Evaluate how different media
institutions market and distribute products in the media are in which you have
studied.
In film, major movie studios and independent production
companies market and distribute their films in many different ways. In todays
media landscape there are hundreds of different channels and platforms, this
creates a competition between film companies, as they have to work much harder
to attract audience to them.
A major institution, that has successfully marketed and
distributed a blockbuster film, is Disney which produced and marketed Star
Wars: A Force Awakens. Additionally,
Film4 Productions, an Independent Production Company produced A Field In
England.
Disney used many marketing strategies to engage the audience
with the film, for example, Disney created a multimedia interactive app. The
app took advantage of technological convergence, using convergent devices to
allow the audience to take Star Wars selfies, and participate in a online game
which they could connect and play with other Star Wars fans. This was
successful because it encouraged sharing and spreading of the brand content
virally, and encouraged the audience to share the outcome of the selfies on
social media.
Another strategy used by Disney is that the trailer was
premiered on ESPN, a channel that is owned by Disney. This is an example of
synergy. The premiere of the trailer was shown on Monday night which is a
popular time for football, this means that there was a large audience engaging
with the channel which meant that lots of people were able to watch the screening
of the premiere.
Furthermore, Disney also used social media to create
hashtags on Facebook and Twitter. An example hashtag is, #ForceFriday. This
encouraged the audience to help with the marketing as they were sharing with
their friends. This created a organic and viral spreading of content. By using
a hashtag also created a ‘event’ feeling with the ForceFriday hashtags.
In comparison, Film4 Productions are unable to do as much
as Disney when it comes to marketing due to them having a lower marketing
budget. Though having a smaller budget, Film4 built single momentum around the
film and created interest across all media platforms.
Film4, like Disney also used synergy as a way of
marketing their film. Channel 4 has an audience view count of 23 million
viewers, which allowed them to successfully market special trailers to
encourage them to watch the television screening of A Field In England.
On top of this, Film4 Productions created a Digital
Masterclass Website that appealed to the film’s ‘cinephile’ target audience. The
website included behind the scene content and took advantage of digital technology. Statistics show that 34% out of 54,000 visits onto the website went on to buy tickets to watch the film in cinemas. This is evidence that the website successfully engaged the audience. Film4 Productions also had a running commentary when the film was first released on it's 'Live Blog' this attracted the audience and encouraged them to post their reactions throughout the film also.
Similarly, Film4 also used social media. A Field in England took advantage of Ben Wheatley's (the director) niche cult fanbase and created a Twitter page for the film which had 2,000 followers. By using social media allowed the audience to tweet the director, which was evident as it got 12,000 mentions on Twitter. This was effective as it allowed viral marketing to take place and also encouraged the audience to take part and express their opinions on the film.
The distribution of both films was very different. Disney had a $240 million budget on production and advertisement which meant that they could afford to do a day and date release. This is when the film is released on one specific day and date. Disney decided to follow the traditional release window and released the film on the 17th December 2015, and later on released the film on DVD and Blu-Ray, and eventually onto VOD and TV. Not only was in distributed in cinemas, the audience were able to choose to view the film in different formats, for example: 2D, 3D, IMAX and IMAX Laser. Star Wars: A Force Awakens had a blanket release and was distributed to 90% of the UK cinemas, and shown in 4,134 cinemas within the US. This was effective as it allowed fans to choose a format in which they wanted to view the film. It also encouraged fans to repeat viewings in different formats to compare the differences. For example, between home viewing, and IMAX Laser. By having a day and date release also meant that a hype was built around the film and it created a 'event' for the release.
In comparison, A Field In England was simultaneously released on July 5th 2013. This means that the film was released on all media platforms on one day and there were no release windows. Film4 Productions decided to release the film this way as they believed it would not be as successful if they followed a conventional film release. The film was only released in 17 cinemas within the UK, and was available on VOD on the same day. This gave the audience the option to how they would view the film, which would have encouraged more people to watch the film as it would be suited them and regardless geography. Film4 Productions did however, add value to cinemas by having a Question and Answer screening with the director of the film, Ben Wheatley, in which 51% of people intended. Unlike Disney, Film4 had a small budget of £112,000. This way of distribution was successful to Film4 as although the niche audience (mostly men) knew that the film was available free to air on Film4, 77% still went to view the film in cinemas. This was successful and also effective as it was very audience centred as they were able to choose where to watch the film. It was also successful as it became the most watched film on Film4O by having a average of 567,000 viewers. It was also effective as it took advantage of convergent devices as the choice to how to watch the film was suited to the audience.
In conclusion, we can see that their are many differences and similarities with how major and independent institutions market and produce their products. One reason why there are so many differences is due to the budget they are both given. By having a larger budget, Disney are able to distribute their film in more ways and in more creative ways too. Whereas, Film4 Productions have a more simplistic way of marketing and distributing. However, they did both use convergent devices in order to both market and distribute as well as social media websites, which suggests that this is the most popular way to virally market a product. In my opinion, I believe that Disney had a more successful marketing and distribution strategy mainly because of the financial differences, but also because it has a larger, much wider audience.
Similarly, Film4 also used social media. A Field in England took advantage of Ben Wheatley's (the director) niche cult fanbase and created a Twitter page for the film which had 2,000 followers. By using social media allowed the audience to tweet the director, which was evident as it got 12,000 mentions on Twitter. This was effective as it allowed viral marketing to take place and also encouraged the audience to take part and express their opinions on the film.
The distribution of both films was very different. Disney had a $240 million budget on production and advertisement which meant that they could afford to do a day and date release. This is when the film is released on one specific day and date. Disney decided to follow the traditional release window and released the film on the 17th December 2015, and later on released the film on DVD and Blu-Ray, and eventually onto VOD and TV. Not only was in distributed in cinemas, the audience were able to choose to view the film in different formats, for example: 2D, 3D, IMAX and IMAX Laser. Star Wars: A Force Awakens had a blanket release and was distributed to 90% of the UK cinemas, and shown in 4,134 cinemas within the US. This was effective as it allowed fans to choose a format in which they wanted to view the film. It also encouraged fans to repeat viewings in different formats to compare the differences. For example, between home viewing, and IMAX Laser. By having a day and date release also meant that a hype was built around the film and it created a 'event' for the release.
In comparison, A Field In England was simultaneously released on July 5th 2013. This means that the film was released on all media platforms on one day and there were no release windows. Film4 Productions decided to release the film this way as they believed it would not be as successful if they followed a conventional film release. The film was only released in 17 cinemas within the UK, and was available on VOD on the same day. This gave the audience the option to how they would view the film, which would have encouraged more people to watch the film as it would be suited them and regardless geography. Film4 Productions did however, add value to cinemas by having a Question and Answer screening with the director of the film, Ben Wheatley, in which 51% of people intended. Unlike Disney, Film4 had a small budget of £112,000. This way of distribution was successful to Film4 as although the niche audience (mostly men) knew that the film was available free to air on Film4, 77% still went to view the film in cinemas. This was successful and also effective as it was very audience centred as they were able to choose where to watch the film. It was also successful as it became the most watched film on Film4O by having a average of 567,000 viewers. It was also effective as it took advantage of convergent devices as the choice to how to watch the film was suited to the audience.
In conclusion, we can see that their are many differences and similarities with how major and independent institutions market and produce their products. One reason why there are so many differences is due to the budget they are both given. By having a larger budget, Disney are able to distribute their film in more ways and in more creative ways too. Whereas, Film4 Productions have a more simplistic way of marketing and distributing. However, they did both use convergent devices in order to both market and distribute as well as social media websites, which suggests that this is the most popular way to virally market a product. In my opinion, I believe that Disney had a more successful marketing and distribution strategy mainly because of the financial differences, but also because it has a larger, much wider audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment