@andrewchen

New here? Check out my list of featured essays · Blogging roadmap · Ask me anything

Product creation in entertainment

I attended the Future of Entertainment conference today at Stanford and enjoyed it immensely. Here were the keynote speakers and here were the panels. As I watched, the first keynote really resonated with me, and I elaborate below. In general, it was great to listen to this vastly different culture talk about intellectual property, distribution, and all the other things we nerds like to discuss.

Andrea Wong and new show creation
First up was Andrea Wong, an executive vice president at ABC in charge of all our favorite shows, like "The Bachelor" "Extreme Makeover Home Edition" "Dancing with the Stars" etc. She talked about a bunch of subjects, but the one that resonated with me was the process she used to create new shows. Ultimately, whenever I’m thinking about technology products for consumers, I often think how you’d approach it if you IGNORED technology, business model, etc., and just tried to build for mass appeal. I think film, music, and TV are good representations of what it’d be like to just cater to customer tastes, rather than building features for the sake of features.

Her group at ABC would do a couple different things to get ideas:

  • Getting pitches from production groups (Mark Burnett of Survivor, for example)
  • Looking at successful shows from other countries, or in the past
  • Brainstorming based on peoples’ emotions and common themes

I’ll mostly focus on the last one because it’s the only one where you’re trying to create ideas from scratch.

Tapping emotional roots
She said that ultimately, getting inspired to create new shows is all about taking large-scale, emotionally resonant themes and developing shows on them. Andrea’s team would take an idea like "psychics" or "falling in love" or "judging how other people live" or "belief in God" and develop shows based on those deep emotions.

Interestingly, Andrea said that because of her background in engineering
(EE degree from MIT), she was trained to take a very complicated
problem and reduce it to simpler ones, which was quite opposite to how her brain needed to think. That sort of reductionist,
deductive logic is what defines an engineer. However, the act of
creating a new show is to take a very small nugget of emotion and building out complexity
from that.

Media as a "failure-driven" business
Another key point was that for all the success she’s had, she’s also had some really big failures. Andrea said that 95% of shows are failures, and that every year, they launch an entire season of new ideas and new shows, and maybe 1 or 2 ever become real properties.

Part of the key then, of course, is to try a lot of different things and realize that you’re facing difficult odds. The only way, then, to success is to throw a lot of stuff at the wall and not get discouraged when the majority of your ideas fail.

Looking at technology products as entertainment, not tools
There’s a huge bias in the tech industry to look at our products and services as tools for getting things done, rather than as entertainment. For example, one looks at eBay and sees a consumer-to-consumer marketplace, that helps you get rid of your junk.

But what if you look at your products as entertainment, something that drives fun based on characters and story? Is there a better way to look at eBay, beyond its functional uses? Perhaps the "story" of eBay is one of winning and losing auctions, of drama and tension created by the countdown timer, or one of surprise and discovery based on finding awesome one-of-a-kind things? Is that what makes eBay fun, rather than merely a tool?

I think this is a surprisingly fresh way to look at consumer products that hasn’t been explored much. And we should, as it would make our days more interesting :)

Like this post?
If you liked this post, please subscribe or follow me on Twitter. You can also find more essays here.

Written by Andrew Chen
February 28th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
  • Craig Hubley

    I’m not sure how new it is. In the 1980s there were quite a few people in the user interface design community that talked about core metaphors, dramatics and learning from theatre, technology as art, etc.. Look at the SIGGRAPH art show, the Bienalle, some of the better installation artists. They all think this way. In 1990 and 1992 I directed a couple of big stage performances at the CHI conference presenting music- and dance-based UIs.

    When I look at these early works, I see no difference other than the consumer market scale and the fact that we’ve all got flat rate long distance so we can collaborate cheaply and just play with people far away. As with UI design in general, the web can learn a great deal from earlier less-net-enabled games or art works, which all “take a very small nugget of emotion and building out complexity from that.” It isn’t hard to find complex works built on relatively simple musical foundations or basic translations of motion to music, etc., etc..

    The less interactive world of TV and the very interactive but visually cramped world of mobile devices have combined very effectively in reality TV: you get to vote, and that makes you interested. If you CAN control something you feel like you MUST… And I don’t think it’s about preferences always, it could be about tolerances, as humiliation and fear plays a role too. For instance, preventing Heather Mills’s heroic artificial leg from being tossed off too early, or preventing Sanjaya from becoming the national shame of the USA.

    “Looking at successful shows from other countries, or in the past” has become the standard reality TV mode. Almost all these shows started somewhere else (“Survivor”, for one) or are fairly simple game shows of traditional style that would have been very well understood in the 50s.

    The “large-scale, emotionally resonant themes” are well expressed in some of those shows but in others it’s the way the themes interact that intrigue us. For instance Survivor forces us to look hard at loyalty versus greed, work ethics, how a friendship is weighed against other values or “the good of the team” etc..

    I’ve yet to see a show that really explores “psychics” or “falling in love” or “belief in God” though there have been some quite amusing shallow plays on all of these. I recall for instance the show where the bachelors were eliminated on by one by a cheerleader who was ultimately dumped by her final choice – because she had once dated Fabio! I nearly laughed off my chair. The fairly plain looking but sincere guy she dumped – to my astonishment – in favour of this shallow character – had ultimately the last laugh. That kind of thing you just can’t script and you just can’t pay people to go through deliberately. I sometimes call these “torture TV”.

    “Dancing with the Stars” is the best in my opinion as it provides:

    - a very traditional style of competition which has been used as the basis for a few moderately successful movies already

    - sexy but elegant visuals

    - competition in which men and women can both compete on relatively equal grounds

    - a wide range of ages involved as pros, amateurs and judges

    - identifiable celebrities known to be acceptable to at least part of the public as personalities

    - some inspiring and genuine sentimental content (Jerry Springer learning the waltz to dance with his daughter)

    - genuine educational content (they show you the dance steps, the judges are very clear about what’s done right and wrong)

    - lots of incidental comedy in the training sequences

    - amusing/animated judges and hosts willing to make a few bad jokes or insult each other or contestants (which builds up sympathy for the contestants)

    - torture, of course, in the form of gruelling dance training going on for many weeks

    None of this is really of much direct use in design of any interactive media I can think of offhand, but let me think a while…

  • http://satelite-keys.blogspot.com free satellite tv

    Development of digital technologies occurs prompt rates. Does not lag behind progress and digital TV. Speaking about digital TV, we first of all mean satellite TV. The digital satellite TV becomes more and more accessible to simple users. The market paid satellite tv also is not necessary on a place. The new digital standard of TV of high clearness HDTV actively develops and takes root. The satellite TV becomes more and more directed on the spectator. Besides digital quality of the image, advantage of satellite systems also is also the extensive cover zone of the companion.

Recent posts

Want more? Featured essays and book recommendations