Special Issue Cfp: OTT and live streaming services–Past, Present and Future
Call for papers
Special issue: OTT and live streaming services: Past, Present and Future
Background and Motivation
OTT is the abbreviation for “over-the-top” and refers to the distribution of video contents over a public network. With increasing popularity of smart connected devices and internet penetration, the global OTT service market is anticipated to grow from $81.60 billion in 2019 to $156.9 billion by 2024, exhibiting a CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) of 14% (Markets and Markets, 2020). During the forecasted period, video on demand (VOD) services, especially subscription-based video-on-demand (SVoD) services and live steaming content, are expected to grow at the highest rate. In the SVoD market, Netflix remains to be the global market leader with 167 million subscribers worldwide. However, its dominance is estimated to weaken with the recent launch of Disney Plus and the rise of Asian OTT service providers. For example, Korea’s Wavve, China’s Youku and Malaysia’s IFlix are just a few local OTT platforms that can challenge global OTT service providers. With Asia being the next lucrative OTT market, severe competition between local and global players is expected.
The live streaming sector is a growing market with significant potential. From professional live content to user-generated content, the openness and authenticity of live streamed contents are engaging more audiences. Top performing players in the live streaming industry include but not limited to YouTube TV, Facebook Live, Periscope, and Twitch. Live streamed content is also popular in Asia with many audiences who consume live streaming content for entertainment and commercial purposes. For instance, Deloitte prospects China to be the largest live streaming market with more than 500 million users (Carnahan, 2020; Deloitte, 2018). Growth in the live streaming sector has led to the establishment of multi-channel networks (MCNs) that offer profound assistance to live content streamers.
Despite the growing interest in OTT services, emerging literature highlights the need for more research. In the domain of OTT SVoD services, many studies appear to examine the platform’s businesses and its impacts on various areas. For studies related to business strategies, case studies and modelling techniques are adopted to understand the service systems of OTT service providers (i.e., Hallinan & Striphas, 2016; Hiller, 2017). Studies comparing different OTT SVoD service providers and their business strategies provide an understanding of the industry (i.e., Park, 2017; Sanson & Steirer, 2019; Wayne, 2018). In light of global OTT platforms’ entrance into different countries, there are studies comparing local and global service providers to explicate the competitive dynamics between them (i.e., Dwyer et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2016). Recent studies further examine this phenomenon through the conceptual lens of imperialism to investigate the cultural impacts of global service providers (i.e., Fitzgerald, 2019; Lobato, 2018). Besides cultural impacts, OTT services’ influence on telecommunication providers, traditional industries, and users are also topics that continue to be discussed (i.e., Kim et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2019; Sujata et al., 2015).
Live streaming contents and MCNs are recent terminologies and thus the literature is still in its infancy. Many prior studies focus on YouTube and examine why and how live video streaming has become the new alternative to mainstream contents (i.e., Koch et al., 2018; Hu et al., 2017). In addition, studies on live streamers’ self-presentation techniques focus on the monetary profits or streamers’ influences (i.e., Johnson & Woodcock, 2019; Lee et al., 2019; Mardona et al., 2018). With MCNs being a new type of entity created for online streamers, prior literature investigates the evolution and role of MCNs in the live streaming industry although it is still in its early stage of research (i.e., Gardner & Lehnert, 2016; Hou, 2018; Lobato, 2016; Vonderau, 2016).
Objectives and Topics
This special issue aims to provide both theoretical and practical studies on the past, present and future of OTT and live streaming services, and their market and policy implications. Considering the wide scope of the Telecommunications Policy journal, we welcome work on various, multi-disciplinary topics regardless of the types of research methodologies adopted. Below is a list of potential topics, but topics for this special issue are not limited to the following:
Ÿ The OTT market structure and ecosystem;
Ÿ Competitive dynamics between Traditional pay TV platforms and OTT platforms;
Ÿ Impacts of global OTT service providers such as YouTube and Netflix on local broadcasting markets;
Ÿ The rise and prospects of new OTT service providers;
Ÿ The relationships between content providers and OTT service providers;
Ÿ AI (Artificial Intelligence), algorithms, and content strategies by OTT players;
Ÿ Users’ adoption and switching behaviors in OTT service markets;
Ÿ Determinants of the success of VoD contents in OTT platforms;
Ÿ Determinants of user engagement with VoD and live streamed content
Ÿ Factors influencing the success of live streaming channels and contents;
Ÿ New business models for OTT, live streaming contents and MCNs
Ÿ Regulations for OTT and live streaming services;
Ÿ Policy issues related to OTT and live streaming services;
Ÿ Comparative studies at regional and international levels;
Ÿ Paper submission: August 31, 2020
Ÿ Final acceptance: December 31, 2020
Ÿ Publication: June 30, 2021
Papers should follow the standard guidelines of Telecommunications Policy and they will be selected competitively according to their intrinsic quality. All papers will be subject to a standard refereeing process.
Telecommunications Policy website for on-line submission:
https://www.evise.com/profile/#/JTPO/login. Choose Special Issue “OTT and live streaming” as Article Type in the drop down menu. Journal information can be found at: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/telecommunications-policy. Authors’ guidelines are available at: https://www.elsevier.com/journals/telecommunications-policy/0308-5961/guide-for-authors. Only original submissions will be considered, not submitted in parallel elsewhere.
Prof. Seongcheol Kim (Managing Guest Editor, Korea University)
Prof. Hyunmi Baek (Guest Editor, Korea University)
Prof. Dam Hee Kim (Guest Editor, The University of Arizona)
Ÿ Carnahan, D. (2020, Mar 19). Live-streaming video format will likely see broader US adoption as the coronavirus spreads. Business Insider. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-could-encourage-more-live-streaming-video-consumption-2020-3
Ÿ Deloitte (2018). Technology, Media and Telecommunications Predictions 2018. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/cn/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/tmt-predictions-2018.html
Ÿ Dwyer, T., Shim, Y., Lee, H., & Hutchinson, J. (2018). Comparing digital media industries in South Korea and Australia: The Case of Netflix Take-Up. International Journal of Communication, 12, 20.
Ÿ Fitzgerald, S. (2019). Over-the-Top video services in India: Media imperialism after globalization. Media Industries Journal, 6(1), 89-115.
Ÿ Gardner, J., & Lehnert, K. (2016). What’s new about new media? How multi-channel networks work with content creators. Business Horizons, 59(3), 293-302.
Ÿ Hallinan, B., & Striphas, T. (2016). Recommended for you: The Netflix Prize and the production of algorithmic culture. New Media & Society, 18(1), 117-137.
Ÿ Hiller, R. S. (2017). Profitably bundling information goods: Evidence from the evolving video library of Netflix. Journal of Media Economics, 30(2), 65-81.
Ÿ Hou, M. (2019). Social media celebrity and the institutionalization of YouTube. Convergence, 25(3), 534-553.
Ÿ Hu, M., Zhang, M., & Wang, Y. (2017). Why do audiences choose to keep watching on live video streaming platforms? An explanation of dual identification framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 594-606.
Ÿ Johnson, M. R., & Woodcock, J. (2019). “And today’s top donator is”: How live streamers on twitch. TV monetize and gamify their broadcasts. Social Media+ Society, 5(4), 1-11.
Ÿ Kim, J., Kim, S., & Nam, C. (2016). Competitive dynamics in the Korean video platform market: Traditional pay TV platforms vs. OTT platforms. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 711-721.
Ÿ Kim, M. S., Kim, E., Hwang, S., Kim, J., & Kim, S. (2017). Willingness to pay for over-the-top services in China and Korea. Telecommunications Policy, 41(3), 197-207.
Ÿ Kim, J., Nam, C., & Ryu, M. H. (2019). IPTV vs. emerging video services: Dilemma of telcos to upgrade the broadband. Telecommunications Policy, 101889.
Ÿ Koch, C., Lode, M., Stohr, D., Rizk, A., & Steinmetz, R. (2018). Collaborations on YouTube: From unsupervised detection to the impact on video and channel popularity. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), 14(4), 1-23.
Ÿ Lee, S. E., Choi, M., & Kim, S. (2019). They pay for a reason! the determinants of fan’s instant sponsorship for content creators. Telematics and Informatics, 45, 101286.
Ÿ Lobato, R. (2016). The cultural logic of digital intermediaries: YouTube multichannel networks. Convergence, 22(4), 348-360.
Ÿ Lobato, R. (2018). Rethinking international TV flows research in the age of Netflix. Television & New Media, 19(3), 241-256.
Ÿ Mardon, R., Molesworth, M., & Grigore, G. (2018). YouTube Beauty Gurus and the emotional labour of tribal entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research, 92, 443-454.
Ÿ MarketsandMarkets (2020). Over-the-Top Services Market by Type, Monetization Model, Streaming Device, Vertical And Region – Global Forecast to 2024. Retrieved from https://www.reportlinker.com/p05838803/Over-the-Top-Services-Market-by-Type-Monetization-Model-Streaming-Device-Vertical-And-Region-Global-Forecast-to.html?utm_source=PRN
Ÿ Park, E. A. (2018). Business strategies of Korean TV players in the age of Over-The-Top (OTT) video service. International Journal of Communication, 12, 4646-4667.
Ÿ Sanson, K., & Steirer, G. (2019). Hulu, streaming, and the contemporary television ecosystem. Media, Culture & Society, 41(8), 1210-1227.
Ÿ Sujata, J., Sohag, S., Tanu, D., Chintan, D., Shubham, P., & Sumit, G. (2015). Impact of over the top (OTT) services on telecom service providers. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8(S4), 145-160.
Ÿ Vonderau, P. (2016). The video bubble: Multichannel networks and the transformation of YouTube. Convergence, 22(4), 361-375.
Ÿ Wayne, M. L. (2018). Netflix, Amazon, and branded television content in subscription video on-demand portals. Media, Culture & Society, 40(5), 725-741.
Contact: If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to the guest editors: Seongcheol Kim (email@example.com), Hyunmi Baek (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Dam Hee Kim (email@example.com).