In what ways do you think "second screening" has changed what shows get made, how they're shot/put together, and what shows get popular?

Submitted by bqzs t3_10nildz in television

Was watching a nature documentary and as someone that is a chronic second-screener, it was hard to actually maintain my attention. My roommate and I will watch subtitled shows, but sometimes we're just "not in the mood" and would rather watch something that allows us to also veg on our phones at the same time. I've personally seen a rise in reality TV shows that seemed designed to exist as background noise, like the Circle or all of those friendly competition shows.

This is also speculation but I have to wonder if some shows, knowing they can only bank on 50% of their audiences visual attention but maybe 75% of their auditory attention, have started putting more auditory cues or "what's this" type dialogue to cue their "viewer" to pay attention, or if reality shows have started including more narration/reminders of what's actually happening, that kind of thing.

Then again, there are lots of counter-examples to suggest that viewers are capable of paying attention to subtitled shows like Squid Game and other prestige TV shows that are still being analyzed shot-by-shot by their viewers.

16

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

NewClayburn t1_j699t93 wrote

I hate how it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. You might not find something particularly engaging and you slip out your phone, but then you aren't paying attention enough that it will ever be engaging to you. So even if you try to put the phone away and pay attention, you'll lose interest because you missed out on becoming invested in the character and stories since you were looking at your phone.

17

ChimpBottle t1_j6acqrq wrote

Yeah, especially first getting into a show. All my favourite shows that I'm super nerdy about started off with me making myself pay attention to it when I was inclined to passively scroll through reddit

4

NewClayburn t1_j6anvie wrote

I didn't like the first episode of The Wire, but it's one of the best shows ever. Fortunately I watched it at a time when there wasn't all that much worthwhile to do on a phone.

3

ErikPanic t1_j6bki8q wrote

This is why I tend to watch things with headphones on and the lights off. Helps me become immersed and avoid distractions.

1

NathanTheSnake t1_j68zsht wrote

I actually got a time-lock safe on Amazon, specifically to hold my phone during TV/movies, so I wouldn’t be able to dick around on my phone. I set it for the length of the runtime, and then there’s nothing to do but watch TV. The result is that I watch fewer things overall, but enjoy the things I do watch more.

One thing I did learn is that the phone and especially the infinite-scrolling apps are the really addictive part. If you can disrupt that dopamine loop, the rest isn’t as hard to resist as you’d think. There was nothing stopping me from browsing Reddit’s desktop site on my laptop, but I didn’t bother. It’s specifically the hand-held information geyser that destroys my focus, not the mere existence of distractions.

7

Calfzilla2000 t1_j69h74g wrote

I am disappointed how little "second screening" has been utilized as a tool for television rather than a distraction for viewers.

10 years ago, there was talk of phones and tablets being used as complementary gadgets for watching TV, both as extra information and interaction, but nobody has really mainstreamed this idea yet.

5

bqzs OP t1_j6a59by wrote

SKAM sort of tried a multi-platform thing, but they didn't take it to it's logical conclusion.

2

Pepsiguy2 t1_j6bum16 wrote

WWE had this nailed down really good for a year or two, you'd see live interviews happen during commercials on your phone, polls, voting for things to happen on the show in the app, and then one day it just fucking disappeared

2

cronedog t1_j69p5a7 wrote

There was a big survey and something like 80% of people play on their phones rather than paying attention to show.

​

Shows can't have subtly anymore because they know the audience will miss it and complain.

​

Imagine a scene where a couple is having an argument. Instead of the wife replying with a look that the director knows will be missed by 80%, she now has to ham fistedly declare that's she's upset.

​

Look at how lambasted the witcher was because no one could bother to pay attention and instead blamed the showrunners.

4

meowskywalker t1_j6a0o0j wrote

> Look at how lambasted the witcher was because no one could bother to pay attention and instead blamed the showrunners

There’s absolutely no good reason not to tell me when the timeline switches, though. It doesn’t have to be huge, I don’t need text on the screen or anything, but at least a woosh like on Lost or something. It’s frustrating to have to be like “oh okay which set of people are we following now?” after every cut.

7

timetoputonashow t1_j6afpw8 wrote

Greta Gerwig's Little Women had a non-linear timeline indicated by the color grade and while a lot of us found it easy to follow, a lot of people were complaining about it. Sometimes the audience is at fault, it's not unreasonable to expect an audience to pay attention and think. Likewise, it's perfectly fine for the audience to say "nope, not for me, you're not being clear enough." But a line should not be drawn saying it must be done a certain way.

3

zanza19 t1_j6arpz0 wrote

There is no reason to tell you either.

−1

meowskywalker t1_j6atqe2 wrote

No the reason to tell me is so that I’m not frustrated by trying to figure out if a time jump happens every time there’s a cut. I explained why there’s a reason to do it.

2

KingEuronIIIGreyjoy t1_j68wymq wrote

I think that's just one of the issues with watching stuff at home. We have those other distractions and there's no penalty to looking at your phone or talking with someone else. In a movie theater, that's not acceptable (or at least it shouldn't be, I see way too many people pulling out their phones and distracting me with the brightness while the movie's playing). James Cameron made a point about that recently; when you see a movie in the theater, you're consciously choosing to give yourself entirely to a piece of art. All of your attention is on the sight and sound of the movie (or again, it should be) for however long it lasts. The home viewing environment is just entirely different.

2

Oh_hey_a_TAA t1_j6e513u wrote

It's literally how Netflix engineers their content, down to the writing and direction. The inclusion of "second screen consideration" in it's content development is why sooo much of their stuff is just middling waste of bandwidth.

That's the primary way on which it's affected content.

1