Linear sport is one key area of broadcast that is not responding to this change well. Part of the problem is that sports broadcasters have traditionally carried out video distribution with a single approach, not adapting the experience for different viewer needs or according to the strengths of different viewing devices. Research by Ampere Analysis has shown – much to the dismay of the broadcast industry, which had hoped live matches would be immune from the powers of Netflix and video games – that young people are turning away from live sport because it fails to meet their expectations on entertainment.

These expectations are being driven by their experience of gaming, social media, and the broader evolution of the Internet, which are all moving rapidly forward. Together, these are defining what they understand about personalisation, interactivity, devices, content creation, and choice. Live sport either ignores these areas completely or incorporates them badly. 

Empowering through choice

A single broadcast feed is no longer sufficient because viewers each have different motivations for watching. Even in a sport such as MotoGP, viewer needs can be incredibly varied. Some want a guided, ‘lean back’ experience akin to a traditional TV broadcast, while others do not want to miss a single overtake, or they want to know about emerging sub-plots and battles. Others still only want to watch their favourite rider. These wide interests are not limited to the realm of sports: they can be applied to any live event.

Because broadcasts can only show one feed on screen at a time, only a fraction of the content is made available to the user. At a time when rights holders realise that they must provide as much value as possible to an increasingly diverse and demanding audience, missing huge amounts of exciting content due to the limitations of a single linear feed is not a sustainable model.

This however presents a great opportunity for sports rights’ holders. They are in a position to deliver international feeds, while pulling in commentary, punditry, data, and social media to satisfy their audiences. Introducing different camera angles can benefit viewers who wish to be really part of the action; for example, throughout a canoe slalom, cameras can be placed at each obstacle or on the helmet of competitors, capturing the view of an athlete as they tackle the course.

This new approach does though need to be managed. Giving viewers access to the full range of content available can be overwhelming, making it difficult for them to decide what to watch and when. Instead, sports broadcasters should consider the qualities that made TV so compelling in the first place, namely scheduling and pacing, curation, commentary, and narrative. By drawing on these qualities, they can guide viewers to discover content which may have previously been difficult to find. Broadcasters also need to understand what the different screens are good for. When delivering to more than one screen, what is too easily forgotten is that the screens need not compete but instead can complement each other to create a more engaging and flexible viewing experience.

A truly ‘live’ OTT experience

There are also other key challenges to overcome: latency and synchronicity. ‘Live’ broadcasts on different devices can be totally out of sync, as well as seconds or even minutes behind social media. To a sports fan, there is nothing that breaks the illusion of a live experience more than hearing what’s going to happen well before their viewing platform allows them to experience it. Viewers want a live OTT solution which synchronises the viewing experience, providing instant stream switching and offering higher picture quality.

The future and beyond

A couple of years ago, live content was being widely heralded as the answer to the threat broadcasters were facing from the relentless growth of OTT giants, such as Netflix and Amazon. This resulted in huge sums being paid for exclusive sports rights. Since then, with the growth of industries such as e-sports, and platforms such as Twitch, it has become clear that for ‘Millennials’ (aged 21-34), and even more so for Generation Z (aged 15-20), it was not simply a question of the content itself being important, but also format.

While there is clearly still huge demand for sports content, younger users also expect to have their expectations met – expectations that are being set in other more disruptive industries. If live sport broadcasters do not respond to this, succeeding to provide the levels of interactivity and personalisation, and delivering these in the right formats on suitable devices that young people increasingly want, all while developing the right commercial models for these, then more and more of the young will simply look for alternative forms of entertainment.

The good news is that technology and sensitive design can make these experiences possible. Provided that there are content owners who are willing to think in innovative ways about how to meet these changing user behaviours and expectations, the future for sports content will be extremely exciting.