Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
From my perspective, the less mainstream corporate media is involved in any alternative independent media, the better. They already destroyed independent film and cable. -- ___ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Bingo. That's THE question, Jacek. Jan On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:53 AM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 7:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ Is advertising the only way to monetize on-line videos that all those bright people in the Valley can think of? I watched one of the Web 2.0 gurus recently admit that the startups need to experiment with new revenue models now, like... e-commerce. -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv Yahoo! Groups Links -- Jan McLaughlin Production Sound Mixer air = 862-571-5334 aim = janofsound skype = janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:28 PM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? You are absolutely right. We don't need them. I don't understand why independent producers want the NBCs of this world to hire them or join the revolution. Funk them. If it is about money, then charge money for your shows, do a premium paid content channel to accompany what you are giving away for free, create and sell courseware, books, DVDs, reach out to small businesses who cannot afford to advertise on the big networks. Help them create brand following on the Internet. Take a look at Gary Vaynerchuk's Wine Library TV or Stormhoek http://www.stormhoek.com/blog/ Whining about big bad networks with get you nowhere. -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 7:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ Is advertising the only way to monetize on-line videos that all those bright people in the Valley can think of? I watched one of the Web 2.0 gurus recently admit that the startups need to experiment with new revenue models now, like... e-commerce. -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
No doubt that there is truth in the expressed misconceptions of what Independent Net Media encompasses. I dont even know the best terminology these days and language always helps define ( whats a vlog? ;) User Generated Content is NOT EpicFu. So yeah that must be annoying to hear. But I wonder if it is a deliberate misinterpretation in order to make a weak point about where their focus is today. I mean, how can they not know that some UGC uploaded to YouTube (ie. webcam talking head or silly cat videos) with zero production is not in the same category as the episodic productions (aka webisodes) that have fans/audience/community/brand/merch/influence/value/market share etc? They know. They just don't want to add any more value to their own competition... especially if they know that they may end up buying that competition up Why drive up the price? I understand the dire straits involved in being a full-time Internet Entertainment Production Studio or whatever term fits... Starving Artist? I know these past 3 or 4 years have been difficult experimental times for both content creators and startups. With risk and failure comes valuable knowledge. And that's not to say that there have not been many forms of success. Amazing success stories. But it is still early and the landscape has become more unpredictable in the short-term. There is also bad short-sighted or overhyped data being thrown around which doesnt help. I think a crossroads has to be reached if you are in this business. Do you want to (can you?) continue creaitng your own market and controlling your own destiny or do you want to pitch to the big networks to sell your brand and assets and lose control? You know who will be driving the terms of those contracts. Even the best established Indie brands will have to succumb to less than desirable contracts with a high risk of the brand dissolving after a short run (which may or may not be what the big network wants to happen). It's a tough situation. Damned if you do, Damned if you dont. Some may feel exhausted and just want some decent financial exit for all their hard work so that they can move on with new creative projects. And that is fine. I'm just trying to put things in perspective even if its my own unique perspective. And a little devils advocate to keep the conversation going ;) sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Despite being a negative person and setting my expectations rather low, things havent met my expectations. I never believed the hype and silly advertising projections, even without the economic storm I dont think all would be well in the world of web 2.0 also known as 'where's the revenue?' Although I was very harsh on would be 'new media networks' and their associated moguls, I did think they might succeed more than they seem to. I have seen a lot of video's that I thought were great, but not that many series, and the overused magazine format with wacky graphics and very fast cuts has driven me away. But I am aware that I am not usually the target demographic, so who cares about my opinion on that. I am not surprised by big media's lack of interest, because we have not seen success in terms of huge regular audience numbers for indie shows. On that front there are very few web shows that would be of interest to tv networks so far. I did think that niche stuff would gain a lot more traction, but this doesnt seem to have progressed too much either. Video has been incorporated into a lot of sites that are the new version of the 'niche but still mass audience' magazine, eg gaming sites and the financial times. And in terms of publicity and promotion, old media still dominates overall and is now kicking butt on the web, with things like hulu, bbc iplayer, and how many of the top podcasts on itunes are from old media. Whilst some shows have harnessed social networking to great affect, traditional media and viral videos seem to dominate such platforms still, and its really unclear how much longevity specific social network sites have, so much fad. I do not know whether its due to a lack of talent, me being a freak, or simply being overloaded and amused to death, but there isnt a show I watch regularly on the net nor look forward to with any real passion. Not that many tv shows or movies fall into that category for me either. But anyway this means that for the most part, internet video for me means typing in words to youtube to find specific content, much of it originally made by traditonal media. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, @... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No doubt that there is truth in the expressed misconceptions of what Independent Net Media encompasses. I dont even know the best terminology these days and language always helps define ( whats a vlog? ;) User Generated Content is NOT EpicFu. So yeah that must be annoying to hear. But I wonder if it is a deliberate misinterpretation in order to make a weak point about where their focus is today. I mean, how can they not know that some UGC uploaded to YouTube (ie. webcam talking head or silly cat videos) with zero production is not in the same category as the episodic productions (aka webisodes) that have fans/audience/community/brand/merch/influence/value/market share etc? They know. They just don't want to add any more value to their own competition... especially if they know that they may end up buying that competition up Why drive up the price? I understand the dire straits involved in being a full-time Internet Entertainment Production Studio or whatever term fits... Starving Artist? I know these past 3 or 4 years have been difficult experimental times for both content creators and startups. With risk and failure comes valuable knowledge. And that's not to say that there have not been many forms of success. Amazing success stories. But it is still early and the landscape has become more unpredictable in the short-term. There is also bad short-sighted or overhyped data being thrown around which doesnt help. I think a crossroads has to be reached if you are in this business. Do you want to (can you?) continue creaitng your own market and controlling your own destiny or do you want to pitch to the big networks to sell your brand and assets and lose control? You know who will be driving the terms of those contracts. Even the best established Indie brands will have to succumb to less than desirable contracts with a high risk of the brand dissolving after a short run (which may or may not be what the big network wants to happen). It's a tough situation. Damned if you do, Damned if you dont. Some may feel exhausted and just want some decent financial exit for all their hard work so that they can move on with new creative projects. And that is fine. I'm just trying to put things in perspective even if its my own unique perspective. And a little devils advocate to keep the conversation going ;) sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I know. The money thing. It's a big problem, when you don't have it and I don't want to trivialize it, as I personally know how it feels when you don't have it and can't tell when it will be coming. In times like these you need to scale down and work within the limitations of the format. I had to do it several times in recent years, it is possible. For example, when I started the first audio podcast in Poland in 2005, I though I could imitate Adam Curry. It just wasn't possible. I gave up on free stuff and decided to develop a line of commercial training videos. Which is not as glamorous as signing a seven-figure deal with a major network, but it offers me a piece of mind and flexible working hours. It counts when you have a small child and a debilitating disease that strikes at you when you least expect it several times a year. I wouldn't count on networks funding the independent producers. Unfortunately, it looks like the money's drying out and the independents have little chance to get a piece of it. On the other hand, we've already seen some major deals so I'm bullish on on-line video. But to see more money pumped into on-line video production and distribution we have to wait for another bubble, just like the Web 2.0 guys now have to make friends with e-commerce and build some useful stuff, it is time for the indies to do the work that pays they bills while working on their portfolios on a side. I think the next bubble will make a lot of new media content producers rich and famous, we just have to be patient. I understand you very well when you write that you are angry when the major networks' bosses laugh at what you strongly believe in, but in times like these it's worth to remember what Ghandi used to say: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win They can no longer ignore us, so they laugh at us. Next, they will fight us, then we'll win. It's only a matter of time. When I started writing computer books, people used to tell me I was an idiot: how a Polish guy living in Lublin, Poland (check in on Google Maps) could possibly write a computer book in English, publish it in the USA, and make money? Guess what? That's what I did with StarOffice for Linux Bible published in 2000 by IDG. Not bad. When I wrote in 1998 a long article on the future of print on demand (POD), people told me again I was an idiot. In 2003 I started a small POD business, again all while living in Poland. I'm selling my work on all international Amazon.com sites, Barnes Noble, and many other on-line stores. This year I'm launching an on-line training business and people are telling me I'm an idiot again! :) Why am I telling you all of this? To show you that you should be doing your own thing, build your audience, and the guys with the money will find you. That is what I did. I started writing articles and speaking at local conferences. I was writing for the local computer press, local edition of Playboy, newspapers, etc. Then I started writing computer books for the US publishers, then, once I found out that the money was in publishing, not in writing books, I decided to write and self-publish my own books. All of that has led to very nice training contracts with Fortune 200 companies. Sure, I am not a world-famous writer and I don't have blond long-legged groupies trying to rip my pants off and sell it on eBay, but life is still not that bad. Just do your own stuff, retain all rights if possible, don't be shy about doing something for money, you may actually learn something. And, above all, listen to your audience. My audience told me to continue writing articles after I wrote my first one. Which I did. Then they told me to write and self-publish a book on the same subject. Which I did. Then, they asked me to do training, in-person and on-line. I am not going to say 'no.' Don't worry about the money. Worry about the free or nearly-free distribution channels disappearing. This is how the major networks may try to fight us, by closing those down, but they will not win. There are far too may bright coders with too much free time on their hands to let that happen. And don't get angry at networks' bosses stupidity. You don't want a wise competitor with boatloads of cash. You *want* your competition to be stupid. Jacek On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Wont investors see it as experimental and very high risk unlss there are more examples of people getting a return on their investment? Maybe I am missing some success stories, where are they? Doesnt help that the handful of early stars seem to have failed to capitalize on their position. What Ive found most annoying is the halfhearted way that those who have received some backing, have been treated. We've seen several shows get picked up by new media networks who then seem to have no clue what to do with them, and eventually bail out. Either they have little idea what they are doing, or the shows themselves dont have the potential that was thought, maybe both. The fixation on the advertising model hasnt helped. I would have paid a subscription to watch Rocketboom back in the day, though probably not now as my interest wained. I do pay a monthly subscription for a podcast, $9.99 whch gets me about 4 hours of audio a week that fills my walks to work. Theres actually probably more like 20 hours a week of material but I just pick what I want. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What Ive found most annoying is the halfhearted way that those who have received some backing, have been treated. We've seen several shows get picked up by new media networks who then seem to have no clue what to do with them, and eventually bail out. Either they have little idea what they are doing, or the shows themselves dont have the potential that was thought, maybe both. I think this situation is actually quite simple to explain. The shows that had a lot of followers on the Internet did not bring their audience with them over to the TV networks. At the same time, the TV networks' audience did not know anything about those new bright things. The next time a TV network does a deal with a show distributed on the Internet, they have to do three things at the same time: a) heavily invest in growing the internet-based audience, b) heavily invest in promotion of the new shows on their networks, do Jay Leno, Larry King, Howard Stern, David Letterman, the whole kaboodle c) publish the shows both on-line and on the TV networks at the same time, simultaneously. Or, in other words, make them stars, not cheap labour. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed.
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Maybe it's because I only watch or subsribe to a certain number of people, but I always get the feeling that for every Epic Fu or Ask a Ninja, there are a thousand shows like minewhich isn't a show at all, just a personal vlog...so for them to not be aware or to state that only we can do Hero'smaybe he is sorta rightagain maybe it's because I don't watch a lot of internet shows so I am missing out...but when I search YT, or Yahoo video, etcall I see are just a bunch of viral videos I don't know, I am sure there is talent out there but it still seems a bit fragmented at times. I don't know, I agree that it is frustratingI am just not smart enough to figure out how to change it. Heath --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's just infuriating. Just plain infuriating. Both these top executives have massive, multi-purpose staff and they''re STILL in a bubble. NBC is starting a digital studio instead of cutting a deal with the well-established Epic-Fu franchise. It just steams me up. 2008/11/13 Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nothing I ever hear about TV executives' approach to the internet ever gives me any hope. Apparently, none of them ever use the internet. And if they do, they're so busy being threatened that they adopt a confused and contemptuous attitude before they've even clicked on the first video. I read two great posts by Steve Bowbrick yesterday about trying to change this mindset at the BBC. He's blogger in residence for six months at the BBC. Which is a great idea - someone from outside to blog about life inside. First, his thoughts about how and why they need to move on from the broadcast mindset. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/11/ moving_on_from_the_broadcast_e.html But more importantly for you to read out there in hell, Jeffrey: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bowbrick/2958508580/ A whiteboard image of the obstacles to sharing with typical reactions in quotes just like those you just repeated from Silverman. The obstacles are grouped under Rights; Culture; Expectations; Competitive Instincts; Regulation. The quotes associated with the obstacles are: Rights: Impossible to untangle Expectations: It'll just be a bunch of pornographers Culture: We don't do that sort of thing Competitive Instincts: We compete in primetime - why should we cooperate here Regulation: They'll never let us do that Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 5:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor% 40gmail.comwrote: They're totally ignoring all the great content that's out there by independent producers. Direct quote from Silverman: we don't want cat pissing in toilet videos associated with our brand. and only we can do something like heroes. -Original Message- From: Jay Dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] jay.dedman%40gmail.com Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 07:52:58 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Cc: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type Can you be more specific about their approach or lack of understanding? Jay On Nov 13, 2008, at 7:01 AM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: I'm currently at the Monaco Media Forum, watching Michael Wolff interview Ben Silverman of NBC/Universal and the Director-General of the BBC. These guys don't get it. At all. It's all top down. They have know idea what's out there, and they really can't be arsed to look. I am so pissed off right now. Discuss. -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor% 40gmail.com http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I feel it's important for two reasons - wasted opportunities and wasted time: 1) it's just a terrible wasted opportunity for a company like the BBC to not Get It. they could do so much good. even for a big US network - they have the resources to create fantastic content, networks and opportunities if they Got It. 2) all the time they're banging on down the other path, they're driving the creation of closed interfaces and hardware - solutions which will impede the progress of independents in reaching a wider audience. eventually this will break down, but it might take many years - all wasted time. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 11:28 AM, @sull wrote: Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:28:02 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I agree with your two reasons, Ru. Essentially all the time wasted trying to close things off from indie creators is also the big guys getting in their own way. It so bugs me that the BBC can do a wonderful project like Capture Wales, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/audiovideo/sites/galleries/pages/capturewales.shtml) - where they went out an helped ordinary people to produce absolutely incredible (beautiful, fascinating, personal, wonderful) digital stories in one 8 hour work session, and then completely ignore the wider potential of that project. Not to mention they completely stuffed up how they present the project online - only Windows Media or Real Player formats, no feeds, no real podcast-able format offered. True, back in 2001, we didn't really have podcasting, but the project ran into Feb. 2008, with no effort I could discern by the BBC to take advantage of the emerging distribution models that would have been so perfect for this project, not to mention of enormous benefit to the public to have their own archive preserved in such an accessible way. I was lucky to meet one of the producers of Capture Wales at a Digital Storytelling conference in Sedona, AZ, where they provided me with a few QuickTime copies of some of the stories and permission to use them as in-class examples for my students, and also permission to reproduce the shoebox story process they came up with when the BBC cut their workshop time down from one week to one day. Ok, I've rambled off the original topic with my example. But damn. The Capture Wales UGC is so much better than the UGC these big guys react against and dismiss. They know this gold is out there and they don't care/produce drivel instead. That's why we need to be able to self-publish find our own way plus our own audience. I don't want to see that taken away. Cheryl --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I feel it's important for two reasons - wasted opportunities and wasted time: 1) it's just a terrible wasted opportunity for a company like the BBC to not Get It. they could do so much good. even for a big US network - they have the resources to create fantastic content, networks and opportunities if they Got It. 2) all the time they're banging on down the other path, they're driving the creation of closed interfaces and hardware - solutions which will impede the progress of independents in reaching a wider audience. eventually this will break down, but it might take many years - all wasted time. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 11:28 AM, @sull wrote: Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
well, there was nothing on after top chef last night (which i watched on dvr, so i didnt watch any of the commercials) so i watched 11 4-minute episodes http://captainblasto.com -- i am constantly running out of time to watch the cute, new shows online -- heath there are so many! not all of them are perfect or good, but i watch them to see whats up the MSM reminds me marie antoinette -- the whole, let them eat cake thing. it would be NICE if they got it, but if they dont get it, then we are going to keep doing our thing independent of them. there's room for all of us. On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Cheryl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with your two reasons, Ru. Essentially all the time wasted trying to close things off from indie creators is also the big guys getting in their own way. It so bugs me that the BBC can do a wonderful project like Capture Wales, ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/audiovideo/sites/galleries/pages/capturewales.shtml ) - where they went out an helped ordinary people to produce absolutely incredible (beautiful, fascinating, personal, wonderful) digital stories in one 8 hour work session, and then completely ignore the wider potential of that project. Not to mention they completely stuffed up how they present the project online - only Windows Media or Real Player formats, no feeds, no real podcast-able format offered. True, back in 2001, we didn't really have podcasting, but the project ran into Feb. 2008, with no effort I could discern by the BBC to take advantage of the emerging distribution models that would have been so perfect for this project, not to mention of enormous benefit to the public to have their own archive preserved in such an accessible way. I was lucky to meet one of the producers of Capture Wales at a Digital Storytelling conference in Sedona, AZ, where they provided me with a few QuickTime copies of some of the stories and permission to use them as in-class examples for my students, and also permission to reproduce the shoebox story process they came up with when the BBC cut their workshop time down from one week to one day. Ok, I've rambled off the original topic with my example. But damn. The Capture Wales UGC is so much better than the UGC these big guys react against and dismiss. They know this gold is out there and they don't care/produce drivel instead. That's why we need to be able to self-publish find our own way plus our own audience. I don't want to see that taken away. Cheryl --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I feel it's important for two reasons - wasted opportunities and wasted time: 1) it's just a terrible wasted opportunity for a company like the BBC to not Get It. they could do so much good. even for a big US network - they have the resources to create fantastic content, networks and opportunities if they Got It. 2) all the time they're banging on down the other path, they're driving the creation of closed interfaces and hardware - solutions which will impede the progress of independents in reaching a wider audience. eventually this will break down, but it might take many years - all wasted time. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 11:28 AM, @sull wrote: Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Thanks for posting, but it and the comments that followed were just annoying. Totally misses the point. One day soon someone will come up with a video interface that truly brings internet TV to the couch for more than just geeks, which shows more than just badly encoded 5 minute YouTube funnies and stolen archive clips. Then some money will come. And not the kind of money that they extort for TV. On top of that, the video content will be densely interwoven with a mass of other videos and media and text pages and social networks. All of which provide their own monetisation opportunities. Adverts will be related to the content in some way. It won't just be advertisers having a single one-way chance to interrupt your favourite shows for five minutes every quarter of an hour to fire shouty messages at you that are totally unrelated to what you're watching, hoping that some of their shit sticks next time you're out shopping. Thank god. I don't even really care about this that passionately - I don't intend to make my living from internet TV or a web 2.0 startup. But all this seems so obvious to me that I'm just amazed when other people rail against it as if online video is just some kind of passing fad. Whatever. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 10:01 PM, @sull wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
wow, just noticed this new post on rrw. synchronicity. http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/netflix_ceo_thinks_the_time_is.php On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:34 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm watching netflix on TV with http://www.roku.com And soon you can use your TiVo to access the netflix VOD catalog. Personally, i'd like to see netflix become more involved with distributing independent net video. I always admired Red Envelope, which was shut down recently ( http://www.indiewire.com/biz/2008/07/netflix_exits_a.html). But since they want to focus on digital media distribution technology, then tapping into the content found on the web seems obvious and the time is ripe. It could bolster their catalog in a positive way by simply having current content. So more than NBC, CBS, BBC etc... I want to see netflix dig in. besides, their name jives :) On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I agree, Rupert. I had written an additional 2 paragraphs about TV as it is and tonights experience trying to sit down with no interruptions, no puter... just sit down and watch some show i never heard of (Life on Mars - weird!). And it was intolerable with all the commercial breaks. I felt like i was getting way off-topic with a rant. and there ya go talking some on that point. Now i'm reading this rrw netflix article after i was mentioning netflix. even used the word ripe! maybe it was me who invented YouTube! ;) @sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for posting, but it and the comments that followed were just annoying. Totally misses the point. One day soon someone will come up with a video interface that truly brings internet TV to the couch for more than just geeks, which shows more than just badly encoded 5 minute YouTube funnies and stolen archive clips. Then some money will come. And not the kind of money that they extort for TV. On top of that, the video content will be densely interwoven with a mass of other videos and media and text pages and social networks. All of which provide their own monetisation opportunities. Adverts will be related to the content in some way. It won't just be advertisers having a single one-way chance to interrupt your favourite shows for five minutes every quarter of an hour to fire shouty messages at you that are totally unrelated to what you're watching, hoping that some of their shit sticks next time you're out shopping. Thank god. I don't even really care about this that passionately - I don't intend to make my living from internet TV or a web 2.0 startup. But all this seems so obvious to me that I'm just amazed when other people rail against it as if online video is just some kind of passing fad. Whatever. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 10:01 PM, @sull wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I'm watching netflix on TV with http://www.roku.com And soon you can use your TiVo to access the netflix VOD catalog. Personally, i'd like to see netflix become more involved with distributing independent net video. I always admired Red Envelope, which was shut down recently ( http://www.indiewire.com/biz/2008/07/netflix_exits_a.html). But since they want to focus on digital media distribution technology, then tapping into the content found on the web seems obvious and the time is ripe. It could bolster their catalog in a positive way by simply having current content. So more than NBC, CBS, BBC etc... I want to see netflix dig in. besides, their name jives :) On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I totally totally totally agree with this. As much as I totally totally totally disagree with the loser on Techcrunch. This is what I've been banging on about for the last year and a half to anybody who would listen. Couch/internet convergence and a pointer remote. Bring it on. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 10:49 PM, @sull wrote: wow, just noticed this new post on rrw. synchronicity. http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/netflix_ceo_thinks_the_time_is.php On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:34 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm watching netflix on TV with http://www.roku.com And soon you can use your TiVo to access the netflix VOD catalog. Personally, i'd like to see netflix become more involved with distributing independent net video. I always admired Red Envelope, which was shut down recently ( http://www.indiewire.com/biz/2008/07/netflix_exits_a.html). But since they want to focus on digital media distribution technology, then tapping into the content found on the web seems obvious and the time is ripe. It could bolster their catalog in a positive way by simply having current content. So more than NBC, CBS, BBC etc... I want to see netflix dig in. besides, their name jives :) On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
We are clearly geniuses. Somebody should be paying us massive amounts of money for our ideas. ;) On 13-Nov-08, at 10:57 PM, @sull wrote: I agree, Rupert. I had written an additional 2 paragraphs about TV as it is and tonights experience trying to sit down with no interruptions, no puter... just sit down and watch some show i never heard of (Life on Mars - weird!). And it was intolerable with all the commercial breaks. I felt like i was getting way off-topic with a rant. and there ya go talking some on that point. Now i'm reading this rrw netflix article after i was mentioning netflix. even used the word ripe! maybe it was me who invented YouTube! ;) @sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for posting, but it and the comments that followed were just annoying. Totally misses the point. One day soon someone will come up with a video interface that truly brings internet TV to the couch for more than just geeks, which shows more than just badly encoded 5 minute YouTube funnies and stolen archive clips. Then some money will come. And not the kind of money that they extort for TV. On top of that, the video content will be densely interwoven with a mass of other videos and media and text pages and social networks. All of which provide their own monetisation opportunities. Adverts will be related to the content in some way. It won't just be advertisers having a single one-way chance to interrupt your favourite shows for five minutes every quarter of an hour to fire shouty messages at you that are totally unrelated to what you're watching, hoping that some of their shit sticks next time you're out shopping. Thank god. I don't even really care about this that passionately - I don't intend to make my living from internet TV or a web 2.0 startup. But all this seems so obvious to me that I'm just amazed when other people rail against it as if online video is just some kind of passing fad. Whatever. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 13-Nov-08, at 10:01 PM, @sull wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
