The increase in hardware and content in media industries has been

significant in recent years. Discuss the effect this has had on

institutions and audiences in the media area you have studied.

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in hardware and content, as
well as a shift from analogue to digital fimmaking. This has impacted all main
stages of filmmaking production, distribution and exhibition by increase easy,
efficiency and quality of overall productions, regardless of whether they are
created as high-budget conglomerate movies, or low-budget independent films.

With regard to film institutions, increased hardware and content has created
many opportunities for almost all types of institutions. Higher quality equipment
has been made available (through the proliferation of hardware) to purchase or
obtain with ease. This allows producers to create higher levels of verisimilitude,
which in turn prompts greater audience identification (uses and gratifications
theory) and allows increased engagement with characters, settings and
narratives which feel more real. This is applicable to all types of film companies
and producers, arguably having impacted independent institutions more than
conglomerate companies, whom would have sufficient funds to afford such
technology (for example, Rogue One was created with an estimated budget of
$200 million, which could be used to cover the cost of heavy CGI). Warp Films,
however, are an independent film company whose evidence of high-quality work
can be seen in their BAFTA award for This is England. Even with low-budget
films such as 71 (produced using only $5.5 million), the company have been
described to have distinctive auteur filmmaking, proving their credibility and
success, made possible through proliferation of hardware.

There are, however, threats which have arisen as a result of increased hardware
and content. Proliferation of hardware has led to increased prosumerism for
example, as a level students we have been able to produce short films
sequences using no budget which means that there are less mainstream hits
for audiences to watch, and instead a large number of niche films are available.
Chris Anderson describes this to the long tail theory, which can have both
benefits and drawbacks. For example, the movie 71 reflects the struggles of
Northern Ireland, and a more niche market allows it to be targeted towards those
who desire information or patriotism surrounding the topic. However, in spite of
more content leading to more specific audience placement , it can arguably
decrease profit for institutions. This is a result of the fact that increased audience
choice leaves them more likely to draw oppositional readings from a larger
number of texts, and further makes it more difficult for institutions to distribute
movies. This can, however, be criticised on the basis of mainstream hits
remaining most popular - for example, Rogue One and Fantastic Beasts earned
worldwide revenue of approximately $1,000,000,000 and $807,00,000. Both of
these movies relied heavily on the use of CGI during post-production, which
independent studios (such as Warp Films or Lucas Film) would have been unable
to fund. This means that higher budget conglomerate productions remain
distinctive and popular due to their creation of intense escapism, generally found
within mainstream movies.
Increased hardware and content can be further linked to the ways in which
audiences both consume and experience a movie. For example, increased online
streaming (as proved by the soon-to-be availability of Rogue One and Fantastic
Beasts on Netflix)means watching films has become an increasingly isolated
activity, as opposed to a social one. This is demonstrated through personal
experience, wherein myself and my peers are more likely to watch a film online,
from home, rather than at the cinema. This diminishes the personal
relationships aspect of the uses and gratifications theory; however arguably
exposes audiences to a wider variety of products, including those from
independent filmmakers. This is supported by the fact that 71 is available on
amazon prime, as well as Netflix having an independent category for
consumers to choose from. It is known that independent movies are more likely
to produce social realism and target more niche audiences/social groups; thus
increasing the likelihood of viewers finding a media text with which they are able
to identify (for example, I, Daniel Blake focuses on the struggles of the working
class, whom lack positive representation in mainstream media). This proves
Andersons long tail theory to produce more opportunities than threats for
audience members, displaying a positive impact on the basis of increased
content and technological convergence.

There are, however, additional problems which can be caused by increased

hardware and content. Technology has significantly shifted not only the ways in
which audiences consume films, however also the ways in which they are
experienced. Whilst CGI is able to produce a unique form of escapism, it poses
the risk of detracting from verisimilitude and thus drawing the audiences focus to
editing, as opposed to the seamless manner in which they are intended to
believe what is happening on screen. As a result, there is a higher change of
audience dissatisfaction, with many viewers preferring the aesthetic authenticity
of analogue footage. This creates more oppositional readings (as stated by
Hall), and means audiences are less likely to receive their desired gratifications
for example, if CGI makes a production appear surreal or false, it is likely to
hinder both escapism and identification with on-screen activity or character. This
is supported by the case study of Rogue One in which CGI was used to re-
construct a character whose actor had died. Whilst permission was granted,
many audiences and fans criticised this, and thus developed oppositional
readings on this basis.

In conclusion, I think that increased hardware and content has impacted

production, distribution and exhibition far more than it has the audience
experience of films. Technological convergence has undeniably increased the
ease and efficiency of these three stages; however has arguably also increased
competition which links to the long tail theory and , in this instance, impacts
filmmakers rather than viewers. Reasons for film consumption have remained
relatively similar, and whilst easy and direct access to desired gratifications has
been granted, audiences continue to watch films with which they can identify, be
informed by, be entertained by, or build a relationship with/through (as stated by
Bulmer and Katz in their uses and gratifications theory). I do not think that
these four primary uses of film are likely to change significantly in future,
although it is highly probably that technology will continue to develop, alongside
which access to gratification will change in form and nature.