be a tool to start a conversation?
i always have liked heidegger his statement that technology provides us tools to store stuff. this will become like a big lake of plenty of possibilities but with zero attachment by its users. the fact that we can store / archive doesn,t mean we have to. especially entertainment wise i -the storyteller or facillitator- may expect something back from my audience. and that is Attention. my making it more scarce you as audience will have to choose - yep, i,m forcing you to watch now or not at all (maybe within a certain bandwith like a day or week). there is nothing old fashioned about that =) that is the luxury of the creator, especially is he/she has a focus on quality not quantity –
so to have or not to have an archive is part of your concept/ format.
I do think there are situations where the archive actually creates the attention. I think there is a tipping point where a creation gets its own momentum; when it becomes a collectors item. The archive can then become the only source. And in the case of artworks the absence of the creator actually increases the attention to the archive and even creates spin offs of its own (think reproductions).
true. but unfortunately I don’t see much of those archives with that intend out there. most of them is putting it online because it can… without thinking… so without concept. therefor my rule is no archive unless you find yourself a good reason, an I can indeed mention plenty =))
What about creating rhythm in your archive? Because I wonder if rhythm for a specific piece of content has to be uniform and set by the broadcaster, or if it could be more flexible. If the rhythm is uniform you probably generate the most discussion amongst the viewers, everyone would be watching the same content the same time. For a lot of content which is creating public debate like Idols this works perfectly, but what about content like Lost or 24? I always find myself downloading the whole season afterwards (and watching the whole thing in 4 weekend mornings)because the weekly rhythm set by the broadcaster doesn’t suit me at all and my engagement is lost. So, what I’m saying is I have a potential engagement, but it gets lost in the uniform rhythm. If I would be able to catch up an episode a day from the archive my engagement would be triggered again and I would visit the broadcaster’s site a lot more.
I don’t think rhythm should necessarily be about releasing pieces of content at a specific time determined by the broadcaster. And maybe it should depend on the sort of content…or maybe we should say: it depends on the story you want to tell, or the experience you want to create.
Still, there is rhythm in Lost and 24 as well. Although you are not letting you lead by the broadcasting schedule, you will most likely not start watching at the end. Maybe you want to experience the flow that is being created by the show in a more rapid flow, nevertheless it still is, creating some sort of flow or rhythm.
More a gut feeling this, but I think indeed rhythm shouldn’t be the same as a ’schedule’ bound to specific time slots…?
Is it then possible to create some sort of ‘jam-session’ with the content; freedom within boundaries. If the archive doesn’t just consist of the final products (episodes), but also raw materials and parts (scenes) you could create your own version. Maybe you can even improve the directors cut. An example of this (although still very much orchestrated) is a marketing-site from AXE (http://www1.bomchickawahwah.nl/pages/home.aspx).