The Curse of Choice
One of the fundamental trends with new media is a fracture of monolithic programming dynamics. By that I mean a tendency of new media is its ability to interact with the end user more bidirectionally than an industrial, broadcast, buyer-to-seller model. As a result of that, individuals have a greater number of options than they had before to customize the media programming they consume. The ease in access, improved, easy-to-use tools to organize the large amount of information out there, and lowered costs all play into this shift. I suspect this trend will continue for some time.
I want to tie in a couple sapling of ideas in this post. One is the development of otaku TV programming and the feedback nature (especially in terms of anime, manga, video games and other related things like light novels) that made it simulate something to that nature in a meta sense. The other is the continuing fragmentation of the anime identity and how it is a portent (or maybe just an example) of being (un)able to make a profit in such diversifying conditions.
Another way to phrase this issue is sort of seeing what kind of commercial competition you get within the long tail. My feeling is there are two sorts, and maybe I can explain it using hypothetical examples.
Suppose you have some kind of mainstream work. One Piece is probably a good example; considering how it is a top-selling title in Japan and the fujoshi dig it. A lot of people follow One Piece, and it ranges from the perfectly innocent young teen to your stereotypical otaku types. I’m sure some older folks follow it as well, casually or otherwise.
At the same time, suppose some niche franchise. For example, this season, the anime adaptation of Uraboku has already begin airing. Uraboku is a clear-cut supernatural BL title that is serialized originally in Monthly Askua, and I think it has a very specific audience in mind: fangirls. If I were to give it the benefit of doubt, it aims no wider than something like Twilight would (which is a lot of people). More realistically, I don’t think BL is nearly as popular overall than the traditional supernatural bishie.
Do the niche show compete with the mainstream show? How do the Uraboku consumers overlap with the One Piece crowd? Surely some do, but clearly they are not direct competitors, in the same space. This is the basic idea about the long tail. A lot of us can watch and enjoy the same title, but it would only be a fraction of all our consumption; the rest would differ, and sprayed across the long tail in small quantities but also in a large and diverse array of different titles that bulks up into an economically significant block. However these items residing in the long tail do not cross compete, as they are seen targeting specific niches, and they compete in a different space with those primary work outside of the tail.
In the next set of hypothetical, how do we go about thinking the competition between two shows in the same niche? For example, how about Gurren Lagann and Gundam Unicorn? They are competitors because their business models compete for the same fan dollars, if not for the fact that the typical buyer of either can consume both equally. They are niche because they target a small audience group.
Taking a step back, it becomes kind of obvious that the first hypo set is more sustainable and the second is less sustainable. And the industry is moving in the second kind of direction.
But with that said, it’s all presumed not on a basis of profitability. That is, presumably if we do not take into account what actually makes money; the nature of consumer niches, their spending power, preferences, and what titles and marketing strategy drive sales in each space vary. On the flip side, if we look at what is making the sales charts, and if we assume that anime projects float or sink in accordance to the degree of success in hitting sales charts (franchise-wise, not just to the anime), the high concentration of certain niche shows means that’s where the money is right now. That conforms to the trend I mentioned at the beginning, as end users are enabled to consume more niche work, and producers can create niche work, often at a much lower cost (lower risk) than big titles.
So let’s take a look at this OP-ED from Beveridge, where he’s saying the industry is throwing darts–that there isn’t a focused trend.
I think that’s just natural expression of trying to adhere to a trend-in-flux? Digital delivery isn’t a settled matter. The business of anime (no Chikara) is not a settled matter. The search for the next PokemonYugioh never stops. Blu-Ray distribution isn’t a settled thing in Japan, let alone as a same-region export. In a sea of uncertainty, the rational thing to do is to make a lot of low-risk moves to feel things out, to see what works, to wait for trends to solidify. To call it a hobby business is not incorrect, but it’s a partial truth. In due time things will sort themselves out.
It’s a scary picture. Where would Funimation be if not for its Dragon Ball money? Where would the US anime license scene be without Funimation? If anything, the whole thing feels like a picture perfect example of harvesting the long tail wrong. Maybe it was never anything but a hobby business.
However, what does this mean to the consumer? It means there are a lot of choices out there, that are apples-and-oranges when you compare them. In some ways it runs contrary to the consumer conservatism that many stalwart fans of the medium have gotten accustomed to, so while it’s always good to have choices, it alienates some of your old clients. I suppose it’s okay to get out with the old, as long as you bring in the new. I just find it amusing that as much as times changed and the media industries struggle to adopt to these changes, hardcore fans sometimes adopt even slower than some industry actors do…
Nothing intelligent to add, but seeing that OP fan art after this long Monday made me so happy like you can’t believe. Thanks, omo.
I might be missing the point here, but if there’s a wider trend in media consumption in favour of niche products/customisable consumption doesn’t that operate on two levels, since anime as a whole is a minority interest? Your One Piece-Urabku model being a long tail inside of a bigger long tail.
If media consumption in general is moving away from a blockbuster model, that presumably broadens the potential anime audience by freeing people up. Most likely there’s a contradiction between trying to pick up on those ‘liberated’ new people with a pantheon of niche titles when attracting their money/time toward cartoons is reliant on some kind of coherent idea of anime as an umbrella.
We’re not so enlightened as consumers that anime is mentally categorised alongside regular tv. The old fans and their interests shape the preconceptions of new ones, affect who watches anything in the first place, and informally serve to market the whole shebang. I guess I’m saying that, aside from the amount of money something like Dragonball makes licensers, it also serves as a focal point for introducing people.
The mess of choice seems more suited to maintaining an otaku subculture than attracting new viewers, even if the fragmentation pisses some people off.
@Anna: LOL. Yeah when I saw it I was like, lol, must use it.
@coburn: I see what you’re saying, but I think abstractionally there’s a floor in which the cost to produce something like One Piece makes such endeavors difficult. The long tail technically cannot get any smaller than “free.” If you look at what it cost to do things in Japan for these titles, the pecking order is kind of clear.
I don’t think media consumption is moving away from a blockbuster model. It’s a subtle distinction, but I think there is a shift in attention that makes the long tail more profitable, rather than a shift of attention away from blockbuster titles. Well, maybe there is, I don’t know.
I appreciate the other comments. You’re right that there are a lot of different factors pushing things each way that only clouds the picture, and does not serve to clear it the more we look.
hi!! this is an old post of yours, but…
http://www.omonomono.com/2009/11/12/healing-kimi-ni-todoke-cross-game-kampfer/
can you explain inductive and deductive characterization a bit more?? that’s the first time i’ve heard of such terms!
LOL, I’ll add a comment on that particular post…
Had to think through the ramifications you brought up here before I could comment; I’m no economics major but I have to agree that the “throwing darts” approach has always existed in the entertainment industry, which is why the whole TV broadcast model developed in the first place. Like you said, it’s nothing to be worried about and is a completely rational course of events (more or less).
The major issue with entertainment is that they’re essentially selling a product that you obviously have imperfect information about – you won’t know if you’re getting your money’s worth until you’ve seen the whole thing – at which point it’s probably too late to ask for cash. Normally this is avoided through the economies of scale you get with TV programming and selling advertising space.
With a direct-sell model however you lack the same scale to make it profitable. Hence the shift towards niches and brand identification: there’s a reason that Gundam Unicorn was made with the OVA market in mind – since it’s a Gundam title, potential buyers have some information to go on in terms of making a purchase. (There’s also the associated sales you get for selling Gunpla, but merchandising is an entire argument – like you said, that delves into how profitable particular niches are)