This article reports on a study of additional transmedia content that is available online in relation to all Australian television drama productions and high rating international drama productions in a five-month period, between January and June 2012. In particular, it asks what additional material exists, and develops a typology of different types of content in order to further explain the current state of play in Australian production. The study examines extended storytelling texts developed specifically for the internet, like ‘webisodes’. It also considers other video and further content that can be based on extending the story world of a program. This article presents and examines the results of the study, arguing that this material can be seen to support the idea of an industry in transition. It finds that there are differences in approach to this type of content between public, free-to-air commercial and subscription broadcasters. Children's television programs are seen to offer the most sophisticated approach online at this time.
BrownA.RutherfordL.2012, 'The Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Multiplatform Projects: Industry Logics of Children's Content Provision in the Digital Television Era, Convergence: International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 201–21.
7.
CianciaM.2013, ‘Transmedia Phenomena: New Practices in Participatory and Experiential Content Production’, Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video.
8.
CresswellJ.2003, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches, Sage, London.
9.
ConsalvoM.2003, ‘Zelda 64 and Video Game Fans: A Walkthrough of Games, Intertextuality and Narrative’, Television & New Media, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 321–34.
DawsonM.2011, ‘Television's Aesthetic of Efficiency: Convergence Television and the Digital Short’, in BennettJ.StrangeN. (eds), Television as Digital Media, Duke University Press, Durham, NC.
12.
DunleavyT.2009, Television Drama: Form, Agency, Innovation, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
13.
EdwardsL.2012, ‘Transmedia Storytelling, Corporate Synergy, and Audience Expression’, Global Media Journal, vol. 12, no. 20, pp. 1–11.
14.
EvansE.2011, Transmedia Television, Routledge, New York.
GogginG.2012, ‘The Evolution of Australian Mobile Screens: New Technology, New Formats, New Business Models’, Studies in Australian Cinema, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 263–77.
17.
HillsM.2002, Fan Culture, Routledge, London.
18.
HillsM.2012, ‘Torchwood's Trans-Transmedia: Media Tie-ins and Brand “Fanagement”’, Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 409–28.
JenkinsH.2006. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York University Press, New York.
21.
KimJ.2010, User-Generated Content (UGC) Revolution?Critique of the Promise of YouTube, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Iowa.
22.
MannD.2009, ‘It's Not TV: It's Brand Management TV’, in MayerV.BanksM.CaldwellJ. (eds), Production Studies, Routledge, New York.
23.
MarwickA.GrayM.AnannyM.2013, ‘“Dolphins are Just Gay Sharks”: Glee and the Queer Case of Transmedia Text as Object’, Television & New Media, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1–21.
PeirceM.TangT.2012, ‘Refashioning Television: Business Opportunities and Challenges of Webisodes’, International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol. 3, no. 13, pp. 163–71.
30.
PerrymanN.2008, ‘Doctor Who and the Convergence of Media: A Case Study in Transmedia Storytelling’, Convergence, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 21–39.
PotterA.2013. ‘You've Been Pranked: Reality TV, National Identity and the Privileged Status of Australian's Children Drama’, Media International Australia, no. 146, pp. 25–34.
33.
PrattH.2013, ‘Why Serials are Killer’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 266–70.
34.
RoseF.2011, The Art of Immersion: How the Digital Generation is Remaking Hollywood, Madison Avenue and the Way We Tell Stories, W.W. Norton, New York.
35.
ScolariC.2009, ‘Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds, and Branding in Contemporary Media Production’, International Journal of Communication, vol. 3, pp. 586–606.
