Agora Media Group Innovation Blog » AppMarket.tv Posts » Dynamics of Interaction and Social TV Experience Architecture
Dynamics of Interaction and Social TV Experience Architecture
in AppMarket.tv Posts, Innovation, Marketing, Social Media, Social TV by Gianluigi Cuccureddu SMP on May 14th, 20101 CommentOriginally posted on the AppMarket.tv blog
There are multiple aspects that define the Social TV experience.
Some of these aspects are:
*Changing basic TV experience from lean-back to lean-in;
*Technology factors like Internet-Connected TV adoption;
*Remote controls that support the social experience effectively and
*Broadband access and so on.
These aspects are all external when we look at the social experience itself, namely communication/interaction.
Would (the type of) interaction be a determinant of how the Social TV experience is created?
What if instead of the enabling of interaction being the starting point for Social TV developments, we take the TV content and its public interaction as starting point.
In the Social TV: Designing for Distributed, Sociable Television Viewing paper, the type of interaction is being researched.
At a general level, we can characterize the comments exchanged by our participants using five broad types (Table 1):
• Content-based comments directly reference the content that is on or recently shown on the screen.• Context-based comments are relevant to the show in its greater context, but perhaps not the specific episode or moment that is being viewed.
Examples are references to the actors, past episodes, show trivia, etc.• Non-sequitur comments are social exchanges such as asking about one’s family, or talking about events unrelated to the TV program. These are usually more common in groups who already have some social connection with each other.
They often take the form of side conversations (usually whispered, or at least toned down) between two participants and rarely follow the structure of the show.
• Logistical comments are relevant to the television watching experience, but are independent of the programming.
Tasks like changing channels, adjusting volume, etc. must be verbally communicated to the group so that whoever has control of the set can respond.• Phatic responses are almost involuntary reactions from the audience like laughter, gasps, groans, “Whoa!”, etc.
To summarize, our observations reveal that interactions between television viewers are tightly interwoven with the structure of the show they are watching.
Do the types of comments/interaction need to be taken into account when designing the Social TV technologies?
Yes, here’s why:
Depending on the TV show, one- or two-screen experiences can be dynamically created in offering widgets or sites in order to communicate in a way which is appropriate for that TV show.
For instance Content-based comments could be showed directly next to the TV content, whilst Logistical comments can be better displayed on a second-screen, without adding noise and irrelevance in relation to the TV content.
Key is to keep it simple without complicating matters in terms of usage and consistency.
This point of view might also explain why current Social TV widgets only clutter the screen instead of adding additional value for the viewers. Twitter for instance is so broad it contains any kind of comment that will be displayed by the Twitter widget. Intelligent systems could detect types of comments and distribute them differently.
Maybe intelligent systems are one step too far ahead, but the offered applications can be enhanced to the most probable or occuring type of interaction related to the TV show.
What do you think, does taking into account the type of interaction, enhance the Social TV experience or not?
TweetAbout the author
Gianluigi Cuccureddu Social Linkedin XeeSM -All my networks & sites Twitter FacebookResponses to “Dynamics of Interaction and Social TV Experience Architecture”
Trackbacks
Leave a reply
Login
Register Recover password
Categories
-
Posts
- Gartner’s Hype Cycle 2010 – on Emerging Technologies
- Is Google changing its Strategy? RIP Google Wave but acquisition of social app developer Slide for 182 million dollar
- Earned, Owned and Paid Media – The applications and implications
- Facebook socializes Mobile
- MTV Networks expands into Social Gaming – Transmedia Entertainment opportunities
Comments
- Affiliate Marketing Reviews » Blog Archive » Mobile Marketing Moving to the Centre of the Marketing Strategy by Gianluigi Cuccureddu on Mobile Marketing moving to centre of the Marketing Strategy?
- The Axiom of Self Segmentation | Axiom on The Axiom of Self-Segmentation
- Mobile Marketing Moving to the Centre of the Marketing Strategy | Facebook mobile on Mobile Marketing moving to centre of the Marketing Strategy?
- EDI on Google Aims at the TV market – Will they Succeed? Yes, and Here’s Why
- Transmedia Lab | Blog | L’équation télévisuelle : que signifie télévision, à part un objet maintenant ? on 20 television predictions for the next 10 years
Pages
Archives
-
augmented reality business development communities connected tv converged Internet-to-television experience data mining Digital television economics Google Wave hotels Innovation innovation agency internet Internet-to-TV experience ipad IPTV linkedin Marketing Mobile online online communities open source ORM paladin paladin studios print media Social Gaming Social Media Social networking Social TV strategy T-Commerce tCommerce technology television 2.0 transactional tv travel industry TV 2.0 TV Advertising tv everywhere Video on demand virtual reality web web 2.0 web media Agora Announcements (13)
AppMarket.tv Posts (2)
Augmented Reality – AR (37)
Broadband (1)
Collective Intelligence (8)
Humour (1)
Industry News (46)
Innovation (48)
IPTV (15)
Management (4)
Marketing (46)
Mobile (18)
Open Source (3)
Social Gaming (7)
Social Media (43)
Social TV (35)
T-Commerce (6)
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Calendar
February 2012 M T W T F S S « Aug 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Linkedin Social TV Group
Join our Linkedin Community:
Social TV Group, Television 2.0, Convergence and CommunityBlog Newsletter
Blog Roll
- ABI Research - Digital Home Industry Blog
- Analyst Blogs - David Mercer
- Andrew Burke's Hardcore IPTV Blog
- BBC NEWS | dot.life blog
- Broadband Finder Blog
- Broadband TV News
- Connected TV
- Dean Bubley's Disruptive Wireless
- Digital-Lifestyles (alpha remix)
- HDTV UK
- IPTV News at IPTV Watch
- Light Reading:
- paidContent:UK
- TechRadar: All blogs feeds
- Telco IPTV View
- The Digital TV Weblog
- Under The Rotunda
- Videonet - news, blogs and analysis for the pay-tv industry - News and Analysis
- WebsEdge Blog
- Wired@Home.blog
- eMarketer
- Harvard Business Publishing
- McKinsey Quarterly
- Strategy+Business
- The Economist
- WOMMA
- Neuromarketing
- Mass Customization & Open Innovation News
- Advertising Age
ITVT News Feed- Interactive TV News Round-Up (III): Comcast, Fisher-Price, Gracenote, Twitter, Nuance
- Interactive TV News Round-Up (II): Broadcom, Comcast, tru2way, Cisco, ActiveVideo, Coincident
- Interactive TV News Round-Up (IV): Hillcrest Labs, Humax, SeaChange, tru2way, itaas, Samsung
- Interactive TV News Round-Up (I): Accedo, Verimatrix, WealthTV, Irdeto, smartclip, Boxer, Audible Magic, O2C Hipermedia
- Interactive TV News Round-Up (II): BBC, Sony, BlackArrow, Bravo
Search
