The TikTok phenomenon is an evolution of reality TV that started in the 90s. New technologies like apps and the internet have simply allowed for the exploitation of previously untapped entertainment value in billions of back yards. There’s probably not much a studio can do to compete with the new small-bite grassroots content itself, since the reality — a kid catching a huge fish in a drainage ditch on a snoopy pole in Thailand or some Florida man sitting in a lawn chair in a creek hand feeding alligators—is the reason we watch. The principle opportunity for the traditional media company is to become a platform for user generated content, rather than a creator of that content. I’m hopeful that there will still be a place for highly produced film and television, but the market share for traditional top-down studio produced entertainment will inevitably shrink.
If I like it, it’s quality to me. Almost no “professional” I’ve known since my days at the beginning of MTV has ever agreed.
The professional POV is “if i make it, that’s quality.” And not for nothing, that includes YouTubers as often as the “upper class” of TV folk. It’s true of record producers who think garage band music is beneath their consideration, or Mr Beast.
Successful people believe that they are the only ones who define quality.
I didn’t write this in the post, but I’ll add that a lot of people who are in a position to opine on quality (not just in media, but any domain in which quality isn’t quantifiable) are in roles that are self selecting for people who already thought they had great taste. That view just gets reinforced at each step up the ladder and further entwined with their identity. So, acknowledging that the consumer definition of quality is diverging from theirs is not an intellectual exercise, it’s a psychic wound.
Relevance to the consumer is likely weighted heavily in the subconscious algorithm used to define quality. Consumers are no longer constrained to get news from a dozen local/broadcast/cable shows largely covering the same stories. They can now get relevant news from talent that looks like them, lives where they live and is passionate about what they are passionate about. It raises the bar for what consumers expect.
Great stuff, as usual, Doug. One intersecting piece that I couldn't get out of my head when reading this was Derek Thompson's latest in The Atlantic, "The Anti-Social Century." Focusing on "self-imposed solitude" and how it is different than loneliness reinforces my thought that this shift to the creator economy (especially since COVID) is a cry out for community as "third places" begin to evaporate from our culture — less hanging out at bars, places of worship, cafes, pick-up sporting facilities, etc. Not only does this lead consumers to scratch that authenticity and reliability itch as you laid out, to me, speaking anecdotally as a millennial/GenZ cusper, it also scratches a "I could easily create something like this if I really wanted to" itch as traditional barriers to quality shrink. Consumers already have the main piece of equipment they need to create the types of content they are consuming — the smartphone. Obviously, the next dopamine hit, which is just one scroll away, is much more tempting than getting up, calling up friends, and convincing them to also step away from the dopamine printer to create a prank video, or whatever they have in mind. But they could, in theory... We see this in younger kids now, as surveys have documented more kids want to be YouTubers/Vloggers today than astronauts, at least in the Western world. Anyways, just something I was chewing on while reading. Thanks for the post!
The TikTok phenomenon is an evolution of reality TV that started in the 90s. New technologies like apps and the internet have simply allowed for the exploitation of previously untapped entertainment value in billions of back yards. There’s probably not much a studio can do to compete with the new small-bite grassroots content itself, since the reality — a kid catching a huge fish in a drainage ditch on a snoopy pole in Thailand or some Florida man sitting in a lawn chair in a creek hand feeding alligators—is the reason we watch. The principle opportunity for the traditional media company is to become a platform for user generated content, rather than a creator of that content. I’m hopeful that there will still be a place for highly produced film and television, but the market share for traditional top-down studio produced entertainment will inevitably shrink.
If I like it, it’s quality to me. Almost no “professional” I’ve known since my days at the beginning of MTV has ever agreed.
The professional POV is “if i make it, that’s quality.” And not for nothing, that includes YouTubers as often as the “upper class” of TV folk. It’s true of record producers who think garage band music is beneath their consideration, or Mr Beast.
Successful people believe that they are the only ones who define quality.
Their loss.
I didn’t write this in the post, but I’ll add that a lot of people who are in a position to opine on quality (not just in media, but any domain in which quality isn’t quantifiable) are in roles that are self selecting for people who already thought they had great taste. That view just gets reinforced at each step up the ladder and further entwined with their identity. So, acknowledging that the consumer definition of quality is diverging from theirs is not an intellectual exercise, it’s a psychic wound.
Excellent, thank you.
Sharp as usual, Doug.
Relevance to the consumer is likely weighted heavily in the subconscious algorithm used to define quality. Consumers are no longer constrained to get news from a dozen local/broadcast/cable shows largely covering the same stories. They can now get relevant news from talent that looks like them, lives where they live and is passionate about what they are passionate about. It raises the bar for what consumers expect.
Great stuff, as usual, Doug. One intersecting piece that I couldn't get out of my head when reading this was Derek Thompson's latest in The Atlantic, "The Anti-Social Century." Focusing on "self-imposed solitude" and how it is different than loneliness reinforces my thought that this shift to the creator economy (especially since COVID) is a cry out for community as "third places" begin to evaporate from our culture — less hanging out at bars, places of worship, cafes, pick-up sporting facilities, etc. Not only does this lead consumers to scratch that authenticity and reliability itch as you laid out, to me, speaking anecdotally as a millennial/GenZ cusper, it also scratches a "I could easily create something like this if I really wanted to" itch as traditional barriers to quality shrink. Consumers already have the main piece of equipment they need to create the types of content they are consuming — the smartphone. Obviously, the next dopamine hit, which is just one scroll away, is much more tempting than getting up, calling up friends, and convincing them to also step away from the dopamine printer to create a prank video, or whatever they have in mind. But they could, in theory... We see this in younger kids now, as surveys have documented more kids want to be YouTubers/Vloggers today than astronauts, at least in the Western world. Anyways, just something I was chewing on while reading. Thanks for the post!