Audience Relations at SBS: The Balance of Power

8/15/2019 Audience Relations at SBS: The Balance of Power

1/49

Audience Relations at SBS:

The Balance of Power

Submission by Tim Bennett for

Honours in Media and Communications (UNSW)

November, 2004

Word count: 14800

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no

material previously published or written by another person, nor material which to a substantial extent has

been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma at UNSW or any other educational

institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the thesis. Any contribution made to the

research by others, with whom I have worked at UNSW or elsewhere, is explicitly acknowledged in the

thesis.

I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work, even though I mayhave received assistance from others on style, presentation and linguistic expression.

Signed: Date: 4 November 2004

Tim Bennett

1


2/49

Abstract

The Special Broadcasting Service not only produces programs, but also constantly produces and

makes use of traces of its own audiences. Its many feedback channels are geared towards

generating information that serves two purposes. Firstly, feedback empowers SBS to refine its

production practices in the never-ending task of fulfilling its core goals. Secondly, audience

feedback allows SBS to ascertain its success in achieving those goals; it provides SBS with

measures for judging performance. The politics of control are at work in these audience relations.

Producers attempt to discern how (or if) their control over audiences functions. Audiences in turn

exert influence over how producers approach their tasks. This relationship is in constant flux, for

contemporary feedback techniques ensure that the nature of the audience (as SBS knows it) is

heterogeneous and fluid.

Contents

Introduction: 3

SBS Television: 10

SBS Digital Media: 18

Public Relations: 31

Conclusions: 38

References: 41

Appendix: 43

2


3/49

Chapter One: Introduction

Like any broadcaster, it is an unavoidable fact that SBS staff make most of their production

decisions away from the immediate presence of the radio listeners, television viewers and online

users who constitute their audiences. How does SBS, from its base in Artarmon, come to know

about those audiences? What purposes do audiences serve within SBS? For that matter, why does

SBS bother with its audiences at all? Audiences are troublesome: getting to know them is difficult

and expensive; it sometimes seems that they can be quantified in any way one sees fit. What they

do say is sometimes unpleasant and counter-intuitive. One might imagine that broadcasters would

be better off without the audience.

But broadcasters truly need audiences in order to survive. It is one of the key tasks of a

broadcaster to attempt to know its audience. A range of feedback mechanisms inform the

broadcaster's knowledge of its audience. With multiple techniques of gathering feedback, there

are thus many images of the audience. It is accurate, in fact, to say that SBS has many audiences.

Each audience affects production processes in manifold ways. While knowledge of audiences is

always abstracted - it is an idea, or a re-imagination of feedback - this knowledge is often put to

practical use.

SBS has a wide range of institutional goals which are accomplished by feedback-informed

knowledge and actions. The goals of SBS are complex, made so by its dual position as acommercial and public broadcaster. In particular SBS's responsibility to serve a multicultural

Australia necessitates constructions of an audience which include references to both diversity and

a united whole. The many audiences of SBS are increasingly recognised to be enmeshed with one

another, as demonstrated by the recognition that television and online audiences share many of

the same citizens.

Staff at SBS are well aware of the complexity (and often inadequacy) of audience feedback.

Nevertheless there are many practices in place which seek to achieve the goals of SBS by utilisingit. In this thesis I have documented some of these practices and how they contribute to the

effective functioning of the broadcaster as a whole. This thesis demonstrates the audience's key

role in broadcasting and its agency in institutional decision-making.

About SBS

The Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) is a radio and free-to-air television broadcaster, and more

recently an online content provider, primarily based in Sydney, Australia. It has existed in one

3


4/49

form or another for over twenty-five years. Initially a radio station operating only in Sydney and

Melbourne, SBS now broadcasts to most of Australia through its radio and television services. Its

online content is accessible throughout the World Wide Web.

'The principal function of SBS is to provide multilingual and multicultural radio and television services

that inform, educate and entertain all Australians, and, in doing so, reflect Australia's multicultural

society.'(Special Broadcasting Service Act 1991: Section 6)

SBS became a corporation through the Special Broadcasting Service Act of 1991. The Act sets out

the particulars of SBS's operations and the general spirit of its purpose. Section 6 of the Act sets

out the corporation's Charter, a document of surpassing institutional importance. (A copy is

provided in the Appendix.) SBS's programming operations must revolve around this Charter's

conditions, or face charges of incompetence and failing to serve the audience.

The corporation's funding comes primarily from the Australian Federal Government; it is

generally referred to as a public broadcaster, in the sense of the public service tradition of the BBC

and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). Nevertheless its funding model also allows it

to collect revenues from commercial activity. This activity is primarily the sale of airtime and

webspace to advertisers. This hybrid method of funding is practically unique within Australian

broadcasting. It also burdens SBS with two sets of masters to whom performance must be

justified.

The type of content broadcast by SBS is another unique feature of the organisation. SBS transmits

roughly half of its television programming in languages other than English. SBS Radio features 68

languages each week. Online, SBS Radio websites are available both in-language and in English. It

is this multi-ethnic approach to broadcasting that often sees SBS branded an 'ethnic' broadcaster.

SBS prefers to label its approach 'multicultural'. The difference is one of potential audience:

multicultural broadcasting aims to address issues within the entire community, not just an ethnic

segment. Multicultural broadcasting aims to be inclusive.

This thesis demonstrates how the idea (and more practically, the construction) of audiences is

central to SBS's institutional practices. In a practical sense, audiences are unknowable and

imaginary, inferred from an institutional perspective only by the existence of audience feedback

(Ang 1991: 3-5). Constructions of audiences, assembled from the myriad forms of audience

feedback available, are the closest that SBS can come to knowing 'real' audiencehood. These

'virtual audiences' are:

4


5/49

'abstraction[s] constructed from the vantage point of the institutions, in the interest of the institutions.'

(Ang 1991:2)

In other words, audiences are constructed to be used institutionally. SBS, in seeking to achieve its

operational goals, relies heavily on utilising its constructed audiences. This thesis examines some

of those operational goals, as well as methods of collecting feedback and constructing audiences.

The practice of applying audiences in achieving goals is shown to be central to SBS's ongoing

activities.

Beginning with a fundamental examination of SBS's commercial and public service

responsibilities, this thesis then outlines the relationships of control evident between producers

and audiences. Following this are three major chapters outlining distinct areas within SBS. In each

chapter I have examined multiple cases in which audiences have had a noticeable effect oninstitutional practices. Chapter Two explores how SBS-TV uses the audience for both

commercial and non-commercial activities. Chapter Three demonstrates three different methods

of considering SBS's online audience. Chapter Four examines the relationship between audience

knowledge and corporate public relations. In the conclusion I have outlined three broad groups of

practices that are each affected by audience feedback. Briefly these are evaluation, planning and

public relations. Practically all of SBS's audience-related processes fall within these three groups,

with some audiences helping to serve multiple tasks.

SBS's Commercial and Public Service Motivations

The two driving influences behind SBS are the public service and commercial broadcasting

traditions. While based on fundamentally different goals, these are certainly not incompatible

traditions. Public service broadcasters, in the fashion pioneered by the BBC, speak to an audience

of citizens in a manner calculated to have a certain social or cultural effect. Commercial

broadcasters treat the audience as a resource which can be utilised to generate advertising

revenue. It is acceptable to broaden the (usually government-supplied) funding base of a public

broadcaster by selling advertising space. Public broadcasters do come under fire when they are

perceived to be putting commercial concerns ahead of public service concerns. This is a fine line

that SBS is occasionally accused of transgressing. While marketing a program's audience is

accepted, the creation of a program driven by marketing is not.

'The relationship of public service institution to its audience remains essentially characterized, not by

economic profit-seeking, but by a pervasive sense of cultural responsibility and social accountability.'(Ang

1991:28)

5


6/49

Public service broadcasting may be thought of as 'giving the audience what it needs' (as opposed

to 'what it wants'). In SBS's case 'what the audience needs' was principally defined by the

Australian Government, and written into the operational guidelines known as SBS's Charter. The

Charter dictates the fundamental ways in which SBS is to address its audiences. It is, therefore, at

the heart of SBS's inquiries into its audiences. SBS programming must be assessed against the

Charter, both in planning and execution.

Whether or not Charter requirements are being met is based on a complex interpretation of the

category of 'audience'. SBS's management is expert in demonstrating how individual programs fit

the goals expressed in the Charter. One example is the defence thrown up around the 2004

program Desperately Seeking Sheila. In this program several men living in rural Western Australia

are introduced to prospective spouses, many who hail from the United Kingdom. The show

generated considerable controversy in late 2003 when it was first announced:

Before a bride-to-be has been recruited, there have been murmurs of 'dating show' and - worse - 'reality

television'. This, Canberra insiders have said, could be a betrayal of the network's charter. Liberal senator

Santo Santoro has warned that SBS is offering increasingly similar fare to the ABC and commercial

networks.(The Age, November 9 2003)

When questioned in a Senate Estimates committee hearing, managing director of SBS Nigel

Milan gave this defence:

'Basically, the program is based around the social problems of young farmers in remote parts of Western

Australia finding it difficult to find brides to go out and live in that part of Australia with them.'

(Hansard 2004-02-16: 79)

Head of Television Shaun Brown also shed light on how SBS seeks to meet its obligations under

the Charter:

'Looking at the charter, not every program is going to get a tick in every box and frankly I think it

would be impossible to do so.'(Hansard 2004-02-16: 79)

Much of the discussion surrounding these two statements seeks to quantify the inclusion of non-

Anglo Celtic people as participants in the show. This demonstrates an underlying assumption that

SBS is primarily a network for non-English-speaking migrants and their descendants in the

Australian community. SBS management strenuously argues against this view, pointing out that

the network is not a 'ghetto' broadcaster. The idea of a multicultural potential audience, as laid

6


7/49

out by the Charter, shapes how programs are formulated and produced at SBS. The flip side to

this is that 'multicultural' is often held to be synonymous with 'non-Anglo'.

SBS is not only interested in its audiences for public service reasons, but also for commercial ones.

As discussed further in Chapter Two, SBS is limited in the amount of advertising it can carry. It is

also limited in how much it can pursue large audiences. SBS is predominantly seen as a niche

broadcaster, and its Charter goals are defined in such a way that large audiences (which attract

higher advertising revenues) are irrelevant to performance. Nowhere does the Charter say that

SBS programming should be popular. SBS is not supposed to be interested in mass audiences.

While nothing forbids it from achieving large audiences, there is a tacit belief that large audiences

are achieved by pursuing commercial success. As Managing Director Nigel Milan said in

November 2003:

'If popular appeal was the yardstick of successful television, then SBS would have to be a clone of Channel

9.'(Milan 2003)

SBS avoids 'chasing ratings' for commercial purposes. This puts it at odds with one half of Ang's

definition of commercial television:

'Commercial television can be characterized at several levels, but in its barest form it is based upon the

intertwined double principle of the making of programmes for profit and the use of television channels foradvertising.'(Ang 1991:26)

Thus the type of commercialism practised by SBS and especially SBS-TV is not that of a for-

profit broadcaster such as the Nine network. Programmes are not made exclusively for profit, but

the channel does carry advertising. SBS does not focus on maximising its audiences, but it

certainly uses its audiences as a resource.

A notable exception in terms of audience maximisation is in Digital Media. In that department

larger numbers are always better. SBS aims to achieve month-on-month growth in audience

figures:

'Monthly, we will achieve minimum increases in traffic of 10% throughout 2005.'(Digital Media

Campaign Eight, see Appendix)

This tends to attract little notice, especially since very little advertising is present on websites

therefore Digital Media's motivation is not thought to be commercial. Digital Media is also a

7


8/49

relatively new part of SBS's operations, still trying to justify the money invested in online

production. Growth in audiences is therefore correlated with success.

The public-service values of SBS can only continue to be compatible with its commercial values if

the pursuit of audience enlargement is limited, it seems. While there is no physical law which

dictates that entertaining, educational and informative multicultural programming cannot achieve

large audiences, the body of evidence demonstrates that this may indeed be the case. Staff at SBS

also realise that the broadcaster operates in a larger media environment dominated by television

stations which routinely achieve more than five times SBS's average audience.

The Operation of Control in Audience Relations

'Quite simply, the people who want to know about audiences, want to know information about themwhich can be used to control them, and make their behaviour more predictable.'(Nightingale 1985: 8)

Audience relations are characterised by constant struggles for control. SBS requires audiences; its

Charter goals are predicated on dealing with a certain type of audience, an audience which

neednt necessarily watch SBS. Therefore SBS must constantly attempt to maintain and grow its

audiences. The institutional discourse around audiences typically focuses on attempting to control

them. Audience measurement's primary goal is to ascertain the effectiveness of SBS's control over

its audiences. Naturally this is not manipulative control. It is, as Ang states, 'of a discursive ratherthan a material nature' (Ang 1990: 8). There is no method of programming which forces people to

take part in being an audience.

However, producers assume that they possess control in some form - usually persuasion or

attraction of the audience. Certain programming moves often appear to correlate with certain

changes in audience feedback; this equates in the minds of producers with 'control over audience

behaviour'. The primary use of audience feedback is to aid producers in controlling the audience.

Producers are empowered by audience feedback to attempt control of an audience. This is only

half of the picture. The other half is that producers frequently respond to audience feedback. This

demonstrates that audiences also have an element of control over producers, albeit one that is

generally unconscious and limited. One might say that there is no method of feedback which

forces producers to take notice of the audience, but that it does happen.

So audience feedback is itself a form of control over program makers. Specifically, audience

relations can be discussed within the framework of Deleuzean societies of control. It can be seen

that control between SBS and its audiences does not rest in any one place, and does not cease

8


9/49

movement. Producers are always in the act of trying to assert control over the audience through

influencing audience behaviour. Similarly, audiences are constantly provoking reactions within

producers. Control is never complete or unidirectional. Deleuze points out that control is not

exercised through 'molds' but through 'modulations' (Deleuze 1990). Producers are constantly

modulated by the feedback coming to them from audiences. The effects of this process are seen in

the remodulation of SBS content (and by extension, SBS audiences) by producers who seek to

address a certain audience. 'Limitless postponement' (Deleuze 1990) is another feature of this

relationship, in that the task of audience management is never complete.

Examining audience relations in this light suggests a possible reason for another shift in public

broadcasting. Ien Ang, in 'Desperately Seeking the Audience', comprehensively details the growing

reliance on empirical methods of feedback by public broadcasters (Ang 1991:140-152). She

contrasts empirical feedback with the 'normative aspects involved in the very idea of public servicebroadcasting' (Ang 1991:148). That is, a reliance on empirical measurement seems at odds with

the paternalistic tradition of public broadcasting in which the broadcaster 'aimed to change, not

anticipate, audience taste' (Ang 1991:141). The social project of SBS would, under such a system,

take precedence over the audience's desires.

I suggest that empirical measurement has gained the upper hand at SBS because producers feel it

is of greater assistance in controlling the audience. Audience measurement allows SBS to

participate with audiences in the economy of control described above. Empirical measurement,which is generally held to be scientific and objectice, allows producers to constantly tweak their

methods of control. Thus the distance between broadcaster and audience is diminished, and the

cycle of production and response quickened. Producers feel that the audience is better served by a

responsive broadcaster, a broadcaster that is in touch with its audience. For producers, empirical

measurement seems like the ideal way to exercise control over the audience.

9


10/49

Chapter Two : SBS Television

The Television arm of SBS is the organisation's most publicly visible aspect, available to

Australians in most communities larger than a few hundred people. As the part of SBS with the

largest audience, SBS-TV has the most invested in coming to terms with its audience. That is to

say, SBS-TV has the most urgent need for valid audience constructions and narratives. These

audience constructions and uses are specific to SBS's distinctive needs as an organisation.

However, on some levels these methods operate in the same fashion as those deployed by

broadcasters with quite different goals. Examining how SBS-TV constructs and employs audiences

reveals much about how it functions as a broadcaster.

In the initial stages of audience feedback collection, SBS-TV operates in much the same way as

the other television stations of Australia. This is hardly surprising, given that the Australian

networks rely on a single system for the production of television ratings data. It is the uses of this

data by SBS that produce illuminating insights into the broadcaster's difference from other

Australian networks. The staff in SBS's television production, publicity and marketing

departments are able to accomplish many of their core tasks by using ratings in conjunction with

other surveys of SBS television audiences and the Australian public in general.

Television ratings documents are interesting products in their own right. I have defined television

ratings as traces of audience activity, which are generalised from a survey panel to the broaderpopulation. Within Australia, survey panels are maintained by ATR Australia, the Australian arm

of the AGB Italia Group. The AGB Italia Group installed the first national audience survey panel

in Italy, in 1981 (ATR Australia, 2004). Television Audience Measurement (TAM) data, or

ratings, is collected by ATR on contract for OzTAM, a company which presents ATR's data to

Australia's broadcasters.

The survey panel presented by OzTAM consists of roughly three thousand homes distributed

through Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. According to Emelia Millward at SBS:

'SBS does not subscribe to the regional 'elemental data', which means we don't have access to the minute

by minute data like we do for the metro markets. This means we can't see how a program performed in

regional markets the next day & we can't get a 'national' viewing figure for programs. But we do get buy

[sic] a quarterly summary of some SBS viewing measures for regional markets so we can track some

trends.'(Millward 2004)

The '5 City Metro' Ratings cover roughly 64% of the Australian population those living in the

10


11/49

five cities listed above (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2003). Ratings collection possibly focuses

on these markets for commercial reasons (because city inhabitants would tend to be wealthier,

and thus more marketable) and technical reasons (because it is presumably easier to maintain a

survey panel within a concentrated area, as opposed to a distributed area). Therefore it is safe to

say that the SBS audience in regional Australia is literally invisible in the daily ratings figures

obtained by the television marketing department.

These ratings documents are electronically distributed daily to relevant persons throughout the

organisation. The daily ratings reports generally contain a top-level summary of the previous

night's best-performing programs. Often these are accompanied by comparative statistics and

theories about how particular numbers came about:

'Sunday Night

Evening share was 3.6%. Top programmes wereDesperately Seeking Sheila with 326k ['k' = thousand

viewers] andWorld News with 218k.

Sheila achieved the second highest audience for the series. It benefited from Channel 10 scheduling

[Australian] Idol an hour earlier due to the ARIA broadcast at 19:30.

Note: All audience figures are for mainland capital cities only.'(Daily ratings, 2004-10-18)

Attached to each email is a spreadsheet with the ratings figures for the previous night's prime-time

ratings period (6.30pm - 10.30pm). These daily ratings emails serve two functions. Firstly they are

a courtesy to individuals who might be concerned with how a particular program is performing.

Secondly the reports can provide emotive 'spin' about certain programs this interpretation of

ratings is generally, though not always, positive in nature.

Ratings are 'traces of audience activity' because they cannot conclusively be proven to correlate

perfectly with viewing behaviour. The audience activity in question is an interaction by survey

panel members with the ATR 'Peoplemeter', a device which 'records and stores four pieces of

information: time, TV set on/off, channel tuned [and] persons viewing.' (ATR Australia, 2004) A

wealth of academic research calls into question the relationship between the 'persons viewing'

figure and who is actually watching (Ang 1990, p154). Additionally, the quality of viewing remains

unknown in these four pieces of information: does the audience have a high level of engagement

with the program? Or is the program only playing in the background while other activities take

place?

11


12/49

These concerns are rendered somewhat irrelevant by the simple fact that, with rare exceptions,

TAM data is accepted as having 'face validity'. Simply put, 'face validity' is the 'judgement that a

measured variable really measures the phenomenon it represents' (Gunter in Bruhn Jensen, 2002:

212). ATR cites its mission as being:

'To establish a common currency used by TV Stations, Media Planners and Advertisers for their

advertising transactions, based upon a reliable, independent, and transparent audience measurement

system.'(ATR Australia, 2004)

Australia's TV stations, media planners and advertisers largely agree that the ATR data provides a

lingua franca for discussing the performance of media properties and that is good enough to

allow ATR's figures (as provided by OzTAM) to be put to use within SBS. Nevertheless, the

organisation feels that OzTAM data often serves SBS quite poorly. One of the main reasons givenis that SBS typically rates more highly with non-Anglo Australians, who SBS feels may be under-

represented on the ratings panel. Pat Quirke-Parry, Head of Sales, explained:

'When the random sample is being constructed - interviewers knock at doors and they are all only

required to speak in English - so if they come across a home where English is not the first language and

communication is difficult or impossible they will simply select the next random household. Hence our

audience is almost bound to be significantly underrepresented in what is otherwise a perfectly correct

random sample.' (Quirke-Parry, 2004)

Another reason is that SBS, with a maximum audience at any one time of around five percent of

all TV viewers, relies on a smaller number of panel members for its measurements than do the

other stations. Having fewer panel members decreases the statistical accuracy of any

measurements performed on TAM data.

The ATR quote above intimates that TAM data is generally used for setting the price of buying

advertising space on a commercial network. SBS uses the data in this sense, but it also uses the

data for non-commercial purposes, often in quite creative ways. I will first examine the

commercial, and then the non-commercial uses of television feedback.

The Commercial Aspect

'In 2002, SBS Television was watched by more than 7.7 million Australian each week.' (SBS 2003:

21)

12


13/49

SBS is permitted to run five minutes of advertising per hour of programming. Any criticism of this

agenda is usually tackled by SBS with the assertion that advertising revenue allows SBS to fund a

wide variety of local content production. In any case, SBS's advertising is hardly intrusive, running

in blocks between programs and not interrupting the flow of programming.

Audience traces have significant value to the organisation. TV Marketing uses its ratings data to

set the prices of SBS's 30-second advertising blocks. A rate card summarises the price for a block

at any time of the day. Blocks can be purchased in six different markets: national (total coverage),

Sydney, Melbourne, Queensland, South Australia and Perth. The reader will notice that these

areas overlap with the five cities from which SBS receives daily ratings, suggesting the use of

ratings in setting these prices.

Part of the Marketing department's repertoire is an industry website called 'SBSin'(http://www.sbs.com.au/SBSin/), not to be confused with the commissioning arm 'SBS

Independent', which is often referred to as 'SBSi'. The site serves as publicity and marketing from

SBS to other industry areas, especially advertisers. The entire site is geared towards extracting

maximum promotional value from the audiences that SBS has constructed through its research.

Sections such as 'Why Advertise on SBS?' rely heavily on talking about an audience:

'SBS viewers are well-educated and more likely to work in professional, managerial and upper white-

collar occupations. They have high discretionary spending power, especially valued by marketers inautomotive, financial services, communications, computers, travel and tourism, entertainment and leisure,

government advertising and many other major categories.'(SBSin 2004(1))

The site also provides presentations of the sort usually aimed at persuading media buyers to

advertise on SBS. Audiences feature prominently in these presentations, as advertisers are

primarily interested in who will likely be viewing their advertisements. The following examples

come from SBSin's 'SBS Television 2004' document:

'- Viewers rank SBS program quality highest of all FTA [free to air] networks'(page 8)

'- Audience Phone Feedback: Entertaining, Challenging, Intelligent, Worldly, Controversial, Informative

[etc.]'(page 9)

'- SBS continues to reach more than twice Pay-TV's audience'(page 18)

'- SBS viewers profile well above the population for:

- Degree 117

- Professional 110 [population average 100]'(page 20) (SBSin, 2004 (2))

13


14/49

Interestingly, any doubts or questions that SBS may have about the validity of its data cannot be

seen on the website. Whatever the truth of the figures and the audiences they construct, SBS

markets them as certain and reliable. My implication here is not that the marketing department

seeks to deceive its advertising clients. Advertisers are not duped into accepting these figures. SBS

and the advertisers are able to put these audiences to use because they are agreed to be good

enough for the purpose.

This relationship is a consensual hallucination which continues because of its ability to help get

the job done. SBS earns a lot of money (which advertisers are willing to pay) through an agreed-

upon system of exchange: show us the audiences, and we'll show you the money. This is an

example of the audience constituting an empowering resource for SBS. Ratings are no guarantee

of future performance, and do not indicate whether or how much a viewer has paid attention to

an advertiser's message. Still the system continues to function, in the faith that it does have utilityfor those involved in it.

Non-commercial Motivations and Uses

The commercial uses of the television audience outlined above are certainly important to SBS

Marketing. However the same audience constructions are routinely used for a variety of other

non-commercial purposes. The core business of SBS television is to populate its broadcast

spectrum with programming that helps the broadcaster to fulfil its charter obligations. Thecharter, as explained in Chapter One, suggests a style and an audience for programs, but leaves the

specifics for SBS to decide.

The presence of an audience always affects the organisational practices of those working in SBS-

TV. I will demonstrate three examples where audiences make a difference in the practices

surrounding television programs. The first of these is Monday nights on SBS-TV. For several years

now, programming in this time slot has revolved around maintaining a certain type of audience.

The second is the 'genre audience', where producers have such a gut feeling for the audience that

the audience becomes a background consideration. Both of these cases are examples of SBS's

attempts to control the audience although a better analogy might be 'baiting the hook'.

Manipulative control of audiences is not possible, but knowing how to attract them is the next

best thing. The third example is where television ratings are used in processes which are not

commercially-motivated. Though ratings are usually intended to set the price of advertising, they

can be used as a valuable resource for program makers.

Scheduling television programs is achieved by addressing the basic questions, 'What do we put on

14


15/49

television, when, and why?' What, when and why are all related to considerations of the audience.

After examining SBS's Monday night programs one might respond to these questions, 'Light

entertainment and comedy, Monday nights, because it works'. Repetition is a tool which can

build up predictability in an audience.

In 1997 SBS began broadcasting the cult animated program South Park. The audience for this

program grew quickly, based around a core audience of younger male viewers. In its regular

timeslot of 8.30pm Mondays, South Parkprovided SBS with some of its highest ratings while it

screened. It was controversial and edgy, but still explored social issues in an entertaining fashion.

It also attracted viewers who were much younger than SBS's typical audience of that time. South

Parkcould be described as a surprise hit, but it had a lasting impact.

From that time onwards, Monday nights have been home to many of SBS's comedy programs.Amongst these are Pizza, LifeSupportand more recentlyJohnSafranvsGod. SBS found itself with

a particular audience for its Monday night programs, one which (through its large size, especially)

was attractive to advertisers. It sought to retain this audience by assigning a theme to Monday

nights: comedy and light entertainment. (This contrasts with much of SBS's documentary, current

affairs and foreign language programming.) In doing so SBS was laying out the bait to catch a

recurring audience, to 'grow the audience' as industry-speak might have it. Scheduling the same

sort of material in repetitive ways is an excellent method of encouraging patterns of behaviour in

audiences, a form of persuasive (though not manipulative) control.

Another type of predictability is found in 'format' programs. The internal structure of some

programming is so predictable that it almost seems to ignore the audience. The World Newson

SBS-TV is one example. Reporting current events and presenting them in relatively the same way

every night is a key part of any news service. It may seem that neither of these practices considers

the audience; one might think that these tasks are audience-independent. In fact the structure of

news and current affairs programs relies heavily on audiences. It is just that those audiences are

taken for granted to such an extent that they rarely receive explicit consideration.

The World Newsoperates with a consistent format, but is obviously different from other news

programs. This is a choice related to the idea of a multicultural audience. The World Newsdeals

mostly with international issues, often providing global context for national stories. The weather

report at the end of the program traverses the entire globe. Sports stories are rarely featured,

unless they involve major events such as the Olympics. (SBS runs a sports program immediately

after the first evening bulletin, hence the lack of sports coverage during the news.) These are all

choices which demonstrate the producers' priorities in serving the audience.

15


16/49

Mark Maley is executive producer of the Insightprogram. Insightdebates one 'hot topic' per week

in a discussion-panel format before a studio audience of people who are relevant to that topic.

Choosing the particular topic for a week comes down to a judgement about what will be of

interest to the audience:

'There is a lot of consultation within the [production] unit, but ultimately it's about relevance to the

audience. It's about finding issues that people themselves are talking about, or are themselves affected by...

As a current affairs program, we fulfil a fairly important social function. And the essence of that social

function is to analyse issues, to tell stories, that are relevant to the lives of a reasonably broad audience.'

(Maley 2004)

This is an example of the gut instinct that producers often have about audiences. Audiences are

always present in their thinking about production, even if those audiences aren't explicitlyreferenced as a reason for doing something.

'It is very much my job to think, 'Is this going to be of interest to a viewer? Is this going to irritate a

viewer? Is this going to impassion a viewer, or move a viewer?' It's a subtle imaginative process because

there is no single [type of] viewer out there.'(Maley 2004)

Of course SBS's producers also use ratings, though not for commercial purposes. They use ratings

as a marker often the primary marker of a program's relative effectiveness in serving theaudience. This is a sensitive topic, as most, if not all, SBS producers would abhor the accusation

of being 'ratings driven'. But television is a very expensive exercise, and to be unable to

demonstrate the impact of programming would raise the question of whether public funding is

justified.

'Ratings are a smaller part of the picture, but still part of the picture. They are the only objective evidence

you have of the size of your audience, and whether you're relevant. And there's no point putting a prime-

time show out to [only] 20,000 people that is a failed exercise.' (Maley 2004)

The use of empirical measures in this way is part of what Ien Ang describes as 'a shift away from

reliance on the a priori, normative knowledge about how the audience should be addressed, which

is part and parcel of classic public service philosophy.' (Ang 1991: 104) In other words, this is

evidence that public service broadcasting is increasingly driven by ideas of the audience as a

market, rather than a citizenry. The basic direction of SBS programming is driven by the charter,

which considers a citizen audience, but the specifics are overwhelmingly governed by market data.

The characteristics of a citizen audience change slowly, mostly as its demographics change, but a

16


17/49

market audience can change as fast as its measurements are collected daily, in the case of ratings.

The attempts of producers to control audience behaviour demand that empirical measurement be

utilised.

17


18/49

Chapter Three : SBS Digital Media

The room that houses most of Digital Media at SBS is tucked away at the back of the building,

near the loading dock and security office. Its lack of natural light often leads it to be alluded to as

'the mushroom farm' or 'the bunker'. As physically removed as they may be from daylight and the

rest of SBS, Digital Media's staff are actually quite well-versed in relating to its audiences.

Digital Media is a part of SBS's division of Technology and Distribution. It is mostly responsible

for the design and development of websites and related technologies (for instance, uploading video

archives of shows). Another of Digital Media's tasks is the periodic evaluation of web content.

Many websites are developed as support for or extensions of television or radio programming.

Digital Media assembles sites and then trains the relevant television or radio program's staff in the

day-to-day maintenance of the site. Major redesigns of sites are occurring constantly, a process

which brings them back into the Digital Media domain.

My experience with Digital Media was gained during the nearly nine months I worked there, from

February to mid-October of 2004. While working in the role of Audience Research Producer I

was constantly involved in the process of interrogating the online audience and reconstructing its

feedback.

In this section I will be examining three major areas in which Digital Media encounters and

relates to its online audiences. Each method constructs the audience in a distinctly different way,

foregrounding the context-specific salient qualities of that audience. Ratings harness the

descriptive qualities of a census of past activity, usually evaluating instead of trying to predict user

behaviour. User surveys focus on areas of website usage which cannot be inferred from ratings,

allowing a more user-oriented (as opposed to usage-oriented) evaluation of websites. Usability

testing sacrifices the statistical safety of a large sample for observation and 'gut feeling' it makes

an informed extrapolation from a very small group to a very large group.

The online audience is often considered to have more control over its interactions with the

medium than the television audience does; hence a website's online audience is frequently referred

to as its users. The term reflects the non-linear format of websites and the expectation that users

will navigate (and use) a site in a variety of ways (in contrast to the linear start-to-finish format of

standard television). The major consequence of this difference is that Digital Media puts more

effort than SBS-TV into imagining the audience's ability to use, rather than consume, content.

18


19/49

In Digital Media the terms 'audience' and 'users' are used interchangeably, but when talking to

television and radio staff the preferred term for people using SBS websites is 'users'. This prevents

confusion between the 'viewers/audience' of a television program and the 'users' of the program's

related website. The distinction between audience and user highlights that producers still

regard television and online audiences as rather separate, although user surveys have demonstrated

that there is a large crossover between the two.

SBS's Digital Media department labours under the same crisis of knowledge as SBS in general.

There is a deep organisational need to construct audiences, to measure and rationalise them, and

to use those audiences for further purposes. As with SBS Television, Digital Media employs a

specialised range of techniques which directly facilitate institutional uses of the audience. At the

same time the deeply porous nature of SBS can be seen in the thorough permeation of Digital

Media's activities by the audiences Digital Media constructs. The three main ways in which theonline audience (or user) is constructed by SBS, and the different ways that these audience

constructions are used within Digital Media, are as follows.

The first method of collecting feedback is through the RedSheriff Customer Intelligence system,

which operates in a similar fashion to the research methods employed by television marketing.

Online ratings data is widely agreed to be the most objective information available; it surveys all

users instead of just a panel of users, thus dodging some statistical uncertainty. However it still

carries its own problems when used to construct an audience.

The second feedback is the suite of annual user surveys deployed by SBS on several of its websites.

These surveys, while aspiring to the statistical objectivity claimed for ratings data, utilise much

more qualitative and specialised purpose-based data collection techniques. Surveys also come with

a large range of drawbacks which must be dealt with or rationalised.

Finally the producers working in Digital Media are constantly aware that their creations need to

be usable. To this end, producers always consider the audience's abilities as internet users. To

extend this knowledge, Digital Media conducted a small-scale user testing project in July 2004.

This method allows a very close engagement with site users, and the ability to see how 'fresh eyes'

interpret the site. While sites in development are always tested, this is the first time that

formalised user testing has been adopted.

SBS's Technology and Distribution division assesses its performance in ten broad sectors called

'Campaigns'. Campaign Eight is entitled 'Maintaining and growing our strengths in digital media

creations'. It is the Campaign which most closely involves the use of audience feedback, and thus

19


20/49

the one which I will examine here. The 'Key Result Areas' (KRAs) of this campaign are:

'The Division will grow its online audience;

The Division will develop a sustained online community of loyal visitors; and

The Division will extend its content offer through interactivity.'

(SBS Technology & Distribution Campaign Eight see Appendix)

These KRAs delineate the importance of listening to audiences and developing a relationship with

them. Digital Media must overcome the gap between audiences and producers to assess its

performance in Campaign Eight. Staff in Digital Media utilise the three audience constructions

introduced above ratings, surveys and usability in order to do achieve this.

Of course, we did not only use these constructions for evaluative purposes we used audience

constructions to inform some creative decisions in regards to developing our content further. Allthree methods of constructing and deploying audiences demonstrate the institutional value found

in a meaningful engagement with feedback gathered from the audience. Each method also

demonstrates how audience relations are used to judge or attempt change in an audience, as well

as how audiences influence the behaviour of producers.

RedSheriff

At the most quantitative end of Digital Media's feedback spectrum is the data produced throughthe RedSheriff Customer Intelligence ratings collection system. The RedSheriff system is

universally regarded as a valuable resource within SBS Digital Media. It directly tackles the crisis

of knowledge at the heart of broadcaster-audience relationships, doing so in ways that reduce the

divide between users and producers. A key difference with television ratings systems is that the

RedSheriff code on SBS websites collects information from practically all users, rather than a

sample panel. The RedSheriff data therefore represents not a statistical extrapolation of audience

feedback, but a solid representation of the actual feedback quantities involved.

RedSheriff, acquired by Netratings Inc. in mid-2004, is a webpage data collection and

organisation tool. RedSheriff provides SBS with website code which allows RedSheriff to gather a

large amount of information about SBS's website users. This information is then organised into

searchable web-based reports for SBS.

'Web sites that run RedSheriff Customer Intelligence include a few lines of Java script [sic]

(instrumentation) into every Web page. When a page is loaded into a browser, the instrumentation sends

information to the front-end machines which collect the data. The data is then processed by back-end

20


21/49

machines and made available to the client in the form of reports.' (RedSheriff 2004)

These reports are not the end of the story SBS Digital Media develops a working knowledge of

its online users through an open-ended exploration of the reports provided by RedSheriff. The

collection agency simply provides data summaries; it does not give recommendations, instead

encouraging Digital Media to adopt the mantle of data interpretation.

RedSheriff's system provides statistics such as number of page impressions, number of unique

visitors, user visit frequency and duration and addresses of pages from which users have arrived.

Information is presented in numerical and graphical form and is currently able to be viewed in

daily, weekly and monthly brackets. Additionally SBS has its results delivered in roughly thirty

sub-reports, categorised by site. It is thus possible to compare the usage statistics ofThe Movie

Showand The World Newswebsites (or any other combination), as well as view an aggregatedreport across all SBS web properties.

Whatever proofs are put forward about the scientific reliability of statistics and survey panels, a

census of the same population (the statistical term for the group represented by a sample) will

always represent the same data more accurately. Survey panels work best when measuring

television viewing because only five channels are commonly available in Australia (excluding

subscription viewing). The World Wide Web has far too many sites for a panel-based system to

work, especially for a niche broadcaster such as SBS.

Importantly, RedSheriff also collects feedback that is an integral part of the user's media

experience. Television ratings are triggered by the conscious action of a sample individual (a

button press) who knows that s/he is being monitored, and that the action is related to that

monitoring. RedSheriff collects information with no user input directed at shaping the process. It

does not come from conscious user input (although some of what it represents is conscious

activity), assembled instead by automated processes. The fact that users cannot typically avoid

having their visit recorded goes a long way towards addressing concerns that the outcome of the

census procedure could be affected by knowledge that the census is being performed. That is,

RedSheriff collects information about all visitors, whether they consent to it or not.

The properties of near-total survey size (because it is possible that a negligible number of site

users will not have their visit measured, for miscellaneous technical reasons) and observational

data collection, discussed above, are enough to give RedSheriff data very good 'face validity' for

the items they measure. This means that the data is accepted as a true representation of what it

purports to measure. However it cannot always be seen to have 'predictive validity' as user

21


22/49

activity is always changing. Ratings report past behaviour but cannot always be relied upon to

predict the future. (Gunter in Bruhn-Jensen 2002:212)

In regards to the campaign result areas discussed above, RedSheriff ratings are very useful in

evaluating the first KRA, 'The Division will grow its online audience'. Carl Hammerschmidt,

Digital Media's Executive Online Producer, includes the monthly figures in his reports for

Campaign Eight. Usually a short explanation accompanies the report, outlining the reasons why

the numbers are what they are.

'The World News website traffic grew by 3%, which is a healthy sign after December's drop and reflects

the user base returning to work and [their] usual consumption patterns after the holiday season.

'The World Feast website lost 23% traffic, effectively falling back tothe pre-competition level. This is a clear indication of the impact

competitions and on-air promotions has[sic] on traffic.'(Campaign Eight report, January 2004)

The presence of Red Sherrif data in the production process illustrates again the dynamics of

struggles of producers to retain some control over their audience. The degree of control that

producers have is measured primarily by how many visitors RedSheriff has recorded on SBS

websites, and how this figure compares to previous months. This information can provide

compelling reasons for action, especially when visitor statistics experience a rapid change. Such anevent happened in late September 2004 with The World Gametelevision show's related website.

A recent redesign had given the page a new look - it was lighter in colour and generally appeared

less crowded. The new page layout was applauded by Digital Media and SBS Sport staff alike.

However within a week it became apparent, through RedSheriff figures, that traffic to the website

was suffering a marked decline. Traffic from August to September was down 700,000 page

impressions. Unique visitors to the site declined from 180,000 to 150,000. The average daily

figures for October (monthly figures will not be available until after this thesis is finished) show

that the slide is continuing.

These traffic levels were the worst that the site has experienced for over 18 months. An entire

year's growth had been wiped away in two months. Obviously something drastic had happened,

but what? Seasonal variations may account for some of the change a similar drop was

experienced at the same time last year. The magnitude of the change was slightly larger in 2004,

but could well be within normal variances.

22


23/49

The explanation favoured within SBS is that the site redesign was the direct cause of the losses.

With perhaps greater diligence than has been applied to the site in some time, several speculative

'flaws' were identified and rectified as quickly as possible in early October. These included the

repositioning of some news items higher on the page, and a general effort to make the online

offering more independent of the related television program.

The changes reflected a visualisation of 'what the users wanted' when they visited the site. The

producers relied quite strongly on rationalising the needs of the users and how the site would

address those. For instance, the higher profile of some news items was related to the intuition that

site users were more likely to want soccer news than television scheduling information.

This crisis would not have been possible without the RedSheriff figures. It became all the more

urgent because the losses coincided with an action taken by SBS (the site redesign) and thuswere the two conflated. Control over the audience was assumed to be direct, even with a similar

previous drop in figures taken into account. In this way the audience was directly present in the

decision making process; not only were ratings used, but also an instinctive supposition about

'what the audience wanted'. The audience undoubtedly affected producer behaviour.

User Surveys

There is only so much information that can be extracted from the RedSheriff ratings data.RedSheriff collects only a few basic measures from each user, managing to build quite complex

representations of user behaviour from such information as time of visit, visit duration and

frequency, and number of pages accessed. However each site is measured in the same way, and

with the same shortcomings. Chiefly RedSheriff is particularly limited in its descriptiveness of

audience members (for instance, their demographics), as well as lacking the ability to forecast

some types of audience behaviour. Digital Media also makes limited use of the figures beyond its

own department, fearing that audience figures may be used institutionally 'as a stick to beat us

over the head with', as one employee privately confided. To address these knowledge gaps, Digital

Media began surveying the users of some of its sites in 2003. It repeated the exercise in April

2004, a process in which I was deeply involved.

The initial planning document for the 2004 survey gave a retrospective overview of the 2003

survey, citing that the previous year's survey was designed 'to establish a precedent for gathering

quantitative and qualitative information regarding SBS's online audience'. (Meers 2004) Key goals

of the 2004 survey included:

23


24/49

'- establish a comprehensive model of New Media surveying activities for 2004;

- survey the audiences of a broad range of SBS websites; and

- gather site-specific data which are relevant to the needs of site administrators. ' (Meers 2004)

Importantly, one of the survey's measures of success was that 'individual website developers will

have an increased understanding of their specific audience, resulting in user specific online content

upgrades, greater cross-promotional potential and a better understanding of how best to utilise

online sponsorship'. (Meers 2004) It was implicit in the planning of this exercise that the role of

the audience could extend to modulating how producers addressed that audience.

These goals demonstrate that SBS was not only planning to compile an archive of audience

feedback, but also to use that data for 'the needs of site administrators'. Not documented, but

certainly evident in SBS practices, is the use of the survey results in making evaluative statementsabout how SBS Digital Media contributes towards the overall activities of SBS.

The surveys are not only useful for evaluating websites, but also for making production decisions.

At the time of writing, no major planning decisions had resulted from the 2004 surveys. However

the surveys of 2003 resulted in a number of new and modified site features, including:

- a 'By Popular Demand' graphic accompanying new site features;

- 'Desktop Delivery' (www.sbs.com.au/desktopdelivery), a service which shows all available SBSemail newsletters;

- the redesign ofThe World Newswebsite;

- in-language versions of the SBS Radio pages;

- an administrator tool to put cross-promotional buttons on other SBS sites (for instance, a The

World Newsbutton on the Datelinepage);

- a television campaign to promote The World Newswebsite; and

- the launch ofThe World Newsemail newsletter.

(Harcourt 2004)

The two surveys of the online audience that SBS has performed have focused on constructing two

main sets of results: characteristics of the audience that aren't (or can't be) measured by

RedSheriff, and audience responses to specific questions about SBS websites. In the former

category are demographic measures such as age, gender, location and language spoken at home. In

the latter category are questions about what parts of the site the survey respondent uses and how

satisfactory the respondent finds the site, as well as what features the respondent might like to see

on the site.

24


25/49

The actual surveys appeared as a pop-up window when the SBS sites involved (Dateline, The

World News, The World Gameand The Movie Show, as well as The World Feastin 2003 only) were

loaded into a standard web browser. Users were first asked whether or not they wanted to

complete the survey:

'As a valued user of SBS online we'd like to ask you a few short questions about [this website]. The survey

will only take five minutes and your response will mean we can better tailor this website to what you

want. Thank you in advance for filling in this survey.'(Online survey 2004 see appendix)

Upon completing the survey, or opting not to fill it in, users received a 'cookie' a small piece of

information which prevented the survey from loading upon the user's next visit to the website.

Some questions were multiple choice, others just a check-box or a pull-down menu (for instance,

for specifying an hour of the day). One question on the surveys in both 2003 and 2004 was anopen-response text box in which users were asked, 'What do you like about [this website]? What

improvements would you like to see?' This text box was a concession to the essential

unpredictability of the audience, and an acknowledgement that SBS often possesses only bulk

statistical data, not qualitative or individual responses. It may be inferred from this that SBS

understands the value of occasionally receiving feedback on the audience's terms. The hope is that

the audience may reveal an agenda which was previously unknown or unimportant to producers.

Central to the task of designing the survey was the necessity to make completing the surveypainless and quick. One process of streamlining was to ensure that only essential questions were

asked of online users. The final selection of questions thus demonstrate the institutional

knowledge that SBS wishes to possess.

The questions can be sorted into two groups depending on the aim of each. The first and largest

group is the 'evaluative' question, the type which builds up a picture of an audience and arranges

it in segments. The second type of question is the 'planning' question, which asks the online

audience to speculate about potential behaviour. Examining the questions asked in each group

gives some interesting clues into how SBS will end up using the information.

For example, why did the surveys ask respondents to identify their age group? The primary reason

is because the age of SBS's audience is the subject of much scrutiny, both internally and

externally. Age is widely regarded as one of the most important demographic categories because it

is a variable that supposedly relates to tastes in SBS's case, media tastes. The website audiences

analysed by SBS showed clear age biases, as demonstrated below by the 2004 results for the

websites ofThe World Gameand Dateline:

25


26/49

Question: Which age group are you in?

19%

28%

33%

16%

4%

3%

12%

34%

36%

15%

Over 55

40 to 54

25 to 39

18 to 24

Under 18

DatelineThe World GameAge Group

(Meers 2004)

The survey revealed that Dateline's online users tend to be older than those ofThe World Game.

Constructing an audience according to its age profile allows Digital Media to develop 'gut

feelings' about the people using SBS websites. Age profiles also allow comparisons to be drawn

between online and television properties. Interestingly the web audiences surveyed in 2004 tended

to be younger than the television audiences for the same program. Combined with data which

shows that most website users are also viewers of the television program, SBS can begin to get an

idea about the correlation between television viewers and online users. For instance, many

Datelineusers visit the website to find out what stories will be on upcoming episodes of the

television show.

Another reason for assessing the age of online users is so that SBS can determine whether it is

meeting its obligations to broadcast to all Australians. Just as in television, it is not enough to

argue that the availability of content to all Australians is the same as broadcasting to them. If SBS

cannot demonstrate that a wide variety of audience members are engaging with it, then any claim

that it serves all Australians becomes more tenuous.

The online survey assessed Digital Media's performance in this area not only in terms of audience

age, but also gender, language spoken and location within Australia. The latter measure divided

users into states and also into regional-capital city groups. A fifth question asked for the

occupations of users, but does not figure largely in the survey report.

These four categories are the characteristics that interest Digital Media in its definition of an

Australian audience. It is these categories which are used to construct an audience within the26


27/49

context of broadcasting to all Australians. For instance, the 2004 survey report 'Who are our

online audience in 2004?' cites a growth in numbers of regional users over the past 12 months as a

success:

'The general increase in Internet uptake in regional areas [up from 18% in 2003 to 25% in 2004]

revealed by this survey dovetails with the promotional campaign that has been undertaken to advertise

SBS transmission upgrades in regional areas.'(Meers 2004)

The 2003 survey also hailed the percentage of regional users as a success:

Dateline Are users based in a capital city or a region?

Capital City 82%

Regional 18%

Breakdown mirrors general population split so the web site is not overly biased.

Good indicator of national coverage and achieving Charter obligations to reach all Australians.

Opportunity to interrogate our regional viewers via the web sites.

(Harcourt and Wong, 2003:18)

This contrasts strongly with information provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics:

'At June 2003, capital city Statistical Divisions (SDs) were home to 12.7 million people, around two-

thirds (64%) of Australia's population.'(Australian Bureau of Statistics 2004)

This is not an assertion that Digital Media produces deliberately misleading reports. Rather, it is

evidence that Digital Media feels a pressure to present itself as a success within the greater

organisation. Survey results, and to some extent ratings reports, are interpreted so that average

results become good, and poor results become 'opportunities'.

27


28/49

User surveys gather an interesting type of audience feedback. It consists mainly of empirical data

such as age, gender and so forth; these measures are useful for assessing how well a site is

performing, or what sort of audience it attracts. However some measures such as open response

boxes, or queries about what site features users would like to see, show that Digital Media accepts

the need to be influenced by the audience or at least to listen to what it wants.

User Testing

RedSheriff ratings and user survey data are invested with a certain type of claim to validity. By

virtue of the large size of their component samples, ratings and surveys claim statistical validity. It

must be noted that the validity required for action is often less to do with scientific appraisal, and

more to do with what intuitively makes sense. As long as the numbers look basically correct and

don't contain too many unwelcome surprises, they are usually acceptable.

This means that large audience samples may not always be necessary to get data that can be used

to take action. In the following case, Digital Media used a sample of just six audience members,

all of whom were recruited to take part in a website usability study. The feedback obtained in the

study was useful for reasons that had nothing to do with sample size, and everything to do with

the content of the feedback.

The production involved was SBS's World Talesproject, in which twenty budding animators werecommissioned to interpret folk tales for the screen. The stories were gathered from many cultures

around the world. Being a multimedia production with a large online component, World Talesfell

under the auspices of Digital Media. The website itself (www.sbs.com.au/worldtales) is a

technically complex and deep production, housing all twenty animations and other related

material.

Before World Taleswas launched in August 2004, the producers involved with the project decided

to undertake a user-testing study. The primary reason for this was to identify any mistakes in the

site, or hurdles that might interfere with the audience's use of the site. Although identifying such

problems was within the abilities of the production team, it was thought that 'fresh eyes' might

pick up problems more successfully.

Because of the limited budget for the study which was limited to providing lunch and a

Cabcharge voucher to participants who had to travel to SBS the test subjects were chosen from

a limited field. Three teenagers (two of these the children of staff) and three SBS employees from

outside Digital Media were chosen to take part. The participants were aged between sixteen and

28


29/49

mid-forties. Despite having a limited field from which to draw participants (co-workers and

children of staff), efforts were made to find people from multiple age groups, none of whom had

prior exposure to the website.

My colleague Cassandra Meers and I took charge of the user-testing process itself. One computer

was provided for each of the six subjects. A seventh PC hooked up to both a monitor and a data

projector served two purposes. As a demonstration machine, we used it to show participants parts

of the site. As a testing machine, it allowed us to provide participants a set of six tasks and to then

observe how they went about accomplishing those goals.

After providing the testers with a brief explanation of the site and showing an example animation,

we turned them loose and monitored their use of the site for about forty-five minutes. During that

time we asked each to come up to the demonstration machine and run through the list ofprescribed tasks.

At the end of the session several of the Sydney-based producers joined us in the testing room, with

two Melbourne-based producers joining in via a conference phone. Together we discussed the

website and some of the problems that participants had experienced during the testing process.

Some inconsistencies in the programming of page-scrolling buttons were discovered. Testers

reported that they found it difficult to know when they had reached the bottom of some pages, as

no visual indication (such as a scroll bar) was available.

Users also expressed some frustration about certain navigational elements, as well as the lack of

any indication about how long each animation lasted (such as a progress bar). Not everything was

a complaint in fact, all six testers expressed a generally positive opinion about the site. This is

the kind of feedback which cannot come from RedSheriff. Even in user surveys, Digital Media

must first decide to ask this question before learning how users feel. Frustration is interesting

because it measures inaction, whereas most other feedback methods trace user actions.

Unfortunately only some of the problems could be rectified, mostly for practical reasons. Parts of

the site were subcontracted and could not be modified without further expense. Other elements

(such as more sophisticated scroll bars) had been tested but rejected due to technical

incompatibility between different internet browsers. Some changes would have simply required

too much effort to alter between testing and launch. One major paradox is that user-testing often

requires a reasonably complete product; subsequent changes can be too hard to deliver within

deadlines.

29


30/49

Can this user testing be thought of as an audience feedback process? The testers an artificial

audience were able to give the necessary feedback, and there were no obvious reasons why they

might not have formed part of the 'natural audience'. Therefore there is little reason to claim that

this testing is not a process of audience feedback.

It is also a process which, within the practical limitations described above, had a definite influence

on production practices. Just as ratings and surveys empower decision-making processes, user-

testing is useful for smoothing out the difficult parts of websites and improving their utility. Each

method helps Digital Media to judge the effects of its actions upon the audience. Feedback also

modulates the production processes of Digital Media staff in their pursuit of the best ways to

serve audiences. Digital Media is thoroughly involved with its audiences, both on the controlling

and the controlled end of audience relations.

30


31/49

Chapter Four : Public Relations

I have already examined the ways in which audience feedback is used to inform processes in SBS's

television and online areas. These processes include evaluation and justification of content,

commercial and government advocacy, and future content production decisions. Through the

previous chapters I have shown how SBS listens to and uses its audiences in production-related

contexts. In this chapter I will explore how SBS involves its audiences in tasks that are not

directly related to production. These may be thought of as processes of public relations, in the

general sense of relating ideas or purposes to the public.

The public I have defined is not a singular entity. It is a heterogeneous collection of people and

organisations with different types and levels of interest in SBS. It is another group of SBS

audiences, although not one which is addressed with standard broadcast content. Public relations

is the area in which staff at SBS are most directly involved in a dialogue with these audiences,

which are not always external. Internal public relations is a way of accomplishing a number of

inwardly-focused institutional goals.

Since these audiences have different associations with SBS, they must be listened to and addressed

in different ways. Although the methods may be various, the goal is always to 'wave the flag', a

belief expressed to me by Corporate Communications manager, Keith Dalton. The crisis of

knowledge suffered by SBS in relation to knowledge about the audience also works in theopposite direction: audiences cannot know about SBS in any detail unless somebody feeds

information back to them. Information goes out to audiences from sources that may have nothing

to do with SBS.

SBS management perceives a need for audiences to 'get the right message' about SBS that is, the

message which reflects institutional perspectives. This is because public and commercial

accountability are at the heart of SBS's ongoing operations. If SBS's public (advertisers, viewers,

bureaucrats and so on) does not perceive SBS as accountable for its actions (through engagingwith the public audience) then SBS may face difficult questions about its institutional practices.

Public relations processes seek to bring public perceptions of SBS into line with the broadcaster's

desired public image.

I will demonstrate several ways that SBS talks to its audiences, and how those processes seek to

accomplish institutional goals. I will show that the information disseminated by SBS all fits into a

grand narrative about the broadcaster, regardless of the audience to which it is directed. In other

words, messages from within SBS to various audiences may vary in approach, but always seek to

31


32/49

contribute to an overarching narrative of identity.

I will first examine the most comprehensive document to cover SBS's performance: the

corporation's Annual Report. As I write this (September 2004) the 2003-2004 Annual Report is

beginning to appear on desks around SBS. In its own words,

'This Annual Report details the programming, content and service provided by SBS Television, Radio

and Online. It also reports on SBS's relations with Government, the community and other stakeholders,

and the way in which SBS manages its human, financial and technical resources as well as its

transmission services.'(SBS 2004: iii)

Section 73 of the Special Broadcasting Service Act of 1991 sets out the requirements for

information in annual reports. 'In addition, [the 2004 report] assesses the Corporation'sperformance against the goals of the SBS Corporate Plan 2004-06' (SBS 2004: iii). I will cover

only those aspects of performance which are supported by the use of the audience.

Annual reports tend to present information in the best possible light. Figures abound, as seen in

the 2004 report:

'-800,000 Australians watched the SBS live broadcast of the Danish Royal wedding.'(page 1)

'-Radio staff produced 14,820 hours of individual language programs.'(page 23)'- Traffic to the SBS website has increased 35% annually for the past four years.'(page 33)

The examples above leave it to the reader to interpret how 'good' the results are. They are

provided without context. This is not always the case:

'A record 5.7 million page impressions were recorded in June 2004.

SBS Online, which streams in 68 languages, is the world's most linguistically diverse website.

The World Game is one of Australia's most popular sports websites.'

(page 33)

Either way, the statements above are supposed to encourage a positive feeling about the

Corporation's activities. In the areas of television, radio and online, annual reports are used by

SBS to tell success stories. Often this is accomplished by interpreting audience feedback such as

television ratings, but also by presenting other institutional decisions to the audience. The points

within the reports contribute to an institutional ideology: SBS the well-performing, valuable

broadcaster.

32


33/49

Similar to, but more targeted than, annual reports, is the 'SBS Review' newsletter. The periodical

document is targeted at some four hundred individuals who may be in some way involved with

SBS. The list includes every sitting Senator and Member of Parliament, media industry

personalities, Community Advisory Committee members and the members of the Federation of

Ethnic Communities' Council of Australia (FECCA) (Dalton, 2004).

The Review is sent out via email with story summaries and links to its website

(http://sbs.com.au/admin/sbsreview/newsletter.html). Dalton explained that the newsletter is

designed to raise SBS's profile within the community. The newsletter is also constructed to speak

to a wide range of audiences including possible sponsors, government figures and community

representatives. Using examples from the September 2004 newsletter, a sponsor might read about

the audience figures for the programJohn Safran Vs God. A FECCA representative might be more

interested in the section 'SBS Radio Reaches New Audiences', about the four new languagegroups in SBS's radio stable (Malay, Somali, Amharic and Nepalese).

Naturally many of these pieces rely on interpreted audience feedback to make their point:

'In its first three weeks, [John Safran Vs God] (8.30pm Mondays) is averaging about 400,000 viewers

in the five mainland capital cities, with an additional 150,000 estimated audience in regional Australia.

It's attracting strong viewing from younger people with a 12% share for people 16-39 and a 17% share

for men 16-39.

SBS's reach also increased with 8.1 million viewers tuning in during the two weeks [of the Athens 2004

Olympic Games] an increase of 24%. Importantly, this increase was most noticeable among younger

viewers with 90% of additional viewers under the age of 50 and 64% under the age of 35.'(SBS

Review, 2004-09-04)

Institutional uses of audiences are typically invisible to those audiences. Though they obviously

involve an audience, processes like the sale of advertising and the evaluation of programming

occur out of view of the general public. To a large extent these processes also involve a limited

institutional 'public'. That is, many audience-related processes within SBS take place relatively

unobserved. This is most likely because of the 'need to know' status of politically, commercially

or creatively sensitive processes.

A political example is the way that Digital Media obscures many of the traffic statistics for its

websites, as detailed in Part Three. These figures, while having utility for Digital Media

producers, are also a liability in that they may reflect unfavourably on how websites have been

33


34/49

designed or operated.

One of the most open and public ways in which SBS's management engages with its audiences (as

citizens) is in its handling of complaints against the broadcaster's programming content.

Programming on SBS is often controversial, as many sections of the Australian community have

polarised opinions on issues covered by SBS (not least of which is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict).

Most of the complaints received by SBS concern the content broadcast on television much of

the time documentaries or news and current affairs programs, but also the occasional comedy

program, such as the often-confronting South Parkor Pizza.

All Australian television stations have a responsibility to follow Codes of Practice in relation to

their program content, as established in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. SBS develops its own

Codes of Practice, as laid out in Section 10(1)(j) of the SBS Act 1991, and notifies the AustralianBroadcasting Authority of these codes (ABA 2004). Thus it is that listening and responding to

complaints is a legislated requirement of SBS. However, the proper handling of audience

complaints is also fundamental to maintaining a healthy relationship with audiences.

The SBS Codes of Practice detail the broadcaster's processes for dealing with complaints. 2004

saw a comprehensive review by the SBS board of the broadcaster's complaints handling process.

According to the document 'Background to Complaints Handling Review', published by SBSs

Policy Department:

'The complaints handling review began about a year ago in response to increasing public interest in the

handling of complaints and perceptions that SBS's system could be improved.'

The result of a lengthy review has recently (as of October 2004) resulted in several changes to the

complaints handling procedures in SBS's Codes of Practice. All of these demonstrate an

institutional commitment to the better management of audience complaints. The first major

change is the creation of the Audience Affairs Manager position (AAM). The AAM is now

'responsible for the coordination, investigation and determination of all formal complaints' (SBS

Policy, 2004).

Secondly, a new complaints-handling database accessible via SBS's intranet is the central

repository for all complaints made against the broadcaster. It is a simple tool for tracking

complaints and making sure that SBS's obligations under its revised Codes of Practice are met.

The database ensures that relevant staff in each division are made aware of new complaints and

that complaints are dealt with within the period specified by SBS.

34


35/49

It was discussed in the House of Representatives' Standing Committee on Communications,

Information Technology and the Arts, that SBS's complaints processes might possibly be moved

to an independent department:

'CHAIROne of the views put forward is that perhaps the complaints review procedure or the panel

should be somewhat separate from the SBS board. Have you given any consideration to the members of

the complaints panel being independently appointed by the minister so that they are totally independent to

that of SBS?

Mr Milan [managing director of SBS]We have not got that far. Most of our focus at the moment is

actually on improving our internal systemsto improve the transparency and, if you like, the

independence of the internal process. One of the flaws of the current system is that the program maker of

the program that is being complained about or the person that purchased the program and made thedecision to publish gets involved far too early in the process. So one of the things we are looking at

primarily is to improve the transparency an

Documents

Audience Relations at SBS: The Balance of Power