Most FANGAs have rapidly seized power in the media world, mainly through their breakthrough technology and focus on consumer desires.
Broadcast Magazine has been around for 30 years. In the still young media industry, the magazine is a survivor, because several revolutions have taken place during this period. Time for a look back.
Commercial TV changed fundamentally in the years that this magazine was founded. In the United States, the triopoly of CBS, NBC and ABC was broken. These companies had built up unprecedented market power in the 1970s and 1980s and ruled the media. This kingdom suddenly collapsed phenomenally, not least because of the arrogance of the networks themselves. The book Three blind mice described this development clearly and should still be mandatory for today's broadcasters. At the same time, commercial TV broke through in Europe, with American managers such as Harry Sloan (the founder of SBS) playing an important role in addition to new European media companies. The first revolution, set in the 1990s when the world economy developed phenomenally, was dominated by commercial TV.
The first decade of this century marked the breakthrough of large-scale TV production. Endemol reached its current (!) Size, Fremantle emerged from the womb of Pearson and CLT-UFA and a number of ITV executives founded All3 Media. It was the second great revolution, the emergence of the Superindies. Every self-respecting media company has now set up its own studio and we live in a world where television production has taken off unprecedented.
The first major transition took place in adjacent markets in these years. Publishers saw their position weaken and the music industry underwent a fundamental change. This first form of disruption had enormous consequences for these sectors, but television continued to develop relatively slowly. Until large numbers of governments started to wonder (after the great financial crisis at the end of the first decade) why people invested so much in public broadcasting. Budgets were cut almost everywhere in Europe and with the exception of a single southern European country (such as Greece, where the existing public broadcaster ERT was even discontinued, there is now a successor), the Netherlands was even a leader in cutbacks. It was the third revolution, the fundamentally different, suspicious view of public broadcasting in Europe.
However, all these revolutions are dwarfed by the massive disruption that is taking place at the moment, the digital media revolution. It all started (as it often does) in the US and reached Europe via Scandinavia. The emergence of new digital players, both in the field of social media and online video, has had an unimaginable impact. Most FANGAs have rapidly seized power in the media world, mainly through their breakthrough technology and focus on consumer desires. Traditional media outlets are trying to fend off these new developments and perhaps, contrary to what happened in the music industry, are doing the right thing. They are adopting a new digital strategy and increasing their scale through massive transactions. Examples abound in the last 2 years: the takeover of Time Warner by AT&T, of Sky by Comcast, of Scripps by Discovery and the merger between CBS and Viacom this summer. These companies are now also targeting consumers directly, with Disney impressing most with a range of SVOD initiatives, from Disney + to Hulu and ESPN.
Four major revolutions in 30 years, no wonder it is so interesting to work in the media. I am curious about the outcome of the latest revolution (which according to colleague Mark Ramakers will result in world domination of only a few companies) and I am eagerly looking forward to the fifth… ..
In December, the international creative community gathers in London to take the temperature of the industry: debating trends, forging partnerships, and hunting for the next big format. In recent years, a new fixture has joined the global circuit of media markets: Content London. C21, once primarily a publisher, now increasingly a heavyweight conference organizer, is steadily tightening its grip on streamers, producers, and broadcasters.
The British creative sector, meanwhile, has reason to celebrate. In 2003, a landmark change in legislation granted producers ownership of the IP they create. It transformed the industry. Since then, the UK’s creative economy has expanded at remarkable speed. This year alone, more than two billion £ worth of formats, finished program sales (these days more often counted as library sales), and consumer products will leave the country. For the UK, the United States has long been a natural export market (the absence of a language barrier helps) and nearly half of all international sales continue to flow across the Atlantic.
This success is anything but accidental. Investors are lining up to back creative talent, the government actively supports the production ecosystem, and the talent pool seems endlessly replenished. More than forty new production companies launch each year, even as the domestic market stagnates. The UK advertising market may be under pressure, but the country’s robust export pipeline more than compensates. I’ve worked in this sector for around fifteen years, and its consistent level of creative excellence never ceases to impress.
The framework may have been shaped by government policy, but it is creative entrepreneurs who continue to push the industry forward. Take Richard McKerrow, founder of Love Productions and the mind behind The Great British Bake Off. Or Stephen Lambert, creator of Gogglebox and Undercover Boss and founder of Studio Lambert. Lambert has built a powerhouse team capable of elevating even externally conceived IP, The Traitors being the most striking example, to extraordinary global success. Each year brings a new wave of talent with ideas that spark fresh energy across the industry.
Driving it all is the British audience itself: curious, loyal, and accustomed to high-quality homegrown programming. Every genre thrives; from soaps (yes, Coronation Street is still going strong) to prestige drama, from factual to entertainment. Anyone wanting to understand what true creative entrepreneurship looks like need only spend some time in the capital of the audiovisual world.
Skeptics might point to turbulence: the challenges at the BBC and Channel 4, Sky’s bid for ITV, or the looming saturation of the streaming market. The rules of the audiovisual landscape are indeed being rewritten. But the British creative engine shows little sign of slowing. It continues to do what it has always done best: turn ideas into global successes.
Do you remember that video from 2006 featuring YouTube founders Chad Hurley and Steve Chen? The two young men addressed the 'YouTube Community' with promises of continued innovation and product development. But after just two and a half minutes, they could no longer keep a straight face. They had just sold their barely 18-month-old, loss-making company to Google for a staggering 1.65 billion dollars.
At the time, many thought Google had lost its mind for paying such an astronomical amount for a fledgling startup. But it quickly became clear that the tech giant had placed a calculated bet. The modest YouTube maintained its position as the market leader in online video, while Google's own platform never gained traction. The team at Google had already recognized that video would become the next killer application on the Internet. Instead of competing, they acquired the persistent rival that was standing in their way, regardless of the cost. The rest is history. According to social media expert Jonatan de Boer, YouTube now generates over 36 billion dollars in annual revenue.
Today, YouTube is unquestionably the largest video platform in the world. Monthly views are measured in the trillions, and the number of active channels approaches 5 million. What stands out is that, according to a recent report by Evan Shapiro, nearly 95 percent of all views come from just the top 10 channels. What began as a platform for short-form, user-generated content is now evolving into a wide-reaching video ecosystem. And increasingly, major media companies are embracing it.
Just a decade ago, traditional broadcasters were extremely hesitant to publish content on YouTube. The Dutch public broadcaster NPO offers a striking example. Acting under the leadership of then-chairman Henk Hagoort, the organization tightly controlled content distribution and explicitly forbade its affiliated broadcasters from using YouTube.
The situation today could not be more different. YouTube is now seen as an ideal platform to promote television programs. An additional reason has emerged as well. YouTube attracts a predominantly younger audience, which gives media companies a valuable opportunity to connect with a harder-to-reach demographic.
Channel 4 in the United Kingdom was among the first broadcasters to recognize the platform’s potential. After a test phase, they decided last year to start publishing long-form content on YouTube. They were also allowed to manage advertising on their Channel 4 YouTube page themselves, with a share of the revenue naturally going to Google.
This created a win-win situation. The broadcaster gained additional reach. YouTube gained more compelling content for its viewers. And both parties benefited from the resulting revenue. YouTube is now often watched on television screens, competes directly with Netflix, and even commands more viewing time in the United States, with 12 percent compared to Netflix’s 7.5 percent. ITV has already followed with a similar deal, and it seems inevitable that others will join. All of this continues to strengthen YouTube's already dominant position: in just 20 years, the once awkward underdog has grown into a mighty media giant.
Broadcast Magazine celebrates its 35th anniversary, a milestone prominently featured in this edition of the media trade magazine. It has evolved into a genuine glossy, allowing it to stand toe-to-toe with international counterparts. Indeed, media trade magazines thrive abroad as well. Each has its own distinct identity, as the trade journals that appear internationally are remarkably diverse. For anyone following global developments in the media industry, they are all well worth reading.
The mother of all media trade magazines is the American Variety. Its first edition was published as early as 1905. In 1930, Variety faced competition from a newcomer, the Hollywood Reporter. These publications remain indispensable resources for anyone wishing to closely follow developments in the American media industry. Interestingly, ownership of these magazines frequently changed hands, suggesting they were seen as valuable, easily tradable assets. Even private equity firms have invested in them at various stages.
In 1973, the UK saw the launch of its first media trade magazine, simply named Broadcast. This monthly publication closely follows developments in the British market and has successfully expanded into a digital platform. Since 2003, the UK's audiovisual content industry has experienced rapid growth, which Broadcast has thoroughly documented
This year, the publisher took a bold step by deciding to expand internationally. Broadcast International focuses primarily on developments in the world of audiovisual content production, quickly establishing itself as a noteworthy source of insider news.
For those interested in the French market, Écran Total is indispensable. It is also a monthly magazine, covering the film and entertainment sectors broadly. True to French tradition, it devotes significant attention to the ‘Exception Française’, the protection of the French film industry. In a way, it represents the ugly duckling among the international trade journals, as the French television world remains relatively closed off, and Écran Total reflects that philosophy.
Then there are the Germans: they truly have their act together. DWDL is an in-depth online platform, filled with excellent articles produced by a team of journalists specializing in the media sector. For those who want to understand how things work in the large German media market, it is an indispensable source, offering daily, detailed articles. Last year, DWDL garnered widespread attention with minute-by-minute reporting of the ProSieben Sat.1 Annual General Meeting, in which our Dutch colleague Bert Habets played a leading role. A clear example of how a media trade magazine can evolve into a highly relevant online platform for our industry.
Remarkably, smaller European countries lack a medium comparable to BM. Broadcast Magazine — now smartly rebranded as BM, since it long ago outgrew its original focus solely on broadcasting — is a successful example, thanks to the entrepreneurial drive of Rob Klap and the tireless editorial leadership of Jeroen te Nuijl. It demonstrates yet again the significant role the Netherlands plays in the international audiovisual content industry.