The Role of Marketing and Advertising of Londons West Ends - Essay Example

The role of marketing and advertising of the London’s West Ends Recent hit shows from the Sound of Music to Joseph have driven the reversal in fortune of West End theatres, which had suffered a trend in declining ticket revenue and profits in the last decade. In January 2008, the Society of London Theatre announced a record breaking year in 2007 with more than 13.6 million theatregoers generating total tickets sales of almost £470 million, passing the £400 million mark for the first time. The Society’s Chief executive Richard Pulford cited the revenue statistics as an “annus mirabilis” for London theatre, stating that “these figures are a wonderful start to our centenary year but we’re under no illusions that we’re going to have to work very hard to maintain this success” (Maev Kennedy., 2008). Moreover, this is a dramatic growth of 10% is in stark contrast to the 0.3% increase in 2006 (Maev Kennedy., 2008) and executive director of the Society of London Theatre Rosemary Squire stated that reality television shows had considerably contributed to the revived theatre revenue with Joseph and Grease following the Sound of Music into the West End, asserting that “it brought in a lot more people, a lot of them young who weren’t traditional theatregoers, which is a great thing” (Maev Kennedy., 2008). The use of television shows as a central marketing tool for attracting theatre audiences highlights the changing marketing strategies evolving in a drive to generate profits. This is further evidenced by the recent casting of Summer Strallen as a West End hopeful in popular TV show Hollyoaks. In reality Andrew Lloyd Webber had cast Summer in 2007 and planted the stage star in the Channel 4 soap to generate a profile for the character and the show. Whilst on the one hand such marketing and advertising ploys are viewed as meritorious and essential to attract younger audiences to the theatre, it raises the question as to whether the development of raw talent at ground level has become a casualty in the drive for profits and revenue. This was highlighted by actor Kevin Spacey’s recent attack on the BBC alleging that the shows such as I’d Do Anything and How do you solve a problem like Maria were tantamount to a thirteen week promotional campaign for the musicals at the expense of serious drama. The focus of this analysis is to evaluate the evolving and changing nature of marketing and advertising in London’s West End particularly in context of Spacey’s comments regarding the demise of funds and advertising into “serious” drama. Firstly, the trend of declining sales and profits in the last decade has clearly created the need to re-evaluate marketing strategies and advertising in the West End. This is further compounded by the lack of Arts funding cuts due to the Olympics. However, the efficacy of any marketing strategy is inherently linked to the funding available to execute marketing and advertising. As such, Kevin Spacey’s criticism of the BBC television shows highlights how it is arguably only multi-millionaire backers such as Andrew Lloyd Webber who can afford to benefit from such a marketing strategy due to funding capabilities. As such, this ignores the predicament of other less high profile plays and theatre works which arguably are in need of such exposure and raises the question as to whether it is ethical to utilise licence payer’s money to fund a marketing campaign for the West End. Spacey’s emphasis on the dichotomy between high profile musicals which arguably do not need as much marketing and advertising as lesser known works is further compounded by the significant cuts in funding for the Arts. In April, 2007, Tessa Jowell confirmed that the Arts Council England would lose £112m of anticipated lottery funding in order to help finance the Olympics construction budget (Andrew Culf and Charlotte Higgins, 2007). Michael Billington highlighted that this served as a direct blow to the transformation in theatre in the last 10 years regional playhouses which were bankrupt in 1997 and were now able to budget and plan productions due to adequate funding (Billington., 2008). Moreover, whilst small, one-off theatres such as Tricycle and the Gate had been given a substantial boost by reliance on Arts Council funding, large companies such as the National and RSC had also become financially stable via extra funding and as such, Michael Billington highlights the point that “That is what makes the future loss of lottery funding so sad.” (Billington., 2008). Whilst Tessa Jowell stated that the cuts will not take effect until 2009 and that money from the sale of Olympic land will be invested back into lottery funds, this ignores the practical reality of a four to five year hiatus where a number of local projects will be jeopardised. Moreover, theatre renovations or festivals cannot be staged if the Arts Council is losing £28million a year and notwithstanding official statements, organisations reliant on Arts Council funding are feeling the tightened financial reigns immediately (Billington., 2008) Indeed, Billington further comments that “At best the arts are expecting standstill grants from 2008 onwards and with rising inflation, this means a cut in real terms”. Furthermore, whilst Jowell argued that “the last thing we want to do is set arts and sport at each other’s throats”, the reverse is true presenting a desperate need for replacement sources to address the shortfall. Moreover, the proliferation of the Internet and new media technologies has spread the dispensable income available for traditional customer bases across multiple entertainment streams. The technically savvy youth have in fact fuelled the drive for recent collaborations with television to attract audiences to the theatre. For example, the new wave of reality TV shows tapped into traditional marketing strategies and surveys regarding typical gender, age and income along with ratings of theatre facilities and consumer behaviour triggers for going to the theatre. Indeed, Christopher Olsen highlights the semiotic approach to theatre audience surveys as essential to targeting audiences and that “visibility” is essential in attracting customers to the theatre (Olsen., 2002) For example, for three months, viewers of popular Channel 4 soap watched the character Summer Shaw played by Summer Strallen pursue a dream of West End stardom, however she had been cast by Lloyd Webber in the summer and the plot was part of a collaboration between Lloyd Webber and Channel 4 producers to raise profile for the show. Andrew Lloyd Webber commented that “I have an 11 year old daughter who watches Hollyoaks with her friends”, which in itself indicates the drive of these ideas to capitalise on the trend for reality TV shows to generate profits for the theatre. Moreover the combination of reality with drama capitalises on a new media marketing ploy of utilising alternate reality; which involves the audience in the selection process thereby exploiting the public hunger for reality TV. To this end, the proliferation of multiple new media marketing streams and the multi-channel digital era has arguably rendered it necessary to utilise television as a marketing tool to attract audiences. On the other hand, Spacey makes the point that selective marketing of high profile self funding musicals ignores the need to utilise the new marketing platform to advertise low funded serious drama, which could arguably benefit more from such exposure. Moreover, the marketing and advertising strategy appears to be focusing on exploiting trends in television such as the growth of reality TV, which again supports Spacey’s argument that it is far removed from encouraging people to go to theatre for appreciation of art. Moreover, it is arguable that such shows are limited in the extent to which they address wider issues affecting the theatre industry and development of talent, which is further compounded by funding cuts. Indeed, Billington argues that Tessa Jowell’s comments and the Government’s approach to the conflict between sports and arts funding fails to understand that artists need grassroots encouragement to achieve national standards and that the “double bind of cuts to revenue and lottery funding will make the run up to 2012 a one legged hobble. Is this the way to launch what should be a glorious explosion of talent?” (Billington., 2008). Moreover, Kevin Spacey’s comments reflect this as he has written to the chairman of the BBC complaining about the plethora of promotional talent shows such as Any Dream Will Do and I’d do anything, in preference of supporting original drama. Moreover, Michael Billington argues that the “BBC’s current attitude to theatre is, in my view, nothing short of a disgrace. On the one hand, it lines the coffers of already wealthy impresarios by putting on promotional shows. Far from helping the West End, it is damaging it ecology”. Indeed, it would appear that shows such as the Sound of Music and Oliver are arguably not in need of significant box office boosts from a talent show thereby negating the argument that the TV shows are needed to revive theatregoers. This is further highlighted by the lack of funding for less known plays which do not lend themselves to mass public castings, which appeals to the format and success of reality TV shows. Furthermore, the selective backing by the BBC of a few obvious musical favourites fails to expose the broad range of theatre in need of exposure. In his letter to the BBC, Spacey called for a return of the Play for Today, which in addition to the Wednesday Play, produced works by Mike Leigh, Dennis Potter and Jim Allen. This is in stark contrast to the current era, with little work being exposed by top writers and lack of adequate funding to nurture new writers from ground level. In supporting Spacey’s critique, Billington makes the point that the BBC ignores theatrical drama, with the conventional “crass modernised versions” of Shakespeare on a sporadic basis and “As for starry revivals of Checkov, Ibsen and Pinter forget it” (Billington., 2008). Spacey’s attack on the BBC further brought attention to what has been criticised as a trend in “dumbing down” of television, with allegations of tabloid values now permeating the BBC coverage of news and new productions. As such, this has lent itself to the growth of such marketing and promotional strategies seen on the television shows. Furthermore, Kevin Spacey criticised the BBC for promotion of West End musicals by Andrew Lloyd Webber at expense of other British Theatre. The artistic director of the Old Vic argued that the BBC had “crossed the line” with the succession of prime-time Saturday night shows designed to find stars for shows written by Webber, which further highlights the anti-competitive monopolistic stranglehold of Webber in the commercial West End. Spacey further argued that the shows were not a good use of licence payers’ money and stated that “I felt that How do You Solve a Problem Like Maria was essentially a 13-week promotion for a musical, on a public service broadcaster” (Billington., 2008) Moreover, Spacey question that the BBC is “not a commercial broadcaster and I thought that was crossing the line. Where’s our 13 week programme when we put a play on? Are they going to do one about a play?” The BBC talent contests have been praised for unearthing new talent and reviving interest in Lloyd Webber musicals but have been criticised for the BBC giving so much publicity to the multi-millionaire peer. Additionally, whilst the BBC argues that it has no commercial interest in the productions of Oliver, Joseph and the Sound of Music; Lord Lloyd Webber will benefit financially as the show is planned for the Royal Theatre on Drury Lane, which he owns. Moreover, the reversal in the fortunes of the West End has been directly attributed to the publicity given through the TV shows, where “All of this was helped no doubt by the marketing triumphs of shows like Joseph, Grease via prime time reality television” (Maev Kennedy., 2008). However, hailing the success of a select minority of shows as being responsible for the revival theatre clearly ignores the wider issues in West End Theatre, further supporting the adage that “you can’t make a living in the theatre, but you can make a killing”. This gives further gravitas to Spacey’s suggestions that the marketing ploy of the BBC television shows highlight the priority of commercial theatre to generate profit and ensure return on investment over artistic integrity and merit. Is it fair to attack the BBC for not supporting original drama on TV? On the other hand, whilst Spacey’s comments clearly have credence in bringing attention to the breadth and diversity of theatre talent in the West End needing funding and exposure, whether the BBC should be held responsible is questionable in light of the general formatting of plays. Indeed, Richard Vine argues that “Spacey’s attack on the BBC misses the point” (2008). Richard Vine further develops his argument by referring to BBC4’s recent adaptation of the modern classic Abigail’s Party, which was cited by Spacey as a justification for a revival of Play for Today. However, Vine argued that whilst there is brilliance in the script and the performances of Abigail’s Party, the intricacies of a play may not transfer adequately onto the small screen to make good television, making the point that “surely the medium has evolved past the point where simply filming a play is enough. Theatre on TV has always felt like a compromise and not a great substitute for actually being there, and not the best use of TV’s potential”(R, Vine., 2008). As such, Vine points out that Spacey’s idea of running a serious theatrical talent search competition may not be the way forward either. “Unless it looked a lot more like Masterchef and a lot less like Any dream or pop idol, it would be hard to imagine young kids being enthused about anything other than being on another talent show” (R, Vine., 2008). The above analysis highlights that the proliferation of the Internet with the multiple media streams and channels has challenged traditional marketing and advertising strategies in entertainment, competing with the multi-channel entertainment world to attract and retain customers. As such, the focus on generating profits and revenue has arguably benefited a privileged minority with the funds to weather Arts funding cuts and lack of budget to generate much needed exposure. Indeed, Spacey’s attack on the BBC highlights the dichotomy between self-funded large scale box office hits and low budget, often high quality dramas. Moreover, Spacey’s argument highlights the primary drive and resultant effect of the BBC TV shows of generating commercial profits as opposed to reviving theatregoing on a grand scale. More importantly, it raises the question as to whether licence payer fees should be utilised to fund what is effectively a promotional marketing campaign for an established West End musical. However, on the other hand whilst Spacey’s attack is welcome in bringing attention to the wider issues facing London theatre and funding cuts, it is questionable whether the blame can be put on the BBC and whether adopting a similar marketing collaboration approach will actually work with serious dramas and straight plays. Indeed Vine comments that the multi-channel world and evolution of entertainment streams has rendered the recording of a traditionally formatted serious play difficult to translate to the small screen and appeal to an audience with an increasingly short attention span. As such, whilst Spacey’s arguments clearly highlight the need to address the wider issues facing the industry along with the need to implement consistent strategies to encourage and facilitate the development of serious drama at ground level, the primary issue facing marketing and advertising in the West End is funding budgets. Whilst the Government fails to acknowledge the need to reach a compromise between spiralling Olympic costs and funding for the Arts, serious drama championed by industry veterans such as Spacey will continue to suffer creating an imbalance in London’s West End. Bibliography Michael Billington (31 March 2008). Spacey is right: the BBC hates theatre. The Guardian. Andrew Culf., & Charlotte Higgins., (2007). Arts Leaders turn on Jowell over Olympics. Maev Kennedy., (2008). TV Reality shows pack theatres. The Guardian. Christopher Olsen., (2002) Theatre Audience Surveys: towards a Semiotic Approach). Theatre Quarterly Cambridge University Press. 2002. 261-275 Richard Vine., (2008). Spacey’s Attack on the BBC misses the point. The Guardian Webber plants Hollyoaks actress. 1 February 2008 www.bbc.co.uk Websites www.bbc.co.uk www.guardian.co.uk Read More