The Wiki-Wiki World Wide Web

In the world of Web 2.0 users want more than just a passive experience they want to take part. There are many ways for users to take part online, they can upload video, pictures, editorial and comment on the entire experience or on other users comments. One tool used frequently that employs all these experiences is the Wiki.

The world of the Wiki has come a long way since Ward Cunningham launched the first Wiki, WikiWikiWeb in 1995. He stumbled upon the word Wiki, the Hawaiian word for fast, while waiting for a bus at Honolulu International Airport and decided it would be a good word to use to describe the project he was working on.

A Wiki enables documents to be written collaboratively, in a simple markup language using a web browser. A Wiki is essentially a database for creating, browsing and searching information. Possibly the most well known Wiki is wikipeidia.org, which launched in January of 2001.

Yesterday’s “geek” culture is today’s core online audience and the TV networks in the US have finally begun to stand up and pay attention. Shows such as Big Brother on CBS have used fan Wiki’s to entice fans and community enthusiasts to provide further content for the show. Registered users can create their own profile and upload their favourite moments from the series, leave comments, discuss strategies and even post their own BB audition clips. Since the success of this Wiki CBS has gone onto launch Wiki’s for other popular shows such as Survivor, CSI, and even popular soaps such as The Young and the Restless.

Other US channels have followed suit. Showtime has Wikis for shows such as Dexter, Californication and Weeds and the Sci-Fi channel has it’s own Scifipedia.

Allowing the fans to build the content is free and worldwide. Fan Wiki’s such as Lostpedia, covers the show in 6 different countries and is translated into 8 different languages. Wiki's such as this go beyond the actual shows and provide fans with news on the cast, show merchandise and even a scriptwriting competition.

Where to next? The more producers allow fans to interact with their shows the larger and more loyal the fanbase. Not only does this build the online community but also drives on-air ratings as demonstrated with the series launch of Skins in January 2007 on E4. What would happen if we applied the same principles to other Channel 4 favourites such as Peep Show...


















It's a Wiki-Wiki world!

Putting the Horse Before the Cart

Our homepage every day advertises the show that was on last night! We have valuable real estate that we use to talk about a programme that’s been on already.
Nowhere on our site is there any mention of the new US acquisitions we’ve got Reaper, Back to you, Big Bang theory (well lets not go there with that one), or series 2 of skins, or the next series of shameless, now in its own custom built studio and extended to 25 episodes? I know all this from other sources, we should be screaming about it all. In June NBC homepage was all about the Fall schedule, Back to you was on the homepage there were video clips, back stories, cast interviews, and a huge push to convince us that the show was actually going to be funny despite rumours. We could get people involved in the show long before they’re on, surely the main aim of our channel is to get people to watch the programmes?

The Tools of the Trade

A big feature of the US sites that’s lacking from c4.com is giving the readers the ability to contribute and talk about their favourite shows. Our remit states to inspire debate. Why can’t we interpret that as allowing fans of ugly betty to argue about who’s got the best hairstyle or frock? It doesn’t have to involve ofcom to hold an inquiry every time.

So what can we give them? Skins got it right with myspace page designs for skins, they love affiliating themselves to a band or programme, and I’d say that the reason they chose to use one design over another isn’t the product they’re helping market but how much it shows they can do things that their friends can’t. We can expand on it though with facebook apps.. Pirates Vs Vampires etc could be adapted to our shows. Supernanny Vs Ramsay..
CW network offer video widgets which embed to blogs, myspace and facebook. They’re easily modified. It’s an swf file which calls on a flsh video to play, we could make this a playlist, or change filenames so they get a different video every couple of days.. What about a tonight on 4 player which plays a clip from primetime for c4, e4, more4, and film4. There are endless opportunities for something that could be replicated for channels, shows, news, anything?
I noticed these on CW when I was looking for Reaper, the new show from Kevin Smith that we have acquired. It was a countdown to the start of the show and had a video trailer, this then changed after ep1 to a trailer from next weeks show.. We’ve got a few months before we get this really good show why not get the community super-users to handle our marketing. Dexter would have been unheard of if it wasn’t for the internet, and people in the media downloading torrents then telling everyone how great it was. A lot cheaper than a full page spread in the metro.

Same Show Different Identity

It has been mentioned before, I think at the last away day from recollection (even though it was before my time). One of the most ridiculously handled websites that we have is Ramsays Kitchen Nightmares. This format has recently been bought up by NBC as another vehicle for the foul mouthed foodsmith to boost his US media credentials. From the promotion that’s currently live on the site the show seems to be identical in format. Bad restaurant, Crap cooks, Ramsay walks in shouts, swears teaches ‘em to cook and buy proper ingredients, goes back and sees the results. Our webpage is in money… A guide on how to set up a business particularly a café/restaurant. Ok this information is great.. fantastic in fact and we’re doing the right thing by hosting it there. I love the show but if I was to go looking for information about it online what would I expect?
I asked my friend Claire who’s madly in love with the mock jock knife wielding star. Number 1 she wants pictures or videos of Ramsay with his shirt off!!! No accounting for taste.. But she has a point there are groups on facebook full of women who have the same delusions, he doesn’t seem shy about exposing his hairy ginger torso in every programme so why not give the ladies what they want..
I however love seeing people who can’t cook or at the very least can cook no better than myself, try to run a restaurant, I marvel at the fantastic concoctions of these celebrity chef wannabes. Smoked salmon with mandarin jus etc. or as Andrew puts it fillet of hare’s knackers with a wham bar reduction. Of course it’ll taste shit, of course it’ll make Ramsay hurl but strangely the chefs all seem to be as useful to cooking as a one legged man in an arse kicking contest. What about a collection of the terrible menus, before and after.
Of course the other great thing about the show is Ramsay’s delicate use of the English language. How many times can he say fuck per episode.. I bet any money somebody has counted and put it online? We could rate each episode with an expletive count.
Then of course there’s the clips I must have watched Ramsay throwing up after eating a rancid scallop so many times I can’t remember. The gormless look on the fat Yorkshire ‘chef’ when he thinks his mentor is joking until he sees the scallop return with haste is a classic. (going back to why they’re wannabe’s this recipe is in the Gary Rhodes cookbook)..

We seem to have thought, we need a website.. moneys struggling 2 and 2 make 5.. The main lesson form all of the US showcards is that they follow the tone of the show.. A big picture of Gordon looking menacing with a whopping great blade in his hand. Not a load of text on a dismal orange page. Why not Gordon’s 10 point guide to running a restaurant, or how not to poison your customers.. We need to stop shoehorning programmes into areas of the site for page impressions, it’s far more important to give the customers what they want.

Channel 4 in the news.

Channel 4 and Black viewers Interesting selection of comments underneath.

Competitor Analysis - Channel4 v The World

The Brief: Pick a competitor who has video content and is doing something interesting and noteworthy trend-wise that we can learn from.

PART ONE – “OVER THERE”

Scott: As a starting point, we chose to look at the key US broadcast networks which show the same programmes as Channel 4, to highlight the similarities and, more importantly, the differences in the way shows are promoted, marketed and the service that is provided for users. Although we’re a world apart on a business level (it’s estimated that NBC has access to 103,624,370 viewers in the US), the programme support by ‘us’ and ‘them’ is still in the basic ‘showcard’ format.

We each analysed ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox, between them showing Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares, The Simpsons, Without a Trace, Big Brother, ER, Deal or No Deal, My Name Is Earl, Scrubs, Studio 60, The IT Crowd, Supernanny, Ugly Betty and Desperate Housewives. In this study, we looked at originality and diversity of content, design, commercial opportunities, on-air continuity, user experience, technical reliability and promotional priorities.

Classing these broadcasters/websites as our competitors is based on the notion that UK viewers/users will turn to our US counterparts for content and information if we fail to provide it (even though not all video content will be available to them).

Narrowing our analysis to NBC.com, we made several key observations about their content which we believe could be applied beneficially to Channel4.com and our home grown programmes. Excerpts from our main study are posted on our blog page.

• The US sites have similar page structure (Gallery, About the Show, Cast etc) but the content is more varied, current, thorough and of a higher quality – especially their video content. Although we cannot necessarily compete with assets from US acquisitions, we could apply this model to UK shows like Peep Show or The IT Crowd by becoming more involved at the commissioning stage.
• They promote what is ‘Coming Up’ rather than what has been on NBC the night before. Although our stats might show that C4.com users come to the site the day after a programme transmits, the forward- rather than backward-looking approach gives NBC.com a sense of anticipation and it is directing users towards the programmes as well as the online content (working with, not apart from, the channel, which should be seen as the site’s most powerful asset).
• Video content is pretty much integrated with the rest of the content. There is far less of the fragmentation we see on C4.com (Watch Online, Unmissable Clips, Simulcast, 4oD, V2 Player, embedded players etc).
• US sites have a greater sense of community and user involvement. They understand the power of their fans networking. They are online support to the network, but they also have web exclusives, wikis, online previews, mp3 soundtrack downloads, comment & rating options and ‘link to it’ or ‘send to a friend' tools, buddy icons, newsletters, mobile downloads, boards (forums) & blogs and the spin-off games. If we involve the user, rather than just dump content on them, we will see fans marketing our content for us.

Next up: 'Over here' The UK perspective...

LESA Ops away day blog

Right, let's get started then.

First up, what's this? This blog is some research by four members of the Channel 4 New Media Operations team. It's for a workshop we're having on Wed 17th at the Globe.