The Internet - not content without football 8:39pm

Like the music and film industries before it, football is finding the transition onto the internet uncomfortable.

Any given 90 minute match can now become a week long event. The trend has been to add more coverage and punditry as issues and sub-plots are debated unabated. The venerable BBC is a victim of this approach such that a chosen Saturday afternoon match can be covered on the web via minute-by-minute commentary, live on the radio and should you choose, you can turn on the TV and watch someone else watch the match. All this, and not a ball in sight.

Challenged with the uneasy thought that the behemoth that has been created might not always yield exciting games (Grand Slam Sunday, anyone?), the reaction of media providers has been to discuss anything bar the ball. Managers, rivalries and squad selection riddle online news aggregators with superfluous information that has forgotten its purpose. As Ian Plenderleith notes in When Saturday Comes (issue 253), immediacy is replacing quality when it comes to web-based journalism in an era of omnipresent news that becomes dated almost as soon as it is written.

Meanwhile, live TV feeds from distant lands are providing thousands of internet users Premier League football for free (albeit illegally). Should someone lack the persistence to make out the fuzzy features and Chinese commentary, those helpful internet pirates will share the bounty on video sharing sites almost as they happen.

The reaction of those in control of football is the same as both the music and film industries – a response proven not to work. Threats of legal action against the very fans to which they market seem contradictory. People just want to watch the football and on the internet content is king.

Online piracy in football appears to be in its infancy. Whilst the days of Napster are long dead and iTunes rules supreme, football’s revolution could be right around the corner. Peer-to-peer streaming video is often poor quality and buffers at inconvenient intervals, whilst complicated broadcast contracts stifle the opportunity for those who are capable of delivering decent production online.

Consider the changes in the two mentioned entertainment industries. Consumers chose to forgo CD artwork and DVD special features to download millions of free songs. Football fans are now wondering how if a satellite provider charges £30 a month for sport but they can get it for free (and perhaps as importantly – if others are getting it for free), then there’s no value in the premium content.

However, the next lesson the industries learnt was that citizens are generally law abiding. If digital content is good value and it delivers what people really want in a convenient way, then they’ll generally pay for it. The theory holds even more currency when one considers that the music industry’s business model has recently flipped – now, the concerts are the revenue generators rather than just an opportunity to peddle the CD. In much the same way, if football can provide good value digital content, attendances are less likely to suffer. Online content is produced for a global audience, and not those within driving distance of the ground.

Ian Plenderleith highlights the official US league’s website MLSnet.com, which is bucking the trend in an attempt to gain traction online (and as result offline). Whilst it is an admittedly emerging league, there doesn’t seem to be much fear on the part of those in control that providing match highlights will affect attendances. One person sat in front of a computer screen does not mean one less empty seat in the stadium. Indeed, Toronto FC’s Director of Football Operations Paul Beirne notes that:

“there are more than 500 live games broadcast here on a multitude of channels. Some of them are pay-per-view but you can get more live football here than just about anywhere else on the planet”.

Toronto’s new soccer-specific 20,000 stadium the BMO Field sold out of season tickets in its first year and hosted 15 sold-out games.

Those who provide the content will inevitably struggle if they try to squeeze more web inches out of the same product. There are diminishing returns on pastiche punditry. Once the deleted scenes on a DVD run longer than the film itself (“over 4 hours of deleted scenes!”), the content that commands such a high price is devalued. Football may have to make the same mistakes to learn that lesson.

In providing the content, the powers that be must deal with the uncomfortable thought that it’s not about them. The best opportunity in the immediate future is to try and deliver their product in the best possible way to suit the viewers, and not just add more of it. As noted earlier, the BBC are attempting to provide as much content in as many forms as possible, but they are significantly hindered by the fact that they don’t have rights to any live Premier League football. It remains to be seen whether the likes of Sky Sports and Setanta will deliver online content that fills the void between free illegal internet streams and expensive subscription based TV coverage.

It’s their mistake to make, but football in any form will always be the people’s game in a consumer society,

• Interestingly, Techcrunch UK reported today that Sky, ITV and Five are looking to integrate their production with online social networks. Have I hit on something?
  
• Tomorrow I’ll post a piece on “The Wisdom of Crowds” and the capacity for online collaboration in football