Sorry about the late response, I was hoping to have responded earlier. I get
sidetracked too easily sometimes.
>"Actually, 18-34-year-old males are the most desired audience, and
>even thoughI still fall in that range, I agree the programming choices
>stink."
>
>This provides an opportunity for video bloggers to fill in the various
>gaps in programming. I see no shift in behavior on the broadcast TV
>side of the fence. With everyone in MSM chasing the same demographic
>group they cast aside millions of people. Segments of the population
>are aging. Other demographic groups demands will take center stage
>(Latino/Latina/Hispanic) Old line media will have a hard time getting
>anyone to pay attention to their petitions.
>
>You might want to beef up your 401K plan to be on the safe side. ;-]
LOL, very true. I believe there are great opportunities awaiting
independent producers, the seeds of which are being planted as we speak. Old
media is faltering, but while they have been complacent, it doesn't mean
they aren't smart. I am sure there are a few tricks up their sleeves.
You know, it wasn't that long ago that if you wanted to see an independent
or foreign movie you'd have to go to a tiny arthouse theatre somewhere. How
strange it is to find those little gems projected on the big screens of
theatres in the mall. All the major studios have divisions devoted to
creating or finding them and running them through the Hollywood ad machine.
What was independent becomes mainstream.
>=======================
>Video on Demand
>
>The future form of video blogging and related compatriots will have to
>establish distribution/syndication accessible to non-technical folks.
>This will happen. If I know who was gonna do it I'd start saving for
>the IPO right now.
>
>There will be more players than just American MSM. When the
>bandwidth/distribution situation is worked out, you will have content
>from around the world. I could choose to watch a performance from
>Ghana or Rome.
>
>The BBC is much more web savvy than any current American broadcaster.
>And they are planning to go further. They understand about
>connectivity, audience participation, and retention. They are still in
>learning mode but are years ahead of CBS.
>
>Sorry.
I agree with this. In fact CBS, ABC, and NBC have all just recently
announced the creation of Internet divisions to take that brand new internet
thing seriously.
Part of the difference between US networks and the BBC is that the BBC is
funded by taxes that come straight from UK citizens. The government keeps an
eye on them to constantly maintain a very high standard and prove they are
delivering a useful service. CBS and other US networks work differently.
While the FCC polices -- to arguably varying extents -- the content on-air,
the networks are beholden to advertisers who desire a certain demographic
make-up. And because of that they were on top and weren't paying attention
when the Internet snuck up on them.
>===========================
>Carpetbagging Part 3
>
>You cannot steal an audience that walked away or was discarded. They
>chucked women, smart people, politically alienated people, creative
>people and millions more in the unwanted pile.
Sure, but many more of them became loyal viewers and maybe 'lured away' is a
better term. Though I would debate whether they "chucked women, smart
people, politically alienated people, people and millions more." I guess it
depends if we are counting cable. And are we only counting TV. I don't think
they chuck those groups, just mostly the choices suck. Same for everyone. I
know plenty of non-18-34-year-old-white-Christian-males who happen to enjoy
television. A lot. There's no accounting for taste and that goes across the
board.
It's like the old joke: How is TV like a steak? It's a medium that is rare
to find well done.
>Television has not yet acknowledged the need to adapt. Not just to the
>distribution methods but viewer choice and participation. They ain't
>got a clue about that one.
True, but they are catching on. They are beginning to pay more attention to
their own industry it seems.
>This might be a harder shift for MSM to make. Blogs, podcast,
>videoblogs, gaming and those 24 hour nooky films web sites are
>alternatives. Don't hate people for wanting more than what was or is
>currently offered.
Agreed!
>You are not gonna change my mind about the "contest" thing. Okay. It
>is a step. I'm not saying what they have stepped into.
:)
>Video bloggers will have to adapt too. Like panty hose, one size does
>not fit all.
>
>There are people here who will run to MSM with content for money. I am
>not knocking this, it is a choice. Some will hook up with like-minded
>affiliates in a co-op income stream.
>
>Some are on a mission/vision and no amount of cash money will stop
>production. A few don't give a damn about mission it is more of "how
>can I exploit this to my benefit."
>
>It is import that "we decide" not advertisers, content pirates,
>marketing/pr firms or traditional media. I know some of the silent
>lurkers are from these places.
Exactly. But how do we do this? How do we organize into a cohesive force
that will be strong enough to make changes? Right now we are growing in
strength and numbers, but we are powerless against MSM.
>Doesn't really matter. It just takes opening up the bandwidth and
>bada-bing we are in the next wave.
If it happened now, maybe. If it happens in six months or a year... it is
too early to tell.
>====================================================
>I'm laughing as I write this: "who am I to say?"
>
>I haven't disclosed who I am. And reading some of the disclosure posts
>I not sure I want to. I have an embarrassing lack of riches to bring
>to the table (real world wise) I would really like to leave it at
>being a human being but some days I have my doubts.
>
>I am an information packrat. I love photography and video and recently
>reclaimed it as my birthright. I have a need to share information that
>I have tenuous control. I still have a curiosity about the world.
>
>I'm not in the media industry. My day job has nothing to do with any
>of my interests. I guess I'm not ready to do this because I can't find
>the words to describe who I am and what I do. Partly because it is
>being invented as we speak.
The beauty of what is going on right now is you don't have to be a "media
insider" of any type to communicate with a mass audience. Sure, to some
extent aesthetic and communicating/storytelling abilities are naturally
stronger in some. But if it is natural you don't need a formal education to
have them, right? All you need to do is learn how to improve. A lot of that
is done by trial and error. So keep vlogging.
Don't be embarrassed. You are bringing 'you' to the table. That's something
no one else here has. Trust me, I've seen my share of "professionals" I
wouldn't trust to write my grocery list or pick up a camera, let alone try
to use it. And I've certainly made more than my share of mistakes. You don't
need a permit. Anyway, at least you are vlogging. Look at me: pathetic.
>
>Later,
>
>Gena
>http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
>
>
-David
SPONSORED LINKS
| Individual | Fireant | Explains |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
