متن را بخوان و با ذکر عناوین به انگلیسی خلاصه کن THE NEW NETWORK BUSINESS
It is evident that the content packagers—broadcast networks—have en- countered the most dramatic environmental changes among all broad-

casters in the last two decades, especially in the television industry. Amid the growth of the MVPD services, broadcast television networks are fighting for a much smaller audience share while at the same time trying to figure out their strategies in the new digital media market full of opportunities as well as risks. The decisions the networks make also have rippled effects on different parts of the industry. For instance, as the traditional scripted shows gave way to reality-based programming, there was a reduction of programming products in the syndication pipeline. Nevertheless, CBS became the highest-ranked network re- cently in overall demographics thanks to this programming approach (Standard & Poor’s, 2004). The competitive picture today is very differ- ent from the time when the big three networks garnered almost all the primetime-viewing shares and held the upper-hand bargaining position with both the upstream producers and downstream stations.
Exactly how has the network business evolved in response to all the challenges? Using an RBV approach, we examine here how these broad- casters have adapted to the environment by investigating the evolution of network resources since the rise of MVPD services. Note that as a firm’s environments become turbulent and uncertain, the relevance and flexibility of its resources become more significant to achieving success (Chatterjee & Wernerfelt, 1988). Similarly, the network broadcasters would have to acquire specific resources to achieve competitive advan- tage and profitability during this period.
Landers and Chan-Olmsted (2004) reviewed precisely the changing property and knowledge resources during four time periods of increas- ing uncertainty (i.e., 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2001). They noted that property-based resources of station ownership, market reach, and over- all/top content properties seem to become more prominent as the net- work television market becomes more unstable or uncertain. Affiliate contracts and top content property appear to be critical property-based resources for the minor networks in their attempt to gain market shares. Network news, on the other hand, does not seem to be influ- enced by the fluidity in the market as a property resource. As for the knowledge-based resources, the “breadth” of human resources such as media employee pools and multipurposing expertise appears to grow in importance as the market becomes more volatile. International exper- tise, mostly in forms of cable programming expansion, is also becoming more vital. Generally, access to a diverse set of knowledge resources (in product and geography) seems to become more essential as the level of uncertainty in this media market increases. As for the resource attain- ment strategies, Landers and Chan-Olmsted also observed that whereas NBC was aggressive in acquiring certain property-based resources such as broadcast media and affiliate contracts properties, developing some knowledge-based resources like management and audience expertise, and employing a “focus” strategy of building electronic media outlets and content, CBS and Fox emphasized expanding property resources such as O&O stations and top content properties. Fox was especially
successful in developing competitive content expertise that aided its seg- mentation strategies.
The analysis thus far reveals that channel/content access and exper- tise in expanding, marketing, or coordinating into other media domains are crucial resources in the changing broadcast television market. View- ing these resources now in the broader context of corporate resources (i.e., broadcast networks as a resource of media conglomerates), we can see that the broadcasters’ contribution to their corporate owners is nec- essarily shifted. Table 5.4 shows the top U.S. media conglomerates’ di- verse holdings and the fact that half of them own at least one broadcast network. Historically, without the complicated affiliations with firms from other media sectors and the presence of multipoint competition, the network business was the source of television programming and what defined a television station. Today, networks play the multifaceted roles of a content developer (for multiple media outlets), channel man- ager (on behalf of the stations), lead cross-media promoter, and brand-marketing tone setter. After GE-NBC’s acquisition of Universal from Vivendi, the media conglomerate is already actively pursuing a strategy of integrating Universal’s studio assets with those of NBC and marketing its Universal movie properties via DVD and other MVPD net- works with NBC’s promotional arms. In conclusion, the network busi- ness has evolved from a one-dimensional programming distributor to a critical platform for executing corporate strategies.
BROADCAST BRAND MANAGEMENT
Marketing researchers have long advocated that managers need to start managing their brands more like assets—increasing their value over time (Keller, 1993). Management has to invest in understanding its brand to- day to make better brand decisions tomorrow. Such a notion holds true for the broadcast industries as well. As the theory of “brand life cycle” suggested, a brand, if well managed and perceived, may enter a stage of fortification with the utility of leveraging a brand’s value by extending the brand to other related product categories (Liebermann, 1986). With the arrival of digital media technologies, broadcasters have the opportu- nity to explore new media services that may bring new revenues and/or develop competitive advantages. A successfully branded broadcaster has the foundation on which to begin such service expansions.
Among all broadcasters, radio stations are most experienced in branding related marketing techniques such as segmentation, differen- tiation, and positioning. Because of their narrowcasting nature, radio broadcasters have long embraced the idea of assessing the audience per- ceptions of their stations (i.e., brand images). On the other hand, with the product of traditionally mass-appeal content, television broadcast- ers have approached the branding concept quite differently.
The three major broadcast networks have historically branded them- selves based on their news divisions and newscaster personalities
Branding via news programming seems to be widespread among local stations because local news often generates ratings, revenues, and visi- bility for these stations (Upshaw, 1995). The continuity and consistency of a news brand is especially important for an affiliated station as it tries to capitalize on the lead-in power of its network’s news brand and the more established, identifiable overall network brand. A survey of local television station managers revealed that the local broadcasters had a very high awareness of the branding concept (Chan-Olmsted & Kim, 2001). Nevertheless, they often treated branding as “promotional” tasks. In addition, although the managers believed that branding plays an important long-term strategic role in the success of a station, they frequently associated branding with tactical operations such as graphi- cal consistency, unique selling points for local news, and network affili- ation image. Station promotions and news functions were more readily identified as related to branding rather than to strategic management, and most branding activities included news-oriented promotions, net- work brand association, and station logo designs. This is not surprising considering the fact that the broadcast networks, the ones that local TV stations often model themselves upon, have embraced the term of branding mostly with a frenzy of logo designs as well as tactical place- ment of these signatures and promotion of the accompanying slogans. The same study also found that the managers’ commitment to brand research, not their industry experience, was linked to a more accurate understanding of branding. Also, the perceived long-term role of brand- ing is negatively related to managers’(general managers’) experience and current position in the industry. It seems that branding is a mana- gerial function that is applied more readily by an industry newcomer than a seasoned veteran. The same study also showed that market sizes matter in a station’s branding endeavor; the upper management in big- ger markets tended to hold a more positive, long-term view of branding, thus offering a better environment of building station brand equity.
Branding and the Internet
Chan-Olmsted and Kim (2001) found that most local television stations perceived the Internet as a good branding tool, especially for news. Ac- cording to the Internet Age Broadcaster Report released by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), two major strategic approaches have been adopted by broadcast networks: one used the Internet as a promotion tool for competing, and the other used the Internet to de- velop a better brand relationship with customers (Sonne, 1999). Lin and Jeffres (2001) also suggested that local TV stations use their online ven- tures to secure and enhance audience brand loyalty. Hashmi (2000) put forward that television networks generally perceived the Internet as a platform for repurposing, brand extension, and promotion. Along the same line of proposition, Chan-Olmsted and Ha (2002) concluded that broadcast television networks largely use the Internet to complement
their core off-line business (i.e., on-air content) rather than delivering new online content or generating e-commerce or online ad revenues.
So how have the broadcasters incorporated the Internet in their branding efforts? The broadcasters have utilized the Internet to enrich their off-line products by distributing a certain online content that takes advantage of the new medium’s capacity of interactivity and personal- ization. For example, ABC launched an Enhanced TV site that allows viewers to interact with its broadcasts of Monday Night Football. NBC created fresh online content for some of its series, such as Homicide, that allows users to get involved in solving crimes with a set of detectives not featured on the show. Fox started Sports Fantasy Network, one of the Web’s active fantasy sports leagues, and TooHotForFox.com, a site con- taining original content that is more provocative and thus not available on the Fox network. These online sites certainly contribute to the build- ing of network brand images. As broadcasters solidify their brand im- ages both on-air and online, it is possible for them to use the Internet beyond marketing purposes. Working toward a market/product devel- opment strategy, a broadcaster can even attempt to sell content prod- ucts online. The online distribution of content products, however, would be viable only when a broadcaster approaches the Internet with a brand identity that is based on solid, differentiated content.

NEW CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES: REFORMULATION OF BUSINESS MODELS

In response to the changing external environment, broadcasters have to revamp their traditional business models to diversify their revenue sources and position themselves for the opportunities offered by the new digital media marketplace. In exploring the applicability of differ- ent business approaches, this chapter now focuses on addressing three issues that have significant implications for broadcasters’ creation of new strategies: the development of digital television, which revolution- ized the capability of the television medium; the growth of satellite and Internet radio, which abolished the traditional geographic limitation of the radio medium; and the emerging broadcast-Internet business mod- els, which could serve as a blueprint for broadcasters’ expansion into new media businesses.