1

Carnegie Mellon University Master of Entertainment Industry Management (MEIM) Capstone Project I and II 2018-19 Course Number: 93.889 (3 units – fall 2018) and 93.890 (9 Units - spring 2019) Meeting times vary throughout the semester Syllabus updated 10.15.18 Instructors: Daniel Green dtgreen@andrew.cmu.edu John Tarnoff jtarnoff@andrew.cmu.edu Ji Young Denick jiyoung@minemr.com Keith Eich kae@andrew.cmu.edu Alison Emilio aemilio@wif.org Tom Meredith tmere@andrew.cmu.edu Kevin Stein kstein@andrew.cmu.edu Teacher’s Assistant: Mary Ryan maryryan@andrew.cmu.edu

COURSE OVERVIEW The Capstone Project is a two-semester applied research project that represents the final requirement of the Master of Entertainment Industry Management (MEIM) Program. The Capstone provides the opportunity for students to apply the sum knowledge and skills gained from the MEIM program to real world issues facing the entertainment industry. Working in teams, and in consultation with industry professionals, students will define, outline and deliver an in-depth examination of a specific research topic, fulfilling a series of deliverables over the course of the project, and adhering to established research project formats and guidelines.

2

COURSE OBJECTIVES

Objective Assessment Mastery of project management, teamwork, and communication skills (including clear, correct business writing and effective presentation),

Fall and Spring peer evaluations, Advisor Check-in Meetings, Advisor feedback

Integration and synthesis of the lessons from prior coursework in the program,

Final presentation, final document

Demonstration of professional behavior through interacting with professionals and conducting research within the industry,

First proposal, First client meeting, Client Project Sketch, Client communication

Deepening an awareness of strategic issues, trends and challenges facing the industry

Client Meetings, First Proposal, Final Draft, Final Presentation

Developing a greater sense of personal accomplishment and relevant career experience.

Client Meetings, Final Draft, Final Presentation

Prepare professional and effective documents appropriate to the objective and context

Revised Project Proposal, First draft, Second draft, Final draft

Prepare and convey communications suitable for diverse audiences.

First presentation, Second presentation, First draft, second draft, final draft

METHODOLOGY

Collaboration The MEIM program encourages collaborative projects. Students will work on Capstone projects in teams. The idea behind the team is really at the heart of the interdisciplinary thinking at Carnegie Mellon. Industry Auspices Each Capstone project will be conducted in collaboration with an entertainment industry company (“Client”). This affords students the opportunity to work in a professional context, to work on a project that has current industry relevance to their client, and to create a professional work product. Team Selection Based on the proposed Capstone project topics, as submitted by the Client companies, students will rank their choices by completing the survey which will be emailed to you and listing your projects by order of preference. Team size can range anywhere from 3 to 5 students.

3

Client Collaboration Clients have agreed to participate in the definition of each Capstone project topic, and on the scope of the anticipated work product. This will involve, at minimum: • One initial meeting with the team to discuss the proposed topic, answer any questions, and

focus the team on the outline parameters for the project, and • One follow-up meeting with the team to evaluate the team’s proposed Sketch for the project,

and to make recommendations on revisions. Each student team will be responsible for completing the Capstone project based on these two initial meetings, without any further guaranteed or expected input from the Client. Certain clients may, depending upon their availability, be willing and/or interested in a more ongoing involvement with their team. In such instance, the Client and the team, along with MEIM leadership, will draft a set of parameters setting forth the Client’s commitment to that team, including follow-up meetings, access to Client-provided research data, introductions to interview subjects, etc. This draft can be as simple as an email or notes taken at one of the initial meetings. NOTE: Students should be prepared for any eventuality in this scenario, from the Client fulfilling their intentions to the Client failing to follow through with their intentions due to other conflicting commitments, personnel changes, or internal policy changes. In any event, regardless of their involvement beyond the two initial meetings, each team will share their key milestones with the Client in the form of a Milestone Schedule, as well as with MEIM leadership. Students should keep the Client informed of the team’s progress by sharing milestones including the Project Proposal, the Revised Project Proposal, the 1st Draft of the Project, the 2nd Draft of the Project, and the Final Draft of the Project. Students are strongly encouraged to schedule and deliver an oral presentation of their Final Draft to the Client at the Client’s offices, prior to their final oral presentation at the MEIM Center (recommended) but at least prior to graduation. MEIM Supervision Throughout the Capstone project, including any ongoing involvement with the Client following the initial meetings, each team will be directly responsible to MEIM Leadership, specifically MEIM Program Director Dan Green, and Head of Industry Relations John Tarnoff. Other advisors will oversee student work and will be the direct day-to-day contacts for the project. All grading and administration concerns will be the decision of the instructor of record, Dan Green in conjunction with the individual team advisor(s).

4

Capstone Advisors include the following: • JiYoung Denick, Co-Founder and CEO, MineMR Research • Alison Emilio, Director, ReFrame (Sundance Institute & Women in Film, Los Angeles) • Keith Eich, Operations Engineering & PMO at LegalZoom, Past Director of Digital

Distribution Operations, NBCUniversal • Dan Green, MEIM Program Director • Tom Meredith, Past General Manager, Television Research at Screen Engine; Past SVP

Business Development, Nielsen Entertainment Television Group • John Tarnoff, MEIM Head of Industry Relations • Kevin Stein, EVP, Augmently; Past Exec Producer, Viacom; Past VP of Programming,

HBO While the advisors are assigned to a particular project, it is important to note that all of the advisors are available to you and your team. MEIM advisors are encouraged to get involved in other team projects as their own schedule permits when appropriate. It is not unusual for a team to get multiple notes on a topic (that can sometimes be conflicting). Part of the Capstone experience is navigating these types of situations and the team making the best decision from its point of view. Team Lead Each team will be asked to designate a different team contact or lead for each semester. This means that one person will be the contact in the fall, and a different person from the team will be the contact in the spring. While the team contact is not in charge of the team, this person will be the communications point person for setting meetings, organizing the group and reporting status updates back to MEIM Leadership and the client. This is a good role for someone who likes to organize, responds to emails and calls quickly and has a sense of collegiality in dealing with others. This person will be voted on by the team itself and needs to change from Fall to Spring semester. Peer Review of Students and Individual Consultations While grades are the final responsibility of MEIM leadership, it is important to conduct a peer review in which each team member provides a written evaluation of all other members and him/herself. Reasons for peer review are:

• The results of peer review inform the advisor for grading purposes; • The results also provide the basis for feedback in individual consultations with students; and • The use of peer review – the giving and receiving of constructive criticism in a professional

manner – is an activity that professionals will increasingly be asked to undertake. Feedback is essential for the development of individual team members. For students doing a good job, it provides rewards and an opportunity to discuss future work in an upbeat setting. For students doing poorly, it lets them know while there is still time to fix problems so that they can improve. There will be one Peer Evaluation in the fall semester. In the spring, there will be a mid-semester evaluation to inform the team how the process is going and a second end of the semester peer evaluation. The focus on evaluations will be on the ability to identify and structure tasks, the ability to carry out tasks, communication, responsibility, time commitment, teamwork and overall dependability and attitude.

PARTICIPATING CLIENTS AND PROPOSED TOPICS

Six companies will be participating in the Capstone projects for the 2018-2019 academic year. The following pages give a summary of the client proposals. Students are encouraged to thoroughly review the descriptions and project topic statements prior to making a definitive decision as to their Capstone project topic preferences. The decision of how you should rank the project should be based on the topic and not the name of the company.

5

Turner Broadcasting/Adult Swim https://www.turner.com

www.adultswim.com Turner: 1888 Century Park E # 1200, Los Angeles, CA 90067

Project A

Capstone Contacts Michael Parnes, Vice President, Turner Broadcasting Systems

Missy Laney, Director of Develoipment, Adult Swim Proposal Name Rating the Ratings: The Evolution of Audience Measurement in Ad-Supported Media Description of Client Tuirner Broadcassting Sytem is a a division of AT&T’s. It operates as a semi-autonomous unit and assets include CNN, TBS, TNT, Turner Classic Movies, Boomerang, TruTV, Cartoon Network, and Adult Swim. Adult Swim is the adult oriented nighttime programming block of the Cartoon Network and broadcasts nightly from 9:00pm to 6:00am. Established as the alternative programming during late night hours, much of Adult Swim's general content is known for its experimental, risqué, unorthodox, crude, dry, and improvisational humor, along with purposefully cheap-looking animation, and often bizarre presentation. In 2005, the block was granted its own Nielsen ratings report from Cartoon Network due to targeting a separate demographic.

Description of Project Ratings used to be simple. There were three networks, three hours of prime time programming, five nights per week. For fifty years, advertisers could rely on a by-appointment, captive audience that watched television shows in staggering numbers (by today’s standards). But starting in the 1990s, when cable channels and DVR viewing began to proliferate, and over the last ten years, as online viewing has granted the audience virtually total control over when, where, and on what device they watch programming, the business of quantifying viewership in order to set advertising rates has been up-ended. This capstone project will study the current business of television ratings across the fragmented landscape of broadcast, cable, and broadband content, including ad-supported and subscription channels and platforms.

6

Relationship of project to business As TV programming continues to undergo more competition from an over-abundance of titles (so-called “Peak TV”), as well as from new programmers like Facebook, Snapchat, Apple, or Jeffrey Katzenberg’s New TV, the company is looking to better strategize its medium-long term programming decisions. A deep dive into audience measurement methodologies and trends will help the company be more pro-active in this challenging marketplace. Objectives of the Project/Students are tasked with answering the following top level questions:

1. Identify the current audience measurement criteria and methodologies across the traditional ratings system (e.g. C3, C7).

2. Articulate how audience researchers are working to deliver more accuracy in their surveys, and what measurements are they moving towards.

3. Outline obstacles that stand in the way or determine more accurate metrics and data for today’s audience’s viewing habits and patterns.

4. Convey how it will be possible to create a unified and accurate picture of the consumer with viewers spreading their viewing time and attention across multiple programming across multiple platforms – including AVOD and SVOD.

5. Validate what advertisers actually need from audience measurement beyond a set of benchmarks to establish advertising rates for their media buys. For example, can tracking SVOD viewing patterns of older episodic series (e.g. “Breaking Bad”) inform advertisers on strategies they could take on AVOD platforms and traditional broadcast and cable channels?

6. Distinguish how SVOD programming can be measured if SVOD providers are unwilling to give researchers access to their data.

7. Characterize how advertisers are viewing the relevance of traditional broadcast and cable since online advertising against digital surpassed broadcast TV advertising in 2016.

a. How does this affect their reliance on ratings? b. How can an advertiser get the most bang for their buck?

8. Delineate the distinction between advertiser and programmer. a. If brands are now producing their own branded content in partnership with the channels

they buy time on, what is the future of content?

7

Deliverables within the Capstone study/report/presentation will include 1. Existing Research: The team will assemble and discus the history of audience measurement in

the traditional television business and trace its evolution through the advent of cable channels and the current “Peak TV” environment. This will include a discussion of the various methods that research companies are using to track audience behaviors across digital and Over The Top (OTT) platforms, and the key companies providing data in the audience measurement field.

2. Industry Interviews: The team will interview key stakeholders related to this topic to uncover what is working in current audience measurement methods, and what is not working. The interviews will also attempt to build a consensus around where audience measurement is headed, and how disparate platforms (e.g. Netflix, Amazon, YouTube) can be included to create a comprehensive picture of how, where, and when content is being consumed. The interview subjects should include executives from top entertainment research companies, current programing and research executives from broadcast, pay-tv, and streaming networks, advertising executives and media buyers, as well as journalists and academics who track this sector.

3. Consumer Survey: To illustrate the discrepancy between traditional TV ratings as conducted each week by Nielsen, the team will create its own audience measurement survey to ascertain what a sample of millennial “cord cutters” (i.e. those who do not watch TV programming over the air, or via a cable subscription) are watching. This survey will seek to record what viewers are watching during the traditional prime-time hours for a period of at least one week, and compare the results with the Nielsen ratings for the same period.

Additional questions to consider:

1. SVOD networks (principally Netflix) claim that audience measurement doesn’t matter. Is this a fair and accurate statement?

2. In this age of both greater transparency, but greater concerns about privacy, can audience researchers to a better job of enlisting consumers as partners in the data collection process? What about “response bias,” the phenomenon of consumers altering their viewing patterns because they know they’re being monitored?

3. Has the traditional Nielsen methodology (including the use of actual paper-based logs filled out by consumers) become outdated? Has the company been too slow to respond to changing viewing habits?

4. As advertisers collaborate more closely with digital publishers to create branded online content (see the annual “New Fronts” event in NY), is traditional audience measurement no longer as necessary as it was when commercials and programs were distinct experiences?

8

Faceware Technology http://facewaretech.com

4515 Van Nuys Blvd, Ste 301, Sherman Oaks, 91403 Project B

Capstone Contacts: Peter Busch, VP, Business Development for Image Metrics Max Murray, Business Development Manager Proposal Name Monetization Trends in Live Streaming Digital Networks Description of Client Faceware Technologies designs facial animation and motion capture technology for the entertainment industry. Faceware produces software used to capture an actor’s performance and transfer it onto an animated character, as well as hardware needed to capture the performances. The software line includes Faceware Analyzer, Faceware Retargeter, and Faceware Live. Faceware software is used by film studios and video game developers including ROCKSTAR GAMES, BUNGLE, CLOUD IMPERIUM GAMES, and 2K in games such as GRAND THEFT AUTO V, DESTINY, STAR CITIZEN, and HALO: REACH.

Through its application in the video game industry, Faceware won the Develop Award for Technical Innovation in 2008 while it was still part of technology developmer Image Metrics. It won the Develop Award again for Creative Contribution: Visuals in 2014. Faceware received Best of Show recognition at the Game Developers Conference 2011 in San Francisco as well as Computer Graphics World's Silver Edge Award at SIGGRAPH 2014 and 2016. Finally, Faceware won the XDS Gary Award in 2016 for its contributions to the Faceware-EA presentation at the 2016 XDS Summit.

Description of Project Live streaming digital platforms including YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitch, Snapchat and others have grown rapidly and are continuing to expand as entertainment platforms. Popular influencers and channels set new records of concurrent viewers each month, rivaling traditional linear outlets including broadcast and cable television, as well as premium VOD and SVOD services. As these live streaming platforms continue to grow, how are providers monetizing their content? What are the successful revenue models, what distinguishes the top platforms, and what opportunities and strategies exist for brands and influencers in this space? This Capstone study will focus on the top digital live streaming platforms and collect data about their current activities, operations, and businesses, focusing specifically on how both users and platforms monetize their content, and what kinds of deals they make with brands, influencers, and other providers. The goal will be to compare and contrast these business models, and to also analyze their effectiveness. Additionally, through interviews with industry professionals and other experts, the team will analyze how the various platforms are perceived, who they are suited for, and how they are positioned for future growth. Finally, the team will conduct a consumer survey, developed in collaboration with the client, to

9

better understand how users view each platform, and whether or not they perceive these platforms as viable long-term entertainment destinations when compared with other entertainment media options.

Relationship of project to business Understanding the evolution of the leading-edge digital live streaming industry will help the company better track its market, and help it better target its product development and marketing efforts to stay abreast of new opportunities. This report will include the following elements: 1. Existing Research: The team will aggregate published reports, press, and research studies about the top live streaming digital networks, including business goals, ownership, financial data, business and content partnerships, earnings, and content licensing deals. 2. Industry Interviews: The team will interview at least 4-6 industry experts who focus in this field, including executives at the companies being studied, legal and investment professionals who work with these companies, end-users and influencers, advertisers and marketers who work with them, executives at MCNs and talent agents who make deals with these companies on behalf of influencers and brands, as well as researchers, academics and journalists who follow these companies 3. Consumer Survey: The team will develop and launch their own survey in cooperation with the client, including approximately a dozen questions, to be distributed to a sample determined in consultation with the client. The survey will likely be distributed via social media, as well as through other research outlets available to the team. Objectives of the Project/Students are tasked with answering the following top level questions:

1. Investigate each major online live streaming platform and compare market share split between them.

2. Identify all major areas of monetization for a live streaming service, including: a. How live streaming platforms monetize (how they make money, how much, range, etc.) b. Audience metrics to support monetization/business models c. How brands and influencers use revenue from live streaming platforms in their overall

monetization strategy d. What kinds of partnerships are used to drive revenue through content?

3. Discover the cost of entry for a new streamer. What do they need to spend money on (workstation, software, camera, lighting, etc) to get up and running?

a. Where do live streaming platforms fit quantitatively into the overall revenue picture across all entertainment platforms and other digital platforms?

b. From an advertiser’s POV, how do live streaming networks compare to traditional and other digital advertising outlets, and what distinguishes these strategies?

4. Clarify how influencers and brands decide where to place content on these platforms? Other than very niched content (e.g. top gamers on Twitch), what criteria are decision-makers using?

5. Identify best practices IP holders (or brands) can follow if they are unfamiliar and unrelated to the live streaming world, and want to access this audience.

a. What should they do to pay an influencer/brand to be involved/partner on their content - and what can they expect in return?

6. Distinguish the current role of MCNs, talent, marketing and ad agencies in bridging the gap between influencers, brands and live streaming platforms.

a. How do these intermediaries view the live streaming platforms in the context of the rest of the industry?

10

Additional questions to consider: 1. What trends drive audience viewing and spending behavior, including brand loyalty, influencer

loyalty, current events, brand/influencer presence across multiple platforms etc. 2. What new forms of indirect monetization,e.g. In-app purchases, are driving future revenue

growth, and how can brands/influencers take advantage of these developments? 3. How is the rise of live streaming platforms influencing the kind of content that is being created,

and is this rise sparking content creators from other areas to get involved with these platforms?

11

PSB Research http://psbresearch.com

3400 Cahuenga Blvd. W Building B/2nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90068 Project C

Capstone Contacts: Jack MacKenzie, Exec Vice-President, PSB Sonny Sidhu, Vice President, Media/Entertainment Max Dawson, Ph.D. Vice President, PSB Proposal Name The Future of Gender and Ethnic Diversity in Relation to Video Games and Esports Description of Client With locations in Los Angeles, Washington DC, Denver, London, New York, and Seattle, Penn Schoen Berland (PSB) is a leading digital market research and consulting firm named for partners Mark Penn, Douglas Schoenm, and Michael Berland. The company is known for its political polling on behalf of Bill Clinton, and since the 1970s PSB has worked on behalf of numerous political campaigns in the U.S. and internationally, contributing to the election of more than 25 political leaders worldwide. Its founders are also credited with the introduction of overnight polling. PSB's notable corporate research and communications work includes research for Microsoft, American Express, AT&T, BP, Coca-Cola, and Ford. The company's entertainment and media practice was founded in 2001 and provides research for magazine publishers, film studios, and video game publishers, including marketing positioning, test screenings, focus groups, creative advertising testing, and box office tracking. In 2012, PSB expanded this area of its business with the acquisition of First Movies International, an entertainment market research company. Major entertainment and media clients include Walt Disney Studios, Paramount Pictures, Major League Baseball, and Conde Nast among others. Description of Project The prevalence of women, girls and people of color as consumers and players in the video game and esports verticals continues to increase. While macro-level gender trends likely correlate to some extent with the proliferation of “female friendly” content in the mobile game development space, the past decade has also seen a marked increase in women’s participation in traditionally male-skewing genres such massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs), shooters, sports games, fighting games, and—most pronounced—in the quickly growing businesses of esports and streaming. Unfortunately, women’s increasing visibility in male-dominated gaming spaces has exposed shameful fault lines within gaming culture itself, with female gamers and broadcasters subject to deciding who does or does not have access or rights to play (gatekeeping), harassment, abuse, and worse within both online and real-world gaming spaces.

12

The past decade has also seen a broader shift towards identity-consciousness in gaming, especially within the most visible, mainstream segment of the commercial games industry. In light of historical industry shortcomings, many games publishers, developers, and media organizations have made public commitments to diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Developers and critics alike now regularly speak of the importance of fair, respectful representation of diverse identities and communities in games. Minority gamer communities have marshaled their voices to argue for recognition and representation, call out missteps and slights, and assert their own place within the gaming community. Unfortunately, these developments have been met by a rising tide of hate speech and action in gaming spaces, and a curdling of reactionary ethno-nationalist viewpoints among the subset of gamers organized in opposition to them. In short, even as gaming culture (slowly but surely) grows to include and inspire new and diverse types of gamers, new platforms designed for socialization and player interaction have exposed a underlying conflict between the old guard and new (or newly visible) players, spilling this toxicity into plain view. This toxic environment threatens to mute the potential growth of the global gaming business—a war is being waged over the soul of gaming, and future market growth depends on which side emerges victorious. Relationship of project to business

• Developing foundational market understanding to benefit the company’s current and future games industry clients, and support thought leadership and issues advocacy via conference talks, etc.

• Potential for public release underscoring the positioning as an agency sensitive to the historical, political, economic, social, and cultural contexts within which entertainment media is produced and consumed

Objectives of the Project

1. Diagnose and classify the social acceptance issues affecting key industry communities (e.g. high-profile multiplayer shooters, livestreaming communities, fan cons and meetups, esports media, etc.),

2. Posit a model for projecting industry revenues potentially lost as a result of those issues. 3. Establish the current diverse demographics and consumption behaviors of the video game

audience through a combination of information sources. 4. Identify how game publishers, developers, and media organizations have or have not made

commitments to diversity and inclusion in the workplace, in their products, and in their marketing.

5. Develop a set of potential diversity-oriented strategies that industry leaders should consider adopting to maintain the respect of their audience, as well as to stay competitive (viz. Nike/Colin Kaepernick)

6. Identify how and why female gamers and other non-mainstream groups are subject to gatekeeping, harassment, and abuse as players – and by whom.

Report Description - This report will include the following elements

1. Existing Research: The team will compile and analyze existing reports, sales data, research, white papers and other available sources to establish a POV on baseline video game usage, female and ethnic participation and representation.

2. Industry Interviews: The team will conduct interviews with executives across the game and esports ecosystem including game development, team leadership, online streaming platform community managers, game and event marketing, and retail, as well as with journalists and academics who track this business sector.

13

3. Target companies will include other game publishers, esports leagues, advertisers (both endemic and non-endemic), players/celebrities/influencers, and venues. The goal will be to compile non-proprietary points of view on the state of the video game sector and the trajectory of female and minority participation and acceptance.

4. Consumer Survey: The goal of the survey will be to identify the views of the gaming consumer regarding gender and ethnic diversity. Questions should include their reaction to the growing presence of diverse gamers within the overall community, and their assessment of how this is affecting the gaming culture, the nature and quality of the products, and their own personal viewpoint on diversity generally.

Additional questions to consider

1. How is the growth of spectator gaming, both online (e.g. Twitch) and at live events changed the industry?

2. Has this evolution exposed gaming to more people and potentially contributed to the presence of more diverse populations within the community? Was this an inevitable outgrowth of continued expansion of the industry.

3. How much of the growth of diverse audiences can be attributed to mobile gaming and casual gaming? Where will this evolution lead, i.e. will traditional platforms (e.g. consoles) and genres (e.g. shooters, RPGs) be marginalized or niched as a result?

14

Screen Engine/asi www.screenenginellc.com/

Headquarters: 1925 Century Park E #950, Los Angeles, CA 90067 First meeting: 12020 Chandler Blvd # 1, Valley Village, CA 91607

Project D

Capstone Contacts: Kevin Goetz, Founder and CEO, Screen Engine Bob Levin, President, Screen Engine Proposal Name Consumers in Control: Discovering and Viewing Content in the Digital Ecosystem Description of Client Screen Engine/ASI is a research and analytics firm with an emphasis on big data focused on maximizing market potential while assessing risk for clients in the entertainment and media spaces. Working with clients to better assess and manage opportunity and risk, they focus their approach across all distribution platforms, including domestic and international film and television, digital and mobile. They design their studies to match their client research objectives, gathering and synthesizing the information in a way to allow them to answer their business and creative questions. Description of Project Today’s consumers of entertainment make little distinction between long-form films or TV shows or videos as discrete product “verticals.” To the viewer, content types represent undifferentiated entertainment options. However, content marketers and producers still perceive movies, television, videos, and video games as separate. This Capstone project will examine the decision-making process that consumers use to discover, purchase, and watch linear content in motion picture and television formats across today’s unified and seamless digital content ecosystem. Entertainment consumers make content choices based on a complex set of criteria that is not always being considered by the content producers and marketers. Legacy definitions of “film” or “TV” no longer apply in the seamless content ecosystem that includes and allows for multiple formats (long form “movies,” medium-form “TV series,” and short-form videos) to be accessed across multiple devices and at times and locations completely under the consumer’s control. While granular and comprehensive analysis of the digital ecosystem audience is beyond the scope of this project, the following delimiting criteria will define this study, and yield sufficient data and information to understand more clearly how the audience’s decision-making process is changing. Information garnered from this study should provide producers and marketers better insights into how they could be developing, producing and marketing their titles. The research team will establish both demographic and psychographic audience criteria on which to base their study, including age, gender, education, and income; as well as preferred genre, preferred video device, personal style, cultural identification - and other criteria to be discussed between the team and the client. The team will also consider factors that are new and unique to the marketing and distribution

15

landscape, including time-shifting, social media influence, device usage, and other ways in which the consumer now controls their experience, and expects to be served by a wide diversity of platforms. The team will draw insights about the decision-making patterns of its sample across a selection of top-performing titles within the prior 18 months (initial release date), including theatrical film, broadcast television, first-run syndication or first-run cable, and digital Subscription Video On Demand (SVOD). Relationship of Project to Business The data and conclusions from this project will help the company guide and support its client companies in better understanding the entertainment consumer, and in providing the consumer with a better content discovery experience across all platforms and channels. Objectives of the Project

1. Identify how consumers obtain and consume content on certain devices and at certain times. 2. Acknowledge the relationships between genres, titles, cast (e.g.), and the time, place and device

that a consumer might select to view that content? 3. Establish a timeline and pipeline of a purchase decision in the digital ecosystem. How do

marketers capture awareness and manage the conversion process to trigger a purchase? 4. Ascertain how advertising technology (“AdTech”) and social media marketing have changed the

way marketers launch titles, seed audience awareness, and develop marketing campaigns. 5. Identify how a title’s placement on a SVOD’s thumbnail listing screen influences the consumer’s

decision to click on a given title. Confirm strategies that SVODs use to optimize consumers’ purchase decisions with their user interfaces (UI).

a. What research data are UI designers using to help shape the design and efficacy of these systems?

6. Distinguish how the green-light decision-making process across the industry (all platforms) is being affected by the rise of SVOD original programming.

a. What genres, casting, budgets or other factors are determining where a given project will be slotted for its first release (i.e. theatrical, pay cable, or SVOD – or even broadcast)?

7. Determine how tent-pole movies matter less in the digital ecosystem, and if the “long tail” theory of longer-term content value is being validated by the growth of SVOD services.

8. Identify how audience data collection is happening across all platforms, and how industry perception around data collection is changing.

Deliverables will include

1. Existing Research: The team will review existing published reports about consumer behavior around the listed criteria and establish a baseline of understanding around these new ways of looking at the audience.

2. Industry Interviews: The team will interview industry professionals who are addressing this issue and making changes to their organizations, including programming executives, development executives, and marketers across all platforms. Additionally, academics and journalists studying and reporting on these developments may have valuable insight to include.

3. Consumer Survey: The team will conduct a survey among a nationally representative sample of entertainment consumers provided by Screen Engine/ASI, to collect the behavioral data needed for this study, and will work closely with the client to define the sample criteria and tailor the questions most effectively.

16

Additional questions to consider 1. Is ESL (electronic sell-through) going to continue to be a viable distribution window? Do

consumers no longer care to “own” their content? 2. Are certain platforms becoming audience destinations? Has the cultural primacy of the movie

theater evaporated?

17

Sony Music Entertainment

www.sonymusic.com 9830 Wilshire Blvd. Beverly Hills, CA 90212

Project E

Capstone Contact: Olivia Barton, Games and Apps Licensing Specialist, SME Andy Lewis, Vice President, Global Partner Development, SME Proposal Name The Future of Music Streaming: Are Current Business Models Viable in the Long Term? Description of Client Sony Music Entertainment (SME) is owned by Sony through Sony Entertainment. The company was first founded in 1929 as American Record Corporation and renamed Columbia Recording Corporation in 1938, following its acquisition by the Columbia Broadcasting System. In 1966, the company was reorganized to become CBS Records. Sony Corporation bought the company in 1987 and renamed it Sony Music Entertainment in 1991. Sony Music Entertainment is one of the "Big Three" record companies, being the second largest after Universal Music Group (UMG) and ahead of Warner Music Group (WMG). Pre-eminent labels at Sony include Columbia Records, RCA Records, Epic Records, Arista Nashville, and RED Associated Labels. Featured artists include Beyoncé, Barbra Streisand, Usher, Alicia Keys, Meghan Trainer, Willie Nelson, Yo-Yo Ma, and Michael Jackson. Description of Project Following Spotify’s successful initial public offering (IPO), despite numerous challenges and uncertainties, are streaming music services here to stay? This study will review the leading streaming music services, including Spotify, and assess their business models, performance statistics, management strategies, and prospects for the future. In 2015, for the first time, streaming music revenue surpassed revenue from physical media, and also surpassed revenue from digital downloads. That trend is continuing as millions of consumers sign up for streaming music subscriptions – with paid subscriptions growing in proportion to free subscriptions. To better understand this market and its leaders, this report will break down the music streaming services and compare their key performance indicators (KPIs). By interviewing leading industry executives and other experts, it will try to determine which companies and business models have the best chance of prevailing in the market, and weathering the challenges of competition, customer retention, and industry frictions – primarily the payment formulas for artist royalties. The study will also look at the ways these companies are working to provide customer-centric products and services, and to best leverage technology to innovate and to create efficiency and scale. Finally, the study will include a consumer survey to better understand what consumers like and dislike about these services, what is driving their loyalty to their favorite service, and what opportunities there could be to provide better, more competitive service in the future.

18

Relationship of project to business As music streaming platforms have grown and become established, the traditional music industry (i.e. the major recording, distribution, and publishing companies) has been ambivalent about their potential, and unsure as to their disruptive power. Similarly, artists have been hoping to hold the streaming companies to the same standards as they once held the traditional companies when it comes to royalties. For the client, this report will be a benchmark to evaluate the future growth potential of streaming music in terms of its own business and business model, and to consider any potential adjustments as a result. Objectives of the Project/Students are tasked with answering the following top level questions

1. Categorize the top music streaming services and how their key performance indicators stack up against one another.

2. Differentiate between the business models of the top music streamers, and discuss the merits and deficiencies of each model.

a. How are these companies working to grow their market share and compete successfully with one another?

3. Ascertain the view of the creative music community to the music streaming services and what progress has been made to appease the damage done to artist royalty revenues since the collapse of the music industry 15 – 20 years ago?

4. Isolate how streaming music revenues figure into the overall recorded music sector in the coming years.

a. How will this growth compare and help/hurt live music revenues? 5. Determine opportunities for collaboration that may exist between the streaming music sector and

other sectors of the music industry, including concerts and tours.

Deliverables will include 1. Existing Research: Students will compile existing data on the top music streaming services,

including Spotify, Pandora, Apple Music, Google Plan Music, Amazon Music, Tidal, Deezer, and Napster. Data will be derived from press reports, published studies, in-depth profiles and other sources.

2. Industry Interviews: The team will identify and interview executives from music streaming services, as well as from record labels and distributors, to get additional data and perspective on how these companies are performing, and where they’re going. Additional sources will include investment banking advisors, journalists, and academics.

3. Consumer Survey: How do music consumers view music streaming services, and how do they choose which one to subscribe to? How many people subscribe to multiple services, and why? The consumer survey will tap consumers’ attitudes and behaviors towards these companies and attempt to qualify and quantify the ways that they enjoy recorded music overall, and what part streaming music plays in their engagement – including their preferences for the available libraries, user interface, user experience, and community engagement.

Additional questions to consider

1. Is the album dead, or with the small growth of vinyl, is there still interest in multi-song bundles (and if so, in what form)? How are music streaming services dealing with this question, and what are their product/service development strategies?

2. How has Spotify’s IPO changed the attitude, if at all, towards the streaming music sector? 3. What has been the impact of streaming music services on the various creative and professional

communities in music (i.e. Rock, Classical, Country, Jazz etc.)?

19

NBCUniversal/Wilshire Studios www.nbcuniversal.com

10 Universal City Plaza, Universal City, CA 91608 Project F

Proposal Name An Examination of the Unscripted Television Series Audience Capstone Contact: Bryan Mu, SVP, Content & Cultural Insights, NBCU Cable Ent. Studios

Anna Andree, Research Analyst, Content and Cultural Insights

Description of Client NBCUniversal Media is a division of Comcast. Among its most significant business units are the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) and the film studio, Universal Pictures. It also has a significant presence in broadcasting through a portfolio of domestic and international properties, including terrestrial and pay television. Via its Universal Parks & Resorts division, NBCUniversal is also the third-largest operator of amusement parks in the world. Assets owned by NBCU include NBCU Television Group, NBCU News Group, NBCU Cable Entertainment Group, NBC Sports Group, NBCU International Networks, NBCU Digital, Universal Parks and Resorts, Universal Filmed Entertainment Group.

Wilshire Studios develops and produces a diverse slate of original unscripted programming for multiple platforms, aligning with award-winning producers and innovative storytellers to create compelling content that explores reality through a variety of formats. From E!’s signature “Live from the Red Carpet,” USA Network’s “Real Country” and “The Cromarties” and Oxygen’s “Mysteries and Scandals,” to the upcoming “Unspeakable Crime: The Killing of Jessica Chambers for Oxygen” and the debut “People’s Choice Awards” on E!, Wilshire Studios produces series that are informative, revealing, thrilling and entertaining. Wilshire Studios is part of the NBCUniversal Cable Entertainment portfolio. Description of Project There were 257 unscripted series premieres in 2017 across all cable television channels, and therefore very difficult for a new unscripted series to achieve significant ratings in order to attract advertisers. The company would like to take a different approach to their development strategy and examine the unscripted audience. Specifically, the client would like to examine the relationship between current unscripted content and the culture at large in order to understand trends that it can mine for future shows. What are the demographics and psychographics of the unscripted audience and what are their interests and content preferences. How will this audience profile potentially impact Unscripted content development over the next five years?

20

Relationship of Proposed Project to Business In an increasingly crowded marketplace, with new digital platforms (e.g. Facebook, Apple) joining traditional outlets, and audiences having much greater content choices, the importance of understanding viewers’ preferences and behaviors is crucial to programming success. Objectives of the Project

1. Understand the full landscape of unscripted programming across networks, cable, digital and other platforms;

2. Attain a clear working knowledge of the development and production aspects of unscripted television, and how they differ from scripted content;

3. Recognize the finance and distribution models particular to unscripted content, how they were created, and where these models differ platform to platform – as well as where they are expected to evolve over the coming five years;

4. Comprehend the ROI of unscripted vs scripted programming, and how that ROI relates to advertiser rates and the perceived value of unscripted programming to advertisers;

5. Analyze the performance and ratings of unscripted programming, and differentiate any specific metrics that distinguish unscripted from other forms of content.

Deliverables 1. Three to five case studies of current unscripted shows on cable today (broadcast, digital, and

premium cable excluded) with audience breakdown and ratings included, along with an analysis of the programs’ success (or lack of success) in tapping into current trends, culture, or events.

2. A survey of viewers of unscripted content, looking at awareness levels of certain unscripted shows (cable only, premium excluded), viewing habits, the amount of unscripted content they watch, and other applicable metrics. Selecting 5-10 survey participants to participate in an additional phone interview or focus group to get greater depth on their unscripted viewing habits and preferences, as well as a greater range of ideas and speculation on future content ideas.

3. Interviews with industry professionals in unscripted programming, including development, current programming, program planning and scheduling, research, talent representation. Academics and journalists focusing on this field will also be interviewed.

Additional questions to consider 1. Is there more than one type of unscripted viewer? What are the main profiles/personas of those

who watch unscripted content? 2. What are the main reasons people watch unscripted content? 3. Does unscripted content compete with scripted content in the audience’s mind, or are they

complete separate value propositions (and viewing decisions)? 4. How does a new unscripted show distinguish itself from others in the marketplace?

ASSIGNMENTS Please see the Milestone Schedule below for the due dates associated with each assignment (and the corresponding revisions and drafts). Assignment titles are listed in red after the schedule.

21

MILESTONE SCHEDULE Listed below is the expected timeline for completion. These are the ‘hard’ dates. These dates should be included as a “Deliverables Schedule” in the team’s Proposal and supplemented as appropriate for the individual project. In other words, there may be additional “hit” dates as the team sees fit. The client, if they remain involved in the project, may have additional requirements, and the schedule may be altered based on those needs. CAPSTONE MILESTONE SCHEDULE (Subject to Change) ** means all students at same time

October, 2018

Due Date

Capstone Orientation Session **

Friday, October 5 @ 11:00am

Student Client Preference Vote Saturday, October 6 @ 2:00pm Capstone Teams Announced Wednesday, October 10 by 1:00pm (some may be

announced earlier due to client schedules) First Meeting with Advisor

ASAP after team announcements per advisor/team schedule (this may not occur before you meet with client)

First Meeting with Client

ASAP after team announcements. Many will occur on Friday Oct 12 for one hour sometime in the AM. Many of the meetings are already scheduled.

Present Sketch Pitch (second meeting with client at their site)

Approximately two weeks after the first meeting with the client. Though much of this will depend on team member, client, advisor, John and Dan’s availability.

November, 2018

Mandatory November Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

On or before - Fri Nov 9 (but before Sunday, Nov 11 when the Project Proposal is due)

Project Proposal Sunday, November 11, 2018 by 6:00pm

Survey and Research workshop with Ji Young Denick (MineMR)

Saturday, November 17, 2018 2:30pm

Capstone Review Day: Fall Semester w/ all students and advisors **

Friday, November 30, 2018 2:30pm

Team self-critique 1) Heinz College Assessment Peer evaluation 2) MEIM Program Peer Evaluation

Friday, November 30, 2018 by 5:30pm

Additional team Meetings with Advisor, John and Dan

Scheduled per Team Leader/Advisors

Initial research work (interviews, data) On-going

22

December, 2018

Mandatory December Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

On or before – Fri Dec 7

Review Project Proposal, (process, milestones, deliverables) with MEIM leadership and advisors

On-going

Research work (interviews, data, etc.) On-going Revised Project Proposal and research/interview sources: Preferred Due Date

Friday, December 14 by 6:00pm (optional due date)

January, 2019

Client meetings to make changes, ask questions, make suggestions

If applicable per team need/availability

Mandatory January Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

On or before – Wednesday, January 23 (before Sundance and NAMM)

Revised Project Proposal and research/interview sources: Final Due Date (if team chose 12/9/17 date, this due date is not necessary)

Tuesday, January 15 by 2:00pm (mandatory due date) –Note this is the first day of Spring Semester.

Sundance Film Festival/National Association of Music Merchants research work (interviews, collect data, etc.)

January 24 – 28, 2019 - Park City, UT January 24-27, 2019 - Anaheim, CA

Initial drafting

On-going per team

February, 2019

Review any deliverables with client If applicable Research work (interviews, data, etc.) On-going Work on first draft On-going Mandatory February Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

On or before – Sat. Feb 9

23

March, 2019

Submission of First Draft and Turnitin Report

Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 6:00pm

Spring Peer Evaluation #1 Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 2:30pm (electronic submission)

Spring Break for MEIM-LA March 10 – March 17, 2019 Work on notes from Advisors from first draft On-going Research work (interviews, data, etc.) On-going Mandatory March Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

On or before – Sat. March 23, 2018

April, 2019

Work on notes from Advisors from first draft

On-going

Mandatory April Advisor Check in (could be phone call, Google Group Chat, in-person meeting, etc.

Friday, April 12 at 8:00pm

First Presentation Run Through for advisors **

Friday, April 5 & Saturday, April 6 (time dependent on MEIM class schedule) to be confirmed as we get closer but sketch it in now – Note this Friday exception!

Submission of Second Draft incorporating notes from first draft and Turnitin Report

Friday, April 12 at 8:00pm (though the earlier in the week would be preferred)

Presentation to Capstone client –Each team will schedule individually

Between Mon. April 22 – Friday May 10: Schedule and present to clients. Some clients will show up at MEIM presentation. If not, see them before May 10, 2019

May, 2019

Final Rehearsal with Advisor Present**

Thursday, May 2, 2019 (May change due to Pgh. administration travel plans)

Capstone Final Presentation Two – In front of MEIM faculty, Advisory Board, client (if applicable) and invited guests **

Friday, May 3, 2019 (May change due to Pgh. administration travel plans)

Peer Evaluations Due Monday, May 6, 2019 at 10:00am

Delivery of Final Draft and (incorporating notes from second draft, presentation, and client) electronic and hard copy

Tuesday, May 7, 2019 at 10:30 AM (can also deliver to client if requested)

24

Project Sketch After each team has had its first meeting with the client, the group will have approximately two weeks to develop a Project Sketch to pitch back to the client. The focus of the Sketch is to confirm and amend the topic statement that the client proposed, discuss the scope of the project, and lay out the work plan ahead. This will be a verbal pitch, supported by a written bullet point outline, which will serve as a leave-behind. The team is certainly allowed to bring in any additional support material as it sees fit (but not a powerpoint). This pitch should be rehearsed prior to the meeting and each member of the team should cover a section of the presentation (as applicable). In other words, don’t talk, just to talk, but all members should be engaged. MEIM leadership and/or the advisor will also be at this meeting, so keep that in mind when it comes to scheduling. Keep in mind that this meeting may have to be during internship hours, so each student will be responsible for getting this time off from his or her internship. The meetings are typically 30-45 minutes long. Sketch requirements:

• Confirmation (i.e. re-statement/distillation) of client proposal • Discussion of the scope of the project which can include the deliverable if not outlined in the

syllabus • Work plan discussion • Other suggested areas to study/investigate • A leave-behind of talking points (as appropriate)

Project Proposal Project Proposal, Sunday, November 11, 2018 by 6:00pm Revised Project Proposal, Friday, December 14, 2018 by 6:00pm or Tuesday, January 15, 2019 by 2:00pm (first day of Spring semester) Following the presentation of the Project Sketch, each team will submit a project Proposal to the MEIM Program Director and the team advisor. The team should discuss the Proposal contents – and prepare multiple drafts of the Proposal as necessary, prior to its submission. The balance of the team’s work on the project will follow the MILESTONE SCHEDULE (see section above). Please note that this schedule includes meeting dates with MEIM leadership. Should the team need additional or regularly scheduled meetings to further assist their progress, or to solve specific problems, the Team Leader should make arrangements with the Program Director/Advisor. Additionally, note that a Revised Project Proposal is scheduled for delivery in either December, 2018 (preferred) or January, 2019. This is an opportunity for the team to update the Proposal with more specific information than included in the original Proposal, serving as a preview of what will be included in the team’s First Draft. Note that the proposal is graded for Fall, 2018. The revised proposal (no matter which month it is handed in) is graded for Spring 2019.

25

Project Proposal Outline The project proposal should be in the following form. Most proposals are anywhere from 7-10 pages in length.

1. Cover/Approval Sheet

Sample form will be sent to you at a later date.

2. Introduction and background (1-2 pages)

This section sets the stage for motivating the work the team will do. The team must respond to the client’s proposed topic statement, incorporating the parameters of their approved Sketch, and outlining in more detail what they hope to accomplish in their project, including, if known at this time, the overall thesis statement for the project. This section can include an outline or overview of what has already been done on the project topic (if applicable), and can also describe any anticipated limitations or constraints that the team may have to address in undertaking the project. Finally, the team should include a discussion of the value of the project topic, and what benefits to the industry could result from a successfully completed study. In summary, you will want to include the following (as applicable – this may not be appropriate for every group) • Response to the client’s proposed topic statement incorporating the parameters project sketch • Value of the project topic, and what benefits to the industry • Objectives of the project • Outline or overview of what has already been done on the project topic (if applicable), • Any anticipated limitations/constraints or concerns that the team may have

3. The work to be done (1 page)

The team will state here, as specifically as possible, the actual work to be done. At this point in the process, the team may not know the final scope of their project, but they should be able to formulate a “take” on the topic. In addition, please address the following in the proposal: • Why this topic is important from the client’s point of view. Some of this has already been

outlined in the project description. If that is the case, no need to repeat. • Where does this topic fit in to the overall business trends that are currently going on in the

entertainment business generally, and in this particular sector specifically? • What is the research plan that the team plans to execute? Will there be attendance at conferences?

Will you interview people at AFM or Sundance? Will you be doing a survey? At this point, you’ve discussed the parameters with the client, so you should have a good idea of next steps.

4. Interview Sources (1/2 – 1 page)

The team will need to complete at least four (4) first-person interviews as part of the course work involved for the project. If appropriate, more interviews on the team’s topic should be included. These interviews should be with an expert in the field of study under consideration, who has several years of industry experience and/or senior leadership status and “gravitas” within the industry. The interviews, as “primary sources,” will constitute a core component of the Capstone project. In preparation for each interview, the team must draft a protocol (a set of questions that relate directly to

26

the topic), with all team members signing off on this list. In choosing interview subjects, the team should consider candidates that represent different, perhaps divergent points of view. Interviewing the client or an employee of the client’s company may be acceptable for one of the interviews, but this should be cleared and approved by the client. Although the team may not have secured interview candidates in time to include them in the Proposal, a wish-list of candidates should be included which will include their name, company, and title. It’s best if you could include a 1-2 sentence bio of each person. You can usually get this information off of their LinkedIn page. In addition, if it’s not clear, state the justification for interviewing the candidate, and the methodology the team will use to contact them.

5. Data Sources The team will describe its intended hard data strategy, including books, periodicals, audio-visual sources and other bibliographical reference that it plans to use in the compilation of information used to carry out the project. Additionally, it will describe any resources necessary to locate or to access such data, including the use of resources affiliated with the client. If original surveys are going be included in the study, the team should discuss the purpose of these surveys, how they hope to conduct them, what resources they will use and how they will compile the data.

6. Proposed Team Schedule

Using the Milestone Schedule that can be found above as a guide, the team will plot out their proposed schedule for the winter break and spring semester. What will be occurring in each month (in addition to the dates in the Milestone Schedule)? It’s best to use the Milestone Schedule and add interior dates that reflect the team’s work schedules and best practices. Past teams have included a breakdown of who is doing what tasks (especially over winter break).

7. Deliverables The team will articulate exactly what artifacts will be submitted along with the project. Minimally, this will be the Project Report and power point — but it also could contain supplementary information: business models/spreadsheets, documentation of research, filmed segments, raw survey data, interview transcripts, etc. This may also be based on the client needs, directions or suggestions, but it’s helpful for MEIM leadership to see what the team is expecting to deliver.

8. Writing Style List what writing style will the team use on the project. The preferred style will be from the American Psychological Association (APA). Books on writing style are located in the MEIM library and on-line. Note that APA is double-spaced. Do not be surprised if you are sent a draft back by not following what you wrote in the project proposal.

27

Project Report

• First Draft - Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 6:00pm • Second Draft - Friday, April 12, 2019 at 8:00pm (though the earlier in the week would be

preferred) • Final Draft - Tuesday, May 7, 2019 at 10:30 AM

The main deliverable of the Capstone will vary depending on the input of the client. Generally, teams will be expected to follow the chapter outline below. Final project reports typically include the following components. We are requiring less writing than we have in past years so that more focus can be placed on the research and presentation. The Chapter page count is a suggestion – however the final page count is not (more info below). Let us know if you need more or less. We are more interested in you digging deep into a subject with excellent interviews and research to back up your claim, rather than being broad and trying to capture every nuance of a topic. There is great value in embracing the process of the research, but concise, economical writing is also important.

1. Title Page - A sample page will be sent at a later date 2. Optional: Special Thanks - can be placed before Abstract (don’t number the page) 3. Table of Contents – This will be page 2 – An index with chapter headings and page

numbers. We suggest that teams include the information below, but each case may be different. Consult your advisor if you deviate from the outline below.

You will be asked to articulate in the Table of Contents who is main or secondary authors of each chapter or section for the first and second draft. You can have more than one author for each section and you are allowed to collaborate with other members of your team on a chapter or section (but not non-team members). Some team members may be more focused on research or interviews and not writing. That is acceptable, but needs to be noted in the Table of Contents. The final Table of Contents will not include these notations.

4. Abstract – 1 paragraph/ no more than 75 words – This will be on a separate page, probably

page three. This will tell the reader what information the Project Report will contain. It will include the purpose, methods and scope of the Project, the hypothesis or thesis statement. It should not include the results, conclusions or recommendations.

28

5. Executive Summary - 1–3 pages

Maximum of 1,000 words – Approximately 3 pages, most likely pages 4 – 6. This will be a summary of the report. It should contain enough information for the reader to understand what the full document is about without reading it. It should contain the background information, the types of research completed, and the major conclusions. The reader should get a strong idea of the major points of the Project Report without getting overloaded with too many details. The executive summary is a condensed version of the most important information you will offer. This should be a thorough piece of writing. Do not skip the Executive Summary in Draft One. The advisors use this as a reference to see the momentum and it should be well written and thorough.

6. Chapter 1- Background/ Topic statement/ Objectives of study/ Hypothesis or Thesis

Statement, Literature support or Opportunity Statement (Not all may be needed) Approximately 3-5 pages See listing under table of contents as a suggestion. Please note that the team should decide on a writing style that is appropriate for a research paper. These may include MLA, APA, Chicago/Turabian, etc, but as a default, the preferred style will be from the American Psychological Association (APA). You will be asked which style you prefer in the proposal. This should give other team members time to get acquainted with the writing style before drafts are due in the spring.

7. Chapter 2 - Research/ Previous work in the field/ Brief review of Research

Methodology(ies), involved (if appropriate). Approximately 3-6 pages

8. Chapter 3 - Data Analysis/ Survey results (if appropriate) Approximately 5-7 pages

9. Chapter 4 - Final Analysis / Suggestions for future / Research and Investigation/ Conclusions or Recommendations. Approximately 5-10 pages

10. Appendix - Survey Data (raw or summary), Supporting Data (If applicable)

11. Interview List - The names, titles and websites of those you interviewed in alphabetical

order by last name – A description of their company may also be appropriate.

12. Bibliography - including interview sources/ titles (mandatory) Page Count of Body – In past years, some first drafts have been unwieldy and unreadable. Teams are using Google Docs and not adequately editing and proofing what they are submitting. This occurs because some teams are not sure of their direction and have thrown everything into the draft which has resulted in unnecessary editing and wasted time. All drafts should not exceed a page count of 30 pages (not counting the Abstract, Executive Summary, Appendix, Interview List, or Bibliography). Advisors will not read past page 30 and your grade will suffer unless permission has been granted as it pertains to page count.

29

CAPSTONE FIRST GRADING RUBRIC FOR FIRST DRAFT, SECOND DRAFT AND FINAL DRAFT

The following rubric will be used when grading the written drafts. Advisors will hand in an overall number that is averaged for each draft. The numeric will be used to convert to a letter grade using the Heinz policy for grading below.

CONTENT

The extent to which the document demonstrates knowledge of the subject matter and objective. • Communicates a

clear purpose • Conveys a

relevant, thorough understanding of the subject matter.

LOGIC AND

ORGANIZATION

The extent to which the document demonstrates a coherent structure and flow. • Contains clear subject, topic,

thesis, arguments, point of view, and conclusion;

• Uses paragraphing to separate and contain discrete ideas and/or arguments;

• Includes appropriate and effective transitional devices;

• Maintains logical sequencing and categorization;

• Provides context as necessary to maintain subject matter focus.

CLARITY AND

TONE

The extent to which the document demonstrates the ability to communicate clearly and to use an appropriate tone. • Uses precise

words • Writes concisely • Writes in active

voice • Uses professional

language

GRAMMAR AND

MECHANICS

The extent to which the document demonstrates the conventions of English, including correct: • Grammar • Syntax • Punctuation • Capitalization • Spelling • Citations • Format

40

Possible Points

30

Possible Points

15

Possible Points

15

Possible Points

Grading Guidelines The Heinz policy for grading is as follows: A+ 99.0-100% Exceptional A 94.0-98.9% Excellent A- 91.0-93.9% Very Good B+ 88.0-90.9% Good B 84.0-87.9% Acceptable B- 81.0-83.9% Fair C+ 78.0-80.9% Poor C 74.0-77.9% Minimum Passing C- 71.0-73.9% Failing

30

Fall 2018 Capstone will consist of the following grades: Assignment Date Grade Weight Proposal Grade November 11, 2018 40% Peer Evaluations November 30, 2018 10% Advisor Grade November 30, 2018 25% MEIM Leadership Grade November 30, 2018 25 % Spring 2019 Capstone Grading will consist of the following grades: Assignment Date Grade Weight Revised Proposal Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10% First Written Draft Sun. March 3, 2019 15% Second Written Draft Fri. April 12, 2019 15% Presentation Grade Fri. May 3, 2019 25% Peer Evaluations Mon. May 6, 2019 5% Advisor Grade Mon. May 6, 2019 20% Final Draft Tues. May 7, 2019 10%

31

Project Presentation There will be three presentations regarding the Capstone. Capstone Presentation One – MEIM Leadership/Capstone Advisor(s) Friday, April 5 & Saturday, April 6, 2019 (time dependent on MEIM class schedule) The first presentation will be in front of the MEIM Program Director, Head of Industry Relations and the team advisor as appropriate (though all advisors will be invited and encouraged to attend). This presentation will occur in early April. The use of presentation slides is required. You will get feedback on your presentation style, the clarity of your presentation and the visual support you offer. All members of the team should participate. More details on this presentation will be offered as we get closer. Capstone Presentation Two – MEIM Capstone Project Committee Friday, May 3, 2019 The second presentation will be more formal than Presentation One. The teams will deliver an oral presentation of the Project to the MEIM Capstone Project Committee - MEIM Program Chair, MEIM Program Director, Capstone Advisors, Head of Industry Relations, and (potentially) Clients. Others may be invited at the discretion of the committee, which may include other faculty, students and advisory board members. The presentation is limited to 15 minutes with an additional 15 minutes reserved for questions and discussion. All team members are to participate in the presentation. The teams are expected to distill the key points of the Project into a compelling, complete but succinct presentation. The use of presentation slides is required. Note: This is the version of the Presentation that the Team will be encouraged to present to the Client at the Client’s offices. However, it should be noted that at times, the client presentation may be more detailed and longer than the presentation to the MEIM Capstone Project Committee. Capstone Presentation Three - Client Presentation: Individually scheduled within each team While each Capstone client will be invited to the formal presentation at the end of the academic year, not all clients show up. Each team should plan on doing a client presentation. The presentation will be similar to the Capstone Presentation Two (above), though if the team feels it would be better to focus on one particular area over another for the clients, those changes should certainly be made. For example, the client may not need or want to know about the methodology of the project, but would prefer you to focus on recommendations. This presentation is limited to 15 minutes with an additional 15 minutes reserved for questions and discussion, but the client will most likely specify their needs before the team presents. All team members are to participate in the presentation. The teams are expected to distill the key points of the project into a compelling, complete but succinct presentation. The use of presentation slides is required. Ideally, this should be presented the week before or the week of the final Capstone presentation. Team members will be busy, so schedule this early!!

32

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC: COMMUNICATION/ CAPSTONE PRESENTATION Course Number: 93.889 Fall 2018 (3 units) & 93.890 Spring 2019 (9 Units) / Section: L

The following rubric is adapted from the Eberly Center at Carnegie Mellon University. The evaluation rubric is divided into four levels of achievement—sophisticated, competent, not yet competent, and unsatisfactory. The highest grade in any of the 4 levels of proficiency (Content, Logic and Organization, Clarity and Tone, Grammar and Mechanics) is 25 points. The highest team total score for the presentation will be 100. The rubric will be given to invited guests to complete during the final presentations on May 4, 2018. Those in attendance will include faculty, advisory committee members, invited guests, etc. All scores will be averaged to come up with a final grade based on the Heinz policy on page 34.

LEVELS OF PROFICIENCY

CONTENT

LOGIC AND ORGANIZATION

CLARITY AND

TONE

GRAMMAR AND MECHANICS

The extent to which the document demonstrates knowledge of the subject matter and objective. • Communicat

es a clear purpose

• Conveys relevant, thorough understanding of the subject matter.

The extent to which the document demonstrates a coherent structure and flow. • Contains clear

subject, topic, thesis, arguments, point of view, and conclusion.;

• Uses paragraphing to separate and contain discrete ideas and/or arguments;

• Includes appropriate and effective transitional devices;

• Maintains logical sequencing and categorization;

• Provides context as necessary to maintain subject matter focus.

The extent to which the document demonstrates the ability to communicate clearly and to use an appropriate tone. • Uses

precise words

• Writes concisely

• Writes in active voice

• Uses professional language

The extent to which the document (power-point/ Presentation) demonstrates the conventions of English, including correct: • Grammar • Syntax • Punctuation • Capitalization • Spelling • Citations • Format

Rate team

from 20 - 25 points

if you feel their work

was: Sophisticated

Demonstrates advanced knowledge of the subject matter and objective.

Demonstrates an advanced, cohesive structure, effectively and completely conveying the subject matter and intent.

Demonstrates advanced word choice that creates clarity and produces a professional tone.

Demonstrates advanced control and usage of grammar and mechanics.

33

Rate team

from 15 - 19 points

if you feel their work

was

Competent

Demonstrates acceptable knowledge of the subject matter and objective; however, revisions are recommended to improve effectiveness.

Demonstrates an acceptable structure; however, revisions are recommended to improve organization and/or flow.

Demonstrates acceptable word choice; however, revisions to phrasing are recommended to improve clarity and/or for a professional tone.

Demonstrates acceptable control of grammar and mechanics; however, corrections are recommended to improve language skills and/or professionalism.

Rate team

from 10 - 14 points

if you feel their work

was

Not Yet Competent

Demonstrates limited knowledge of the subject matter and/or objective. More relevant and/or thorough content is needed for effectiveness.

Demonstrates a limited control of structure. Revisions in organization are needed for a coherent structure and/or flow.

Demonstrates limited control of word choice. Revisions are needed for clarity and/or for a professional tone.

Demonstrates limited control of grammar and mechanics. Corrections are needed for suitable language skills and/or professionalism.

Rate team from

5 - 9 points if you feel their work

was

Unsatisfactory

Does not meet course

requirements

Does not meet the minimum course requirements for “Content”

Does not meet the minimum course requirements for “Logic and Organization”

Does not meet the minimum course requirements for “Clarity and Tone”

Does not meet the minimum course requirements for “Grammar and Mechanics”

Score

The Heinz policy for grading is as follows: A+ 99.0-100% Exceptional A 94.0-98.9% Excellent A- 91.0-93.9% Very Good B+ 88.0-90.9% Good B 84.0-87.9% Acceptable B- 81.0-83.9% Fair C+ 78.0-80.9% Poor C 74.0-77.9% Minimum Passing C- 71.0-73.9% Failing

34

COURSE POLICIES Team Selection Students will select their preference via a Survey Monkey poll that Mary Ryan will email out. Please rank ALL of your choices with 1 – being your top choice, 2 – your second choice, etc. Please rate all six Capstone projects by Saturday, October 6 at 2:00pm

• Evolution of Audience Measurement • Monetization Trends in Live Streaming Digital Networks • Gender & Ethnic Diversity in Video Games & Esports • Discovering Content in the Digital Ecosystem • The Future of Music Streaming • Examination of Unscripted Television Series Audience

Authorship/ Ownership Each student team is creating a unique document and the authorship will be attributed to that team. Clients may require students to sign a non-disclosure agreement (“NDA”) regarding confidential and/or proprietary material and information that the client may provide to the students, but it is the intention of this process that the final work product be original to the team. Authorship is a precise manner of acknowledging responsibility and giving credit for intellectual work. The practices students adhere to should reflect the hard work they put into this project. It is important that students express their own ideas in their own words. In any presentation, creative, artistic, or research project, it is the ethical responsibility of each student and/or student team to identify the actual sources of third-party ideas, concepts, research, data or opinions incorporated into the submitted work. Failure to do so is dishonest and is the basis for a charge of cheating or plagiarism, which is subject to disciplinary action (see Cheating & Plagiarism below). On the first and second draft, we are going to ask that you state, what each team member is doing. For example, if 1 person writes chapter 1 and 2 (overall), please state that. Also, if one person is not writing but instead doing the research or interviews, just state that. In the Capstone projects, you are allowed to collaborate with each other, but you must not plagiarize any of the work. You must also use correct citations. Even if you are just defining a term in an appendix or footnote, proper citations are required. Please see this quick link (less than 2 minutes) from CMU libraries in regards to the importance of citations: http://guides.library.cmu.edu/CitationManagement Cheating and Plagiarism Cheating, plagiarism and other forms of academic misrepresentation are viewed as extremely serious matters that violate the integrity of a student’s basic agreement with their academic institution, and undermine and invalidate their academic work, doing often irreparable harm to their academic record, their academic career, and their post-academic reputation. Punishment for cheating and plagiarism offenses can include expulsion from the MEIM Program and Heinz College. Cheating is defined as including (but not limited to):

1. Submission of work that is not the student’s own; 2. Submission or use of falsified data;

35

3. Unauthorized access to an exam or assignment; 4. Use of a stand-in for an exam; 5. Use of unauthorized material in the preparation of an assignment or during an examination; 6. Supplying or communicating unauthorized information to another student for use in an

assignment or exam; 7. Unauthorized collaboration on an assignment that is not explicitly approved and permitted by an

instructor; 8. Submission of the same work for credit in more than one course.

The above definitions apply to all exams and assignments, whether required or optional, and whether they are undertaken in–class, or at home. Plagiarism is defined as the misrepresentation of another party's original work as one’s own (including ideas, language, graphics/artwork, scientific or mathematical proofs, whether published in print or electronically, or unpublished, copyrighted or un-copyrighted). To avoid committing plagiarism, all third party work must be referenced and cited using established academic protocols and formats, including the use of quotation marks, footnotes and bibliographies. Cheating and/or plagiarism on any assignment will result in a failing grade (0 points) for that assignment. The assignment on which the cheating and/or plagiarism occurred will be included in the offending student’s grade calculations, and the zero (0) points for that assignment will be factored into the student’s grade for the applicable course. Furthermore, the violating student’s final grade in the applicable course will be reduced one full letter grade as a further penalty for the infraction, thus impacting the student’s overall grade point average. In addition, cases of cheating and plagiarism will be submitted to and reviewed by the Dean’s Office, and more severe penalties may be imposed, up to and including expulsion from Heinz College. Survey Resource Center As many of you may be developing surveys for your Capstone projects, a valuable resource will be the Survey Resource Center, which is part of Carnegie Mellon’s Institutional Research and Analysis Department. The Survey Resource Center provides survey research and design support for graduate students. Although their preference is to have students engage in a thorough research process, they will work with students wherever they are in the process, for example: 1. discuss how to clarify their research questions • help students construct survey items to answer their research questions, giving attention to instructions,

item wording, measurement properties of response sets, and item order; or review an existing survey instrument, including instructions, item wording, measurement properties of response sets, and item order

• explain how to test survey items and revise them when necessary • share best practices for survey administration and maintaining respondent confidentiality • provide guidance for analyzing collected data • show examples of reporting results and findings The Survey Resource Center could be particularly valuable for students who have not had instruction on how to measure attitudes, perceptions, behaviors, etc.; how to create good instruments; or how to test survey items. Though no appointment is needed, they would appreciate if you could send them an email ahead of time

36

to coordinate with one of their staff members and send any survey material prior to your phone meeting. Our contact person there is: Laura Velasco Publications and Projects Manager Institutional Research and Analysis lvelasco@cmu.edu (412) 268-2042 The Ten Commandments of Capstone Projects 1) A Capstone is the equivalent of a thesis project; please treat it with the seriousness it deserves. 2) Respectful and effective communication with the client, advisor, and the MEIM leadership is essential. 3) Any knowledge not possessed by the group should be obtained through research and by consulting with University and community experts.

There is a vast universe of intellectual resources within the Carnegie Mellon community. Discovering what information is lacking, where to find it, how to ask for it and how to use it is another critical learning opportunity of Capstone; project teams should not expect information, resources or assistance to be handed to them.

4) Capstone students are expected to put in a minimum of 6 - 10 hours of work per week on the project in the Spring.

It is to your advantage to not put off work on the Capstone until the last minute. The level of success a team achieves depends, to a significant extent, on the quantity of and the quality of time that the team invests. At times, students are surprised at getting a C or B on a particular aspect of Capstone, but advisors will be critical of rushed work that is not supported by outside sources. In addition, use your internships and Sundance Film Festival experience to gather research and interview opportunities.

5) It is every student’s responsibility to know what each team member is doing within the group and within the project.

In the entertainment industry, each member of the crew must be aware of and in sync with what others are doing. The same is true with Capstone projects. For example, it may be easier to meet on a Sunday afternoon, than to schedule an 11:00 pm meeting during the week at MEIM if you know your team member lives in Santa Monica

6) You succeed as a group; you fail as a group.

It is in a student’s own best interest to be selfless in assisting others on the project team. However, in the past, we have discovered that some members obviously work harder than others and the grades will reflect this. You are not given team grades, but individual grades. We evaluate student’s progress based on input from clients, advisors, other team members, interaction with MEIM leadership, as well as the work itself.

7) Capstone students are expected to treat each other with respect; gossip is not a productive way of dealing with conflict.

All conflict should be handled within the group. Individuals must try to work out problems between themselves. If necessary, MEIM leadership should become involved as mediators, not judges.

37

8) Peer evaluation is an important tool for constructive criticism and quality improvement of the team; it is not a tool for personal attacks or retribution.

Project team members are expected to use their peer evaluations in a professional manner. It is the responsibility of the team members to understand and endorse the evaluation criteria. Participation in peer evaluations is a vital part of the Capstone process; failure to do so will be considered a failure to participate fully in Capstone, and it will be reflected in the student’s grade. This year, we will use two forms of peer evaluations. One is related to a larger Heinz College assessment being done in 2017-18 related to all system’s projects. The other one is related to the Heinz College System’s projects

9) Capstone students should understand the importance of fulfilling their responsibilities in a timely, professional and respectful manner.

Respect for the project is a student's duty as a member of the team. Following through on commitments in a timely manner, sharing information fully but succinctly, providing timely responses to inquiries, and having regular and effective communication with the team leadership are the critical student responsibilities that epitomize respect for the project.

10) The role of the team contact is to structure the agenda, keep meetings moving in an organized and expeditious fashion, and to mediate internal disputes.

The contact’s key role in meetings is to help the process be inclusive and move forward. The contact will encourage participation from team members who are not engaged, as well as discourage disruption, digression and obfuscation.

38

MEIM Capstone Teams 2018-19 Fall - Course # 93.889 and Spring Course 93.890

Instructor of Record: Dan Green Faceware Technology: Monetization Trends in Live Streaming Digital Networks Course # 93.889 & 93.890 Section LB Advisor: Keith Eich

1. Laila Archuleta 2. Mengting Han 3. Paul Luckenbaugh 4. Tori (Victoria) Martinez 5. Todd Tuchek

NBCUniversal/Wilshire Studios: An Examination of the Unscripted Television Series Audience Course # 93.889 & 93.890 Section LD Advisor: Ji Young Denick

1. Emmalee Helmes 2. Kristy Klixbull 3. Varnell Moffett 4. Dora (Youqi) Pu

PSB Research: The Future of Gender and Ethnic Diversity in Relation to Video Games and Esports Course # 93.889 & 93.890 Section LC Advisor: Allison Emilio

1. Mingyu Bian 2. Carina Carbetta 3. Olivia Green 4. Dan Hoyt 5. Joan Rodriguez

Screen Engine/asi: Consumers in Control: Discovering and Viewing Content in the Digital Ecosystem Course # 93.889 & 93.890 Section LE Advisor: Tom Meredith

1. Jingyuan Li 2. Abby Botnick 3. Kelly (Xueying) Cheng 4. Ryan Barbera

Sony Music Entertainment: The Future of Music Streaming: Are Current Business Models Viable in the Long Term? 93.889 & 93.890 Section LF Advisor: Kevin Stein

1. Valentine Banor 2. Abby (Chang-Hui) Liu 3. Alyson Loutzehiser 4. Emily Nees 5. Katie (Mary) Rousseau

Turner Broadcasting System/Adult Swim: Rating the Ratings: The Evolution of Audience Measurement in Ad-Supported Media Course # 93.889 & 93.890 Section LA Advisor: John Tarnoff

1. Arzoo Bahl 2. Edmond Raymer 3. Colin Vasick 4. Elaine (Yiran) Zhang