Question 2: Media Ownership

To what extent does Media Ownership affect video game audiences?

Refer to Minecraft to support your answer.

Task 1 - Read the example response and then:

• Use the markscheme to give it a grade /15
• Decide what (if anything) you think was particularly good.
• Decide what could be done to improve it.

EXAMPLE RESPONSE

Introduction

The concept of media ownership is intended to help us to consider how different media industries are impacted by the control of companies, individuals, groups and governments. In the case of the gaming industry we might look at the tendency toward oligopoly that exists in most media industries, the effects of democratisation and the impact of regulation.

Oligopoly

While the video gaming industry is predominantly owned by large companies (and therefore risk averse), there is significant opportunity for independent games producers to capitalise on niche markets. This has been especially true since the advent of touchscreen technology on smart phones, which has opened up a huge industry in mobile app production and broadened audiences to include much older gamers and far more female gamers.

Despite this, the revenue within gaming is still dominated by an oligopoly of around ten companies. However, unlike the film industry, which is dominated by U.S. film companies, the top ten gaming companies include two Japanese, one French and one Chinese company. The cultural diversity of producers means that audiences have access to a wider range of different gaming experiences.  The diversity of the marketplace is also significant. While U.S. audiences still make up the largest marketplace for film goers, and China a close second, the Asian markets dwarf the US market in gaming, which again makes for a wider range of different niche values and gaming options for audiences.

Both Hesmondhalgh and Curran and Seaton argue that, like all industries, the video gaming industry is subject to the normal capitalist phenomenon of the concentration of ownership moving into fewer and fewer hands. Curran and Seaton argue that this leads to a narrowing range of options and of reduced quality. The purchase of Minecraft by Microsoft at the end of 2014,  raised concern amongst Minecraft fans as they believed that Microsoft could ruin the game and make previously free content part of a subscription package (e.g. texture packs and mods etc.) This was not an unreasonable belief as they had previously purchased games such as Halo and it was widely considered that they had subsequently  ‘ruined’ the game. However, in the case of Minecraft, this fear seems to have been unfounded. Instead, Microsoft seemed to have allowed their symbol creators freedom to maximise audience engagement; the takeover enabled the game to be delivered by the world’s leading technology company, improving the quality, speed and accessibility of the game. The subsequent success of Minecraft has been due to its ability to distribute and circulate engagement amongst its users – not just gaming fans but also non-traditional gamer audiences using digitally convergent media.

Democratisation

The democratisation of game production and the rise of the prosumer is the result of the reduced cost of gaming technology and the increase in connectivity. Hesmondhalgh points out that large studios are risk averse, and this may be especially true in the gaming industry which is very obviously subject to the problem of high production costs and low reproduction costs. This means that independent game developers can now compete with the large studios, taking risks that the larger companies often avoid and widening the variety of experiences available to audiences. Minecraft is arguable the best example of this. The most popular game of 2010 was Call of Duty: Black Ops, so the idea of creating an online 'lego' game would have likely been rejected by any of the big games producers; but Markus Persson (Notch) - the creator of Minecraft - was able to take this risk because he was an independent developer. However, Notch was also a member of the gaming community and had some reason to believe such a game would be popular. He engaged in constant back and forth (which we might consider audience research) with other gamers to make improvements to the game that appealed directly to users. Thus, the game developed through a very different relationship between audience and producer and its popularity grew through ‘word of mouth’ rather than conventional methods of marketing.

In addition to game development, the democratision of distribution across media platforms like YouTube.com and in more recent years Twitch.com has lead to a secondary industry growing in tandem with the gaming industry. For example, video producer ‘Dream’ has 6 million subscribers on Twitch and 30 million YouTube subscribers. Their content is exclusively focused on Minecraft gameplay. We might ask ourselves why companies like Microsoft make little or no effort to charge these prosumers for use of their intellectual property, but it is clear that these channels provide free and highly targeted marketing for game producers, as well as providing entertainment for audiences.

Regulation

Another factor that we need to consider when approaching Media Ownership is the impact of government control and regulation. Worldwide, these forms of control vary, with some countries exercising draconian control over the distribution and communication via online media. The UK walks something of a tightrope between seeing audiences as consumers (for whom freedom is paramount) and citizens (for whom protection is the most significant factor. 

Regulation of Video Games in the UK is undertaken by the VSC Rating Board, which is a statutory body rather than a self-regulatory body (as exists in the film industry). Social attitudes to video gaming are not entirely different to film, but fears, often stoked by other media, warn of addiction, social isolation and the supposedly harmful effects of exposure to violent representations. In addition, the comparatively young target audience means that that there is a considered to be a greater need for statutory regulation to protect the vulnerable. However, video gaming is a digital industry, with audiences able to purchase online, and producers able to retail from any country. The VSC can only realistically police physical games and cannot enforce their rating system within households. As a result, regulation has little effect on the chosen gaming experience of audiences within the UK.

At first look, Minecraft seems largely benign. According to the ‘Entertaining Software Rating Board’ (ESRB), it is suitable for users aged 10+, due to its ‘Fantasy Violence.’ However, in their parents’ guide to Minecraft, National Online Safety Ltd. (NOS) warn against the potential for cyber bullying, grooming and addiction. These concerns go hand in hand with the technological advancements that facilitated much of Minecraft’s popularity. Online, cross platform gaming allowed Minecraft to reach a huge audience, and to develop a sense of community, both in the early stages of its development and then as it continued to spread. It is this capacity to play online that leaves its younger players vulnerable to grooming and to cyber bullying. In addition, the pocket edition of Minecraft available for mobile devices may seem to be a perfect way for audience to enjoy the gaming experience in a variety of location; however, this may contribute adversely to the potential for gaming addiction.

Another potential issue highlighted by NOS is the potential for third party creators to include malware, spyware, and viruses in their ‘mods.’ Minecraft was one of the first video games to provide a platform for prosumers to create mods for the game. Minecraft users on PC have always had a ‘store’ option which allowed them to purchase game mods and new skins, but this option became ubiquitous across all platforms in June 2017. By September of the same year, the Minecraft Store announced that they had exceeded 1 million dollars in sales. These mods are almost all fan-made by ‘prosumers.’  Here then we see improvements for general players, a way for prosumers to generate revenue and also a method for Microsoft, in partner with these independent creators, to share some of the revenue. However, we also see the potential bad actors to invade the ‘personal space’ and compromise the safety of gamers. At present, it is almost impossible to police this situation.

IN AN ESSAY ON MEDIA OWNERSHIP

Livingstone and Lunt point to the uneasy tension between the idea of seeing audiences as consumers with the right to choice and quality, and citizens with the right to protection.  In the UK the VSC Rating Board (in charge of Video Game rating) is a statutory body rather than a self-regulatory body (as in the film industry), which reflects the perceived vulnerability of the comparatively young target audience (citizens). However, video gaming is a digital industry, with audiences able to purchase online; the VSC can only police physical games and cannot enforce their rating system within households. Ergo, regulation has little effect on the chosen gaming experience of audiences within the UK and ratings have little impact on the age of consumers. 'Minecraft' seems largely benign, with only mild ‘Fantasy Violence.’ However, in their parents’ guide to Minecraft, National Online Safety Ltd. (NOS) warn against the potential for cyber bullying, grooming and addiction. Cross platform gaming allowed Minecraft to reach a huge audience and develop a sense of community, but this capacity to play online leaves its younger players vulnerable. The pocket edition available for mobile devices may seem to be a perfect way for consumers to enjoy the gaming experience in a variety of location; however, this may contribute to gaming addiction in citizens. So, given the near impossibility of regulating computer games, what responsibility do owners have to provide ethical support for citizens while supplying the demand from consumers? Legally, they have none. However, with the growing worry around the adverse effects of online media (especially social media) and the propensity for moral panics around video gaming, it seems possible that gaming industry owners will be next in the firing line. 

TAKE A CRITICAL LOOK AT THESE TWO RESPONSES

EXAMPLE 1

When exploring the affect that media ownership has on the audience, it is important to investigate regulation, the tendency toward oligopoly that exists in most media industries and the effects of democratisation. There we can question if video games like Minecraft cause audiences to experience harmful effects, feel connected with the producer and have the opportunity to make money.

Let’s first discuss regulation, according to the ‘Entertaining Software Rating Board’ (ESRB), Minecraft is suitable for users aged 10+, due to its ‘Fantasy Violence.’ However, in their parents’ guide to Minecraft, National Online Safety Ltd. (NOS) warn against the potential for cyber bullying, grooming and addiction. These concerns go hand in hand with the technological advancements that facilitated much of Minecraft’s popularity. Minecraft utilizes cross platform gaming, where online gamers create communities. However online youth are vulnerable to grooming. Perhaps suggesting media ownership is profit driven and fails to be accountable for the dangers their games create. Furthermore, the difficulty with regulating video games is that children younger than 10 can access it and even some children over 10 may find the content unsettling. This creates “moral panic”, which is further reinforced by Minecraft’s use of digital convergence. For mobile, Minecraft mobile revenue Minecraft's mobile edition made $161 million in 2021, accounting for 42% of the game's total revenue. Gamers can access the pocket edition of Minecraft on their mobile devices, which could contribute to gaming addiction and therefore social isolation of their audiences.

When discussing video game ownership, it is important to understand the difference between the ownership of other media discourse. Theorists such as Curran and Seaton argue that there is a concentration of media ownership which leads to narrowing range of opinions. The revenue within gaming is still dominated by an oligopoly of around ten companies. Microsoft purchased Minecraft at the end of 2014, however audiences feared they would change to high subscription fees or discontinue the versions of Minecraft made for non-Microsoft game platforms. This highlights how media oligopoly affects the audience, lowering innovation, and increasing prices. However, Minecraft is an example of how independent companies (e.g. Mojang) can profit in the gaming market. Minecraft had over 16 million registered users and 4 million purchases, prior to its official release in 2011, without the help of media conglomerates like Microsoft. Thus, the game developed through a very different relationship between audience and producer and its popularity grew through ‘word of mouth’ rather than conventional methods of marketing. This in a way, appealed more to a gaming audience as it seemed more special and unique.

Arguably, this close relationship between producer and consumer is like no other, when regarding the gaming industry. The democratisation of game production and the rise of the prosumer is the result of the reduced cost of gaming technology and the increase in connectivity. Not only can an independent producer like Notch reach millions of gamers through an online community but also democratisation can be seen in the distribution across other media platforms, such as YouTube. For example, video producer ‘Dream’ has 6 million subscribers on Twitch and 30 million YouTube subscribers. Their content is exclusively focused on Minecraft gameplay. This leads to a secondary industry growing in tandem with the gaming industry and highlights how this sense of egalitarianism in the ownership of games allows consumers to make profit. Gamers can also earn money through Minecraft Realm’s, where they can charge for server access. Minecraft was one of the first video games to provide a platform for prosumers to create mods for the game. This active audience now feel game production is not a solitary and private process but rather a social and public one and further strengthens the gaming community, because of the circulation of content.

In conclusion, due the oligopoly of the gaming industry, audiences may receive less quality content due to the pursuit of profit however democratisation has allowed video game producers to understand and interact with their audiences like no other industry. The rise of the prosumer could perhaps counteract the lack of quality and creativity of the large gaming conglomerates, such as Microsoft. Furthermore, with the opportunity to produce award-winning video games as an independent producer, video games become more aligned with the community they are produced for. Audiences feel involved and the community grows stronger, especially through online connectivity. Despite these advantages, the online world of gaming is a danger to young audiences. Regulation becomes an impossible task when it comes to prosumer content and even digital content. There is no way of knowing if a player is under 10 or a slightly player will find the content upsetting. Although digital convergence has allowed Minecraft to reach and maintain more audiences, the introduction of Minecraft mobile edition could contribute to the gaming addiction of their audiences. This shows how much media ownership can affect their audiences, even to a point of “moral panic”.

EXAMPLE 2

Ownership does greatly affect audiences of video games, the idea of big companies ruining indie games for profit is shown in the fear fans of Minecraft had when Microsoft brought Minecraft in 2015. Ownership also can change the way the game appears or how the audience can interact with the game, which can be both good and bad.

Minecraft was originally an independent game owned by Mojang, however Mojang was brought by Microsoft, meaning a member of the gaming oligopoly now had control of the best selling game ever (according to wikapedia) and can change it to increase profit, which the fans were worried about. The negative changes that have been seen in Minecraft since Microsoft took over include expensive add ons and even the removal of all references to the games creater Markus (Notch) Persson. Minecraft Story Mode was heavily advertised on Tv and within the game itself, and once it was released, people realised that sections of the story was blocked by a pay wall, meaning you had to buy it in sections. This, to the audience, proves how big companies like Microsoft only care about profit and not the gaming experience of the consumers, ruining the game.

However, there are some positive attibutes to a game being owned by a tech coglomerate. Since Microsoft’s take over, there has been regular updates to optimise the gaming experience, these include adding more Mobs, Items and even Biomes. Microsoft also has regular interaction to the fan base, showcasing new updates at Minecon and getting fans to vote on what to add in the game. A recent example of this was Glow Squid being added to the game instead of Flower Cows, which also introduced many new items. Microsoft also created the Minecraft Store where people can buy maps, skins and texture packs with ingame money or real money. This also allows prosumers to create their own content for people to buy which increases profit for the audience and Microsoft.

The Democratisation of being able to produce your own games and content also means more independent games like minecraft can be made, and that prosumers of games like minecraft can make their own content to upload, such as tutorials or parody songs on youtube. Greater access obviously gives fans more ways to play minecraft but also gives Microsoft more consumers meaning more profit. As prosumers upload videos, such as Dream uploading his Hide and Seek videos onto Youtube, they are also acting as advertisment for Minecraft, leading to the prosumer’s audience likely buying the game. Democratisation also means a very wide demographic of people can also play, which leads to fan bases, seen in Minecon, and more interaction. The different game modes allow people of all ages to play such as younger children can play on creative and older audiences can play on Hard Core. The addition of servers on PS4 and Xbox also means that consumers can play with eachother whether it be Building Competitions, Role Play or Player vs Player. By having a large company which can invest money into minecraft, especially as it is already uch a big game meaning there is little chance of a flop, Minecraft now can provide a greater experience to the audience within and outside the game.

Ownership does to a big extent affect video game audiences, for the better and the worse. Minecraft was lucky to already be very sucsessful and have an active fan base as Microsoft took over, meaning the risks of extra paywalls or anything to ruin the game was low, as it would have led to a big outcry from the fan base. Microsofts take over has affected th audience for the better, as seen with regular interaction and letting fans decide what to add, as well as greater access and the rise of prosumers. However, not all ownership affects the audience well, such as EA being known for overcharging for addons as well as over charging for “New Games” such as FIFA.