July 12, 2009
I’ve been thinking quite a bit about the multi channeling stategies being undertaken by the free networks.
- ABC was first to kick off their second digital channel and choose to brand similar to BBC (and others).. e.g. ABC1, ABC2, ABC3.
- SBS has now followed the same lead, with SBS one and SBS two.
- Network 10 on the otherhand have made their second channel a dedicated sports network called one HD.
- Channel 9 look to be doing a similar thing and branding their station as a youth channel – in order to increase their marketshare in the much desired younger demographics
- Channel 7 haven’t really done anything yet.
As I’ve written in my previous post, there are definite constraints with dedicating your HD channel to one genre of show.
I strongly believe that the ABC and SBS have selected the more intelligent format due to its lack of restrictions.
For example, at the moment most nights on SBS throughout July are filled with sport. They’ve stuck the Ashes on SBS one and Le Tour on SBS two. SBS one has the HD channel, so the cricket is in HD. When the cricket is not on, the cycling can switch to SBS one and grab the HD channel (or not, depending on what else is on)
Devil’s advocate says that switching serial programs between channels would confuse viewers. But I don’t believe we’re that stupid. If the cycling’s been on SBS one for the past week and I tune in to find the Ashes, I’m going to go to SBS two automatically. Informative idents and cross promotion help this. It’s a unified network across two channels. It works.
I can’t fathom why channel 10 has restricted themselves so much by dedicating the channel to sport. If the network had 5 different channels of course it would be fine to make one sports-only. However with 2 channels only, it’s just ridiculous to tie their hands so tight behind their back.
May 17, 2009
With the introduction of three new channels onto our televisual landscape, the amount of new available airspace has increased so suddenly by an amount not seen since the introduction of Australian television in itself.
So for a while the commercial networks used their new HD channel to broadcast their programs in high definition (where available). Brilliant! The latest movies became available in a cinematic quality that may have put the Lumiere out of business (okay not really). Then there was sport – arguably one of the great champions of HD TV – tennis actually became watchable. The world of television seemed pretty good right there and then – TV in regular or BONUS mode!
Then came multi-channeling.
One HD launched on March 26th to great fanfare. One HD was an interesting case, because it wasn’t ten HD anymore. It was One HD. A new brand. It looked as though sport on ten was to be no more. Even sporting productions (noteable the Melbourne Grand Prix) were branded on both channels as a One HD event.
Now comes the gripe..
I’m going to use ten/one HD as an example here because they are the only network really actually using multi-channelling to its full potential.
For the sake of argument, let’s say that ten currently have three channels:
– Ten (SD)
– One HD
– One SD
Can you see something wrong with this picture?
The flagship channel for ten is still ten. Yet it now finds itself with no HD alternative, while One HD broadcasting (alternative) sports gets both a high definition and standard definition channel.
Recently the Simpsons when HD and widescreen in the US. ten no longer has a high definition channel so it’s now marketed here as Simpsons in widescreen. Actually I’m not totally sure that there would be that much difference in The Simpsons HD and The Simpsons SD anyway.
At the moment whilst the IPL takes place on a Saturday night, AFL football is only broadcast on ten (branded as ten). This means that the program being broadcast all over the country in Melbourne’s second highest rating football slot isn’t in HD because there’s people flying planes in circles and Indians pretending that their domestic cricket competition is the best in the world.
It would seem that the priorities are all wrong here. The hurdles jumped in the advancement of multi-channeling appear to have effectively been negated by its cannibalism of the wonderful HD.
Having a flexible HD channel used by both SD channels where seen best fit would be a bit too confusing for the viewer I reckon.
So the answer has got to be the addition of another high definition channel simulcasting the original flagship channel in HD.
This is only going to get more frustrating as the networks begin to multi-channel more and more over the coming months and will need to be addressed at some stage.
(images taken from wherever they come from after google suggested them)