Post by: Molly Noonan
Remember the days when you
had to be sitting in front of your television screen at 8pm to watch the finale
of American Idol? You had to be watching just so on Friday morning you could
talk about how happy you were that Carrie Underwood won. Although American Idol
is currently airing it’s 13th season, the days of just talking about
it with classmates or co-workers are long gone. Now, instead of just talking
about it with friends or family, you can talk about it with virtually anyone in
the world, thanks to social media outlets like Twitter.
There’s nothing worse than
accidentally reading a spoiler, this has happened to me way too many times just
by going on Twitter. If you are an
American Horror Story fan and just happen to not be in front of your television
at 10pm on Wednesday night and go on Twitter around 11 pm, forget it. Read
through your newsfeed you just may unintentionally get a recap of the episode,
whether you want to know or not. It is clear that Twitter has changed the
dynamics of television viewing, but is it harming the experience?
Although Twitter may be at
fault for spoiling an episode if you do not watch it live, it also has proved
to be more than just twitter users outlet for expression or networks attempt to
get shows trending on Twitter. Twitter was the saving grace for NBC’s “Community”.
The kickoff episode for the 4th season had very low viewership, only
4 million viewers. With such low ratings NBC didn’t think twice about taking it
off the air. But, this was not the end of “Community”. According to a Wired article,
fans were so upset that they turned to Twitter to get Community trending, and
miraculously got the show back on the air (Vanderbilt 1). In this case Twitter
saved Community, but it can also hurt a show. Ratings are not only decided by
the number of viewers anymore but also number of tweets and trending topics
related to the show. Nielson is now publishing Twitter Ratings, or the most
talked about shows on Twitter. This fall “Breaking Bad”, “The Walking Dead” and
“American Horror Story: Coven” topped the list (Nielson 1).
If you have a twitter
account it’s not secret that live tweeting has become a huge phenomenon and
today it is apart of the viewing experience. Just log on to your twitter feed on
Thursday, February 29th around 10 pm; I guarantee your feed will be
monopolized by “Scandal” fans live tweeting. The networks are also accepting
the fact that live tweeting has become apart of the viewing experience and
their embracing it. Almost every show not has a “hashtag” at the bottom of the
screen like “#TheVoice” or “#TheBachelor.” According to Nielson ratings Twitter
does impact viewers as far as what and when we watch. In one study the results
showed that “live TV ratings had a statistically significant impact in related
tweets among 48% of the episodes sampled” (Galliart 1). It’s not just fans that
are tweeting either. Kerry Washington and the cast for “Scandal” do a great job
of not only live tweeting during the show, but also keeping fans engaged and
excited during breaks in seasons. In the end Twitter has changed how we watch
television and has proved to be both beneficial and harmful at times. It’s not
about whether it’s good or bad though, this is how television viewing is now
and we just must accept it.
Works Cited:
Galliart, Jessica. "Twitter: And the
Tube." Editorial. Chicago Tribune 7 Aug. 2013: n. Page. ProQuest. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.
"Newswire." Tops of 2013: TV
and Social Media. Nielson, n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2014
Vanderbilt, Tom. "The Nielsen Family Is
Dead." Wired.com. Conde Nast Digital, 17 Mar. 0013. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.
As in my last blog post, I will begin this one by referencing the title. The question posed is whether or not live tweeting enhances or diminishes a person’s viewing experience; I think it’s both. Molly brings up a good point when she says that there’s nothing worse than reading a spoiler on Twitter by mistake (I’m sure there are worse things in life though). Twitter can both destroy and make a viewing experience. Take the show “Breaking Bad” for example. According to the article, “Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media”, “Breaking Bad” was the show that was tweeted about the most averaging 521,000 tweets. Not only did “Breaking Bad” average the most tweets, they also averaged the most unique audience and impressions. For those people who watched the show live, the tweeting would be a fun way for them to get their thoughts out there for their friends and strangers to read and comment on. For those who didn’t watch the show live, these live tweets could spell disaster. I never watched “Breaking Bad” so I didn’t understand any of the Facebook posts or even Tweets that I read about the show and especially the series finale. According to the article, “Broadcasters Ambushed By Hysteria Around ‘Breaking Bad’ Finale”, around 10.3 million people watched the finale live. Now imagine if you were someone who was a major fan of the show and didn’t watch the finale, you would practically be banned from social media because it’s practically guaranteed that there will be spoilers there. Unfortunately, in the age we live in now, many people simply can’t stay away from their social media sites, whether it is Facebook or Twitter. So as I said before, the live tweeting or posting is a fun and fresh way for the live viewers to communicate with each other about the show but it is also not good for those who haven’t watched and don’t want spoilers. In addition to what is good about live tweeting is that the stars of the show get involved as Molly pointed out. That is a great tool to get viewers more involved in the show. Towards the end of this post, Molly mentions the “hashtag” at the bottom of the screen for almost every show on TV now. Personally, I hate the “hashtags” that the shows put up at the bottom of the screen. I think that it temporarily distracts the viewer from what is going on in the show. I have a Twitter account but I very rarely use it so coming at it from that angle, I don’t care about the special “hashtag” that viewers can use to begin a conversation with other viewers. To me, these “hashtags” are just a nuisance that disrupts my TV show. I don’t think I would mind these “hastags” so much if the network or show put them up at the end of the show or at the beginning of the commercial break. In conclusion, live tweeting proves to be both good and bad.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited:
De Moraes, Lisa. "Broadcasters Ambushed By Hysteria Around ‘Breaking Bad’ Finale." Deadline. 30 Sept. 2013. Web.
“Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media.” Nielsen.com. 17 Dec. 2013. Web.
Honestly, I don’t watch a lot of television and I really don’t use Twitter that often (I literally have one for the occasional scholastic adventure) so I can’t totally relate to some of the user examples you suggested. However, I find all of your points really quite interesting. I think the American Idol example is so interesting. It has never really occurred to me that American Idol is 12 years old! That seems so crazy to me—I was only 12! When I think about my peer’s interaction with a program like American Idol in 6th grade, and even as a 12 year old, everything you say is entirely true. If you didn’t watch the episode, you would be a social outcast and have no clue as to what happened and who won. Nowadays, however, thanks to social media like Facebook and Twitter, anyone can be a “viewer” by simple checking their newsfeed.
ReplyDeleteAnd I suppose that’s a good thing. Perhaps the way in which we Tweet and even the way we interact with social media while watching television is like free advertising, but for our subjective opinion and for the network that produces any given show. Not only does it got our own personal message out there (and who doesn’t love new social media followers), but it also promotes a show for a network by letting the viewer basically create user generated content that gets a shows premise or storyline out to the public. The “can you believe what just happened?” and “this show is nuts. What’s going to happen next?!” tweets act as a way to draw potential viewers in. Like the 6th grade version of myself stuck in 2002, it allows for people to want to be part of societal extravaganza, that being the buzz the a television program does and will create. A perfect example of that is Sharknado. According to Tony Maglio of The Wrap, Sharknado is a show whose success relied solely on the buzz created on social media platforms, especially Twitter. I mean, a movie about flying sharks falling from the sky doesn’t seem to really spell out “success” (Tara Reid was in it), but because people saw it as a bit of a farce and completely comedic, they took to Twitter to share the evidence of their satisfaction throughout social media accounts. They created enough buzz about the silly movie to actually land it a red carpet, with a second movie on the way in 2014! Talk about impact.
On the flip side of that, however, is the spoiler issue. I guess I’m biased because I’m the person who reads the last page of the book first. That’s right, I like the spoilers. I purposefully seek them out, because guess what: if I don’t like the spoilers, then I probably won’t like the show. I also like to know what’s going to happen; it lets me set up my emotions just so (it all insures that by the end of a sad movie, I will be the only one not crying)! However, as time shifting continues to become an increasingly visible trend in television consumption, people who care about spoilers will really have to monitor the amount of time they take up between the airing of a program and when they time shift to actually watch it. According to Nielsen in 2013, “Time-shifting continued to grow increasingly stocked as a big part of viewers’ diet of video content. For the second year in a row, the top time-shifted show in terms of lift percentage severely outpaced the top spot from the year prior.” Thus, time-shifting is a trend that seems to be gaining a lot of momentum, especially with all technology available to watch shows we so choose to view in a different time frame than their regularly scheduled time slot.
Overall, I think it’s really an interesting topic. I’m all for live tweeting and spoilers, but that’s just me and I’m sure a lot of people would disagree with me. But I do find it an endearing way to engage and interact with the shows we love on the social media we also love.
George Fracasse
Molloy, Tim, et. al. "Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year." The Wrap. 9 Dec. 2013. Web.
“Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media.” Nielsen.com. 17 Dec. 2013. Web.
As Molly has said, along with most everyone else I guess besides George, I hate Twitter for spoilers as well. So to answer this question I would have to say that Twitter is definitely diminishing the viewing experience. Again, I hate going on social media, especially Twitter and seeing things tweeted from my favorite shows that I was not able to watch the night they were airing. Its particularly frustrating. Also, its actually sad in a different way when this happens. I understand that people are excited and want to know what others have to say about who just made out with who, or what Juan Pablo did in the ocean, but really does everything have to be broadcasted? Our generation, any major, could be anyone’s PR director: fact. It is sad that every little things has to be put on Twitter to feel like you are in the loop. I realized it the other night when my phone was dead and was too lazy to get the charger *struggles* but as I watched everyone around me who were watching, no one was even watching the show. All heads were down and frankly I do not even know if anyone even knew what had happened. Sometimes facial expressions and looks play roles into the emotions of a show but so many people probably miss these as they are never even watching. Anyway, Twitter is useful for gaining hype and followers to a show or their characters as Scandal does, coming in as the highest rated Twitter TV series for ABC shows at 375,000 tweets, and American Horror Story: Coven on FX which rarely puts out this high of a rated show. This I believe is because if the close-knit community of Twitter followers they have accumulated (Nielson).
ReplyDeleteIndividual celebrities on TV and shows have also made their name world famous by these ridiculous Twitter hashtags. More often than not (actually I will say 99.9% of the time I cannot stand the hashtags but that little 1% is pathetic enjoyment of how cheesy they are) I hate hashtags on TV. Somehow in ratings, they work though. People do sometimes use them but for me at least, just because a show has this cliché little phrase in the corner, does not make me want to use it any more or less. A show very guilty of this is Pretty Little Liars, but that’s a story for another day. However, we all remember the amount of hype that was created from the VMA hashtags all about none other than, you guessed it: Miley Cyrus. According to the article, “"Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year." by Tim Molloy, Miley came in as a “winner” for 2013. He goes on to say that people can say what they want about her but she knows how to get attention. Miley, “who caused a national case of the vapors during her MTV VMAs twerknado” generated “a massive wave of 306,100 tweets per minute” (Forbes). This just goes to show how Twitter can really impact viewership and interactivity of an audience just by hashtagging the same things or participating in viewing,
So while I do not really agree with the amount that we are head down, typing, and not paying attention to the shows and people around us, I do think that Twitter is a great tool for everyone that has anything to do with production and marketing of shows. I still hate spoilers and think that they ruin my own viewing pleasures, but hey, what can you really do? I realistically will never give up or stop looking at my Twitter so Molly is right when she said, “we need to just accept it.”
Molloy, Tim, et. al. "Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year." The Wrap. 9 Dec. 2013. Web.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkantrowitz/2013/08/27/miley-cyrus-vma-performance-drove-over-300000-tweets-per-minute/
“Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media.” Nielsen.com. 17 Dec. 2013. Web
It is interesting for me to read this because I do not have a Twitter, but still feel the pain and annoyance of finding out about a television show before actually watching it. It happens on Facebook as well. Someone feels the needs to write a paragraph long response to whatever show they had just seen. I guess it is a matter of staying away from them by looking for keywords of the show in a Tweet or post and learning to not read them.
ReplyDeleteI actually found out something on “The Walking Dead” without watching it, not because I saw it on social media, but because someone else had and spread the news through word of mouth. Despite my efforts to avoid any postings on social media, I still cannot avoid it. The article, “Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year” by Tim Molloy, et al. actually spoiled part of “Breaking Bad” for me when it stated, “Walter White mowed down a Nazi ranch.” I have not finished the season and now I am trying hard to forget what I read.
To answer Molly’s question regarding if live tweeting is enhancing or diminishing the viewing experience, I believe it is diminishing it. The interaction sets up losses for anyone, especially with shows that have hashtags trending. The more talk the TV show tries to generate the more likely information will spill. While some viewers might not benefit because of this, the TV shows are gaining talk at the cost of nothing.
I found it most interesting that any television show creating hashtags and trends are free advertisement by active users. I can only imagine that when a Twitter user sees a hashtag trending, they become more interested in what is going on in that part of the Twitter community. The YouTube video “The Best of Twitter TV” mentions Twitter stories because of the abundance of Twitter users talking about a certain TV show and gaining popularity.
Another thing I found interesting was that certain TV shows that happen to have Twitter trends are not always that popular. For instance, in “Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year” “The X Factor” has Twitter trends that are used throughout the show. However, the article considers the show a loser of 2013. “Eastbound & Down” is considered a winner, but belongs to HBO, which does not necessarily need Twitter hashtags and trends. This also correlates with “Breaking Bad,” its popularity grew upon the quality of the show. Yes, Fox News uses hashtags to gain Twitter talk, but they also use Twitter handles so they can interact with their viewers. I think interaction is the benefit of live tweeting during a show. This way a viewer can personalize what he or she needs from the specific show by asking someone on the show directly. If the one in the television show does a good job at maintaining questions brought on by Twitter users then it will create loyal fans, who will most likely share their satisfaction on Twitter.
Marissa Himbele
Molloy, Tim, et. al. "Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year." The Wrap. 9 Dec. 2013. Web.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cfzSYYj8qk
I have to admit, I love live tweeting (I’m live tweeting the Olympics right now) but I only like to tweet events like awards shows and things like that. The reason that I don’t like to live tweet shows is just like everyone else has said, there’s nothing worse than seeing spoilers on Twitter for your favorite show. I know that I would be mad at the people who ruined a show for me, so I’m not going to spoil it for someone else who missed the show because they were in class. But with live events, most people are watching it anyway so I feel like there is not much to spoil.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to this, like Ari said, when I am watching a TV show, I like to pay attention to what is happening in the show. One of my biggest pet peeves is watching a show or movie with someone and I turn to see their reaction to what just happened and see that they are on their phone. If I have Twitter open while watching TV, my attention will usually go to Twitter and I end up missing what is happening on the TV. But with shows like the Oscars, Grammy’s and other awards shows, I find myself doing more listening than watching anyway, because once you see what they are wearing, the rest you can just listen to. For the most part, I want to see what other people are saying on Twitter. In this way, I think it is enhancing the viewing experience. You can’t always be with everyone that you want to see the show with, but through Twitter, you can still see what they think.
As Ryan’s article on TV Ratings Winners and Losers stated, “Live TV” events like the SuperBowl and the Oscars were the year’s most watched shows. I think one of the reasons why they are the most watched is because of social media. People feel like they need to watch it live, otherwise there is no point in watching because they will see the results somewhere. These days, you can find out who has won an award as it is happening if you are connected to any form of social media. In this way, I think live tweeting is sometimes diminishes the experience.
In the end, however, I think Twitter is really does enhance our overall experience. Not only can you interact with people from all over the world while the show is on, it also brings in new viewers. The example of Scyfy’s “Sharknado” is a good example of this. In The Wrap article “Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year” it mentions how the telecast got more viewers after “taking over Twitter.” In my personal experience, I think this is true. When I see people tweeting about a show, it usually makes me want to watch the show, because the way I see it, if you’re taking the time to tweet during the show, it must be good.
Gilman, Greg, Tim Kenneally, Tony Maglio, Tim Molloy, and Jethro Nededog. "Best & Worst 2013: TV’s Biggest Winners and Losers of the Year." The Wrap., 9 Dec. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
Ryan, Joal. "The Year's TV Ratings Winners & Losers." Yahoo TV., 17 Dec. 2013. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
Twitter and television definitely go hand-in-hand. If there’s a big event, like the Super Bowl, or a popular show, like American Horror Story, Twitter will definitely be a site to check during their air times. Sometimes, I love to live tweet because it generates conversation between my friends and I. On other occasions, I will keep refreshing my news feed during a program, but won’t tweet anything. Depending on the show and who’s featured, I can either be a passive or aggressive Twitter user. Regardless, when I watch a show at its scheduled time, my phone and computer are right next to me.
ReplyDeleteIn our current society, people are constantly multi-tasking. It is hard for a person to stay focused because of the many different distractions we have. Social media is a major distraction that can sometimes yield a positive outcome. When someone live-tweets a show, it creates a sense of community. You are no longer strictly communicating with the people in a room, but people all over the world. You have the opportunity to Tweet at whom you want, including celebrities. When celebrities live-tweet one of their shows, it causes even more incentive to tune in during real-time and have Twitter open.
According to “Tops of 2013: TV and Social Media,” we learn that Twitter ratings have earned a spot on the list. The article states:
As television content often transcends the viewer experience to become conversation on Twitter, this year’s lists include Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings (NTTR) Top Series of Fall 2013. The Top Series list, which looks at airings of regularly scheduled programs since the measurement of Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings began in September, is populated by both cable and broadcast series (1).
These Twitter ratings help to prove what shows are popular and talked about the most. The more people that tune into a program, the more they will want to voice their opinions with others in 140 characters or less. By searching hashtags, Tweets are easily categorized and refreshed. This can be helpful for the audience, the show’s producers, and the staff keeping track of ratings because it provides instant feedback. If you aren’t tuned in to a show at its scheduled time, though, Twitter can become your enemy because it will be filled with spoilers.
In “The Nielson Family is Dead” by Tom Vanderbilt, he recognizes the power of Twitter. He says, “Turns out that networks and advertisers are using all-new metrics to design hit shows. Under these new rules, Twitter feeds are as important as ratings, fresh ideas beat tired formulas, and niche stars can be as valuable as big names” (1). Twitter has become a way for networks and advertisers to hear directly from the people and cater to what they want so a show becomes successful. In this way, it seems that Twitter has given the audience power over the producers. A show gains maximum exposure by trending on Twitter, which could spark interest in non-fans to hop on the bandwagon.
As an example, I had no idea what Breaking Bad was until Twitter and the finale. It seemed that everyone on my Twitter feed was talking about it on Sunday nights. When the finale aired, everyone’s Tweets got me interested because they were going crazy over it. I researched the show and the characters, and I have recently reached the final season on Netflix. Although there were some spoilers that I didn’t notice at the time, I still got hooked on the show.
Works Cited
“Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media.” Nielsen.com. 17 Dec. 2013. Web.
Vanderbilt, Tom. "The Nielsen Family is Dead." Wired. 19 March 2013. Web.
It's interesting to think that Twitter might be the savior of live television and allowing shows to generate viewership like it’s done in the past. The idea is that by not watching it live and participating on Twitter and other sites, you as the audience are not getting the full viewing experience. The fact that shows are creating all this content for the second screen experience proves that point. “Breaking Bad” averaged about 5.84 million viewers in its final season. According to Nielson, on Twitter the show was being tweeted by 266,000 people. These people tweeted and average of 521,000 times and these tweets were seen and interacted with by 6,026,000 people on average making for 51,415,000 people seeing these tweets, retweets, and favorites (Nielsen). When you have a system that is so easily monitored and so widespread, you cannot ignore it.
ReplyDeleteWe've all live tweeted a show or know someone who has. Live tweeting is the new way to watch tv. Sure you have people who choose not to participate, but that person is just getting the most basic level of the show. I think sometimes as media studies majors we see the world through our own little microcosm and because we talk about these topics a lot. And maybe it might not be as big as we think it is, because we are the ones participating. In the case of “Breaking Bad”, 266,000 people out of 5.84 million people isn’t that much. We cannot deny that this it is a growing trend. The fact that the Nielsen rating system has begun looking at Twitter says a lot! Nielsen has the connotation of being archaic and out of date, but they have jumped on this new trend to monitor it and see where it takes us as an industry.
We can’t forget the number one rule of the media industry. This is a business and it all boils down to money. Shows like “The Walking Dead” now encourage fans to go on their website and watch rewinds of scenes during the commercial break and then go back to the show once the commercials are over. I don’t see how this is helping advertisers or how advertisers feel about the show telling people not to pay attention to their ads. But I’m sure that by following the effects of social media in the television industry, this will bring around advertisements on our Twitter feeds tailored to the shows we tweet about, or vice versa. Advertisers may look at our tweets and see there is a trend or some connecting factor, besides the show, that they can advertise and market towards on television. We all know how easy this is because we’ve generated these types of studies in Research Methods. According to an article on Wired.com, The Nielsen Family is Dead, Twitter has already started doing this with a company called Bluefin which will, “turn mentions to dollars” (Vanderbilt)
I think we are at the forefront of something that is going to be very big and change the television industry. Do I think Twitter will be the be all and end all of how we watch television or what makes the Nielsen rating system relevant again? No. But I do think it will have a huge part in making television more interactive and getting people back to the live viewings.
“Nielsen Tops of 2013: TV & Social Media.” Nielsen.com. 17 Dec. 2013. Web.
Vanderbilt, Tom. "The Nielsen Family is Dead." Wired. 19 March 2013. Web.