In this First Monday article, David Liroff, vice president and chief technology officer at the public television and radio broadcasting organisation WGBH Educational Foundation, writes about the continuing challenge to maximise the public service value of the content they create and acquire. He defines 'public service value' as the "extent to which we can maximize its usefulness to viewers and listeners, visitors to our Web sites, teachers and students, researchers, other producers, both now and into the future."

Liroff addresses the measuring of 'public service value' by breaking it into two main themes: 'markets are conversations' and 'understanding audience expectations'.

First, Liroff states that with so many different media choices available - like cable, radio, satellite, Internet - that media use patterns are becoming too complex to track with any degree of accuracy using legacy measurement systems.

Second, he says that "we're rapidly moving beyond the one–way mass communications model to one in which there is increasing interaction between members of the audience and the communicators, and among members of the audience as well. Interactive media are taking many new forms, including the use of cell phone text messaging for audiences to register their responses to broadcast programming. Viewers and listeners and readers go online to participate in forums and conversations, and to access additional audio, video and text which were not included in the broadcast program."

One of Liroff's dilemma is how can one have a "voice" online - which brings us to "markets are conversations".

Markets are conversations

Liroff provides an example of how one public radio station sends out informal emails to its email subscribers. It's not at all like a formal press release and that, according to Liroff, may be the catch.

What do audiences expect from us?

Liroff describes how WGBH is in the middle of several major research projects underway in cities across the United States. "It's too early to report any findings. [They] began with individual interviews and focus groups with hundreds of viewers, and [they're] now in the midst of a quantitative study to further explore some of the themes which emerged in the qualitative phase. But what became clear in the focus groups is that different viewers had differing expectations of what needs they wanted television — and particularly public television — to fulfill for them.

...In reviewing the tapes from the focus groups, it became clear that the answer to the question "What do viewers expect from us" is, in part, "it depends." Obviously, it depends on who they are, what we are offering, what's on the other channels, "how was your day, dear?" and in general what else is competing for their attention."

Research doesn't have to be expensive. "In Boston, [WGBH] is creating audience panels to provide [them] with regular feedback across a broad range of issues. While the plural of 'anecdote' may not be "data," any additional insight into audience expectations can only help us meet their needs." Liroff encourages using a balance of quantitative and qualitative information to determine the audience's expectations. He says, "We need to back away from over–dependence on quantitative audience data, which provides little insight into effects.

Click here for the full article online.