There remains in common use today a popular term coined by British biologist Herbert Spencer in 1864. That phrase is survival of the fittest, a term later adopted by Charles Darwin as a synonym for his own term natural selection. Despite there being plenty of time since 1864 to resolve any disputes over the meaning of Spencer's phrase, it is still common to hear people using the phrase in a way that reveals their misunderstanding of it. The wrong use of the term carries an implication that fittest means in the best physical shape or capable of the highest performance with respect to speed, strength, stamina and so on.
With that wrong meaning in mind, businesses such as TV stations and their technology suppliers just try to increase the octane of their existing business methods. They make best efforts to become lean and mean. They try to improve their fitness in terms of power, strength, speed and efficiency.
It isn't enough.
It isn't going to work in the long term, despite the apparent short-term improvements in the bottom line. Dinosaurs died out during the Ice Age because they were reptiles, and reptiles can't function in the cold. Their ability to run, fly and swim didn't help them, no matter how good and fit they were at those things.
The right interpretation of the term survival of the fittest, expressed in my own paraphrase, is fit for the purpose, or most able to adapt to the new conditions, or even the least inconvenienced by the new conditions. It is with that meaning in mind that I consider the events of the year recently completed, 2013.
We found ourselves at the end of 2013 (and now in Q1 2014) in a time of particularly dynamic circumstances: dynamic as in characterized by constant change. What makes the changing circumstances so challenging to the TV industry is the fact that there are multiple changes occurring simultaneously.
I can think of at least three relevant things that are changing significantly: Technology, economic conditions and consumer behavior. The year 2013 saw major shifts under all three of those headings.
Let's consider each separately.
Technology shift 1: Phablets are now ubiquitous. Phablet is a coined word, a portmanteau from phone and tablet. See the prime examples in the Samsung Galaxy Note and Sony Experia Z1 and LG Optimus G Pro. This author, an Australian living in Hong Kong, is a happy user of the Samsung Galaxy Note 2. And every day when I ride on public transport, I see that I am surrounded by fellow phablet users.
We have great public transport systems here. We are not imprisoned in our cars like those poor souls living in America and Australia. We have our hands and minds free to consume information and entertainment while we commute to and from work every day. The phablet is a non-driving commuter's best friend.
The iPad was too big for my needs, so I never bought one. I did buy an Asus Transformer, which is an Android tablet with a docking keyboard that allowed the tablet to be used as a quasi-netbook. It's too heavy, and too big.
The Galaxy Note 2 is just right. It is neither too big nor too heavy, and yet it is still small enough to be a practical phone as well. It's too bad that the built-in camera is such a disappointment. Perfection eludes me.
The important point is that I watch a lot of video on my phablet. It's perfect for watching YouTube. I read the news and sometimes watch news video clips on the phablet.
The operational duty cycles of my big TV receiver at home and my desktop computer have dropped significantly, because I can do so much with the phablet, so conveniently, even while on the go.
That roaming consumption of information and entertainment on the phablet wouldn't be practical without Technology shift 2: LTE networks.
LTE networks are pure IP networks. The voice calls and text messages and streaming media are all payload in IP packets. A phablet on a 4G (LTE) network can access the entire web from anywhere that a good wireless network (4G or Wi-Fi) can reach.
Accessing the entire web means we can also access OTT television and video content. We are free at last.
Traditional television broadcasters are now required to follow us viewers around. The broadcasters' original mobile strategy, DVB-H, didn't happen. Instead, the broadcasters need to buy their OTT seats on the LTE and Wi-Fi networks if they want us roaming viewers to receive their content. And that brings us to the subject of consumer behavior.
Consumer behavior shift 1: Many of us now prefer the smaller screen in our pocket rather than the bigger one in the living room.
Consumer behavior shift 2: We are spending much less time on the sofa in front of the big TV in the living room. We want to consume television and video content in whatever location we have the free time.
Consumer behavior shift 3: Even when we are on the sofa watching the big TV screen, we are also holding and using the small screen in our phone/phablet/tablet.
If the TV show is engaging, we use the second screen to find supplementary information about the show or the characters or the story in it. Or sometimes we use the second screen to interact with the TV show, via Twitter, for example. If the TV show isn't engaging, we use the second screen to help us find something more interesting to watch.
Consumer behavior shift 4: We are taking charge of the decisions about the TV programming that emits from our screens. We are much less willing to have programming choices dictated to us by TV network programming executives.
Consumer behavior shift 5: We are creating more and more of our own content, publishing it on social networks, and we correspondingly consume content from our friends via social networks. We are becoming independent of broadcast networks for news and entertainme
