M.Stocchetti Interview with Anu Nissinen,10.2012-Page 1/7
M.Stocchetti–Interview with Anu Nissinen,10.2012-Page | 1/7
Anu Nissinen, born 1963, MSc (Economics & Business Administration) CEO of Sanoma Media Finland and Member of the Executive Management Group of Sanoma since 1 September 2011.Joined Sanoma in 2001, previous positions as President of Sanoma Entertainment since 2008-2011, President of Welho / SW Television 2004-2008 and Marketing Director at Helsinki Television 2001-2004.Served in various marketing positions at Sinebrychoff 1990-2000 and at Cultor Ltd 1988-1989.
Anu Nissinen: Education and Entertainment in Commercial Media
Matteo Stocchetti - What is the role of the media in education?
Anu Nissinen – In our vocabulary, here at Sanoma, education means professional education and that’s a different kind of business area.But I understand you mean here what is the role of media when it comes to educating people and especially underage people, what kind of role models or inspiring they get or whatever, how they see the world through our media. And of course that is very important: it is an aspect that is present in our mind when we think of programming, TV or magazine. Donald Duck, or in Finnish AkuAnkka, for example, has a huge impact when it comes to teaching young people to read. Especially in Finland, AkuAnkka or comics books are almost the only readings for some younger boys. For us it is very important that we use rich and vivid Finnish language in AkuAnkka. During the over 60 years it has been published, it has been praised and won many prizes for that. It has an important educational role.
MS - It is a very basic grammar role…
AN - Indeed.And then there’s TV of course. You have to remember that TV is a very regulated media. There’s a lot of self-regulation and regulation from the authority as well concerning, e.g. what kind of age limit, what kind of programs are broadcasted before 9 PM, and so on. We are followed very careful by the authorities. The educational role of TV should be seen within this framework. In commercial TV we always start from the point that there must be something interesting, as there must be enough of viewers. There are of course some basic rules in TV to attract people, whether it is drama, fiction or big feelings:something that give people a reason to watch TV and underage people are no different in that sense, of course. There are many good examples, for example all kind of competitions that are very popular nowadays. Some people believe these are promoting the wrong kind of image, that one always have to win and somebody else has to loose and so forth..However I am happy that the recent trend in that kind of genre is moving away from promoting competition in a nasty way but it’s really more about promoting everybody and praising one for the things one is good at. I have heard that in schools, for example, pupils have been encouraged by talent shows to come out with their own talents and to perform. It seems that TV has made some pupils to think“maybe I can do something too…”.
MS – Are you then suggesting that TV program such as Idols may actually promote the right competitive attitude: not necessarily competing against but competing for…?
AN – Exactly…. A kind of competitive attitude that is essentially and about self-esteem, about being self-conscious, self-confident and for Finnish youth I think this is especially important. This kind of TV is really changing the fundamental lack of self-confidence. Think for example about our recent success program Masterchef Junior. There kids were cooking and it was such an amazing program. I wonder how many kids were encouraged to try something for themselves….
MS - … to try and help mother or father with the cooking….
AN – Yes, these are the things. When we do this kind of programme, we know that in the audience there will be a lot of kids, and of course the kids themselves are the stars. So we know we have to be very encouraging, avoid all kinds of negative feedback but just encourage and praise what they have done. I think we managed quite well and we had a lot of positive feedback from that program.
MS – As I understand, AkuAnkka is deliberately controlled to make sure that publication can effectively perform the grammar or linguistic educational functions we discussed…..
AN - Yes, that is one of the core values….
MS - So there’s someone who make sure that the dialogues and the story are suitable for the expected audience. With the due differences does the same apply to broadcasting?
AN - Oh yes, absolutely…
MS - Is there someone minding to broadcast the right message when it comes to children or teenager broadcasting?
AN - Yes, I would say so. In this case when we know that there are a lot of kids in the audience, there’s a very special attention paid to it. Of course there are cases when programs that are not aimed at kids are watched by kids.These cases are a bit more problematic. We know there are kids which are also watching programs not designed or suitable for them but created for adults. But in these cases it should be the responsibility of the adults themselves to control [decide] whether the kids [should] watch the programs or not. This is where age limits come into the picture and we really make it clear when something it is not suitable for children under certain age limits.
MS –And this broadcasting is produced by your network so you have control on the concept?
AN - We work very closely with the production companies.
MS - Yes, but when it comes to broadcasting bought from elsewhere?
AN - Well, most of the foreign content, the international content is coming from so called “output deals”…
MS – And what is that?
AN - It means we have a deal with the studio for several years and when we make the deal we don’t know all the programs included in the deal. MS - Ouch…
AN - That’s the way that business is done nowadays. We really have to trust [them]. We usually have a long relationship with the studio and we have to trust that they come out with some good, interesting programming. But we don’t know. How do you know what may come in 5 years?They don’t even know themselves.
MS - So you cannot know in advance…
AN - No, we know for the next year but that’s all.
MS - So the acquisition of international programming is made based on the reputation of the studio, for example, or …?
AN - Of course we know the studio. Decision is based on reputation, on what we know is coming up in the near future. So yes, it is based on lots of things.
MS - But you cannot do anything about the content?
AN - No
MS - Except rating it…
AN - Of course, we rate it and we place it in different places of the program grid. That’s what we play with.
MS- So the control is on the time span
AN - Yes the programme grid. Of course this is Hollywood studios.Then we acquire other programs as you mentioned from Sweden and Europe where the system is not like this. In that case is different. We usually buy programs case by case.
MS - The output deal does not apply to European products?
AN - No this is practise only with the Hollywood studios
MS - What are the criteria for the acquisition of products from non-Hollywood producers?
AN - Of course it’s up to our expertise to follow what’s doing well in other markets. We have learned this has been huge success in other markets …
MS - You can pick and choose there….
AN - Yes…
MS - Do you think the arrival of the internet has significantly affected the way of choosing, buying broadcasting for TV? I am thinking, for example, to what is called “TV on demand” or the possibility of choosing what one wants to watch….
AN - Well that whole market is now in a very big change. We just had Netflixentering Finland, HBO is coming and that’s mostly about American content. So yes, it is changing. We are of course present on internet platforms ourselves already with our catch up serviceRuutu.We are coming there with paid content ourselves so yes, it changes a lot even if I definitely believe that the linear TV will remain the most important way of watching TV also in the future. But of course “TV on demand” will grow, definitely.
MS - You said that this is mostly about American content. Would you say that the digitalization of TV has the enhanced the influence of American productions?
AN - Well, when American companies like Netflix and HBO come to Europe so at least they start with international content but maybe later on they will acquire local content as well. But when it comes to TV content in general, all over Europe it’s the local content that is becoming more and more important. So people want to see programs that are made for them or localized for them, in their own language.
MS – Do you see significant differences between the US and Europe when it comes to the entertainment culture – for example in relation to tolerance for explicit sex and violence?
AN - Maybe a little bit more sex is tolerated nowadays, even in America? But I haven’t seen big differences. Violence to me is related to specific genres and those who watch those they know that there will be violence. So the most popular programs don’t include violence or sex. These always relate to specific genres.
MS - So you don’t believe what some people claim that there is violence in the street because there is violence on TV?
AN - No I don’t believe that. There was violence also in the Middle Age when there was no TV.I don’t believe in that.However, I do believe kids should not be watching violence. MS - Would you rather blame the videogames?
AN - That’s an interesting claim because I wonder if… that’s a good point – I am not a psychologist – but if you are playing something yourself where you can goal is to kill other people, I wonder if it impacts your brain or attitude. I am not an expert but maybe it is, I don’t know. If you are watching programs where there’s violence, in most of the programs violence is not a virtue or something to praise. But when you are playing yourself at killing other people than you may have a different attitude: you really want to kill those people.
MS –… you have to be involved…
AN - Yes.
MS – If I can go back to TV, when it comes to public TV is there an established educational role? I am thinking at the time of the Cold War….
AN - Yes, in Finland in the 70s and YLE there was also propaganda.
MS - What was told to people in those days?
AN - Of course Ylewas the only broadcaster that we had and those were very different times. We wanted to have good relations with the Soviets and it kind of showed, in the news even or in the programs.
MS - It was about avoiding direct criticism to the Soviet Union. And it was the Kekkonen time…
AN - Yes, it was the Kekkonen time, pretty much, yes… I was still a teenager and I was not interested in political programs at the time. I tried to watch the very few commercial programs that there were, some TV series or movies, I don’t remember. But what I’ve seen later, some of the programs were, oh my God….
MS - I think there was the same problem everywhere in the West…
AN - It could be, yes…
MS - But then what happened after the end of the Cold War? Has the public service lost its “educational” role, because there’s no more Soviet Union to be afraid of, or what is now the standpoint? If there is still an educational role, what are they doing?
AN - Of course they are into politics, doing the same things as our newspapers are doing: trying to uncover things which are not in order. Of course they are trying to look at it from the citizen point of view, whether it is political or economic. I think that’s their role.
MS - Do you think nowadays they have a conscious political agenda?
AN - At least they shouldn’t have.
MS - Was there e.g. at Nelonen a conscious agenda to provide an alternative source of information, for example. Or was it merely a business operation? Was the educational dimension relevant in the minds of those who started the commercial broadcasting?
AN - I think [the agenda] was mostly in our news. I was not there at the time but as I understand the idea was to provide news in a bit different way and also maybe to attract people that usually don’t follow news to watch our news. But when it comes to programs, the slogan was “Jotainihanmuuta”, “something completely different” so there were also some different kind of drama. But this kind of educational mission is difficult to define like that.
MS - “Different” in what sense?
AN - Mostly compared to MTV3, the main commercial competitor. Definitely YLE but mostly with the commercial competitor. You have to look at the competitive situation and the time. It was 1997 and there was only one commercial broadcaster at the time, MTV3. It was a monopoly market, you know. So the whole attitude was really about being a challenger and doing things differently, and really shaking the status quo in that sense. So I think you need to have this kind of new attitude, new kind of ways of doing thinks which means new kind of personalities as well. For me it’s very difficult to discuss it from this educational point of view because that was not the starting point. But implicitly it is there, it has to be, but I don’t have a sort of word for that in a way.
MS - Do you see any special advantage in the digital opportunity to broadcast from many to many, for example in terms of feedback from consumers or the capacity of the broadcasters to develop some sort of connection?
AN - Well so far it has been mostly about some voting or something like that. Second screens are coming up. Because people are nowadays multitasking, doing all kinds of things with their laptops, or tablet or mobile, smart phones while watching TV. Very often they are discussing about the TV programs in social media, or they are looking for extra information about the TV program or something related to the TV programme. So it means that they are much more engaged with TV programs. I think this is something that really offers opportunities. Engagement is the word. It means that the viewers can communicate and engage by themselves or with some sort of moderator in a TV station. It could be anything. So the possibility will be there. How we see it? It means that the people, if they want, have the possibility to feel being part of the community and doing something right now together, following whatever is taking place, discussing it and commenting it and being part of something bigger in a way.
MS - That is now possible and that is the Second Screen….
AN - Yes that is possible and it is the Second Screen, yes, because the gadgets are there.
MS - Do you think that people are more critical nowadays because of this change and the changes in the media environment, compared to the Cold War (or better pre-digital) days?
AN - I think people have are always been critical.
MS - But sometimes they are allowed to express their criticism and sometimes they are not…
AN - Yes…
MS - So do you think that our youngsters are todaymore intelligent than we were?
AN - What is maybe true is that they are more media literate. They are so digital natives in a way that they understand what the message is and from whom it is coming. Well, maybe it is true, they are more critical. For example there have been comparative studies made on the narratives or the scripts for different TV series, in the 70s and the 80s and in the 2000s, and they have become so much more complex. People have learned to follow so much more complex stories and so many different layers, so many characters. When we look at the Dallas from the 70s we feel itis boring. People have learned to follow media in a very different way.