Pushing the button: A quantitative analysis of red button television content in the UK Submitted in partial fulfilment of the Requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. July 2014 Andrew Fox 1 Table of Contents Abstract p. 8 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction p. 10 1.2 Technohype p. 11 1.3 Internet Television p. 13 1.4 Television and Interactivity p. 14 1.5 Research Aims p. 17 1.6 Field Interviews p. 18 1.7 Thesis Structure p. 18 Chapter 2: Theoretical framework and literature review 2.1 Introduction p. 20 2.2 Has the sociological position of television changed? p. 20 2.2.1 ‘The Death of Television’ p. 21 2.2.2 Convergence p. 23 2.2.3 Uncertain future p. 26 2.3 Is interactive television happening and if so why? p. 29 2.3.1 Institutional attitudes p. 29 2.3.2 Regulatory policy p. 33 2.4 What does interactivity mean for television? p. 38 2.4.1 Participatory experience p. 39 2.4.2 Individualistic experience p. 43 2.5 What does interactivity mean for television content? p. 46 2.5.1 Enhanced content p. 46 2.5.2 Freedom of choice p. 48 2 2.6 What does interactive television mean for the audience? p. 50 2.6.1 A more questioning audience p. 51 2.6.2 An everyday experience? p. 52 2.6.3 Choice means responsibility p. 55 2.7 What does interactive television actually offer? p. 57 2.7.1 Defining ‘interactivity’ p. 58 2.7.2 Forms of interactive TV p. 60 2.7.3 Changing relationship p. 62 2.7.4 Conclusion p. 63 Chapter 3: Methodology 3.1 Introduction p. 65 3.1.1 Research Questions p. 66 3.2 Primary Data p. 68 3.2.1 Field Interviews p. 68 3.2.2 Content Analysis p. 69 3.2.3 Context p. 70 3.2.4 Sample and Data Set p. 71 3.2.4a Sample p. 71 3.2.4b Platform p. 72 3.2.4c Channels p. 74 3.2.4d Data Set p. 76 3.2.4e Time p. 76 3.2.4f Genres p. 77 3.2.4g Categories and Values p. 77 3.2.4h Coding Sheet p. 86 3 3.3 Pilot Studies p. 86 3.3.1 Initial pilot study p. 86 3.3.2 Extended pilot p. 86 3.3.3 Data Collection p. 88 Chapter 4: Results and Findings 4.1 Introduction p. 91 4.2 Presence p. 95 4.3 Signification and Appearance p. 96 4.4 Signposting p. 100 4.5 Navigation p. 104 4.6 General Content p. 109 4.7 Specific Content p. 112 4.8 Purpose p. 119 4.9 Key Findings p. 123 Chapter 5: Discussion 1 5.1 Introduction p. 124 5.2 Past broadcasting attitudes towards interactivity p. 124 5.2.1 Key findings from interviews p. 125 5.2.2. Critical analysis of interviews p. 127 5.3 RQ1. What amount of interactive television is there? p. 129 5.4 RQ2. What information is carried by the red button content? p. 136 5.5 RQ3. What does interactive television look like? p. 149 4 5.6 RQ4. To what extent does interactive television add to the experience of television? p. 155 Chapter 6: Discussion 2 6.1 Introduction p. 164 6.2 Broadcasting policy p. 165 6.2.1 Commercial p. 165 6.2.1a Advertising or promotional p. 166 6.2.1b Games p. 167 6.2.2 Public service p. 170 6.2.2a The BBC’s strategic consistency p. 170 6.3 Convergence p. 174 6.3.1 Interactive convergence p. 174 6.3.1a Accessing red button content p. 174 6.3.1b Non-convergence p. 176 6.4 Consumer choice p. 176 6.4.1 More choice p. 177 6.4.2 The mediapolis p. 179 6.5 Political Economy p. 181 6.5.1 ‘Interactive’ Television p. 181 6.5.2 ‘Red button’ television p. 182 6.6 Lack of interaction p. 184 6.6.1 Explaining ‘interactive’ TV p. 184 6.6.2 Non interactive TV p. 186 6.7 Broadcasters like to be seen to be ‘interactive’ p. 187 6.7.1 ‘Sky Race Control’ and Antiques Roadshow p. 188 5 6.7.2 Signposting p. 189 6.8 Conclusion p. 190 Chapter 7: Conclusion 7.1 Introduction p. 192 7.2 Key findings p. 193 7.2.1 Data collection period findings p. 193 7.2.2 Discussion findings p. 194 7.3 Methodological considerations p. 194 7.3.1 Introduction p. 194 7.3.2 Aims p. 195 7.3.3 Sample and platforms p. 196 7.4 The red button as ‘participation’ p. 198 7.4.1 Introduction p. 198 7.4.2 Active participation p. 198 7.4.3 Implied participation p. 200 7.5 The red button as ‘enhanced experience’ p. 201 7.5.1 Introduction p. 201 7.5.2 Multiscreens p. 201 7.5.3 Un-scheduled programming p. 203 7.6 Overall conclusions p. 204 7.6.1 Introduction p. 204 7.6.2 The ‘telecomputer’ p. 204 7.6.3 The Death of Television p. 206 7.6.4 Conclusion p. 206 7.7 Final thoughts p. 207 6 Bibliography p. 210 Appendix A: Coding Handbook p. 224 Appendix B: SPSS Datasheets p. 233 Appendix C: Transcription of interview with Chris Berthoud p. 235 Appendix D: Transcription of interview with Rahul Chakura p. 242 Appendix E: Transcription of interview with Lindsay Charlton p. 256 Appendix F: Transcription of interview with Marc Goodchild p. 283 Appendix G: Transcription of interview with Peter Schofield p. 301 7 Abstract The technological, sociological and cultural position of television, as a method of delivering content, has been the subject of much academic debate in the past twenty years. Perceived threats to television have emerged through the convergence of technologies, which has enabled traditional media forms to take on the characteristics of each other. As a result there is no such thing as a dominant communications medium in the 21st Century, as shared technological characteristics mean that the user can access a multitude of content through one single device. Some believe that television is on the wane, leading to dire predictions of the ‘death’ of television. For others, if television is to survive and develop as a communications medium, it needs to take on one element of convergence by becoming more interactive. There is a substantial amount of academic work which suggests how television can achieve this and what the content provided will do. However, these are merely suggestions, as there is no research which looks at what interactive content actually is. The assumption for scholars, who believe that interactive television is a viable format, is that it is inevitable that interactivity will become an everyday element of television use. Ideas as to how this can be achieved have been put forward but have not been followed up. This research aims to fill that empirical gap and is informed not by what could be but what is. It is clear that digital television has allowed for an additional stream of information to be accessed, through the red button on the remote control. This content provides a variety of options for the viewer, however, the key question, which this research is addressing, is how much of it is interactive? Additional research is now needed to establish just how much of this content exists, what the red button allows the audience member to do and how. Therefore it is necessary to measure and quantify the amount of red button content across a sample of channels, which represent the three types of broadcasting comprising the British broadcasting landscape; public service (the BBC), commercial (ITV) and subscription (Sky). 8 Comparisons can also be made between the set top box technologies to ascertain if the red button content across platforms is different on a channel by channel basis. This will help establish if there is a technological difference between the platforms or a policy difference from broadcasters towards the platforms. The research will establish how much, if any, interactivity there is from red button applications by exploring what the applications are and what they do. What will also be addressed is whether the red button applications potentially provide the audience with a different experience in how the television set can be used. The conclusions from this thesis will add to the academic body of work, which currently exists, and help the debate move forward. What will be established is whether the broadcasters of television content have adapted to the threats that have been brought about by digitalisation of media forms. Also established will be whether television has become a technology which can be viable in a converged media landscape and provide the audience with an experience which provides more flexibility, more choice and direct audience participation. 9 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction In addition to technological concerns, television’s impact on society has led to a significant amount of academic work being published in the last twenty five years. This work has provided a broad critical debate of the medium’s power from a variety of positions. Amongst these are Crissell (2006), who examines the historical development of the medium and its increasing commoditisation. The basis of Gripsrud et al’s (1999) work is the contradictory nature of television, its ability to provide an engaging experience, whilst at the same time asking its audience to suspend belief.