so lets sum it all up shall we.....

•State the questions I wanted to answer and why I found each one important.

•As I did work experience in agency sales, I am interested in the funding of advertising and the effect it has on the TV industry, this meant i could use prior knowledge as well as my own research to draw conclusions.

•I use TV on demand quite often and love it’s benefits but am worried about the effect it is having on the TV industry because it is an industry i hope to work in one day.

First I completed my secondary research which mainly consisted of finding internet sites with relevant information. This was in fact more difficult than I anticipated because simply doing different Google searches did not give me enough good sources. This lead me to use different search engines and my own knowledge of sites (such as the media guardian) to find more.

In addition to this I browsed through the library for books but could only find two useful ones.

My primary research was more of a challenge: Not only did I interview, create questionnaires and run a focus group but also had to find appropriate ways to record the information as I did not have access to any cameras or mini disk recorders.

 

 

The slide shows some of the common answers I got to this question. Not only in the interview but almost all participants of the focus group agreed on the same points. I got mixed opinions from my research and found a  similar amount of advantages and disadvantages but I have come to the conclusion that the popularity of TV on demand can only grow because the arguments against TV on demand are not strong. As it becomes a more common way of viewing programs, more adverts will be plastered all over the sites and new (possibly interactive) features will be added to on demand websites because the number of people visiting them will increase. Currently, TV adverts are more expensive than new media advertising, but as TV ratings drop and online TV grows in popularity I am sure this will change. I learned from a secondary source (http://www.impliedbydesign.com/articles/the-advantages-of-internet-advertising-vs-traditional-advertising.html) that advertising on the internet is so much more powerful than on TV because you can target more specific audiences. This is backed up by what Peter Turner said in my interview when he talks about the evolution of the internet.

It was only a few people in the focus group who commented on the quality of the programs on the internet, but they came to the conclusion this was related to each individuals internet connection and download speeds.
I believe that as more people use it, designers and companies will put the extra effort in to eliminate the disadvantages of TV on demand and it could one day over take TV in ratings.

I was surprised to find that over 50% said they would be willing to pay for TV on demand. However, I did not survey enough people to say that there is potential for sites to start charging in the near future. I believe that since online newspapers have begun to charge small amounts the public may have become more open to the idea of paying for online content, this conclusion is backed up by what was mentioned in the focus group and what Peter Turner mentioned.

I have found that the advertising industry and the world of TV on demand are very strongly linked. With the exception of the BBC Iplayer, on-demand-video sites have become dependant on advertising to survive. The slide shows expert advice from Jim Pinto which tells us how companies are trying to make enough money from advertising so they will not have to charge customers for services.

 

Despite the need for these adverts, as explained in the previous slide, originally the beauty of TV on demand was it was completely advert free. Could the rise in advertising back fire and actually decrease the popularity of the system?

The answer from my questionnaire expresses the view of a particular psychographic. A person who has no problem with illegally downloading programmes. My survey monkey research showed that it was certain demographics who had this attitude. It showed that most commonly the younger generations would be more likely to find ways to watch shows with out paying. This is not surprising, as it is the younger generations and students who have the least money.

The quote from the interview shows that audiences may understand the need for adverts but, not for web sites constantly plugging their own content.

With the current economic uncertainty, I have not found a way to predict how all future online programmes will be funded. If research shows that enough consumers would be willing to pay for TV on demand, companies could decide to make them do so. However I believe this action would increase illegal consumption of online content and in some ways widen the social gap between the rich and the poor.

 

The above quote was written in 2008.  I have found during this research project that it is useful to look at the past, to predict what could happen in the future. The article talks about  developments which have in fact happened over the last two years. It also mentions TV on mobiles developing, in many ways this has happened but it still has a long way to go. When I began this research I was not looking at software on mobiles, but now think it could be the next step for TV on demand. The public will not only be able to access shows whenever they want, but also WHERE EVER they want. Printed TV guides will become obsolete.

  

Just as online programmes have stolen audiences from sitting in front of the television, it looks like the iPad could do the same to the computer.