Interactivity in Video
by Seun Olowo-Ake
My first encounter with ‘interactivity’ was with an Archie comic I read as a child. In one of the stories, the writers gave the readers the power to decide what happened to Jughead after what I believe was an outer space adventure. There were only two choices but I did find it exciting, because I was able to read my choice first. (Although, some of us would have preferred having the power to choose whether Archie ended up with Betty or Veronica, but that’s not the point of this).
I am as in love now with Riverdale as I was with the Archie digests as a child, so much so, that I spend a lot of time watching and reading about it online. Earlier this year, Camila Mendes, who plays Veronica on the show, said in an interview with Entertainment Weekly that the producers of the show keep up with what members of their audience like and dislike about it through social media and keep that in mind going into later seasons (Kinane, 2017). This comment led to audience members tweeting the show runner, Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa, and cast members their visions for Season 2 as well as campaigning on social media for others, particularly people who shared their vision, to do the same. They believed that the producers of the show were going to be watching and picking the best or most popular ideas. Some even went as far as jokingly threatening to stop watching the show if certain things happened or not.
In his book, Media Audiences: Effects, Users, Institutions and Power, John Sullivan (2013) refers to audiences as “armed with new forms of video and computer technologies” (p. 218) and able to give instant feedback on their thoughts of a particular media product. He also says that they have an increased sense of entitlement: audiences can now decide what happens to or in a media product because essentially, they keep it going.
The Riverdale case illustrates what Sullivan alludes to; and it seems like right now, producers and audiences are figuring out new power dynamics created by the internet as to who really controls the media.
There’s this old saying: ‘There is nothing new under the sun,’ and it rings true when it comes to interactivity. Douglas Adams (1999 in Hoguet, 2014) reminds us that early entertainment was interactive: Greek performers interacted with audiences during plays, and traditional folklore had the storyteller interact with the audience face to face. Today, interactive content is coming back to us in different forms.Thanks to the integration of new technologies that allow audiences to give their feedback in real-time, entertainment is no longer one sided. Can we take interactivity even further with film and TV? I’ve often tried to imagine going to the cinema and interacting with some futuristic Marvel film, choosing what Iron Man does or doesn’t do. Every time I think that though, I wonder if it’s possible: if the audiences choose what direction the stories take, how many realities would the producers have to create? I think if they wanted to make the story interesting, the answer to that would be: a lot. Also, how will choosing what I want work in a cinema setting with so many people? Can it? Do we need another space and do we have it?
Netflix just launched an interactive story, Puss in Book (read the review by Jessica Watson), where children get to choose what happens to the beloved Shrek character. I decided to check it out, so I opened the Netflix app on my Android phone and watched it. After some time, I realised that I hadn’t been given an opportunity to choose what Puss does and after reading about it online, I discovered that only a few platforms actually let you do that. This goes back to my question of whether or not we have spaces that allow for interactivity in video.
Now, it has been reported that Netflix is working on expanding interactive capabilities to other platforms. Carla Engelbrecht Fisher, Netflix director of product innovation, said to Variety, “We’ve gotta start somewhere” (Roettgers, J, 2017). She’s right, because even though ‘interactivity’ is something that has been around since the beginning of time, we now have a variety of digital platforms that are designed to host particular kinds of content. New content needs revised platforms to hold them and experimentation is key to finding the best way to distribute this content.
The article in Variety also mentions that some of the questions asked in the development of Puss in Book were, ‘how many choices are too many?’ and ‘how deep should individual branches go?’ (2017). These questions are interesting because they highlight the fact that even though this product seeks to give audiences more control, the ‘power’ still lies with the producers. No matter what you decide should happen to Puss, you are still within the boundaries the producer has created for you. It seems that no matter how interactive a story is made, the uneven power dynamic between producers and consumers will remain.
Twitter images from Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa’s twitter page
Puss in Book image from Netflix
