Webtelevision, Webseries and Webcasting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Webtelevision, Webseries and Webcasting Case studies in the organization and distribution of television- style content produced online Dee Majek Filmvetenskapliga Institutionen / Department of Cinema Studies Examensarbete 15 hp / Masters of One Year Thesis 15 credits Filmvetenskap / Cinema Studies Magisterskurs (15-30 hp) / Masters of One Year course (15-30 credits) Vårterminen / Spring term 2012 Handledare / Supervisor: Maaret Koskinen Webtelevision, Webseries, and Webcasting Case studies in the organization and distribution of television-style content produced online Dee Majek Abstract This thesis outlines the structure and functionality of a selection of webseries, webshows, and eSports casting examples, in order to add to the discourse on online video. Webtelevision, or Web TV production, distribution, and financing systems will be detailed in the case studies made; and industry actors such as entrepreneurs, independents, corporations and conglomerates will be discussed and identified. Who are the producers, the advertisers, the distribution platforms, the sponsors, the rights holders, and how do they interact? In exploring the structure of some examples of Web TV, I wish to debunk the online-amateur association as an inaccurate or insufficient description which permeates much prior academic study on online video. Webshow content, business strategies, legal and copyright issues, as well as fan culture aspects will also be investigated; and in regards to eSports, the question of televised as opposed to streamcast tournaments will be examined. Keywords Web TV, webseries, webshows, eSports, webcasting, webtelevision, livestream, Blip, YouTube, Nostalgia Critic, Channel Awesome, Angry Video Game Nerd, Cinemassacre, Day9, Twitch.tv, Starcraft, liveness Contents Introduction...........................................................................................2 But is it TV?: Defining Webtelevision.......................................................3 Online Channels and Hosting Service Migrations: Bootstrap Businesses, Corporate Strategies, and Copyright Witch-hunts...................................5 From YouTube to Blip (and back again)..................................................................6 That Guy With The Glasses and Channel Awesome..................................................9 Cinemassacre and the Angry Video Game Nerd.....................................................12 eSports: Casting and Casters................................................................17 Examples of eSports Casting: Past and Present.....................................................18 Sean ”Day[9]” Plott and The Day9 Daily...............................................................24 Televised or Online Casting? ...............................................................................27 Conclusions...........................................................................................32 References............................................................................................34 1 Introduction "Since the Web went mainstream around 1995, people have made the same mistaken assumption with each new mutation of the medium: that amateurs would finally triumph over professionals, kicking those bigwigs of the publishing industry / music industry / movie industry / TV industry to the curb." - Scott Kirsner, "The Future of Web Video"1 Certainly, the media conglomerates of the pre-internet era have not been dismantled as a result of viral videos and lolcats. On the other hand, to contest that nothing has in fact changed would be equally ill- reasoned. So what is actually happening in the realm of online video? In the hopes of contributing to this discourse, I attempt to map out the organization of a handful of examples of 'web TV,' or television-esque content produced primarily for online distribution, within the greater context of the media industry. By examining a selection of popular webseries, webshows, and eSports webcasting, I intend to provide some insight into the industrial structure of web-based, TV-style content. How is this content produced, financed, and distributed? Who are the players, be they independents, entrepreneurs, established media moguls, or multinational corporations; and how do they interact? While media scholars such as Scott Kirsner and Toby Miller stress the naivete of cybertarianism and reject the claim that, thanks to the internet, “everyone is a publisher,”2 much of the discussion surrounding online video production is based on vague or weakly defined notions of 'amateur' and 'professional.' This amateur/professional dichotomy tends to hinge on the unfortunate assumption that content produced for online viewing is by nature 'amateur,' because 'professional' content is produced for the television set and movie theatre. One of the reasons for this assumption is the lack of academic attention given to web TV, such as webseries and online shows, whose creators, often CEO's of their own companies with relevant backgrounds in film-making, produce online video content as a full-time job. So how do we define notions of amateur, professional, and industry bigwig when it comes to audiovisual media? Is it the name of the company behind the production? The number of productions under their belt? The level of connection with a media conglomerate? The production costs involved? Is it the method of content distribution? The amount we pay for access? The level of popularity? It is a household name, and in which case, whose household? One of the aims of this thesis is to highlight the 1 Scott Kirsner, The Future of Web Video, CinemaTech: 2007. 2 Toby Miller, “Cybertarians of the World Unite,” The YouTube Reader, eds. Patrick Vonderau and Pelle Snickars (Stockholm: National Library of Sweden, 2009), 424. 2 need for redefined terminology when it comes to online audiovisual content, for, as will be explored in the coming chapters, the common dichotomy of amateur and professional is inadequate in describing the complex interrelations of independent companies, advertisers, corporations, and media conglomerates online. But is it TV?: Defining Webtelevision "YouTube and the emergent practices referred to as IPTV, Internet-protocol television, might be seen as the final straw, fragmenting the cable era's slivers into atomic particles and pushing our expectations and definitional conceits regarding television to the breaking point." - William Uricchio, “The Future of a Medium Once Known as Television”3 How to study web television? One of the most immediate hurdles to overcome lies in choosing and defining terminology. What I have opted to describe as 'web TV' is fundamentally different from both Uricchio's 'IPTV' and 'internet TV,' despite the similarities in nomenclature. By web TV, I do not mean content produced primarily for viewing on the television set via cable or satellite, which is later made accessible online via Netflix or the like (internet TV). Nor am I referring to television content delivered to the set via Internet Protocol as opposed to cable or satellite (IPTV). Rather, by 'web TV,' I refer specifically to content produced primarily for online distribution, where viewing is done on the PC. Webseries and webshows are an example of just that, and are generally hosted via online video distribution platforms such as YouTube, Blip, Vimeo, etc. That Uricchio chooses to group two distinct technological forms of content delivery, IPTV and YouTube, further stresses the need for better defined terminology. Prior academic study tends towards overemphasis on YouTube, or rather, the neglect of online video outside of YouTube. While I do not question the importance of YouTube and its obvious value for academic study, too often is it used as a sort of blanket-term for online video in general. The vague, assumptive labels of 'amateur' and 'professional' may be a product of this in my opinion unhelpful blanket-terming: we all know YouTube began as a platform for the upload of home videos, and if we accept that YouTube is synonymous with online video, we risk drawing the inaccurate conclusion that online video is by nature amateurish, or not professional. Studies of amateur film-making are, of course, not unvaluable to the study of webseries and web TV, but neither do I feel they are wholly sufficient on their own, for the simple reason that much web TV 3 William Uricchio, “The Future of a Medium Once Known as Television,” The YouTube Reader, eds. Patrick Vonderau and Pelle Snickars (Stockholm: National Library of Sweden, 2009), 34. 3 is professional. Of what theoretical groundwork can we then avail ourselves? In his study on the digitalization of media and communication, Jostein Gripsrud defines broadcast television as push, or something that flows, as opposed to pull or “discrete items on demand.”4 To Grisprud, watching video- on-demand television is not television at all, but “the digital version of watching a rented videocassette.”5 But livestreaming technology, as is the staple of eSports casting and live webshows, baffles this definition because it fulfils Grisprud's characteristics of television as content that flows, that is not available 'on demand,' that is often not archived after the flow has ended, that is scheduled, that is live, and so on. Direct-address from presenter to audience, or co-presence as currency, is just as fundamental to many webshows and eSports casting in particular as it is to traditional television. In fact, livechats during livestreamed webshows and eSports events