The blockbuster has always met the following criteria: big star, big budget and big audience. I have to admit that growing up, i restricted my media consumption to the mainstream. I even believed that the content that made it to cinema or that could be found in stores was reflective of its worth and value. I worked at a cinema for 6 years and can remember believing that if a film didn’t make it to the big screen then it obviously wasn’t very good. Of course I didn’t think that every film that made it to cinema was good, but I naively assumed that if a film deserved to, it would.
Before university, I had never really considered Chris Anderson’s concept of the long tail. Living on campus at university, I was introduced to a computer network where music and films and videos were downloaded and shared at ease and the preconceived ideas I had about media content were diminished. As trendwatching.com (2005) stated “the only reason mass used to equal 'hit', had to do with the now outdated perception that if something sells well, it must certainly be good. Now, with consumers not only being comfortable wandering further from the beaten path, but the beaten path also being much easier to leave (thank you WWW), they discover their taste is not as mainstream as they thought.”
It is now so easy to access content that was once restricted by its distribution. Previously, our viewing and concept of a ‘hit’ was moulded by what was chosen to be placed in front of us, which was usually determined by funding. If a program wasn’t screened on free to air television the chances of most people even knowing it existed were pretty slim. Physical retailers will only carry content that can generate sufficient demand to earn its keep. But each can pull only from a limited local population (Anderson, 2004). Living away from the city, my film viewing was restricted to the small number of films showing at the local 5 screen cinema and the 3000 or so titles that fit on the shelves at the local civic video.
Step in Amazon.com, iTunes and Netflix. As Anderson discusses Online retailers such as these have provided audiences with distribution medium that doesn’t favor the 'hits ' alone. The internet landscape enables online retailers to service all customers from various geographical locations from a small number of warehouses. The location of fans no longer matters as they don't need to worry about limited shelf space. Therefore more titles are available and easily found, which service a large variety of niche interests. These niche interests are what makes up Andersons Long Tail. The anatomy of the long tail, shows the huge difference in the number of titles and as Alex Iskold (2007) states, "how collectively, things that are in rather low demand can amount to quite large volumes. This is because there is a large number of people who belong to the long tail and they encompass a wide rage of tastes."
It is now so easy to access content that was once restricted by its distribution. Previously, our viewing and concept of a ‘hit’ was moulded by what was chosen to be placed in front of us, which was usually determined by funding. If a program wasn’t screened on free to air television the chances of most people even knowing it existed were pretty slim. Physical retailers will only carry content that can generate sufficient demand to earn its keep. But each can pull only from a limited local population (Anderson, 2004). Living away from the city, my film viewing was restricted to the small number of films showing at the local 5 screen cinema and the 3000 or so titles that fit on the shelves at the local civic video.
Step in Amazon.com, iTunes and Netflix. As Anderson discusses Online retailers such as these have provided audiences with distribution medium that doesn’t favor the 'hits ' alone. The internet landscape enables online retailers to service all customers from various geographical locations from a small number of warehouses. The location of fans no longer matters as they don't need to worry about limited shelf space. Therefore more titles are available and easily found, which service a large variety of niche interests. These niche interests are what makes up Andersons Long Tail. The anatomy of the long tail, shows the huge difference in the number of titles and as Alex Iskold (2007) states, "how collectively, things that are in rather low demand can amount to quite large volumes. This is because there is a large number of people who belong to the long tail and they encompass a wide rage of tastes."
While the long tail is certainly becoming an important consideration for business, i doubt it will ever completely wipe out the mainstream. They will continue to co-exist together. Content moves from the long tail into the mainstream and vice versa as it becomes more or less popular. It is important for all productions to be available and i agree that more people will continue to look for niche interests in the long tail. However, i also believe that the mainstream is important as it connects indivduals and indicates wide cultural beliefs and values.
Anderson, C. (2004) "The Long Tail." Wired 12.10. Accessed May 2, 2008 from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html
Anderson, C. (2004) "The Long Tail." Wired 12.10. Accessed May 2, 2008 from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html
Trendwatching.com. "Nouveau Niche." March 2005. http://www.trendwatching.com/trends/nouveau_niche.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment