Transmedia TV and its potential
The contemporary status of transmedia storytelling within the Dutch
television industry
Name: Evy Knol
Student number: 6048676 evy.knol@gmail.com
MA Thesis Television and Cross-Media Culture Word count: 22.700
Supervisor: Anne Kustritz Second reader: Sebastian Scholz
27-06-2014 Amsterdam
ABSTRACT
The last decade the phenomenon of transmedia storytelling gained more attention in the academic sphere and transmedia projects increased. This research focuses on the contemporary status of transmedia storytelling within the Dutch television industry and its potential for future’s entertainment. The qualitative analyses of the Dutch transmedia projects In Therapie, Wie Is De Mol?, Goede Tijden, Slechte Tijden and
Collapsus show that these projects cannot measure up to all features of Henry
Jenkins’ definition of transmedia storytelling, but however are successful in their own right. The dual broadcasting system brings along different struggles for transmedia storytelling in the television industry. Although the biggest struggle for producers in the public broadcasting service remains the financing of transmedia projects, new regulations increase the potential for accepting the transmedia logic. The form of transmedia storytelling occurring in the Dutch television industry goes beyond the limitations of media and provides enhanced experiences by immersing the audience in the storyworld.
KEY WORDS: transmedia, storytelling, Henry Jenkins, experience, Dutch television industry, immersion, storyworld
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page:
INTRODUCTION 5
CHAPTER 1 WHAT IS TRANSMEDIA STORYTELLING? 9
1.1 Blurring boundaries; multiple screens 9
1.2 The founding of transmedia storytelling 11
1.3 Further developments 15
1.4 Transmedia distinctions 18
1.5 Summary 22
CHAPTER 2 TRANSMEDIA STRUGGLES 24
2.1 The American media industry 24
2.2 The Dutch media industry 26
2.3 Summary 28
CHAPTER 3 CASE STUDIES 30
3.1 In Therapie 31 3.1.1 The storyworld 31 3.1.2 Transmedia 35 3.1.3 Corporate structure 37 3.1.4 Summary 39 3.2 Wie Is De Mol? 40 3.2.1 The storyworld 40 3.2.2 Transmedia 45 3.2.3 Corporate structure 48 3.2.4 Summary 49
3.3 Goede Tijden, Slechte Tijden 51
3.3.1 The storyworld 51
3.3.2 Transmedia 54
3.3.3 Corporate structure 58
3.3.4 Summary 58
3.4 Collapsus: Energy Risk Conspiracy 60
3.4.2 Transmedia 62 3.4.3 Corporate structure 64 3.4.4 Summary 66 CONCLUSIONS 68 REFERENCES 77 APPENDIX 78
INTRODUCTION
What is happening now, is that the Internet has arrived. All these possibilities lead us towards one medium. […] There is one medium and that is supposed to be transmedia, or be given that name1
(Joris Hoebe qtd. in Holland and Alkemade 2012).
There is still so much left to discover, and to explore for that matter2 (Sander Oskamp
qtd. in Holland and Alkemade 2012).
The Dutch television series Freshers embraces the lives of the member of student association H.S.C. Mercurius. Collaboration between media companies, game developers and public broadcasters formed an entertainment franchise in order to bring the story alive and to create an enhanced entertainment experience. A fictional storyworld was mapped through the use of television, film, social media platforms and live events. The Facebook-page of H.S.C. Mercurius provided an application that enabled the viewer to become member of the association. This immersion became bigger by the development of a mobile application, in which the users can create their own fraternity within the association, and where users are enabled to invite friends. The storyworld could be explored on different levels: from only watching the television program to an online search provided by an alternate reality game (ARG). This ARG demand users to seek out various media platforms in order to solve a mystery. Live events created for the members of H.S.C. Mercurius, enabled the viewer to really take a step into the storyworld. The way this storyworld is constructed embraces the phenomenon of transmedia storytelling: it offers a layered story across different media that merges fiction and reality, in order to create a coordinated and unified experience.
Media scholar Henry Jenkins popularized transmedia storytelling as key feature of future’s entertainment, which embraces a powerful way of storytelling across media, in response to media convergence. Through collaboration a transmedia
1 Original quote: ‘‘Wat er nu aan de hand is, is dat er internet is gekomen. Al die
mogelijkheden zorgen ervoor dat we naar één medium toegaan. […] Je hebt één medium en dat moet dan transmedia gaan worden, of gaan heten.’’
story attempts to create a unified entertainment experience by using different media that complement the limitations of the others. According to Jenkins, ‘‘each medium does what it does best’’, so each medium contributes to the overall story through its medium-specific features (2006, 96).
Focusing on the medium of television, its meaning has changed over the last decades. In the beginning, the television was considered an important medium through the metaphor ‘‘window of the world.’’ To imply that looking at the television screen is the same as looking out of the window, the television screen as window gives a broader view of the world. It portrays life through different perspectives; as documentary, as news, as soap, or as sports. Throughout the years, myriad technological, political, social and cultural changes have altered the media landscape. In the current convergence era different media are merging; meanwhile the television screen is multiplying. The television set is just one of these screens, supplemented by the computer, the mobile phone, the tablet, PS3, Xbox and more (Doyle 3). In this convergence culture boundaries between media are blurring, which opens up new possibilities of media production, distribution and reception.
Transmedia, as a reaction to media convergence, takes over the metaphor ‘‘window of the world’’ and expands the amount of windows and ways of looking in. By adding new layers across media using additional media technologies, stories become part of the same large world. The phenomenon of transmedia storytelling maps the world and describes how the parts fit in together. After Jenkins hyped the term transmedia storytelling, the concept was incorporated into the academic media sphere. The last decade various media scholars have tried to get a grip on the phenomenon by criticizing and extending on Jenkins’ model of transmedia storytelling. Although transmedia productions increase through the rise of digital technologies, producers are still struggling and experimenting with the concept of transmedia storytelling.
This thesis focuses on the contemporary status of transmedia storytelling within the Dutch television industry and claims that the Dutch transmedia practices cannot yet achieve Jenkins’ ideal model of transmedia storytelling. Instead, these Dutch transmedia projects possess different forms of transmediality, due to dual broadcasting system the Dutch television industry characterizes. Most struggles unfold in terms of legal questions and financial problems, which makes it harder to
meet Jenkins’ definition. However, as Jenkins argues: ‘‘new models are emerging through production and critical debates, and we need to be open to a broad array of variations of what transmedia means in relation to different projects’’ (2011). Although the public broadcasting system copes with the biggest struggles, recent developments offer great potential for the artistic quality of transmedia projects in the future, whereas in the commercial domain this focus is being overvalued by the act of profit making. Most transmedia projects in the Netherlands are successful in their own right, and therefore this research investigates the different ways in which Dutch transmedia projects are constructed; what are the struggles, to discover the features and boundaries of transmedia storytelling. The central question to this research is the following:
In which ways is transmedia storytelling used within the Dutch television industry and how can this concept be developed for future’s entertainment?
In order to answer this question, this research includes a textual discourse analysis of relevant academic material to map the contemporary status of transmedia storytelling in the academic field. To gain insight in the Dutch transmedia practices, a historical and theoretical perspective on the Dutch television industry gives a better understanding to the contemporary conditions and context in which transmedia storytelling takes place. By means of four case studies the storyworlds of different Dutch transmedia practices are analyzed. These storyworlds consists of various media platforms, which tell different parts of the story. The analyses focus on the narrative structure by looking at the different media platforms, the relations between the platforms and at the larger whole: the storyworld.
Transmedia storytelling as phenomenon reflects changes in all parts of the media ecology: production, distribution and reception. Therefore, both top-down and bottom-up networks are involved in a transmedia system. In addition, producers expand and extend the storyworld by adding texts, and fan production is also part of this same storyworld. The space in which media consumption and fan practices can lead to new meanings within a transmedia system is acknowledged in this research, but this project specifically focuses on the top-down networks. Here, the focus will be on the production and distribution side of transmedia systems, with television as the
central point.
The first chapter contains a theoretical approach to transmedia television, in which television is placed within the broader context of media convergence. As a key convergence culture theorist, Jenkins had popularized the concept of transmedia storytelling. In his book Convergence Culture (2006) and on several posts on his blog
Confessions of an Aca-Fan Jenkins elaborates on the phenomenon. In line with this
development other media scholars, such as Marie-Laure Ryan and Carolos Alberto Scolari, have critically extended on Jenkins’ work. The aim of this chapter is to form a theoretical basis of the definition of transmedia storytelling, but also to examine the different types of transmedia stories.
The second chapter embraces the ways in which producers are struggling with transmedia storytelling in practice. The first part focuses on struggles concerning the American entertainment industry, which most academic literature on transmedia storytelling is based on. The second part concerns transmedia struggles of the Dutch producers to give a clear image of the Dutch media industry. The history of the Dutch broadcasting system gives better understanding to the current conditions and market-specific features in relation to considerations behind transmedia productions. The last chapter comprises four case studies of Dutch transmedia projects based upon television programs. The following transmedia projects will be analyzed:
In Therapie, Goede Tijden Slechte Tijden, Wie Is De Mol? and Collapsus. Each case
study ranges between genres to incorporate a broad variety of transmedia practices within the Dutch television industry. As the Dutch broadcasting system is organized around a dual system, there are transmedia productions from both the public and the commercial domain. The case studies show that in these transmedia projects not all platforms are self-contained, due to financial and legal struggles. The form of transmedia storytelling occurring in the Netherlands is not in line with Jenkins’ aspirations, but instead possesses a mix of different transmedia logics. The focus of transmedia storytelling moves towards creating an enhanced experience, by using new media technologies to involve audiences into the story and keep them engaged. As the quote of Joris Hoebe suggests in the beginning of this section, the Internet can be seen as potential environment in the creation of a new kind of transmedia storytelling that takes place within one medium, by merging genres and technologies.
CHAPTER 1 – WHAT IS TRANSMEDIA STORYTELLING?
This chapter comprises a theoretical approach towards the altering meaning of television and focuses on new ways of storytelling. In the first section, the notion of television is placed within the contemporary convergence culture, which demands analysis of a combination of technological, cultural and social developments and changes. The second section focuses on the founding of transmedia storytelling scholarship by key theorist Jenkins, and works towards a broad definition that will be used as basic principle. The third section continues on Jenkins’ work by extending the discourse around the phenomenon of transmedia storytelling with some important perspectives and theories of various media scholars. Last, transmedia storytelling will be placed within the broader context of ‘‘transmedia’’ as umbrella term that covers different transmedia practices. This theoretical framework offers understanding to the form of transmedia storytelling that occurs in the Netherlands. This form is not in line with Jenkins’ assumptions, but instead focuses on the potential of the online environment to create deeper kinds of storytelling and enhanced experiences.
1.1 Blurring boundaries; multiple screens
‘‘Convergence alters the relationship between existing technologies, industries, markets, genres and audiences’’ (Jenkins 2004, 33).
Because the media environment is constantly transforming, due to technological developments, the Dutch industry must be considered within the context of global convergence and industry-wide adaptation to transmedia. The emergence of colour television, the remote control device, the VCR, and the cable are such developments that have altered television itself, its industry and television studies (Evans 2011, 1). Yet, digitalization, the rise of the Internet and the rise of the mobile phone with all its tools and services have caused an immense amount of changes that affect the whole media industry. The contemporary media environment is defined by the convergence of media. Jenkins redefined this term – convergence culture – in his book Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide (2006):
By convergence, I mean the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who will go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want (Jenkins 2006, 2).
As Jenkins’ quote suggests, the concept of convergence culture is more than a technological issue, but attempts to embrace technological, industrial, social and cultural aspects of the contemporary media environment (Jenkins 2006, 3). The distinction between ‘‘old’’ and ‘‘new’’ media, mentioned in Jenkins’ book, is problematic, since Bermejo argues that every medium is a technological sequel on an earlier innovation, and therefore each medium was in some particular historical context ‘‘new’’ (134). The critique of the use of this distinction lies in the emphasis on the binary dichotomies between ‘‘old’’ and ‘‘new’’, characterized as ‘‘passive’’ versus ‘‘(inter)active media’’, ‘‘push versus pull’’, ‘‘top-down versus bottom-up’’, ‘‘conservative versus progressive’’ and ‘‘controlled versus choice’’ (Caldwell 41; Carpentier and Van den Bulck 1). These binaries cover the digital revolution paradigm of the 1990s, which presupposed that new media would substitute old media. According to Jostein Grupsrid, digitalization offers new opportunities for media delivery and distribution of already existing media, rather than replacing them (215). As a result, Jenkins states that media convergence does not describe the opposition between two different types of media, or the displacement of old media to new media, but rather comprises a cultural shift in which new modes of media production encourage different forms of media consumption (2006, 3). Rather than speaking of a digital revolution, the process of media convergence can better be described as digital evolution.
Within the process of convergence, the medium of television, its status and meaning have changed, and therefore should be reconsidered. As the emergence of digitalization has caused a rapid growth of new technological developments, scholars like Caldwell argue that the television-dominated culture shifted towards a so-called ‘‘post-network’’ or ‘‘post-television’’ era (43). Television as medium has expanded and extended through convergence with digital tools and services, such as TiVo, video-on-demand, and electronic program guides. Besides, television’s interface does not only consist of the television screen of the box, but online streaming services that
provide the possibility to distribute televisual content via the computer, the Ipad, the mobile phone; any device which possesses an Internet connection. The notion of ‘‘watching television’’ has expanded and altered the viewing experience, both spatial and temporal, since television consumption can take place whenever and wherever. According to Uricchio, television has never been a stable medium; the identity of television only gets more and more complicated within the convergence culture (2005, 166). The social status of television as ‘‘window of the world’’ does not have to be rejected because the television’s box, which is mostly placed centrally within the domestic place, is nowadays not the central mode of consuming content anymore. Rather, the emphasis should be on television’s dynamic form within the convergence culture which provides new modes of production and new modes of storytelling, regarding to industrial synergies between television and other media. The online environment offers great potential to expand and extend the linear stories told via television. Alexander and Levine introduce the term Web 2.0 storytelling to refer to ‘‘the telling of stories using Web 2.0 tools, technologies and strategies’’ (42). There should be mentioned that the relation between production and consumption has become more transparent, so new modes of production consequently provide new modes of consumption, since digital media services and tools encourage the consumer to interact with the media technologies as well as with other consumers. As Jenkins states: ‘‘aspects of this convergence model are shaping decisions of media producers, advertisers, technologists, consumers, and policy-makers, and thus convergence has many different aspects and consequences’’ (2011). One of these consequences is the arrival of transmedia storytelling, which is according to Jenkins a reaction on the convergence culture. By looking at the production side of transmedia storytelling, the story exceeds the boundaries of one medium.
1.2 The founding of transmedia storytelling
‘‘The Matrix is entertainment for the age of media convergence, integrating multiple texts to create a narrative so large that it cannot be contained within a single medium’’ (Jenkins 2006, 95).
convergence, other media platforms offer space for online streaming services, which distribute televisual broadcast content. Various media scholars use terms such as ‘‘second-shift aesthetics’’ (Caldwell 2003), ‘‘cross-media or 360-degree strategies’’ (Bardoel and d’Haenens 2008; Doyle 2010), ‘‘Web 2.0 storytelling’’ (Alexander and Levine 2008), ‘‘media matrix’’ (Curtin 2009), and ‘‘deep media’’ (Rose 2012) to emphasize the expansion of television interfaces to the television set. Jenkins predicts the future of entertainment on the MIT Technology Review in 2003 by the introduction of the related concept of transmedia storytelling, as reaction on the blurring features of media within the convergence culture. Jenkins argues that the young generation of media consumers grow up with the complexity of narrative across media, and therefore expect an enhanced entertainment experience (2003). The children’s entertainment experience can be explained through the example of
Pokemon: toys, television programs, games, films and books are used to experience
children the Pokemon story. Although Jenkins introduced transmedia storytelling as a key feature of entertainment’s future, the concept itself is not new.
Marsha Kinder introduced the term ‘‘transmedia intertextuality’’ in 1991 in her book Playing with Power in Movies, Television, and Video Games: From Muppet
Babies to Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle to describe the relations between different
narrative media. According to Kinder, the transmedia experience of a child is constructed around entertainment franchises, which make use of transmedia intertextuality. These media franchises are presented as ‘‘commercial supersystems’’, which Kinder describes as ‘‘a network of intertextuality constructed around a figure or group of figures from pop culture who are either fictional […] or ‘‘real’’ […]’’ (Kinder 122). In this case, each medium gives a commercial contribution to the transmedia of a child. Just as Jenkins’ example of Pokemon, the Ninja Turtle franchise is such a supersystem that consists of toys, films, television series, games, comic books, clothing, and food. According to Kinder, the aim of these supersystems is commercial success, in which ‘‘transmedia intertextuality works to position consumers as powerful players while disavowing commercial manipulation’’ (119/120). Toys thus help to teach children to become consumers, to get immersed into the fictional world, where they can be exploited.
A significant shift took place from the earlier use of transmedia as commercial advertising to its current meaning, which is important for the understanding of
contemporary transmedia television. As Kinder describes transmediality as a process of merchandising and marketing, Jenkins rather allude to the dispersion of texts across various distribution outlets (Jenkins 2007). In chapter three ‘‘Searching for the Origami Unicorn: The Matrix and Transmedia Storytelling’’ of Convergence Culture Jenkins uses The Matrix franchise as example of transmedia entertainment to explain the features of transmedia storytelling (2006). The Wachowski brothers started with a story that was told through film. This story was expanded and extended quickly by the supplement of two more films, comics, animation, and games. The process of expansion allowed The Matrix to grow towards a fictional universe, in which ‘‘each step along the way built on what has come before, while offering new points of entry’’ (Jenkins 2006, 95). This model of transmedia storytelling comprises a narrative structure across various media, in which each part of the narrative is told via a different media platform. All narratives form part of a larger whole – the storyworld – which functions as site that holds together the different texts. In the essay ‘‘Transmedial Storytelling and Transfictionality’’ (2013) Marie-Laure Ryan defines the storyworld as follow:
World suggests a space, but story is a sequence of events that develops in time. Storyworlds, consequently, are more than static containers for the objects mentioned in a story, they are dynamic models of evolving situations, we could say: they are mental simulations of the development of the plot (Ryan 2013, 364).
The story is thus created from the world. The case of The Matrix shows that a story can start with a film, but that a story can be expanded through the supplement of other media platforms. Since every transmedia project is different there is no vast formula of transmedia storytelling. However, in ‘‘Transmedia Storytelling 101’’ on the blog
Confessions of an Aca-Fan Jenkins elaborates on his book attempts to cover these
differences under the following definition:
Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience. Ideally, each medium makes it own unique contribution to the unfolding of the story (2007).
As Jenkins states, within the process each medium narrates its text uniquely as contribution to the narrative understanding of the story (2006, 95/96). The texts within a transmedia system are highly interrelated, but also should also be self-contained; each medium may be experienced without reading the others (Ibid 96).The quantity of the consumption of texts determines the depth of the entertainment experience, in which the interconnection between texts enhances the experience as a whole. The balance between interconnection and self-sufficiency of texts seems to struggle in Jenkins’ model of transmedia storytelling. The way in which The Matrix films were received by viewers emphasizes this struggle. The success of The Matrix (1999) led to the making of two sequels, The Matrix Reloaded (2003) and The Matrix
Revolutions (2003). As Jenkins states about the Matrix’ storyworld: ‘‘the deeper you
drill down, the more secrets emerge, all of which can seem at any moment to be the
key to the film’’ (Jenkins 2006, 99). Hereby Jenkins suggests that a viewer that has
also played the game has a different viewing experience when watching The Matrix
Reloaded than one who only watches the film. The Matrix-sequels were not received
as positive as the first film, and therefore labelled by some film critiques (who only watched the films) as ‘‘failure’’ (fig.1).
Film Rotten Tomatoes Metacritic
The Matrix (1999) 87% (139 reviews) 73 (35 reviews)
The Matrix Reloaded (2003) 73% (237 reviews) 62 (40 reviews)
The Matrix Revolutions (2003) 36% (208 reviews) 47 (41 reviews)
Average rating 65% 61
Figure 1: Ratings of the Matrix-trilogy based on critical reviews3
As a reaction on the low ratings, Jenkins argues: ‘‘few of them consumed the games or comics or animated shorts, and, as a consequence, few absorbed the essential information they contained’’ (2006, 104). This assumption counters an earlier statement in his book: ‘‘each franchise entry needs to be self-contained so you don’t need to have seen the film to enjoy the game, and vice versa’’ (2006, 96). Yet, as the
3 ‘‘The Matrix (1999)’’; ‘‘The Matrix Reloaded (2003)’’; ‘‘The Matrix Revolutions (2003)’’.
Rotten Tomatoes. 26-3-2014.
complex narrative of The Matrix-sequels show, the transmedia path towards other sources needs to be explored in order to understand, and thus enjoy, the film.
Jenkins offers a broad definition on transmedia storytelling, which possesses more or less three important features. First, the narrative is told across different media platforms. Second, each distinct text gives a valuable contribution to the overall story, and third, each text must be self-contained and forms an entry point into the storyworld. Although Jenkins considers The Matrix-franchise a flawed but interesting experiment in transmedia storytelling, this example shows that it cannot fully achieve Jenkins’ aspirations of transmedia storytelling. Thus raised the question of whether this model of transmedia storytelling is still too ideal in practice; what is happening now? The discourse around transmedia storytelling is further developed and constructed around various scholars from different disciplines that examine the relation between distinct texts and storyworlds. These distinctions help to understand the ways in which the storyworlds of Dutch transmedia projects are extended and expanded to a kind of transmedia storytelling that focuses on the creation of an enhanced experience rather than expanding the narrative to its fully potential.
1.3 Further developments
‘‘The theory of transmedia practice pivots on a key single trait: the employment of multiple distinct media, and environments. This unifying trait is one that can be implemented in many creative practices, industries, countries and cultures. It can be recognised in a single creative work or from the relationships between works. This wide goal requires an interrogation of all implementations’’ (Dena 2009, 102/103).
The quote above elaborates on Jenkins’ model that comprises ‘‘the full aesthetic potential of transmedia storytelling’’ as the way the future of the entertainment industry will look (2006, 97). Jenkins retains an important position in the discourse, as he still takes an active role in the development of the concept. From Jenkins’ work on transmedia storytelling, other media scholars have examined the concept with the aim of distinguishing different kinds of transmedia stories. Media scholar Marie-Laure Ryan is an important media scholar in the development of transmedia storytelling. By focusing on narrative, she critically extends Jenkins’ work. The example of The Matrix is just one example of how a
transmedia project is constructed. In the article ‘‘Transmedia Storytelling and Transfictionality’’ (2013) Ryan distinguishes two different types of transmedia projects. The first contains a project in which the story is already presented as transmedia from the beginning, and the second refers to a project that possesses a snowball-effect. Here, the cultural prominent story that started with a single medium, has expanded and extended by the adaptation of transmedia platforms (2013, 363). In addition to distinguishing two ways in which transmedia storyworlds can come into existence, Ryan also investigates whether all contributions within a transmedia system refer to the same storyworld through the concept of transfictionality4
. Ryan cites literary theorist Lubomír Dolezel to mention three transfictional relations: expansion, modification, and transposition. The most common relation within a transmedia system is expansion of the scope of the original storyworld, since expansion is the only operation that preserves the integrity of the story, and thereby making the transmedia story powerful in the sense that the expansions reinforce the identity of the storyworld, rather than losing it. In the article ‘‘Lostology’’ Carlos A. Scolari examines expansion strategies within transmedia systems, and argues that expansion of the storyworld can be distinguished in three categories: time-based, space-based and character-based strategies (2003, 58/59). The narrative within a transmedia system gets larger by expanding the temporal dimension, expanding the diegetic territory, or by adding new characters (Ibid 58/59). According to Ryan, not every contribution is an expansion of the same storyworld. The relation of modification refers to a contributing text that restructures and reinvents the design of the story, and the relation of transposition places the story within a different temporal or spatial setting (Ryan 2013, 366). Transposition in this sense functions as time-based or space-based strategy as Scolari describes, but the expansion refers to another storyworld. Ryan thus suggests that not every expansion does have to represent the same storyworld. These transfictional relations between storyworlds demonstrate the complex texture of transmedia systems (fig. 2).
4 Ryan sees transmedia storytelling as form of transfictionality. ‘‘Transfictionality refers to
the migration of fictional entities across different texts’’; in transmedia storytelling these texts refer to different media (Ryan 2013, 365/366).
Figure 2: Relations between storyworld in transmedia systems.
Another relevant theorist (and designer) related to transmedia storytelling is Christina Dena. Although not a media scholar or professor, Dena is cited by media academics and Jenkins states about her: ‘‘someone who consistently sharpens my own thinking, since she is unafraid to critique anyone but also knows of what she speaks’’ (February 2013). According to Dena, the different transmedia practices should be examined in order to understand the transmedia phenomenon in the broadest sense. In the article ‘‘Techniques for Segmenting Content Across Media’’ Dena discusses ‘‘segmentation techniques’’ referring to the different ways in which expansions of unique content within a transmedia system can be designed (2008). In contrast to Ryan, these techniques more focus on the interrelation between texts rather than between storyworlds. Dena describes three transmedia formats: series, serial and hybrid (Ibid 2008). The first format is the transmedia series, consisting of distinct texts (via different media outlets) that are self-contained, but also contributing to the overall storyline. In opposition to the transmedia series, the transmedia serial refers to a story consisting of highly interrelated texts, which cannot be experienced individually. The last form is the transmedia hybrid: a format that blurs the distinction between series and serial. This format refers to ‘‘continuing AND self-contained strands’’ (Ibid 2008). Although each text is self-sufficient, they are also highly interrelated - opposed to transmedia series. As with Dena using The Matrix-franchise as example of transmedia hybrid, this format is most in accordance with Jenkins’
ideal form of transmedia storytelling. Jenkins himself acknowledges The Matrix was a ‘‘flawed experiment’’ due to the various text that are too highly dependent on one other to consume them individually, yet the intention of the Wachowski Brothers was to create a universe in such form Dena described (2006, 97).
Dena, Ryan and Scolari contribute to the discourse about transmedia storytelling by distinguishing different types of transmedia stories. The complex structure of transmedia systems due to the high interrelation between texts and storyworlds emphasize the fact that there is no determined formula of transmedia storytelling, as transmedia storytelling manages various elaborations. This makes it hard to pose the boundaries of transmedia storytelling. In order to get grip on what fits in the notion of transmedia storytelling and what does not, the concept must be distinguished from other forms of transmedia.
1.4 Transmedia distinctions
‘‘Transmedia […] is one way of talking about convergence as a set of cultural practices’’ (Jenkins 2011)
The conversation about the features of transmedia storytelling is still in development. The previous section has shown that a transmedia project can occur in different ways, but also their constructions can vary. In ‘‘Transmedia 202: Further Reflections’’ Jenkins places transmedia storytelling within the broader field of transmedia. ‘‘Transmedia branding’’, ‘‘transmedia performance’’, ‘‘transmedia ritual’’, ‘‘transmedia play’’, ‘‘transmedia activism’’, ‘‘transmedia spectacle’’ are, just as transmedia storytelling, forms of transmedia that enable to think about the flow of content across media through a specific lens (Jenkins 2011). This distinction between different forms of transmedia proposes a better understanding of the limits of transmedia storytelling. Also, it offers a way to locate the differences between transmedia productions from the Dutch public and the commercial broadcasting system.
The most common mistake is the mix-up between transmedia storytelling and transmedia branding. As mentioned in chapter 1.2, Marsha Kinder used the term transmedia intertextuality to refer to commercial intentions of the marketing and
entertainment industry (119). This concept can be seen as form of transmedia branding. In ‘‘Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds, and Branding in Contemporary Media Production’’ Scolari examines transmedia branding through a semiotic perspective (2009). As Scolari states: ‘‘the brand is a device that can produce a discourse, give it meaning, and communicate this to audiences’’ (2009, 599). This process of branding can occur in different ways within a transmedia system. Marketing techniques such as product placement includes a brand into the storyworld, but the storyworld itself can also be the brand. Scolari calls these storyworlds ‘‘narrative brands,’’ which are expressed through ‘‘a set of characters, topics, and an aesthetic style that define the fictional world of the brand’’ (Ibid 600). The difference between transmedia storytelling and transmedia branding is mainly visible in the level of degree of each contributing text. In transmedia storytelling, each text makes ‘‘a distinctive and valuable contribution to the whole’’ (Jenkins 2006, 95/96). In contrast, these contributions in transmedia branding do enhance the value of the brand, but are often limited in their contribution understanding the story. The Pokemon-franchise can be considered as transmedia branding. Pokemon was first introduced as role-playing game for Nintendo, but the story of Pokemon quickly grew into a big media franchise by launching more games, films, comics, animation, but also merchandise such as trading cards, toys and clothes. Although the storyworld has expanded enormously through the addition of narratives and characters, the contribution of merchandise does not add to the understanding of the overarching narrative. Instead, it enhances the experience of the brand rather than the story. Therefore, the autonomy of the different elements is more important in transmedia branding than the coherence in transmedia storytelling, since these elements are connected under the same brand.
Continuing on the creation of an overarching narrative or story as key features of transmedia storytelling in which each text functions as an extension of the story, there also needs to be a distinction between adaptation and transmediation. Geoffrey Long wrote his master thesis ‘‘Transmedia Storytelling: Business, Aesthetics, and Production at the Jim Henson Company’’ in 2007, and since then has become an important player within the conversation around transmedia storytelling. As Long states:
multiple media types to craft a single story is transmediation. […] While this shares some of the same benefits as transmedia storytelling, primarily the creation of new “access points” to a narrative world through alternative media types, it differs from transmedia storytelling due to the lack of one of the key components in Jenkins’s definition: distinction (Long 22).
According to Long, adaptation refers to the reconfigurations of the same story to suit the limitations and potentials of a new medium. Important to mention here is that adaptation does not replicate content, and thus should not be confused with what Gillians Doyle calls ‘‘multi-platform or 360 degree strategy’’ in the article ‘‘From Television to Multi-Platform’’ (3). Doyle alludes to the dispersal of the same content via multiple media outlets; for example televisual content that is distributed via different interfaces to the television set such as Netflix, which can be viewed on various devices. Doyle forms an approach towards the possibilities of (digital) distribution rather than towards production, as Long does by using the example of the
Lord of the Rings films of Peter Jackson as adaptation to J.R.R. Tolkien’s novels.
Jenkins acknowledges the distinction between adaptation and transmedia storytelling in ‘‘Revenge of the Origami Unicorn’’ and states that adaptation ‘‘reproduces the original narrative with minimum changes into a new medium and is essentially redundant to the original work, and extension, which expands our understanding of the original by introducing new elements into the fiction’’ (December 2009).
Adaptations help to transform a story to other media in order to reach new audiences. As Hutcheon states in her book A Theory of Adaptation: ‘‘adaptation is repetition, but repetition without replication’’ (7). A novel can be translated into a film, or a game adapts to a television program, but it is not the medium that is adapted. According to Paul Kerr, ‘‘it is the illusion of reality’’ that the medium attempts to produce (qtd. in Ellis, 3). John Ellis mentions a range of functions of how such illusion of reality can get adapted: through ‘‘characters, locations, costumes, actions and strings of narrative events’’ (3). According to Long, although adaptations possess some of the same features of transmedia storytelling such as creating new entry points to the storyworld through different media platforms, adaptations do not function as distinct components of a larger story (22). In this sense adaptations may add something to the franchise by reaching new audiences, and therefore work as transmedia branding, but do not build on storylines communicated via other media
platforms.
Ryan elaborates on this theory of adaptation by introducing the concept of ‘‘transmedia adaptation.’’ As with transmedia storytelling, Ryan examines the relations between storyworlds through transfictional relations and claims that the medium-specific features determine that each medium cannot represent the same storyworld, although the adaptation is based upon the same story. As Ryan states:
In a novel, the thoughts of characters can be represented very explicitly and in great detail; in a film, the corresponding resources are much more limited, and the mental states of characters must usually be inferred by the spectator on the basis of visual signs (2013, 368).
As the transfictional relations suggest, transmedia adaptations unfold in different ways; they adapt, adjust or alter from the (same) original text in different modes. In the article ‘‘Transfictionality Across Media’’ Ryan maintains four conditions of transfictionality, to examine the degree to which distinct texts can be considered as transmedia adaptations (2008). First, there must be a relation between two distinct works (Ryan 2008, 388). Here, Ryan emphasizes on the word ‘‘work’’ rather than ‘‘text,’’ referring to the material identity of the text and the author as a whole. Second, the distinct works represent two distinct storyworlds, but these worlds must be related to each other through expansion, modification, or transposition (Ryan 2008, 386; 2013, 366/367)). Unlike transmedia storytelling, in the case of transmedia adaptations the different storyworlds are not merging into one (Ryan 2013, 366). The third condition refers to the process of reception; the reader must be familiar with the storyworld of the original text; the fourth condition maintains that the adapted work must enhance the immersive power of the original world (Ryan 2008, 391/392). These distinctions between transmedia forms enable media scholars to see the differences between transmedia practices. According to Jenkins, The Wachowski brothers intended to create a storyworld that can be explored through various entry points. Yet each text contributes to the overall story through the interrelation between them. In contrast, Scolari states that a brand can be incorporated in the storyworld, but the storyworld itself can also be a brand. In this case the brand gives meaning to and creates identity for the storyworld. The Pokémon-franchise is an example of such a storyworld that is built around separate elements that enhance the world as brand, thus aiming on the commercial element rather than the aesthetic. With the retelling of the
story of the books of Lord of the Rings into the films Ryan claims that this transmedia adaptation creates two different storyworlds that relate to each other based on four transfictional conditions. The move from one medium to another does certainly add new interpretations to the original story by redesigning the same story through another framework, but does not provide storylines that together form a larger narrative. Therefore these kinds of transmedia differentiate from transmedia storytelling. However, these differences can occur on different levels of degree. Focusing on the last part of Jenkins’ definition of transmedia storytelling - the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience - adaptations can lead to new interpretations of the story and therefore in some way be considered as extensions of the story. As Jenkins suggests: ‘‘it might be better to think of adaptation and extension as part of a continuum in which both poles are only theoretical possibilities and most of the action takes place somewhere in the middle’’ (2011). As a result, it can occur that a transmedia project makes use of a form of transmedia storytelling, but also includes commercial elements. This mix of transmedia types is important in the distinction between public and commercial transmedia productions in the Netherlands, since both domains use different transmedia constructions while their aim is similar. Whereas the commercial broadcasting system uses commercial strategies to support the project as well as to encourage audience participation, the public broadcasting system also involves different types of transmedia to emphasize the experience, rather than focusing on expanding the narrative.
1.5 Summary
Transmedia storytelling is a concept hyped by Jenkins as a response on the changing media landscape in the current era of media convergence. Jenkins’ definition covers the flow of content across multiple media platforms, in which each distinct text is self-contained but also gives a unique contribution to the overarching story. This definition can be understood as an ideal form of storytelling that embraces the future of entertainment, but in practice most transmedia projects cannot achieve these aspirations. From Jenkins’ work, other media scholars have elaborated in this discourse around the phenomenon of transmedia storytelling in order to determine its features and boundaries. While the use of transmedia storytelling can differ in projects by examining the relation between distinct texts and between storyworlds, the concept
is part of the broader domain of transmedia. Theoretically the different logics offer distinct lenses to look at transmedia productions, but in practice one project can involve different logics that make sense to the larger storyworld. As Jenkins states: ‘‘the same text might fit within multiple logics’’ (2011).
CHAPTER 2 – TRANSMEDIA STRUGGLES
This chapter focuses on transmedia storytelling in practice. Most transmedia projects cannot measure up to Jenkins’ ideal form of transmedia storytelling, but as mentioned in the previous chapter a transmedia project unfold in different ways through different elaborations. In academic literature some struggles are discussed with regard to academic aspirations of Jenkins’ definition of transmedia storytelling. These struggles acknowledged in academic literature are mostly based on the American commercial entertainment industry, while the Dutch media industry has developed a dual system in which the public broadcasting system plays an important role. This dual service system displays two different ways in which producers are struggling with the production of transmedia storytelling. Although the commercial domain has grown steadily, the public service offers potential for transmedia storytelling in future’s entertainment. In addition, it is never asserted that Dutch producers attempt to meet Jenkins’ model of transmedia storytelling, but rather try to find their own suitable form of transmedia.
2.1 The American media industry
‘‘[…] where I think transmedia storytelling cannot fully account for the full range of franchising is in the inherent messiness of franchising and its push away from integrated forms of collaboration’’ (qtd. in Jenkins 2014).
In the American entertainment industry producers increasingly uses transmedia storytelling around blockbusters or television series to expand the storyworld. Transmedia projects The Blair Witch Project (Myrick & Sánchez, 1999),
The Matrix (Wachowski Brothers, 1999), Artificial Intelligence (Spielberg, 2001), The Dark Knight (Nolan, 2008), 24 (Cochran & Surnow, 2001-2010), The Ghost Whisperer (Gray, 2005-2010), Heroes (Alexander & Warshaw, 2006-2010), True Blood (Ball, 2008-present) and The Walking Dead (Darabont, 2010-present) embrace
the transmedia potential in the American entertainment industry. In addition, television programs that possess the snowball effect have expanded their stories by the supplementation of media and have grown towards bigger transmedia storyworlds. However, due to an altering corporate structure for media production, the American entertainment industry has to deal with economic and power struggles. Although the
U.S. media industry also possesses a public broadcasting system, the media landscape is renowned and characterized by the commercial companies and broadcasters (Uricchio 2009, 64). In this commercial corporate form the economic logic overemphasizes the artistic components of the transmedia storyworlds. As Jenkins notes in his book: ‘‘everything about the structure of the modern entertainment industry was designed with this single idea in mind – the construction and
enhancement of entertainment franchises’’ (2006, 104).
According to Evans, in these franchises all transmedia texts belong to one ‘‘unified author’’ that controls the transmedia storyworld (2013, 31). Through licensing arrangements the author, or central media company, sells rights of intellectual property, concerning characters, settings and concepts. These licensing arrangements limit the possibilities of adding transmedia components. Hence, this industry model makes it hard for producers to change or add something to the original storyworld. As Jenkins speculates: ‘‘Soon, licensing will give way to what industry insiders are calling ‘‘co-creation’’’’ (2006, 105). Jenkins’ notion is based upon the horizontal integration by encouraging co-creation, or collaboration, in order to expand ‘‘the range of product offerings across markets: from an Iron Man comic to Iron Man television series, toys, and video games’’ (Johnson 9). As Johnson claims in an interview with Jenkins, this ideal form of transmedia storytelling maintains an ideal form of franchising in which ‘‘every elements is designed to work together in a coordinated, coherent, integral way, without elements that seem unimportant to an overarching story’’ (qtd. in Jenkins 2014).
One of the reasons the American media industry cannot measure up to this ideal form of transmedia storytelling, according to Jenkins, is because these licensing agreements and ownership strategies chiefly lead to complex power relations between producers that expresses in competition, rather than collaboration (2006, 107). The struggle with the academic qualifications of transmedia storytelling within the American entertainment industry thus concerns its corporate structure, regarding licensing and authorship that limit the potential of collaborations for developing the fictional storyworld through multiple media.
2.2 The Dutch media industry
‘‘The biggest obstacles in the field of transmedial working currently occur in the Media Law, the financing and distribution of projects’’5
(Bruno Felix qtd. in Truijen
en Kuitenbrouwer).
In the Netherlands the transmedia productions also have increased. Like the American examples mentioned above, most of the Dutch transmedia practices are constructed around film or television as dominating medium. In the convergence culture where the television itself is surpassing the boundaries of the medium to mobile devices and computer screens, the online media environment offers great potential to expand and extend the storyworld with complementary media platforms. Nevertheless, as in other countries, Dutch producers are searching for the ideal model of transmedia storytelling. As Jenkins acknowledges on his blog:
[W]e are still in a period of experimentation and innovation. New models are emerging through production practices and critical debates, and we need to be open to a broad array of variations of what transmedia means in relation to different projects (2011).
Therefore, each transmedia project possesses its own most effective model. The struggles with transmedia storytelling are not the same in each country. National differences between the American and the Dutch media industry explain that Dutch producers are struggling and experimenting with transmedia storytelling in a different way.
One of these national differences is the scale of the industry, as the Dutch media industry contains a quite smaller market than the American market. This market consists of a relative small amount of media companies, media productions and media consumers, since the Dutch language limits the boundaries of global productions. Yet the Dutch government plays an active role in the stimulation of the public broadcasting service and invests in experiments within the adaptation of new technologies that go beyond the linearity of broadcasting, in order to fight the
5 Original quote: ‘‘De grootste hindernissen op het gebied van transmediaal werken liggen
commercial media productions (Wijfjes 12). This innovative character of the Dutch media industry results in increasing interest in the use of multiple media platforms and transmedia storytelling techniques, which arises from a larger history of the Dutch broadcasting system. The history of the dual-market sketches a profile for the current media landscape, regarding to converging media and transmedia practices. Several political, cultural, economic and technological conditions have affected the media landscape in different phases. Since the beginning of the twentieth century the Dutch broadcasting system has been a public service, based upon an internal pillarization with the purpose to ‘‘reflect the whole of Dutch culture’’ (Wijfjes 3). The Broadcasting Act in 1967 had altered the Dutch media landscape, by opening up to new broadcasters, as well as to internal commercialization of public broadcasting. The pillarized character of the Dutch market disappeared by social and cultural change, due to the young generation that was critical to the pillarized society (Vos 270). This change was in line with the emergence of the cable and satellite in the 1980s, which provided a rise of commercial broadcasters. This development had led to a dual broadcasting system. The ideological purpose of the public broadcasting service was perpendicular to the economic goal of the commercial broadcaster, which resulted in a power struggle and a change of program content, blurring the boundaries between information and entertainment (Bardoel and d’Haenens 352). Due to the rise of computer technologies in the 1990s the Dutch broadcasting system needed to adapt to the convergence culture that dominates in the current media landscape. Accoring to Hins, professor of media law, the Media Act 2008 was one strategy of the public broadcasting system to reposition in the current multimedia landscape, since they still need to fulfill their public role in a more becoming commercial media landscape (94). The public service thus nowadays goes beyond the boundaries of broadcasting by providing innovative content and expanding to other media platforms (Bardoel and d’Haenens 359).
The changes and developments are forcing a constant battle for the public service to remain its important position in the dual system. The strategies to adapt to the contemporary digital culture offer potential for transmedia storytelling in the public domain. However, this potential is limited, since producers still cope with several problems in terms of legal and economic questions. Katia Truijen and Klaas
Kuitenbrouwer, both working for Virtueel Platform6
, are searching for a
multi-disciplinary approach towards the Dutch creative industry. They published research on the Dutch transmedia practice, comprising the vision of Dutch producers on transmedia storytelling, and investigating the potentials and problems of financing transmedia projects in the public domain. As the quote of Bruno Felix7
in the beginning of this section suggests, the struggles regarding to transmedia projects in the Netherlands concern three aspects. Regulations in the Media Law limit the public media domain, which lacks a transmedia commission that evaluates a transmedia project as a whole (Truijen en Kuitenbrouwer 22). Therefore, it can occur that one medium receives a grant from a foundation, meanwhile another (essential) medium can be rejected. Joris Hoebe8
complements this view by arguing that the Dutch cult and art foundations are not yet organized around transmedia projects as a whole, and argues that there should be one foundation that represents all media platforms (Ibid 14). This lack of business models undermines the collaboration between different media and thereby obstructs the production of a transmedia project (Ibid 22). However, this research is published in the year 2011. The Media Foundation, Incentive Fund Creative Industry and Dutch Film Foundation have collaborated to start a new funding regulation in 2013 to support public non-fictional Dutch transmedia productions (‘‘Non-Fictie Transmedia Regeling 2013). These transmedia stories have to relate to the real world, without excluding fictional elements such as games. The aim for this is to bring up socially relevant themes. This new regulation provides positive developments to involve the logic of transmedia storytelling within the Dutch media landscape and offers potential for the aesthetic of transmedia storytelling in the public domain that perhaps goes beyond commercial productions.
Summary
The dual broadcasting system consisting of the public and commercial domain makes an important distinction in the Dutch media landscape. The long history of public broadcasting shows the importance of the public broadcasting system. To keep that position the public domain tries to adapt to the convergence culture by producing
6 Virtueel Platform is per 1 January 2013 changed into Het Nieuwe Instituut. 7 Bruno Felix is co-founder of Submarine, a Dutch transmedia production company. 8 Joris Hoebe is creative director at Spektor Storytelling, a media company that creates
innovative productions. However, the biggest struggle of producers in the public domain derives from the Media Law, which does not acknowledge transmedia projects as a whole. However, the characteristics of the public system to make qualitative and cultural reflective productions together with the coming of new funds offer potential for transmedia storytelling in the public domain. In contrast, the struggle of commercial producers is more in line with the struggle of the American media industry, although the scale of the Dutch market is much smaller. Here, the biggest risk is that the economic aspects overvalue the aesthetic element of transmedia storytelling. Although the public and commercial broadcasters are struggling in diverse ways since they have different purposes in the production of media, all transmedia productions analyzed in the next chapter mainly focus on the online media platforms to create a profound experience of the story.
CHAPTER 3 - CASE STUDIES
This chapter embraces textual analyses of four case studies on transmedia projects in the Netherlands. These projects possess different genres to cover a broad array of transmedia approaches. This includes productions from both the public and the commercial broadcasting system. The analyses are based upon the features of transmedia storytelling mentioned in chapter 1. In the first place Jenkins’ definition on transmedia storytelling is used to analyze in which ways the transmedia project does not meet his features. Therefore, the transmedia project is framed by looking at the storyworld through the fundamentals of the project and the construction of the story across different media platforms. Then, by means of the relations between texts and worlds the form of transmedia storytelling is determined. The final part affects the corporate structure of the production, by examining the collaborations between companies in context of the struggles of the Dutch market in chapter 2. The first case is the second season of In Therapie (2011), which is - due to popularity of the first season – extended to other media platforms and is presented in the media as transmedia storytelling. The second case is the fourteenth season of Wie
Is De Mol? (WIDM), which’ storyworld has also grown as result of a snowball effect.
Both cases are collaborations between media production companies and public broadcasters, meaning that the regulatory and financial struggle in these cases should take into consideration. In opposition, the third case is about the television series
Goede Tijden, Slechte Tijden (GTST), broadcast since 1990. From onwards 2012
GTST is presented as transmedia practice, with the supplement of several media platforms. The collaboration between production companies, commercial broadcasters and also sponsors provides the possibility to expand the storyworld on a bigger scale. The last case focuses on Collapsus, which is the only project presented as transmedia storytelling from the beginning. This case involves collaboration between an interactive production company and a public broadcaster, and explores the potential of transmedia storytelling in the public domain for the near future. These textual analyses de-construct the productions of four different cases, and give insight how transmedia storytelling is used and has realized its goals within the Dutch media industry.
3.1 In Therapie
In Therapie is a drama series which main story is dispersed via television. The
second season of In Therapie was broadcast in the summer of 2011 on the public channel Nederland 2. In Therapie is based on the Israeli television series Be Tipul. In addition to the television program, the use of digital media platforms is important for the creation of a transmedia storyworld. The story is extended through the storylines of the characters, but these storylines are not yet fully developed. The relation between texts shows that the additional platforms highly depend on the main platform of television. However, In Therapie won a silver SpinAward in the category Crossmedia, for the creativity in digital communication, and therefore can be suggested that this transmedia construction works in the Netherlands.
3.1.1 The storyworld
Due to the popularity of the first season, the producer of In Therapie has chosen to use transmedia storytelling techniques to expand and extent the storyworld in the second season. As Evans states in her book Transmedia Television: ‘‘transmediality, especially transmedia storytelling, functions to a specific end within drama programming’’ (2011, 10). According to Evans, drama creates a fictional world that seems natural; this world invites the viewer to interact and get immersed into the storyworld (Ibid 11). Although social media were already used in the first season, the second season shows more intense use of these media platforms. Furthermore, the addition of the mobile application has transformed the second season into a transmedia story. The second season of In Therapie thus comprises a transmedia practice generated by means of a snowball effect, consisting of a television series, a website, mobile application and social media platforms. As Ryan states: ‘‘there is a central text that functions as a common field of reference to all the other texts’’ (2013, 363). Hence, the television series functions as the central text, but is only part of the storyworld that is created. The digital media platforms are efficiently used to fulfill the complementary function of expanding the storyworld. Therefore, according to Evans, transmedia storytelling encourages the viewer to ‘‘seek out information on those hidden parts via the extensions onto multiple platforms’’ (2011, 11).
