Event Media Eller; hvordan mediebransjen skaper begivenheter for å vinne kampen om oppmerksomheten. Med blikk på Idol og MGP Forelesning på MEVIT Deltakelse, fankultur & sosiale medier IMK 26 januar 2010 Yngvar Kjus

Hvordan og hvorfor lage begivenheter? - Begivenheter og oppmerksomhet - Å planlegge og arrangere begivenheter - Å eie og profitere på begivenheter - Å delta i begivenheter

«A simplest taxonomy of events distinguishes between those that happen to us and those that we make happen. The former I have called “happenings”, reserving the term “event” for those things that we ourselves make happen. The key difference between happenings and events is that happenings have an unintended character, while events are precisely meant and intended. (...) They are meant and intended to happen in a particular way, with particular effects for participants and a particular end in mind. As such they require, fromthose responsible for making it happen, much forethought, effort, and planning.» - Paddy Scannell, 2002: 271, "Big Brother as a Television Event" i Television and New Media.

Flere kjennetegn ved begivenheter Forløpet er planlagt, men utfallet er uvisst Utspiller seg i vår tid, og vårt rom Innebærer og inviterer til deltakelse Måten disse elementene ordnes på avgjør begivenhetens type og betydning

Tittartidsandelar% Året 2008

Ny ekspertise på oppmerksomhet vokser fram, som 'eventbyrået'

Paul Lazarsfelds tostegs- hypotese, publisert i boka Personal Influence i 1955

1) “ Pseudo-events are more dramatic – they are planned to be more suspenseful.” 2) “They are planned for dissemination and are therefore easier to make vivid under those circumstances. Participants can be selected for their dramatic interest.” 3) “They can be repeated at will, and thus their impression can be reinforced.” 4) “They cost money to create; hence somebody has an interest in disseminating, magnifying, advertising, and extolling them as events worth watching or worth believing.” 5) “They are more intelligible, and are planned for that effect. Many aspects are simplified and concealed, but we can at least judge the effectiveness of the television performances.” 6) “They are more sociable, more conversable, and more convenient to witness. Their occurrence is planned for our daily routines – in newspapers in the morning, on television at night.” 7) “Knowledge of pseudo-events – of what has been reported, or of what has been staged, and how – becomes the test of being ‘informed’. Pseudo-events provide ‘common discourse’.” 8) “Finally, pseudo-events spawn other pseudo-events in geometric progression.” - Daniel Boorstin (1962/1987) The Image, s «pseudo-events» versus «spontaneous events/happenings»

5

«[S]ociety cannot make its influence felt unless it is in action, and it is not in action unless the individuals who compose it are assembled together and can act in common. It is in common action that it takes consciousness of itself and realises its position; it is before all else an active co-operation. The collective ideas and sentiments are even possible only owing to these exterior movements which symbolize them » – Emile Durkheim 1965 [1915]: The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, pp. 465–6.

”Alle er med!”

- Arne Hjeltnes, tidligere ansatt i Innovasjon Norge, nå konsernsjef i kommunikasjons- selskapet Creuna

Sentralt spørsmål for alle som bidrar og deltar: Hvordan få størst mulig utbytte av begivenheten?

Idol-formatets vandring fra internasjonale mediekonglomerater til nasjonale mediehus: Tykk linje: Aktører som samarbeider formelt med å produsere Idol (kontraktbundne) Tynn linje: Eierskapsforbindelser (her foregår kontrollerte synergier) Ingen linje: Aktører som samarbeider uformelt (fleksible synergier, ingen kontrakter)

Vesentlige spørsmål i analysen av medieskapte begivenheter - Hvilken form og formål har begivenheten? - Hvem arrangerer og hvem deltar? - Hvem formidler, og hvordan? - Hvilke risikoer og gevinster er involvert?