Evans, Elizabeth and Coughlan, Tim and Shipp, Victoria ... · Building Digital Estates: Multiscreening, Technology Management and Ephemeral Television Elizabeth Evans (University

Evans, Elizabeth and Coughlan, Tim and Shipp, Victoria (2017) Building digital estates: multiscreening, technology management and ephemeral television. Critical Studies in Television, 12 (2). pp. 191-205. ISSN 1749-6039

Access from the University of Nottingham repository: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/39643/1/Evans%20et.%20al.%20-%20Building%20Digital%20Estates.pdf

Copyright and reuse:

The Nottingham ePrints service makes this work by researchers of the University of Nottingham available open access under the following conditions.

This article is made available under the University of Nottingham End User licence and may be reused according to the conditions of the licence. For more details see: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/end_user_agreement.pdf

A note on versions:

The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

For more information, please contact [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

ThisistheacceptedversionofanarticleduetobepublishedinCriticalStudiesinTelevisionin2017.

1

BuildingDigitalEstates:Multiscreening,Technology

ManagementandEphemeralTelevisionElizabethEvans(UniversityofNottingham)

TimCoughlan(OpenUniversity)

VictoriaShipp(TheInsightLab)

Inthelate-1990’sandmid-2000’s,anumberoftelevisionandnewmedia

scholarsdebatedthefutureoftelevisionviewing.Atthecentreofthisdebatesat

thenotionofconvergenceandtheprospectofdifferentmediatechnologies

comingtogetherintoasingleboxthatwouldbemultifunctionalandreplacethe

establisheddominanceofthetelevisionset(see,forexample,Nash,1996;

Murray1997;Owen,2000;Deery,2003;Flew,2005).Perhapsmostwide

reachingofthesewasHenryJenkins’(2006:2-4)modelof‘convergenceculture’,

whichplacedtheemphasisawayfromjusttechnologyandtowardsawider

integrationofmultipledevicesinindustrial,economicandsocialcontexts.

Althoughthesmartphonefunctionsasthecurrentepitomeofamultifunctional

mediadevice,thesevisionsofconvergenttechnology,ofasingleboxthatbrings

togethereveryimaginableformofmediadevice,havenotfullyemerged.Instead,

fifteenyearsaftertheseproclamations,digitalmediaconsumptionstillconsists

ofasetofinterconnectedmediadevices,eachservingtheirownuniquepurpose.

However,thecapabilitiesofthesedevicesandtherelationshipsformedbetween

themhaveopeneduparangeofscreenexperiencesthathavesignificantly

alteredthenatureoftelevisionviewing.Increasingly,thespacesinwhich

televisionandotherscreenmediaareexperienced,especiallythehome,are

becomingexplicitly,andcarefullymanaged,‘multiscreen’spaces.

Thisarticlewillexplorethefindingsofaninterdisciplinaryresearchprojectthat

soughttoexplorehowthemultiplicationofdigitalscreentechnologiesshape,

andareshapedby,thesocial,spatialandtemporaldynamicsofthehousehold.

Perhapsunsurprisingly,televisionscholarshiphasrecentlyturnedattention

towardstheproliferationofscreenswithinthedailylivesofaudiences.Daniel

Hassoun(2014)haslabelledthis‘simultaneousmediause’,thoughthemost

commonterminbothacademicandindustrydiscoursehasbeen‘second


2

screens’.Inthesameeditedvolume,HeyJinLeeandMarkAndrejevic(2014:41)

arguefor‘secondscreen’asthe‘2012buzzwordoftheyear’,whilstEthanTussey

(2014)interrogatestherangeof‘secondscreen’appsemergingfromtheUS

televisionindustry(seealsoEvans,2015;Wilson,2016).Whilstfittingour

researchinsomeways,thistermalsocontainsconnotationsthatdonotfully

reflectthefindingsofourownresearchortheentirerangeofrelationshipsthat

formbetweenmultiplescreentechnologies.Instead,weadopttheslightly

broadertermof‘multiscreen’fortwomainreasons.Firstly,ourfocushereisthe

household,ratherthanindividualviewers,withinthetraditionofworkthathas

exploredhowmediaanddigitaltechnologiesareintegratedintohousehold

spacesandroutines(seeMorley,1986;SilverstoneandHirsch,1992;Lally,2002;

HollowayandGreen,2008).Assuchweareinterestedingroupingsof

technologies,whichwedescribeas‘digitalestates’,andhowtheyaremanaged.

Labellingthisactivity‘secondscreen’impliesalimitationinthosegroupingsto

onlytwodevices;putsimply,audiencemembers(andespeciallyahousehold)

mayusemorethantwoscreens.Secondly,theterm‘secondscreen’immediately

denotesahierarchy,withdigitaltechnologiesas‘second’tothetelevisionsetand

wewerekeentonotimposesuchahierarchyonoursamplehouseholds.As

EvelienD’heerandCédricCourtois(2016:9)haveargued,thetelevisioncanact

as‘bothaprimaryandasecondaryscreen’.Wewereinterestedinexploringthe

variousrelationshipsbetweenscreendevicesthatmightemerge,whichmay,or

maynot,placethetelevisionsetattheircentre.Wewantedtobeopentothe

possibilityofthetelevisionbeingasecondary,oreventertiary,screen.

Thisarticlewillbeginbyexaminingtherelevanceoftheterm‘digitalestate’to

understandingboththeUKtelevisionindustry’smultiscreenstrategiesandthe

realitiesofaudiences’multiscreenuse.Theincreasingmultiplicationofscreen

technologiesraisesquestionsregardingthestandardaudienceresearchmethods

thathaveprimarilybeenusedwithintelevisionstudiesandthetelevision

industry.Herewewillpresentanalternative,interdisciplinaryapproachthat

combinestelevisionstudiesandhuman-computerinteraction(HCI)inorderto

monitoraudienceactivity,andsogaingreaterinsightintotherealitiesof

multiscreenbehaviour.Byemployingatechnologically-enabledobservational


3

approachwecanrevealandexplorethecentralityoffleeting,ephemeraland

passiveexperiencestothesedomestic‘digitalestates’.Indoingso,wewill

address‘ephemeral’televisionfromtheperspectiveofaudienceexperience.An

‘ephemeral’experiencecouldbetakentobeonethatisbrief,itsephemerality

tiedtoitsmomentaryduration.However,weusetheterm‘ephemeral’todiscuss

experiencesthatarefleetinginthesensethattheydonotbecome‘events’that

arethennoticedandsignificantinthelivesofthoseexperiencingthem.Inour

research‘ephemeraltelevision’equatestotelevisionthatisforgettableor

inconsequentialforitsaudiences.Suchmomentsmayseetelevisionas

backgroundor‘ambient’(seeMcCarthy,2001),but,asweshalldemonstrate,

theymayalsobeadeliberatechoice,intendedbyoursampletobeforgettable

withoutslippingintothebackgroundoftheirdailylives.Thiswillallowusto

challengetheconstructionof‘passivity’asnegativeanddigitaltechnologiesas

particularly‘active’technologieswithintelevisionandmediaaudienceresearch.

Theemergenceofmultiscreen‘digitalestates’Theconceptof‘digitalestate’offersausefulframeworkforinterrogating

multiscreenspacesintermsofbothrecentUKtelevisionindustrystrategyand

thecorrespondingchangesinaudiencehabitsthathaveshaped,andbeen

shapedby,suchstrategy.TheterminitiallyemergedasawayforUKpublic

servicebroadcasterChannel4toarticulatearealignmentandrebrandingofits

linearbroadcastandonlineservices.Thisrealignmentsatwithinabroadertrend

withinUKtelevision’sadoptionofdigitalmediatechnologies.Afteraninitial

periodofdigitalexpansionthatsawthemajorbroadcasterssimplycreatean

onlinepresenceviawebsites,theindustry’sattentionturnedtoexploringthe

potentialofonlinespacesforthedistributionofhighdefinitionvideo.This

initiallytooktheformofexperimentsintransmediastorytelling(Jenkins,2006),

suchastheBBC’sextensionofitspremiumdramabrandSpooks(2002-2011)

intoaseriesofgamesasawayto‘testout’thethennewbroadband

infrastructures’scapacityforhighbandwidthcontentsuchasvideo(seeEvans,

2011:184).TheseinitialattemptsechoedHenryJenkins’(2006:95)ideaofa

storytoldovermultipleplatforms,inwhichthe‘narrative[is]solargethatit

cannotbecontainedwithinasinglemedium’.However,theUKindustry’s


4

attentionquicklyshiftedtowardsissuesofdistributionandaccessinrelationto

moretraditionaltelevisioncontent.

Sincethemid-2000s,eachoftheUKbroadcastershavefollowedstrategiesof

proliferatingdistribution,workingtoensurethattheirbroadcastcontentis

availableacrossallformsofscreentechnology.Theinitialwaveofonlinecatch

upservices,includingChannel4’s4OD(nowAll4),Sky’sSkyPlayer(nowSkyGo)

andtheBBC’siPlayer,wereredevelopedtoallowaccessacrossdifferentmobile

devicesandoperatingsystems.Morerecentlythisproliferationhasbeen

followedbyprocessesofintegrationanditisherethattheconceptof‘digital

estates’hasemerged,bothintherhetoricofkeyexecutivesandindistribution-

relatedstrategies.WhenChannel4’svideoondemandservice4ODwas

rebrandedasAll4,ChiefExecutiveDavidAbraham(2014:online)describeditas

‘acompletereframingofourdigitalestate,toprovideamorejoined-uponline

contentandbrandexperience.Linearbrandswillbeseamlesslyreinforcedin

thisnewenvironmentforthefirsttimeintelevision’.Abrahamclearlypositioned

allofChannel4’sservices,bothtraditionallinearbroadcasttelevisionandonline,

asacoherentwhole,asingle‘estate’.ThisframingcontinuedatAll4’slaunch,

whenRichardDavidson-Houston(2015:online),HeadofAll4andDigital

Content,describeditasincorporating‘classicBoxSets,catchupTV,liveTV

channels,originalShortprogrammes,TVpremieresandbonuscontent’.Rather

thanactingasatelevisionbroadcaster,Channel4positionedthemselvesas

managersofadigitalestateencompassingmultipletechnologiesandmultiple

textualforms,butretainingasingleorganizinglogicandbrandidentity.

Channel4’sframingofthemselvesaspurveyorsofa‘digitalestate’ratherthanas

atelevisionbroadcasterisechoedinthestrategiesofothermajorUK

broadcasters.Intheirannualreportfor2014,Sky(2014:19)discussedhow‘for

theveryfirsttimewemovedawayfromlinearviewingasthedefaultoption’and

increasinglyusetheterm‘digitalestate’injobpostingsandindividualrole

profiles.ITVhavefollowedChannel4’srebrandingtechniquebyre-christening

theironlineplayerasthe‘ITVHub’,anamewithconnotationsofbeingacentral

pointinanetworkofinterconnectedaccesspoints.AttheBBC,theondemand


5

serviceiPlayerhasbecomeanincreasinglycentralpartofthecorporation’s

operations,movingtoaprominentpositiononitswebsiteand,most

significantly,becomingtheonlyhomeoftheBBCThree‘channel’inFebruary

2016.Whenexplainingthismove,controllerofBBCThreeDamienKavanagh

(2014:online)firmlystatedthat‘BBCThreewouldnotclose.Irepeat,BBCThree

wouldnotclose’.Thisshiftwascarefullypositionedasanevolution,andnota

cessation,ofwhatBBCThreewas,echoingtheUKtelevisionindustry’s

repositioningofthemselvesasmanagersoflargemultiplatformestatesinwhich

onlineformsofdistributionandcontentareincreasinglypositionedasequalto,

ifnotindistinguishablefrom,linearbroadcastactivities.

Theconceptof‘digitalestates’isthereforegainingincreasingrelevancefor

understandingtheUKtelevisionindustry’stransformationintomultiscreen

providersandcurrentcontentanddistributionstrategies.Theconceptof‘estate’

isparticularlyimportanthere,conjuringupnotonlyconnotationsofmultiple

outletsintegratedintoacoherentunitbutalsostrategiesofassetmanagement.

However,these‘digitalestates’requirebothindustryorganisationsand

audiencestotakeacertainamountofcontroloverwhichdevicegetsusedfor

whatcontent,whereandwhen.Digitalestatesareasmuchaboutwhataudiences

actuallydoastheyareabouttheidealexperiencesthatbroadcastersdesign

themfor.Theconnectionbetweendigitaltechnologiesandaudiencebehaviour

hasbeencentraltotheindustry’spositioningoftheirdigitalestatestrategies.

Skyhaveclaimedthattheir‘aimistoputSkyattheheadofthe“connected

household”’(Sky,2014:20),firmlypositioningthemultiplatformexpansionof

televisionasbothindustrialanddomestic.Whenmakingtheannouncement

aboutBBCThree,theBBC’sDirectorofTelevision,DannyCohen(2014:online),

justifieditasfollows:

there is a verybig gap emergingbetween the viewinghabits of the16-

24’sandolderaudiences…Dowesitbackasalegacycompanyandwatch

asgenerationalchangebitesawayatourimpactordowetakeaplaceat

theforefrontofthatchange?

Theevolutionofaudiencebehaviour,particularlyintermsofyoungeraudiences,

hasbeenpositionedasajustificationforthedevelopmentofdigitalestates


6

whereinthetelevisionsetissimplyoneofmanystorytellingspacesor

distributionchannelsand,insomecases,asecondaryone.Asaconsequence,

audiencesincreasinglyneedtomanageandnavigatedomesticdigitalestates,

comprisingdifferenttechnologiesandcontentformsandbringingtogether

multipletypesofexperiences.Turningtohow‘digitalestates’manifestwithin

thedailylivesofaudiences,however,challengesanyideaofaudiencesmoving

seamlesslybetweenandacrosstheassetsofabroadcaster’sdigitalestatewhilst

alsocomplicatesanotherconnotationoftheterm‘estate’:thecreationof

somethingthatislastingandsignificantenoughtoberemembered.

Multiscreeningindailylife:Capturingephemeraltelevision

experiencesTheimportanceplacedonaudiencebehaviourinthedevelopmentofindustrial

digitalestatesmeansthatunderstandinghowthesetechnologiesareactually

beingusedbyaudiencesisessential.However,muchoftheworkproducedby

boththeindustry(see,forinstanceOfcom’sCommunicationsMarketreports,on

whichCohen’saboveclaimsarebased)andacademics(Tussey,2014;Evansand

McDonald,2014;GreerandFerguson,2015;Wilson,2016;D’heerandCourtois,

2016)isbasedonreportingmethodssuchasquestionnaires,interviewsorfocus

groups.Whilstthesemethodsarehighlyuseful,theyarealsoopentoreliability

issuesasindividualsmaymisrememberorsimplyassumetheydosomething

moreorlessthantheyactuallydo.Thisisparticularlythecasewithtelevision

andnewerdigitaltechnologies.Althoughsuchtechnologiesmaycontain

memorable‘event’(DayanandKatz,1992)moments,theyequallyencompass

highlymundaneorephemeralbehaviours.Itisdifficulttokeeptrackofevery

websiteonevisitsandwhen,justasitcanbedifficulttoremembereverypieceof

contentonewatchesontelevision.Inparticular,thedirectandnuanced

temporalrelationshipbetweendifferentpiecesofcontentcanbeeasilyforgotten

ormisremembered.SherylWilson(2016:183)observesthisissueinherown

researchonsecondscreenuseinwhichfocusgroupsparticipants‘commented

thattheyhadto“thinkhard”torecallwhattheydidonadailybasis’.As

alternativestoreportingmethods,moreobservationaltechniqueshave

occasionallybeenutilisedwithintelevisionstudies(seeforexampleMorley


7

1980;Hobson1982)andsomeindustryresearchcompanies,suchascommercial

television’smarketingbodyThinkbox’sScreenLifestudy(Thinkbox,2013).Such

research,however,ishighlyresourceintensiveand,assuch,remainsrare.The

UnderstandingMultiscreenHouseholdsproject,fundedbyHorizonDigital

EconomyResearchattheUniversityofNottingham,soughttobuilduponand

expandmoreobservationalresearchbyutilisingtechnologytomonitorandlog

televisionandinternetbasedbehaviour.HelenWood(2007:494)haspreviously

demonstratedthepotentialfortechnologytofacilitateobservationalresearchby

combiningscreenrecordingsoftelevisionsetswithaudiorecordingsof

conversationswithinasample’slivingrooms.Thisinterdisciplinaryproject

buildsonherworkandcalledonexpertisefromtelevisionstudiesandHCIto

createaloggingsystemthatcouldmoreeasilycapture,recordandsyncaudience

behaviour.Thisinturnallowedamoredetailedanalysisoftherelationship

betweenscreentechnologiesandcontentformsandhowthatbehaviouris

boundupinthetemporal,socialandspatialdynamicsofdomestic‘digital

estates’.

Cameraswereplacedinthelivingroomsof5samplehouseholdsforaperiodof

betweenthreedaysandonemonth1.Onecamerawasaimedatthetelevisionset

inordertocaptureanytelevision,filmorgamingcontentbeingengagedwith.

Twoadditionalcameraswerefocusedontheseatingareainordertocapture

whowaswatching,theportabledevicesbeingusedandanyinteractionbetween

viewers.Thecamerasweretriggeredbymotionsensors,whichmadeitpossible

toautomaticallyidentifythetimeperiodsinwhichthetelevisionscreenwas

turnedonandwhenpeoplewereinthelivingroomarea.Inaddition,a

secondarywirelessinternetnetworkwascreatedineachhousewhichloggedthe

URLofeverywebsitevisited,whenitwasaccessedandonwhichdevice2.The

projectgeneratedanextremelylargedatasetconsistingof1,086.5hoursofvideo

(dividedintoone-minutelongsegments)and63daysworthofcontinuous1Thediscrepancyintimeframesresultedfromparticipantavailabilityandinitialtechnicaldifficultiesinensuringthereliabilityoftheloggingsystem.2Thehouseholds’originalwirelessnetworksremainedactive,toprovideparticipantswithanon-loggedconnectioniftheydidnotwishtheirwebactivitytobepartoftheresearch,butwefoundthatparticipant’srarelyusedit.Formoreinformationontheloggingsystememployedinthisproject,seeShippet.al.2014.


8

internetlogging(resultinginmanythousandsoflinesofdata).Eachperiodof

observationandloggingwasfollowedbyafocusgroupwithparticipantsto

reflectonboththeresearchprocessandinitialfindings.

Eachdatasetfeaturedtimecodestofacilitatesyncingbetweenthem.The

timecodesgeneratedfromthevideodatawerefilteredtoidentifythosethat

matchedupwithrecordedinternetuse.Thumbnailimagesforeachvideowere

thenscannedmanuallytofindinstancesofhouseholdmembersusingmultiple

screendevicesincludinglaptops,smartphonesandtabletswhilstwatching

television.Thedatastreamscouldthenbealignedinordertodeterminewhat

wasbeingwatchedonthetelevisionandwhichwebsiteswerebeingaccessed.

Thisallowedustonotonlyidentifyspecificmomentsofmultiscreenuse,firmly

pairinguptelevision-basedandwebsite-basedcontent,butalsopositionsuch

momentswithinthebroadertextual,technological,social,spatialandtemporal

dynamicsofeachhousehold.Suchnuancedsynchronisationisimpossible

throughreportingmethodsbutofferedusaclearerpictureofactualratherthan

reportedmultiscreenbehaviourthatcouldthenbetwinnedwiththemore

establishedmethodoffocusgroups.

Audienceresearchmethodsthatborrowfromethnographictraditionsarenot

withouttheirlimitations,mostnotablytheriskthatparticipantswould‘playup’

tothecameras.Wehavenowayofconfirmingifthisisthecaseornot,though

participantscommentedinfocusgroupsthattheyfrequentlyforgotthecameras

werethere.Therewerealsotechnicallimitationstothedatathatwecould

capture.Forethicalreasonswefocusedthecamerasonlyonthecommunalspace

ofthelivingroom,ratherthanprivatespacessuchasbedrooms,thoughinternet

datawascapturedthroughouteachhouse.Mobileinternetnetworksoperateas

closedsystemsmeaningthatitwastechnicallyimpossibletocaptureanyactivity

thattookplaceonparticipants’smartphonesover3Gor4Gnetworks.Similarly

we,naturally,couldnotcaptureanymultiscreenbehaviourthathappened

‘offline’,forinstancedoingworkonalaptop.However,thevideofootagedid

allowustoidentifymomentswhenparticipantswereusingdeviceswithoutany

correspondingdatalogging;similarly,theloggingdatarevealedactivitieson


9

devicesoutsideofthelivingroom.Weweresubsequentlyabletoexploresuch

momentsinthefocusgroups,withvideofootageservingtopromptparticipants’

memories.Thefocusgroupsthereforeservedasawaytocontextualiseand

expanduponthevideoandloggingdatawehadcollected.Finally,duetothe

complexandexperimentalnatureofthemethodology,oursamplewassmall,

consistingofthreestudenthouseholdsandtwocoupleswithatotalofeighteen

participants(fourteenwomenandfourmen).Despitetheselimitations,however,

ourmethodologygeneratedahighlydetaileddatasetofactualaudience

behaviour.

Theproject’soriginalaimwastoexploremomentsofmultiscreenbehaviourthat

functioninsimilartermstotransmediastorytelling,tolookatwhenandhow

audiencesusedasecondscreendevicetolookatcontentrelatedtowhatever

theywerewatchingonthetelevision.Ourintentionwastomaphowaudiences

managedtheirdigitalestatestonavigatethesetransmedianarrativejourneys,

forinstancefromtelevisionsettosocialmediatowebsiteandbackagain.What

actuallyemergedwasrelativelylittlesuchbehaviour.Ourfindingsinstead

demonstratedthatwhilstthenotionofa‘digitalestate’isasrelevanttodomestic

settingsasitistothetelevisionindustry,theseestatesandtheirmanagement

primarilyinvolvedthecreationofdisconnected,ephemeralandforgettable

multiplatformexperiences.Onsomeoccasions,participantsdidusethemultiple

technologiesoftheirdigitalestatestobuildonandinvestigatethecontentseen

onthetelevisionscreen.Thispredominantlyinvolvedusingtheirsmartphones

tolookingupcertainactorsondatabasessuchasIMDborsportspersonalitieson

Wikipedia.Themostcomplexexampleofsuchbehaviourinvolvedone

participantusingherlaptoptoshowtheothersintheroomaYouTubevideo

relatedtoanexperimentseenonBBCscienceprogrammeHorizon.However,

suchmomentswereextremelyrareandmomentswhentelevisionanddigital

technologieswereusedtogetherindistracted,passiveandephemeralwayswere

farmorecommon.

Digitalestateasephemeral:Thevalueofpassiveengagement


10

Syncingupthecamerafootagewiththeinternetloggingrevealedthatalthough

multiscreenbehaviourwasprevalent,anyconnectionbetweenthecontenton

differentscreenswasoftenabsent.Theabilitytolog,andsoanalyse,this

behaviourbecameaparticularadvantageofthetechnology-drivenobservation

approachthatthisprojecttookovermoretraditional‘reporting’methods.The

absenceofdirectconnectionsbetweenthevariousdevicesbeingusedtherefore

becameourkeyresearchfinding.Thedifficultiesofrecallingmultiscreen

behaviourwithaccuracybecameapparentinthefocusgroups,when

participantsoftenhadlittlerecollectionofspecificmomentsofmultiscreenuse

duringfocusgroups,evenwhenshownexamplesofthem.Asoneparticipant

commentedindiscussionwiththeinterviewer:

INT: What’sitlikeseeingtheimages,doesithelpyouremember

anything?

3.2F: Yes,it’sprobablyremindedme-Iwouldn’thaverememberedthat

I’dwatcheditwithoutthepicture.

Thedeviceswithinoursampledigitalestateswerepredominantlyusedtogether

nottoconstructfocused,attentivescreenexperiences,butinwaysthatwere

ephemeralandforgettable.

Thissenseofmultiscreentelevisionexperiencesbeingimportant,butalso

inconsequentialandephemeralbecameapparentthroughnumerousinstances

withinoursample.Allsampleshadthetelevisiononforsignificantportionsof

theirtimeathome,indicatingtheimportanceofthetechnologywithinboththeir

domesticdigitalestatesandtheirdailylives.However,inthevastmajorityof

examplesduringwhichthemultiplemediatechnologiesofdigitalestateswere

broughttogethercontenthadamorevariablestatus.Momentsofmultiscreening

behaviourwereprimarilycharacterisednotthroughthespecificcontentonthe

televisionsetbutasthecreationof‘easy’mediaexperiences.Oneparticipant,for

instance,discussedthecontenthechoseforalessinvolvedviewingexperience:

INT: StorageHuntersisonDave,soyouwatchthatlive,isthat

somethingyouregularlywatchthen?


11

3.5M: DuringthedayitwilljustbelikerubbishTVwhilewe’redoing

somethingelse…youdon’thavetoconcentratebutyoucanwatch

it,butyoudon’thavetokeepfollowingwhat’son.3

Aparticipantinanotherfocusgroupmadeasimilarcommentwhenhesaid‘I

thinkItendtousealaptoporiPadifwhatwasonTVwaslessengaging,likeifI

was,sayitwasthenewsoninthebackground.’(1.2M).Certaingenresofcontent,

mostnotablyrealityprogrammesthatarefrequentlyrepeatedandnews,were

highlightedas‘easy’towatchandsofacilitatedmultiscreenbehaviour.

Theemphasisinthesequotesoncontentthatrequireslittleconcentrationis

highlyreminiscentofJohnEllis’(1992:128)theoryofthetelevision‘glance’:

TVdoesnotencouragethesamedegreeofspectatorconcentration.There

isnosurroundingdarkness,noanonymityofthefellowviewers,nolarge

image,nolackofmovementamongstthespectators,noraptattention.TV

isnotusuallytheonlythinggoingon,sometimesitisnoteventhe

principalthing.TVistreatedcasuallyratherthanconcentratedly.

Suchmodesofviewingareoftenusedtodenigratetelevisionaspassiveor

problematic.Fromtheverybeginningofaudienceresearchtherehasbeena

concernoverthepotentialformediatextstocreate‘passive’experiences.Early

‘effects’researchdemonstratedthismostclearly,takingitscuefromAdornoand

Horkheimer(1997(1944))toarguethataudiencesarethepassiverecipientsof

mediamessages.Evensubsequentworkthatusefullychallengedthisposition

hassimultaneouslyperpetuatedavalueassociationthatconnoted‘passivity’as

‘bad’throughassertionsthataudiencesarenot,andcannotbe,passive.Rather

thanconfrontingthisbasicconnection,scholarsinsteadturnedtodemonstrating

howtelevisionaudiencesarenot‘passive’atall.Theculturalstudiesapproach

thatemergedinthe1970sand1980s,forinstance,prioritisedaudiences’ability

toactivelyquestion,choosebetween,andresistthemessagespresentedtothem

bymedia(see,forexample,Hall,1989;Morley,1980,1992;Buckingham,1987;

Lewis1991).Morerecentworkthathasturnedawayfrom‘general’audiences

3Eachparticipantwillbeidentifiedalphanumerically.Thefirstnumberwilldenotetheirhouseholdnumber.Thesecondwilldenotetheirpersonalnumberwithinthathousehold’sfocusgroup.Thefinalletterwillidentifywhethertheyaremaleorfemale.


12

hasdonesobyfocusingoninterrogatingmoreexplicitly‘active’or‘productive’

groupssuchasthewealthofworkaroundfancommunities(forafewexamples,

seeJenkins,1992;Booth,2010;Stein,2015),orinterrogationsofnewmediaor

participatoryculture(forafewexamples,seeLivingstone,2002;Brooker,2004;

Jenkins,2006;Jenkins,FordandGreen,2013).Throughoutsuchscholarship,the

defaultassumptionthatpassive,distractedviewingbehavioursare‘bad’,non-

existentorsimplyuninterestingremains.Wedonotwishtochallengethiswork

anditsrightfulassertionaboutaudienceagencyintermsofchoiceover,and

interpretationof,mediamessages.Insteadwewishtoreclaim‘passive’and

ephemeralbehaviourassomethingforfurtherinterrogation.Thedisconnected

andforgettableexperiencesthatdominatedoursampledonotfitwithinthe

generalapproachoftelevisionormediaaudienceresearchbuttheirexamination

canoffersignificantinsightsintothedailypracticesofaudiences.

Inadditiontochallengingthenegativeconnotationsthatgetassociatedwith

‘passive’orforgettabletelevisualexperiencesbyplacingthemasakeypartof

theirdailylifeandthewaytheymanagedtheirdomesticdigitalestates,our

samplealsoexpandedtheseassociationstoincludetechnologiesthatare

normallyplacedagainsttelevisioninanactive/passivebinary.Ascomputer-

basedtechnologiessuchasthelaptop,tabletandsmartphoneareintegratedinto

boththeindustrialanddomesticspheresoftelevisionengagementtheybring

theircomparativecapabilitiesanduseintogreaterrelief.Evenmoresothana

televisionset,asmartphoneisonalmostconstantly(seeboyd,2012),anditsuse

wasdefinedbyourparticipantsthroughease,butnotnecessarilyactive

attention.Severalparticipants,forinstance,describedevaluatingtechnology

basedonthelackofactivityrequiredtouseitandhoweasilyitfitsintoa

particularmomentofuse.Onecommentedhow:

ifI’vegotmylaptopthereI’llusethatinsteadofmyphone[toaccessthe

internet].ButifI’mlayingdownandthenIwanttolookatthenewsI

won’tgoandgetmylaptopfrommyroom,I’lljustlookatitonmyphone.

Butthenifwe’rewatchingafilmIwon’tusemylaptopreallybecauseit’s

toobrightwhilewe’vegotthelightsdim(3.5M)


13

Anotherdescribedhow‘IthinkbecauseI’vegottheiPad,it’saloteasiertosit

thereandsurf,andwatchbecauseit’snotlikeanimposingthing’(1.1F).In

anotherquote,aparticipantofferedadecidedly‘glance’-likedescriptionoftheir

useofFacebook:‘IjusthaveFacebookopenusually,I’mnotdoingloadsonit.I

alwayshavemyphonejusthere.’(3.1F).Thiseaseofaccessledtoparticipants

seeingtheiruseofdigitaltechnologiesasjustasephemeralastheiruseof

television.Anothermemberofthesamehousehold,whenconfrontedwithvideo

ofherusingherphone,clearlyhadlittlerecollectionofwhatshehadbeendoing

onit.Whenshewastoldshebeenonsocialmedia,shereplied:‘Yes,Ithinkso,

somethingonFacebookorsomething’(3.4F).Fortheseparticipants,makinguse

ofmore‘active’or‘interactive’technologiesdidnotnecessarilymakeitamore

meaningfulorlessephemeralexperience.Whilsttheywouldhavebeenrequired

topressbuttonsandsophysicallyandmechanically‘interact’withthecontent

ontheirphones,itwaspositionedashavingasimilarstatusasephemeral

momentsoftelevision.

Thesebehavioursandexperiencesofferacontradictorypositiontothevalue

judgementsthatcanbeplacedoncomparisonsbetweentelevisionandmore

recentdigitaltechnologies.EllenSeiter(1999:120),forinstances,recognises

howcomputertechnologiesareframedas‘educational,virtuousandnew’

whereastelevisionis‘entertaininginastale,commercialized,violentway’(see

alsoLally,2002:59;Evans,2011:95)SheilaMurphy(2011:106)echoesthis

positionwhendiscussingthestatusofvideogamesas‘television’:

Insteadofjustdrawinggamersintothevirtualworldsrepresented,

onscreencontemporaryvideogamesalsoextendthespaceofthegame

outintothespacetraditionallyreservedfortelevisualspectatorshipand

consumption.Indoingso,contemporaryvideogamesystemsmarkthat

spaceoutasoneofactionandengagement,ratherthantheinactionand

passivereceptionthatisstereotypicallyassociatedwithtelevision

viewing.

Inopeningherbook,Murphy(2011:3)bringsgamesandtelevisiontogetherbut

throughthecaveatof‘interactivetelevision’,ratherthanthe(implied)inherently

non-interactivebroadcast‘television’.Thisdistinctionbetweentechnologiesthat


14

arepassively‘watched’,suchasbroadcasttelevision,andthosethataremore

actively‘used’or‘played’tendstoprivilegethelatterovertheformer,with

televisionreceivingtheassociationsofbeing‘easy’andthereforelessvaluable

thanmore‘interactive’forms.

Throughoutthehistoryofscholarshiparoundtelevision,ormedia,audiences,

thereremainsadismissalof‘passive’formsofengagementthatstemsfromthe

fundamentalfocusofaudienceresearchonissuesofinterpretationand,

ultimately,ideology.Scholarshipthatpositions‘passive’mediaasnegativestems

fromthepositionthattheyresultinaudienceswhowillnotseektochallengethe

dominantmessagespresentedtothemthroughthatmedia.Scholarshipthat

defendsviewersas‘active’doessowiththeintenttopositionaudiencesas

capableofmakingtheirownmeaningsandchallengingsuchdominant

ideologies.Evenscholarshipthatseekstocomplicateanysimplisticdivision

between‘active’and‘passive’modesofengagementsimilarlymaintainthis

criticalfocusoninterpretation.DebraClarke(2000:online),forinstance,argues

that‘Tobeactiveinone'sreadingofatextisnotinitselfempoweringnorshould

itevenimplythecapacitytoresist’.MorerecentlyAlisonOddeyandChristine

White(2009:10)havequestionedthenegativeconnotationsof‘passive’screen

mediathroughafocusonsemiotics:‘Ifweassumethatpassiveiswatchingand

receivingwisdom,whatisactiveaboutreadingthatisdifferentfromtheactivity

ofwatchingafilm?Thesametranslationandinterpretationprocessoccurs–a

processofcommunication.’Notionsofaudience‘activity’or‘passivity’are

predominantlyassociatedwithhowmediatedmessagesareinterpreted.

‘Passive’behaviours,wherelittletonoeffortisperceivedonthepartofthe

audiencesuchassimply‘watchingtelevision’,arethereforepositionedas

dangerousorignored.

Oursample’sbehaviourofferedafurtherchallengetoastraightforward

associationoftelevisionwithpassivityanddigitaltechnologieswithactivityand

thecorrespondingvalueassociationsthatgoalongside.Inoursample,choices

overbehaviour,ratherthaninterpretation,wereshapedbypassivityand

ephemerality.Thestatusof‘passive’engagementhereisacomplexone.Asthe


15

aboveexamplesindicate,suchmomentsmaystillbeanactivechoiceonthepart

oftheaudience.Theymaymakeaconsciouschoicetohaveapassive,forgettable,

ephemeralexperience,onethatismerelydesignedtoprovidedistraction.From

theplethoraoftelevision,gamingandonlinecontentoptionsavailabletoour

samplefromatelevisionset,laptops,tabletsandsmartphonestheyoftenchose

toseekoutexperiencesthatwerefleeting,forgettableandeasy.Whendiscussing

television,SherylWilson(2016:182)notesthat‘thereisnosinglemodeof

attentionthatcanbeattributedtotheaudienceortoessentialqualitiesinherent

inthemediumitself;sometimesviewingisdistracted,andsometimesitisfully

engaged’.Thisisahighlyvaluableperspectivetotakeandcanevenbetaken

further.Oursampleregularlysimplywantedtowatchtelevision.Theyequally

wantedsimilarexperienceswithdigitaltechnologiesandusedsuchdevices

alongsidethetelevisionsettocreatedeliberatelyinattentive,ephemeral

experiences.Mostimportantly,however,theseexperienceswereacentralpart

oftheirdailylivesandtheirrelationshiptotelevisualanddigitalmedia

technologies.Thereisaneedtorecogniseand,inmovingforward,interrogate

thevalueofconsciouslypassivemediatedexperiencesforaudiences,especially

withinthecontextofthegreateragencyfacilitatedbytheemergenceofdomestic

digitalestates.‘Passivity’hereisnotassociatedwithaudienceslackingcontrol

overtheirmediabehavioursortheimpactofthosebehaviours.Insteaditis

abouthow,withintheconstructionandmanagementofmultiscreendomestic

digitalestates,notionsofephemeralandultimatelypassivebehaviourbecome

key.

ConclusionTheUKtelevisionindustryisincreasinglybeingcharacterisedbyashifttowards

multiplatform‘digitalestates’ofcontentinwhichdifferentkindsofmedia

technology,serviceandcontentarebeingbroughttogetherintoasingle,

managed‘estate’ofassets.Theterm‘digitalestate’ultimatelyprovesusefulin

offeringaframeworkforunderstandinghowaudiencesintegratemultiplescreen

devicesintotheirdailylivesandofferstwokeycontributionstotelevision

studies.Firstly,itpointstothepotentialtodevelopinterdisciplinarymethodsfor

examiningactualaudiencebehaviourthatisincreasinglymultiplatform,


16

changeableandephemeral.Arelianceonquestionnairesandfocusgroupsas

televisionstudies’keymethodologiesplacesboundariesaroundthekindsofdata

wecangatheronwhatareincreasinglycomplextelevision-relatedbehaviours.

Byusingtechnologytofacilitatetheobservationofoursamplewewereableto

capturemomentsthatthosesameparticipantswouldnothaverecalledhadwe

justspokentothemafterthefact.Crucially,thisalsoallowedustocapturethe

absenceofbehaviourthatisoftentoutedbytheindustryasfundamentally

alteringaudiences’relationshiptotelevision.Theabilitytosyncupautomatically

generateddatastreamsallowsustocaptureamorerefinedsenseofhowour

samplewerebehaving,linkingspecificmomentsofwebactivitytospecific

momentsoftelevisionviewing.Theephemeralityofthesemoments,as

demonstratedthroughparticipants’lackofrecall,ensuredthattheywereonly

apparentviamoreobservationalmethods.Althoughourresearchwasonly

basedonasmallsample,itpointstothevalueinexploringinterdisciplinary

approachesforunderstandingthemoreephemeral,forgettablemomentsof

televisionengagement.

Secondly,theideaofadigitalestate,inwhicheach‘asset’maintainsequalor

near-equalstatusdisruptsthepre-existinghierarchiesthathaveemerged

betweendifferentscreentechnologies.Forthetelevisionindustry,thishas

involveddigitalandonlinetechnologiesbeingplacedascentrallyasthoseof

broadcast.Fromthedomesticperspective,thishasallowedustochallengethe

hierarchiesofvaluethatassociatebroadcasttelevisionwithmorepassive,

ephemeralexperiencesanddigitaltechnologieswithmoreactive,significantand

therefore‘better’ones.Whilstwedonotwishtoclaimthatalltelevisionviewing

followsthispattern,itisvitaltorecognisetheplaceofephemeralandultimately

passivebehaviourswithinmultiscreenhouseholds.Fromoursampleitbecomes

apparentthatthetelevisionset,laptop,tabletandsmartphoneallopenupmodes

ofpassive,ephemeralexperienceandthat,crucially,theseexperiencesmaybe

valuedbyaudiences.Byacknowledging,andopeningthedoorforfurther

interrogationofsuchmomentsitbecomespossibletoconsiderthevalueand

pleasuresinvolvedthatbothtelevisionanddigitalmediaaudiencesgainfrom

simplysittingbackandwatching.


17

AcknowledgementsThis project was funded by the Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute, an

RCUK funded research hub at the University of Nottingham. The authors would like

to acknowledge Sarah Martindale and Stuart Reeves who took part in initial stages of

the research, contributed to the development of the logging system used in the

research and helped organise the early sample households.

BibliographyAbraham,David(2014)‘AssessingthehealthofbroadcastTV–DavidAbraham’s

IBCkeynote’[online]available:

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/assessing-the-health-of-broadcast-

tv-david-abrahams-ibc-keynote

Adorno,TheodorW.andHorkheimer,Max(1997(1944))Dialecticof

Enlightenment.Trans.JohnCummin.London:Verso.

Booth,Paul(2010)DigitalFandom:NewMediaStudies.NewYork:PeterLang.

boyd,danah(2012)'Participatinginthealways-onlifestyle'inMandiberg,

Michael(ed.)TheSocialMediaReaderNewYork:NYUPresspp71-76

Brooker,W.(2001)LivingonDawson'sCreek:Teenviewers,cultural

convergenceandtelevisionoverflow.InInternationalJournalofCulturalStudies

4:4pp456-472.

Buckingham,David(1987)PublicSecrets:EastEndersandItsAudience.London,

BFI.

ClarkeD(2000)‘Theactivepursuitofactiveviewers:directionsinaudience

research’inCanadianJournalofCommunication25(1)www.cjc-

online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1138[accessed31/08/2015]


18

Cohen,Danny(2014)DannyCohenSpeechtoPressRegardingtheNewBBC

ThreeProposal.[online]available:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2014/danny-cohen-bbc-three

accessed19/02/2016

Dayan,DanielandKatz,Elihu(1992)MediaEvents:TheLiveBroadcastingof

history.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Davidson-Houston,Richard(2015)‘Channel4’snewAll4ServiceLaunches’

[online]available:http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/channel-4s-

new-all-4-service-launches[accessed31/08/2015]

Deery,June(2003)TV.com:ParticipatoryViewingontheWeb.InJournalof

PopularCulture37:2pp161-183.

D’heer,EvelienandCorutois,Cédric(2016)TheChangingDynamicsof

TelevisionConsumptionintheMultimediaLivingRoom.InConvergence:The

InternationalJournalofResearchintoNewMediaTechnologies.22:1pp3-17.

Ellis,John(1992)VisibleFiction:Cinema,Television,Video.London:Routledge.

Evans,Elizabeth(2011)TransmediaTelevision:Audiences,NewMediaandDaily

LifeLondon:Routledge.

Flew,Terry(2005)NewMedia:AnIntroduction.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Greer,ClarkF.andFerguson,DouglasA.(2015)TabletComputerandTraditional

Television(TV)Viewing:IstheiPadReplacingTV?InConvergence:The

InternationalJournalofResearchintoNewMediaTechnologies21:2pp244-256.

Hall,Stuart(1989)‘Encoding/Decoding’inHall,Stuart,Hobson,Dorothy,Lowe,

AndrewandWilson,Paul(eds.)Culture,Media,Language:WorkingPapersin

CulturalStudies,1972–79.London,Hutchinson,128–138.


19

Hassoun,Daniel(2014)TracingAttentions:TowardandAnalysisof

SimultaneousMediaUse.InTelevision&NewMedia15:4pp271-288

Hobson,Dorothy(1982)Crossroads:DramaofaSoapOpera.London:Methuen.

Jenkins,Henry(1992)TextualPoachers:TelevisionFansandParticipatoryCulture

London:Routledge.

- (2006)ConvergenceCulture:WhenOldandNewMediaCollide.NewYork:

NewYorkUniversityPress.

Jenkins,Henry,Ford,SamandGreen,Joshua(2013)SpreadableMedia:Creating

MeaningandValueinaNetworkedCultureNewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.

Lee,HyeJinandAndrejevic,Mark(2014)Second-ScreenTheory:Fromthe

DemocraticSurroundtotheDigitalEnclosure.InHolt,JenniferandSanson,Kevin

ed.ConnectedViewing:Selling,Streaming&SharingMediaintheDigitalEra.

London:Routledgepp40-61.

Lewis,Justin(1991)TheIdeologicalOctopus:AnExplorationofTelevisionand

ItsAudience.London,Routledge.

Livingstone,Sonia(2002)YoungPeopleandtheMedia:Childhoodandthe

ChangingMediaEnvironment.London:Sage.

McCarthy,Anna(2001)AmbientTelevision:VisualCultureandPublicSpace.

Durham,N.C.:DukeUniversityPress.

Morley,David(1980)TheNationwideAudience.London,BFI.

Murphy,Sheila(2011)HowTelevisionInventedNewMediaPiscataway,NJ:

RutgersUniversityPress


20

Murray,Janet(1997)HamletontheHolodeck:TheFutureofNarrativein

Cyberspace.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.

Nash,Michael(1996)VisionAfterTelevision:TechnoculturalConvergence,

HypermediaandtheNewMediaArtsField.InRenov,MichaelandSuderburg

Erikaeds.Resolutions:ContemporaryVideoPracticesMinneapolis:Universityof

MinnesotaPress.

Oddey,AlisonandWhite,Christine.2009.ModesofSpectating.Bristol.Intellect

Owen,BruceM.(2000)TheInternetChallengetoTelevision.Cambridge,MA:

HarvardUniversityPress.

Shipp, V., Coughlan, T., Martindale, S., Ng, K. H., Evans, E., Mortier, R., & Reeves,

S. (2014). Wearables or infrastructure: contrasting approaches to collecting

behavioural data in the home. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint

Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication (pp. 931-

938). ACM. available: http://oro.open.ac.uk/43485/

Sky(2014)SkyAnnualReport2014ReviewoftheYear[online]available:

https://corporate.sky.com/documents/annual-report-2014/review-of-the-

year.pdf[accessed31/08/2015]

Stein,Louisa(2015)MillennialFandom:TelevisionAudiencesintheTransmedia

AgeIowaCity:UniversityofIowaPress

Thinkbox(2013)ScreenLife:TVinDemandonline.Available:

https://www.thinkbox.tv/Research/Thinkbox-research/Screen-Life-TV-in-

demand[accessed20/06/2016]

Tussey,Ethan(2014)ConnectedViewingontheSecondScreen:TheLimitations

oftheLivingRoom.InHolt,JenniferandSanson,Kevined.ConnectedViewing:


21

Selling,Streaming&SharingMediaintheDigitalEra.London:Routledgepp202-

216

Wilson,Sheryl(2016)IntheLivingRoom:SecondScreensandTVAudiences.In

Television&NewMedia17:2pp174-191.

Wood,Helen(2007)TelevisionisHappening:MethodologicalConsiderationsfor

CapturingDigitalTelevisionReception.EuropeanJournalofCulturalStudies10

(4)pp405-506.

Documents

Evans, Elizabeth and Coughlan, Tim and Shipp, Victoria ... · Building Digital Estates: Multiscreening, Technology Management and Ephemeral Television Elizabeth Evans (University