I'm assuming most of you know of the online phenomenon of lonelygirl15, of her success and inevitable demise. Lonelygirl15 was a professionally created video blog, following the hopes, dreams and daily meanderings of the irreverent, pretty, teenage, vulnerable Bree, delivered to us right from her bedroom using no more than a web-cam. Or so we thought. Featured on YouTube, her audience took her for real, but after finding out that she was really the creation of talent backed by CAA, her numbers started to drop. 'She' averaged between 300,000 - 600,000 viewings per episode at the shows height. The shows numbers still remain fairly high (100,000 viewings per episode) considering the fact that everyone now knows the truth behind this professionally produced show.
Enter Esmee Denters & Lisa Nova...
Esmee Denters, a pretty, talented, vulnerable, teenage girl from the Netherlands auditions as a singer in front of the world...and the world likes her very much indeed! Who needs American Idol? Esmee has already been featured on local radio, dutch television, and has been written about on YouTube's own blog. Check out her videos on her YouTube Channel along with her profile on MySpace.
Lisa Nova is, well, an anomaly. Lisa Nova is a self taught comedian who got her big break on YouTube with what is best described as her own, pretty raw, variety show. With over 6 million viewings, people clearly love her. Lisa writes and directs all of her own content. Lisa recently sold her show to the Daily Reel, an independent, online channel.
Considering Time Magazine chose 'You' as in 'all of us' as the man of the year, this is significant. The emergence of Esmee Denters & Lisa Nova is an evolution in a trend along with lonelygirl15, and the creation of the character Bree. An evolution of the power of the medium, and of anyone's ability to publish. This is not a trend people. It continues to re-iterate that the power is in the story, the talent, the every-man - and to hell with production values (for now at least). Rest assured more surprises are on the way in '07, and more stardom for Esmee Denters beyond Bree's wildest dreams.
Stay tuned.
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Proctor and Gamble's Men with Cramps!
P&G breaks new ground. For those of you that missed the article in the New York Times yesterday...go and read it and take a look at their Men With Cramps site (www.menwithcramps.com) before reading the rest of this.
The good news is that this is a really big deal for all of us in the advertising industry. Why?The fact that P&G, a fairly conservative company, would even elect to put something online as irreverent as this, and for something that is as close to a drug as P&G gets, this is great news. Georgia Pacific did something similar with the Brawny Academy for Brawny towels and have enjoyed millions of viewings at no media cost to them as a result. The same also goes for Snickers and its InstantDef site along with a few others. But this, people, is P&G!
The P&G site goes a step farther creatively even if it does gratuitously jump on the current Borat craze with its main character. What is so successful about it is that it seeks to entertain and have fun with the subject matter more than it does to try to sell. It brings value first, and hence builds better relationships as a result, something SmashTube has been preaching about for some time.
Basically, P&G tries to draw attention to the problem of monthly female cramps and thus their product ThermaCare. A touchy subject for sure, and a fantastic effort at consumer value via irreverent entertainment. Now that P&G is on board, hopefully other brands will step up and take some 'risks' rather than continuing to bore their consumers to death.
The only criticism I have is that it is almost too good and may ultimately not get the final brand message across. After speaking to a couple of dozen people about the site I was amazed at how many men and women missed the point and thought that this was actually for a real male syndrome that may resemble monthly female cramps. Make no mistake, this is for a female issue and it tries to draw attention to it by making a comparison and creating empathy via a fictitious male syndrome. Clear now?
If that is the case, creativity may have overshadowed the product itself and it's a fine balance. But overall, a valiant effort by a big player that most creative folk shied away from working with in the old agency days.
The good news is that this is a really big deal for all of us in the advertising industry. Why?The fact that P&G, a fairly conservative company, would even elect to put something online as irreverent as this, and for something that is as close to a drug as P&G gets, this is great news. Georgia Pacific did something similar with the Brawny Academy for Brawny towels and have enjoyed millions of viewings at no media cost to them as a result. The same also goes for Snickers and its InstantDef site along with a few others. But this, people, is P&G!
The P&G site goes a step farther creatively even if it does gratuitously jump on the current Borat craze with its main character. What is so successful about it is that it seeks to entertain and have fun with the subject matter more than it does to try to sell. It brings value first, and hence builds better relationships as a result, something SmashTube has been preaching about for some time.
Basically, P&G tries to draw attention to the problem of monthly female cramps and thus their product ThermaCare. A touchy subject for sure, and a fantastic effort at consumer value via irreverent entertainment. Now that P&G is on board, hopefully other brands will step up and take some 'risks' rather than continuing to bore their consumers to death.
The only criticism I have is that it is almost too good and may ultimately not get the final brand message across. After speaking to a couple of dozen people about the site I was amazed at how many men and women missed the point and thought that this was actually for a real male syndrome that may resemble monthly female cramps. Make no mistake, this is for a female issue and it tries to draw attention to it by making a comparison and creating empathy via a fictitious male syndrome. Clear now?
If that is the case, creativity may have overshadowed the product itself and it's a fine balance. But overall, a valiant effort by a big player that most creative folk shied away from working with in the old agency days.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Connecting through vulnerability...
...and why a 2 way dialogue is important for a relationship...and other interpersonal Brand Advice.
Brands are just now recognizing the fact that their consumers have a bigger voice than they do. One product miss-step or bad customer experience can turn into a PR nightmare, as consumers fight back via blogs or online video posts that often get more attention than the brands themselves. The ubiquitous two way dialogue.
But this can be turned around. The sooner brands start talking with us rather than at us, the better off they will be. No one likes being preached to by a friend. What we do connect to are those friends that open up to us, those that are vulnerable, that tell us their secrets, good and bad. Yes, bad. We do not appreciate perfection, we don't trust it.
Online video is the perfect forum for this. CNBC did a fabulous job with one of their producers taking a camera around introducing the audience of CNBC.com to the production staff. The basic idea showed how even big companies are staffed by individuals that work hard just like us and have to pay for their sons and daughter's college educations or daughter's pony. It was real, and connected way beyond what any traditional station identification could have done.
So why don't other do the same? Imagine if:
• Journalists admit to their mistakes rather than have us wait for the network cover up.
• Weathermen admitting to the fact that what they are doing is predictive, and that it would be impossible to always be right.
• Ford and GM admit their designs suck and realize they can no longer win the low price, 0%APR wars.
Now, this does not have to all be grounded in humor, I am just trying to make a point. If Brands want to have relationships with us, especially in todays ubiquitous two way dialogue, they need to connect as an individual does because it is now all about individual connections. One to one, doesn't just refer to the technology employed. It is more than delivering the right product to the right consumer, but in the right voice too.
The Brand can still go out with their Big Brand campaign. It's sort of like us going out for the evening in our best tux, but we still need to get real.
Brands are just now recognizing the fact that their consumers have a bigger voice than they do. One product miss-step or bad customer experience can turn into a PR nightmare, as consumers fight back via blogs or online video posts that often get more attention than the brands themselves. The ubiquitous two way dialogue.
But this can be turned around. The sooner brands start talking with us rather than at us, the better off they will be. No one likes being preached to by a friend. What we do connect to are those friends that open up to us, those that are vulnerable, that tell us their secrets, good and bad. Yes, bad. We do not appreciate perfection, we don't trust it.
Online video is the perfect forum for this. CNBC did a fabulous job with one of their producers taking a camera around introducing the audience of CNBC.com to the production staff. The basic idea showed how even big companies are staffed by individuals that work hard just like us and have to pay for their sons and daughter's college educations or daughter's pony. It was real, and connected way beyond what any traditional station identification could have done.
So why don't other do the same? Imagine if:
• Journalists admit to their mistakes rather than have us wait for the network cover up.
• Weathermen admitting to the fact that what they are doing is predictive, and that it would be impossible to always be right.
• Ford and GM admit their designs suck and realize they can no longer win the low price, 0%APR wars.
Now, this does not have to all be grounded in humor, I am just trying to make a point. If Brands want to have relationships with us, especially in todays ubiquitous two way dialogue, they need to connect as an individual does because it is now all about individual connections. One to one, doesn't just refer to the technology employed. It is more than delivering the right product to the right consumer, but in the right voice too.
The Brand can still go out with their Big Brand campaign. It's sort of like us going out for the evening in our best tux, but we still need to get real.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
The death of the networks...and what is a channel anyway?
To start off, the evolution of the internet & television convergence is happening even faster than I, or most of us in the industry ever imagined. Combine the ability for anyone to be able to publish & broadcast via the internet, with the power of traditional television and anyone can now start a channel. But what is that?
The answer lies within the history (or lack thereof) of the internet itself. (If you are not interested in this, skip the next two paragraphs!) The internet experience for most of us is not that old. Maybe 10-15 years at best. Even if you go back to it's invention as a network of computers in the late 60's. The first node went live at UCLA on October 29, 1969 on what would be called the ARPANET, one of the "eve" networks of today's Internet. Following on from this, the British Post Office, Western Union International and Tymnet collaborated to create the first international packet switched network, referred to as the International Packet Switched Service (IPSS), in 1978. This network grew from Europe and the US to cover Canada, Hong Kong and Australia by 1981. The network gained a public face in the 1990s. On August 6th, 1991 CERN, which straddles the border between France and Switzerland publicized the new World Wide Web project, two years after Tim Berners-Lee had begun creating HTML, HTTP and the first few Web pages at CERN.
Contrary to some common usage, the Internet and the World Wide Web are not synonymous: the Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks, linked by copper wires, fiber-optic cables, wireless connections, etc.; the Web is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs. The World Wide Web is accessible via the Internet, as are many other services including e-mail, file sharing, and access to countless amounts of data & services that are now common to us all.
So it all started as a way to get at information. From an evolutionary standpoint things are still young here. Web 2.0 is just now being mined and the benefits both financial & information-ally are allowing us to leave the crash of 1.0 behind us. 3.0 is already being discussed as a piece of Artificial Intelligence which may allow the connectivity of all of this connected information via the internet to be able to make decisions for us, prompted or not. Yes, your TV will know what it is you want to watch even before you do - and it will never be wrong - we are creatures of habit. Scary or not, it will happen.
So what does this have to do with the networks, the creation of channels and the old boob tube? Lots!
First off, the internet has evolved from a text based medium to one that delivers sound, images and now video. When it comes to watching video, 'TV', like the internet, will no longer be a linear experience. Video sites have taken off because we can now search and watch whatever we want (provided we can find what we want) whenever we want to watch it. From this point forward the concept of there never being anything to watch on TV will disappear. Search will also evolve to be something very different than it is now with new technologies that are able to tag video content automatically by scanning the content for the spoken word along with optical character recognition. Traditional broadcast platforms are scrambling to deliver a larger choice of PPV and VOD products in an attempt to compete or catch up. The bad news is, they never will and the survivors will have to figure this out soon and migrate their platforms over to web based initiatives in order to survive.
So, what is a channel? For this discussion lets define that as a destination with the predominance of video content. Basically any website has the ability to be able to serve video, and thus any web address has the ability to be a channel. I also believe that the phenomenon that started with YouTube and users posting professional, albeit stolen content is the tip of the iceberg and will actually become the norm. That's right, the networks that are trying so hard to stop this flow of stolen content are merely sticking their finger in the hole of the dam. If you take the evolution that I so painfully described above as any indication of what is about to happen, it is also painfully clear that channels or the networks as we know them may in fact disappear. As the web evolves, we will be served content that is relevant to us on channels that are branded by and for us. In other words we will NOT go to ABC to watch Lost, Lost will come to us or our home-page for us to watch. That does not say that Lost will not be branded as being brought to us from ABC as a distribution network or that there will be no commercials...but the rules we are used to will no longer apply.
We are already seeing this, as the networks start to legally license their content out to other destinations like iTunes or MSN for download or streaming. But as I said, this is the tip of the iceberg and the start of something big...the death of the Networks as destinations...as we currently know them...has begun.
For non-believers, a few relevant articles from this weeks news:
Coming Soon via Your TiVo: Internet Video on Television
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/technology/14tivo.html
With a Dish, Broadband Goes Rural
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/technology/14satellite.html
MSNBC.com Offers Video Podcasts of News Shows On Nov. 14, MSNBC.com will begin offering video podcasts of two of NBC's top new shows. The site will begin offering podcasts of both NBC Nightly News along with Meet the Press at podcasts.msnbc.com. Each weekday starting at 10 p.m., Web users can access the full-length version of that day's Nightly News broadcast at podcasts.msnbc.com. In addition, each week's broadcast of Meet the Press will be downloadable starting on Sunday nights at 10 p.m.
ESPN.com Announces Local Podcast Net To bring new content to ESPN.com and broaden the audience for local programming that airs on local ESPN radio stations, ESPN Monday announced the launch of a local podcasting network. For the first time, local ESPN radio shows that air on five ESPN owned-and-operated stations in markets such as Pittsburgh and New York will now be available for downloading at the ESPN.com PodCenter and via Apple’s iTunes Music Store.
InStyle.com Unveils Parties Channel Time Inc.'s In Style is boosting its celebrity coverage with its launch today of a Parties channel on its Web site, Instyle.com. The channel features daily updates of Hollywood parties and events with photos and video, which will be open to advertising sponsorships. Other features on the channel include photo galleries of partying celebrities, an events calendar, a party scene blog, and party and style news feeds from various sources.
Lycos Cinema Rolls Out Classic Shows Web portal Lycos, which is in the midst of an attempted reinvention as an online entertainment hub, has launched a new product that combines streaming video and chat. The new Lycos Cinema allows Web users to gather virtually to watch old TV and movies online and chat in real time using a proprietary technology.
VH1 to Launch Home Purchasing Club on VSPOT VH1 has announced plans to launch an original series for its broadband platform VSPOT while at the same time unveiling an initiative to distribute VSPOT content across the Web. On Nov. 27, the cable network's online video hub will begin streaming Home Purchasing Club, a short-form spoof of home shopping TV shows. The new eight-episode weekly series comes from a pair of writers/performers who have worked on several comedic TV series, such as Jimmy Kimmel Live and the Drew Carey Show.
The answer lies within the history (or lack thereof) of the internet itself. (If you are not interested in this, skip the next two paragraphs!) The internet experience for most of us is not that old. Maybe 10-15 years at best. Even if you go back to it's invention as a network of computers in the late 60's. The first node went live at UCLA on October 29, 1969 on what would be called the ARPANET, one of the "eve" networks of today's Internet. Following on from this, the British Post Office, Western Union International and Tymnet collaborated to create the first international packet switched network, referred to as the International Packet Switched Service (IPSS), in 1978. This network grew from Europe and the US to cover Canada, Hong Kong and Australia by 1981. The network gained a public face in the 1990s. On August 6th, 1991 CERN, which straddles the border between France and Switzerland publicized the new World Wide Web project, two years after Tim Berners-Lee had begun creating HTML, HTTP and the first few Web pages at CERN.
Contrary to some common usage, the Internet and the World Wide Web are not synonymous: the Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks, linked by copper wires, fiber-optic cables, wireless connections, etc.; the Web is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs. The World Wide Web is accessible via the Internet, as are many other services including e-mail, file sharing, and access to countless amounts of data & services that are now common to us all.
So it all started as a way to get at information. From an evolutionary standpoint things are still young here. Web 2.0 is just now being mined and the benefits both financial & information-ally are allowing us to leave the crash of 1.0 behind us. 3.0 is already being discussed as a piece of Artificial Intelligence which may allow the connectivity of all of this connected information via the internet to be able to make decisions for us, prompted or not. Yes, your TV will know what it is you want to watch even before you do - and it will never be wrong - we are creatures of habit. Scary or not, it will happen.
So what does this have to do with the networks, the creation of channels and the old boob tube? Lots!
First off, the internet has evolved from a text based medium to one that delivers sound, images and now video. When it comes to watching video, 'TV', like the internet, will no longer be a linear experience. Video sites have taken off because we can now search and watch whatever we want (provided we can find what we want) whenever we want to watch it. From this point forward the concept of there never being anything to watch on TV will disappear. Search will also evolve to be something very different than it is now with new technologies that are able to tag video content automatically by scanning the content for the spoken word along with optical character recognition. Traditional broadcast platforms are scrambling to deliver a larger choice of PPV and VOD products in an attempt to compete or catch up. The bad news is, they never will and the survivors will have to figure this out soon and migrate their platforms over to web based initiatives in order to survive.
So, what is a channel? For this discussion lets define that as a destination with the predominance of video content. Basically any website has the ability to be able to serve video, and thus any web address has the ability to be a channel. I also believe that the phenomenon that started with YouTube and users posting professional, albeit stolen content is the tip of the iceberg and will actually become the norm. That's right, the networks that are trying so hard to stop this flow of stolen content are merely sticking their finger in the hole of the dam. If you take the evolution that I so painfully described above as any indication of what is about to happen, it is also painfully clear that channels or the networks as we know them may in fact disappear. As the web evolves, we will be served content that is relevant to us on channels that are branded by and for us. In other words we will NOT go to ABC to watch Lost, Lost will come to us or our home-page for us to watch. That does not say that Lost will not be branded as being brought to us from ABC as a distribution network or that there will be no commercials...but the rules we are used to will no longer apply.
We are already seeing this, as the networks start to legally license their content out to other destinations like iTunes or MSN for download or streaming. But as I said, this is the tip of the iceberg and the start of something big...the death of the Networks as destinations...as we currently know them...has begun.
For non-believers, a few relevant articles from this weeks news:
Coming Soon via Your TiVo: Internet Video on Television
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/technology/14tivo.html
With a Dish, Broadband Goes Rural
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/technology/14satellite.html
MSNBC.com Offers Video Podcasts of News Shows On Nov. 14, MSNBC.com will begin offering video podcasts of two of NBC's top new shows. The site will begin offering podcasts of both NBC Nightly News along with Meet the Press at podcasts.msnbc.com. Each weekday starting at 10 p.m., Web users can access the full-length version of that day's Nightly News broadcast at podcasts.msnbc.com. In addition, each week's broadcast of Meet the Press will be downloadable starting on Sunday nights at 10 p.m.
ESPN.com Announces Local Podcast Net To bring new content to ESPN.com and broaden the audience for local programming that airs on local ESPN radio stations, ESPN Monday announced the launch of a local podcasting network. For the first time, local ESPN radio shows that air on five ESPN owned-and-operated stations in markets such as Pittsburgh and New York will now be available for downloading at the ESPN.com PodCenter and via Apple’s iTunes Music Store.
InStyle.com Unveils Parties Channel Time Inc.'s In Style is boosting its celebrity coverage with its launch today of a Parties channel on its Web site, Instyle.com. The channel features daily updates of Hollywood parties and events with photos and video, which will be open to advertising sponsorships. Other features on the channel include photo galleries of partying celebrities, an events calendar, a party scene blog, and party and style news feeds from various sources.
Lycos Cinema Rolls Out Classic Shows Web portal Lycos, which is in the midst of an attempted reinvention as an online entertainment hub, has launched a new product that combines streaming video and chat. The new Lycos Cinema allows Web users to gather virtually to watch old TV and movies online and chat in real time using a proprietary technology.
VH1 to Launch Home Purchasing Club on VSPOT VH1 has announced plans to launch an original series for its broadband platform VSPOT while at the same time unveiling an initiative to distribute VSPOT content across the Web. On Nov. 27, the cable network's online video hub will begin streaming Home Purchasing Club, a short-form spoof of home shopping TV shows. The new eight-episode weekly series comes from a pair of writers/performers who have worked on several comedic TV series, such as Jimmy Kimmel Live and the Drew Carey Show.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Is YouTube a $1.65 billion flash in the pan?
Dare I say it? A $1.65 billion snafu? Ouch!
Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan (I own Google stock!), and have been tracking YouTube since their inception. The funny thing is that they were not the only players back then, but they were the only ones with a singular focus....and so they amassed market share. Now there are many players in the space, all of them focusing on User Generated Content (UGC). I have listed the URL's of the most prominent players at the end of this blog. It's a looooong list.
So what is the draw of User Generated Content in the first place and why did it take off? Like most things there is not one answer, but I narrow it down to this:
1. Sociology: We are social beings, and we want to share. Websites that make that easy, reap the benefits.
2. Democratization: The internet has democratized many things and video is no exception. Now that the general public has easy access to the tools that make creation of video possible, they want to share them.
3. Non-Linear Experience (VOD): Unlike TV, this is a non-linear, on-demand, streaming experience that technology could finally deliver and we were ready for. Now traditional TV is playing catch up, with technology that will enable that same experience. In the near future we will most likely watch very little programming at the scheduled time of 'release'.
3. Short Format: With little time these days, the short, 'snack-like' experience of UGC fills a need. It is in its early stages and will probably breed a whole new art form before all is said and done.
4. No Advertising: Not that this will last long, but entertainment without advertising appeals to us. Perhaps advertisers will get a clue and deliver content of value as a result.
But is all of this enough to keep sites like YouTube & UGC in the public eye? Long term, I don't think it is. Today it is a novelty, because for the first time since the invention of big media, the common man can publish his thoughts and point of view for free - for everyone to see. The power of that is huge, but the fact remains that the content that is most watched, even on sites like YouTube, has to be...well...you know...good...and most if it is not. In fact, most the videos on YouTube that are the most watched, are professionally produced or disguised as such like lonelygirl15 . Now under Google's corporate monicker, YouTube is playing nice and making significant strides to remove content that is not owned by them. Read this article as Viacom trial lawyers ask YouTube to take down copies of the Colbert Report. The irony is that it is no secret that the Colbert Report's ratings grew in popularity because of circulation on YouTube. http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/10/open_letterstephen_colbert_don.html
But the big deal here is that the networks and other professional content producers are catching on. It won't be long before short format programming produced by professionals is able to be streamed and eclipses most UGC. I'm not saying that there are not some very talented filmmakers out there that will not rise to the top, but I am saying that the days where we are willing to wade through crappy video are numbered. Even AOL's has built a professional online video portal to compliment its UGC site: http://video.aol.com/
UGC will also not be able to compete with the amount of media dollars placed behind the promotion of professionally produced content. 1/3 of commercials on TV today are for shows on TV.
So what is a 'YouTube' to do? I don't have an answer, but in order to be able to sell ad space which, we assume they will start doing given the Google relationship and the need to get a return on that $1.65BB, they will need to keep the eyeballs on their site. In order to do that, they will need to make sure the stuff on the site is good, and right now all they are doing is having to remove most of the good stuff.
What will happen here is anyone's guess, but it ain't going to stay like it is!
Take a look at two articles from this week from two of the largest, independent players in media and how they are making big strides into this territory.
Barry Diller & Co.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/business/media/31jackson.html
Turner Broadcasting
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3iSvX2Mh9HIlLBrE13tEdDEg%3D%3D
What Comes After YouTube
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_44/b4007052.htm
'Short List' of competitive sites to YouTube (UGC)
SelfMadeTV.com
Current TV
The Yahoo! Current Network
AddictingClips
IFILM
FireANT | Not TV
C H A N N E L B L A S T :: the future of internet television
GUBA - Usenet Search - Easy access to Usenet Pictures and Videos
Revver
Google Video
Yahoo! Video - Featured Videos
Channel101 - The Unavoidable Future of Entertainment
Official Google Video Blog
Welcome to Vimeo!
Myspace-Film
Break.com - Funny Pics, Hot Chicks, & Cool Flicks
GoFish - Watch videos, upload your own and share with friends
Metacafe: Funny Movies & Videos
Zango – You’re Good to Go. Unlimited Free Games, Free Videos and Free Downloads.
Veoh - The First Internet Television Peercasting Network
AOL UnCut Video
blip.tv (beta)
ClipShack
Dailymotion - Share Your Videos
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
Ourmedia Homepage | Ourmedia
Streamload - Free Online Storage - Share Videos and Photos - Online MP3 Storage and Access
vSocial - The Video Clip Sharing Community
motionbox
PodShow
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
eyespot
Grouper Video - Watch. Share. Create.
Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan (I own Google stock!), and have been tracking YouTube since their inception. The funny thing is that they were not the only players back then, but they were the only ones with a singular focus....and so they amassed market share. Now there are many players in the space, all of them focusing on User Generated Content (UGC). I have listed the URL's of the most prominent players at the end of this blog. It's a looooong list.
So what is the draw of User Generated Content in the first place and why did it take off? Like most things there is not one answer, but I narrow it down to this:
1. Sociology: We are social beings, and we want to share. Websites that make that easy, reap the benefits.
2. Democratization: The internet has democratized many things and video is no exception. Now that the general public has easy access to the tools that make creation of video possible, they want to share them.
3. Non-Linear Experience (VOD): Unlike TV, this is a non-linear, on-demand, streaming experience that technology could finally deliver and we were ready for. Now traditional TV is playing catch up, with technology that will enable that same experience. In the near future we will most likely watch very little programming at the scheduled time of 'release'.
3. Short Format: With little time these days, the short, 'snack-like' experience of UGC fills a need. It is in its early stages and will probably breed a whole new art form before all is said and done.
4. No Advertising: Not that this will last long, but entertainment without advertising appeals to us. Perhaps advertisers will get a clue and deliver content of value as a result.
But is all of this enough to keep sites like YouTube & UGC in the public eye? Long term, I don't think it is. Today it is a novelty, because for the first time since the invention of big media, the common man can publish his thoughts and point of view for free - for everyone to see. The power of that is huge, but the fact remains that the content that is most watched, even on sites like YouTube, has to be...well...you know...good...and most if it is not. In fact, most the videos on YouTube that are the most watched, are professionally produced or disguised as such like lonelygirl15 . Now under Google's corporate monicker, YouTube is playing nice and making significant strides to remove content that is not owned by them. Read this article as Viacom trial lawyers ask YouTube to take down copies of the Colbert Report. The irony is that it is no secret that the Colbert Report's ratings grew in popularity because of circulation on YouTube. http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/10/open_letterstephen_colbert_don.html
But the big deal here is that the networks and other professional content producers are catching on. It won't be long before short format programming produced by professionals is able to be streamed and eclipses most UGC. I'm not saying that there are not some very talented filmmakers out there that will not rise to the top, but I am saying that the days where we are willing to wade through crappy video are numbered. Even AOL's has built a professional online video portal to compliment its UGC site: http://video.aol.com/
UGC will also not be able to compete with the amount of media dollars placed behind the promotion of professionally produced content. 1/3 of commercials on TV today are for shows on TV.
So what is a 'YouTube' to do? I don't have an answer, but in order to be able to sell ad space which, we assume they will start doing given the Google relationship and the need to get a return on that $1.65BB, they will need to keep the eyeballs on their site. In order to do that, they will need to make sure the stuff on the site is good, and right now all they are doing is having to remove most of the good stuff.
What will happen here is anyone's guess, but it ain't going to stay like it is!
Take a look at two articles from this week from two of the largest, independent players in media and how they are making big strides into this territory.
Barry Diller & Co.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/business/media/31jackson.html
Turner Broadcasting
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3iSvX2Mh9HIlLBrE13tEdDEg%3D%3D
What Comes After YouTube
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_44/b4007052.htm
'Short List' of competitive sites to YouTube (UGC)
SelfMadeTV.com
Current TV
The Yahoo! Current Network
AddictingClips
IFILM
FireANT | Not TV
C H A N N E L B L A S T :: the future of internet television
GUBA - Usenet Search - Easy access to Usenet Pictures and Videos
Revver
Google Video
Yahoo! Video - Featured Videos
Channel101 - The Unavoidable Future of Entertainment
Official Google Video Blog
Welcome to Vimeo!
Myspace-Film
Break.com - Funny Pics, Hot Chicks, & Cool Flicks
GoFish - Watch videos, upload your own and share with friends
Metacafe: Funny Movies & Videos
Zango – You’re Good to Go. Unlimited Free Games, Free Videos and Free Downloads.
Veoh - The First Internet Television Peercasting Network
AOL UnCut Video
blip.tv (beta)
ClipShack
Dailymotion - Share Your Videos
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
Ourmedia Homepage | Ourmedia
Streamload - Free Online Storage - Share Videos and Photos - Online MP3 Storage and Access
vSocial - The Video Clip Sharing Community
motionbox
PodShow
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
eyespot
Grouper Video - Watch. Share. Create.
Monday, October 23, 2006
Will online video fall to the same fate as online music?
How much does online video have in common with online music...?
Other than the fact that both mediums consist of a personal, digital media file that can be shared or purchased...not much.
It's no secret that the music industry missed the boat with online commerce as it focused its efforts on copywriter infringement and peer to peer file-sharing with the likes of Napster - so does the same fate await online video?
There are two major differentiators when it comes to discussing these two mediums and their respective business models:
1. Music is listened to over and over. We listen to music over and over while we are usually doing something else. Music is short in format and keeps us company in the background unlike video that you need to focus on. Not that we don't like to buy movies and keep them to watch over again if we love them, but the difference is fundamental. That is why we care about ownership of one more than the other.
2. Music has always been purchased, never rented or listened to for free along with a sponsor message like video. Yes, yes, I know some of you still 'download' music for free, but that is not the point. Anyway, try that with a video file that is over 1 gig.
These two fundamental differences will essentially dictate the commerce model for video moving forward.
In other words, we will prefer to watch video content for free along with a sponsor message like we have been used to. Especially if we only plan on seeing the show once - so why own it? With video, we will also gravitate to rentals as we do now with DVD and VOD once the online technology for this improves. We will still buy movies and TV shows, but not like we do music.
So, what does this mean for the industry? For one thing, Apple better get their act together (I own the stock :-) and figure out a rental model soon - before Netflix or one of the other players improves their interface along with download & compression technologies. As for the studios and the Networks, although it took them a little bit of time to catch onto things, they are well on board with streaming their popular shows for free online - complete with sponsor messages. They will most likely keep the advertising/sponsorship model to themselves and NOT share that with the Netflix and Apples of the world. The Networks will most likely also sell their content and compete with Apple as they already do now in some form.
The good news for video is that the model is healthy and booming, especially for young, aspiring filmmakers who really own the new medium. There will also be entirely new art forms invented for the medium which will give birth to new stars and expressions we have yet to realize.
The music industry may even learn a thing or two...
-----
The truth is that I was scooped on this one by Shelly Palmer, but I started writing this a few weeks back - I swear! Hopefully my perspective adds a thing or two.
I recently met Shelly Palmer, the Chairman of the Advanced Media Committee for the Emmy's who had this and more to share on his blog at: http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/
Other than the fact that both mediums consist of a personal, digital media file that can be shared or purchased...not much.
It's no secret that the music industry missed the boat with online commerce as it focused its efforts on copywriter infringement and peer to peer file-sharing with the likes of Napster - so does the same fate await online video?
There are two major differentiators when it comes to discussing these two mediums and their respective business models:
1. Music is listened to over and over. We listen to music over and over while we are usually doing something else. Music is short in format and keeps us company in the background unlike video that you need to focus on. Not that we don't like to buy movies and keep them to watch over again if we love them, but the difference is fundamental. That is why we care about ownership of one more than the other.
2. Music has always been purchased, never rented or listened to for free along with a sponsor message like video. Yes, yes, I know some of you still 'download' music for free, but that is not the point. Anyway, try that with a video file that is over 1 gig.
These two fundamental differences will essentially dictate the commerce model for video moving forward.
In other words, we will prefer to watch video content for free along with a sponsor message like we have been used to. Especially if we only plan on seeing the show once - so why own it? With video, we will also gravitate to rentals as we do now with DVD and VOD once the online technology for this improves. We will still buy movies and TV shows, but not like we do music.
So, what does this mean for the industry? For one thing, Apple better get their act together (I own the stock :-) and figure out a rental model soon - before Netflix or one of the other players improves their interface along with download & compression technologies. As for the studios and the Networks, although it took them a little bit of time to catch onto things, they are well on board with streaming their popular shows for free online - complete with sponsor messages. They will most likely keep the advertising/sponsorship model to themselves and NOT share that with the Netflix and Apples of the world. The Networks will most likely also sell their content and compete with Apple as they already do now in some form.
The good news for video is that the model is healthy and booming, especially for young, aspiring filmmakers who really own the new medium. There will also be entirely new art forms invented for the medium which will give birth to new stars and expressions we have yet to realize.
The music industry may even learn a thing or two...
-----
The truth is that I was scooped on this one by Shelly Palmer, but I started writing this a few weeks back - I swear! Hopefully my perspective adds a thing or two.
I recently met Shelly Palmer, the Chairman of the Advanced Media Committee for the Emmy's who had this and more to share on his blog at: http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/
Friday, October 06, 2006
Will consumers accept marketing on mobile devices...
...or will they be willing to pay for content, or want it at all?
Marketers are obviously hoping that we will be willing to accept some form of advertising on our phones. In the United States, the very thought of getting advertising on our handsets is appaling to us. But what if the content was not advertising per se, but sponsored content that we subscribed to? What if a portion of our long distance or roaming calls were free and paid for by a sponsor?
For the most part, mobile content is new to us in the Unites States. Only a very small percentage of the handsets can even play video streams, but that is changing fast. In Asia, watching video content is commonplace. Technology aside, large cultural differences make it difficult to compare the success Asia has seen with mobile content in the United States. For one thing, in Asia, people's cell phones are often the ONLY device they have to communicate with. Unlike Europe or the U.S., most users do not have a computer and rely solely on their phones for everything.
In these countries, subscribing to content is commonplace and a large revenue source for the providers who face continuing competitive pressure on the price of regular voice and data services.
So where is it going...? It is clear that while the U.S. may be behind, the world is watching to see if our proposed ad model will work. Logic sais it will as we accept sponsored programming in other forms of media. But not so fast, phones are different. For one thing, our time is very limited with this device and even if it allows us to get content for free, do we have enough idle time to watch that commercial or sponsored message too? My guess is not. Which leads me to believe the rest of the word has it right on this device and we are barking up the wrong tree.
It does not mean that sponsors cannot participate. Carrier services are a commodity. This is clear by constant price wars and ill-backed claims of better networks. Proprietary content may be the only thing to separate one carrier from another in the future.
ESPN actually had it right despite their mobile phone failure. If I am a sports nut, I might just gravitate to one carrier over another for the best sports content. The mistake ESPN made was trying to actually get into the phone business rather than having their content exclusively integrated with one carrier.
Brands need to find ways to form relationships with consumers in inventive ways on these devices. Providers need to work with brands and content creators to secure proprietary content for their networks or face being placed in the same commoditized marketplace they are in now. Both need to bring us content of value, or we won't be willing to pay for it.
Marketers are obviously hoping that we will be willing to accept some form of advertising on our phones. In the United States, the very thought of getting advertising on our handsets is appaling to us. But what if the content was not advertising per se, but sponsored content that we subscribed to? What if a portion of our long distance or roaming calls were free and paid for by a sponsor?
For the most part, mobile content is new to us in the Unites States. Only a very small percentage of the handsets can even play video streams, but that is changing fast. In Asia, watching video content is commonplace. Technology aside, large cultural differences make it difficult to compare the success Asia has seen with mobile content in the United States. For one thing, in Asia, people's cell phones are often the ONLY device they have to communicate with. Unlike Europe or the U.S., most users do not have a computer and rely solely on their phones for everything.
In these countries, subscribing to content is commonplace and a large revenue source for the providers who face continuing competitive pressure on the price of regular voice and data services.
So where is it going...? It is clear that while the U.S. may be behind, the world is watching to see if our proposed ad model will work. Logic sais it will as we accept sponsored programming in other forms of media. But not so fast, phones are different. For one thing, our time is very limited with this device and even if it allows us to get content for free, do we have enough idle time to watch that commercial or sponsored message too? My guess is not. Which leads me to believe the rest of the word has it right on this device and we are barking up the wrong tree.
It does not mean that sponsors cannot participate. Carrier services are a commodity. This is clear by constant price wars and ill-backed claims of better networks. Proprietary content may be the only thing to separate one carrier from another in the future.
ESPN actually had it right despite their mobile phone failure. If I am a sports nut, I might just gravitate to one carrier over another for the best sports content. The mistake ESPN made was trying to actually get into the phone business rather than having their content exclusively integrated with one carrier.
Brands need to find ways to form relationships with consumers in inventive ways on these devices. Providers need to work with brands and content creators to secure proprietary content for their networks or face being placed in the same commoditized marketplace they are in now. Both need to bring us content of value, or we won't be willing to pay for it.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Online video surpasses TV with 18-24 demographic...
I've just come from a two day session at OMMA (Online Media, Marketing & Advertising Conference) in New York. It was astounding at how much of the focus was on online video. There was great discussion on metrics & measurement, standards, viral marketing & behavioral targeting, but the focus was clearly video.
Driven by the success of User Generated sites like YouTube, Revver, Yahoo, Google Video, AOL UnCut Video, Jumpcut, Grouper, Eyespot, Wallop, Clipshack...the list is becoming endless. Most content is amateur content, some of it is pro-am. All of it is drawing millions of eyeballs.
As a result,more marketers are using video in place of simple banner ads and Google is making a big push toward the technology from both a video display and media buying standpoint. Adoption is growing and the shift of content viewer-ship has just tipped over to the internet with the 18-24 demographic watching more video content online than on TV. The 18-34 demographic is not far behind.
The statistics are showing that online video is more engaging, memorable & measurable, giving marketers a better bang for their buck. Those on the cutting edge are getting in early in order to seat themselves before the internet convergence completes itself within the next 3- 5 years.
The focus for brands is on bringing value to their customers. Videos that bring value and are viewed as authentic are the most requested, watched, and are ultimately the ones being passed around. Viewers are watching the videos all the way through and they have the highest recall...Repurposed television spots running within a banner are bombing in comparison.
Watch two guys from the midwest as they film their discovery of what happens to a bottle of Diet Coke when you drop in a few Mentos. Irreverent & funny. The combined videos have been viewed 6 million times & counting. The combined media value of this to both brands was in the millions and they got it all for free.
http://one.revver.com/browse/Most+Watched#_show_video_27335
As a brand, there is NO WAY that you can afford to not be a part of this right now. Those that are participating are reaping huge rewards by creating their own valuable content that consumers are asking for. But brands beware, this is now a two way dialogue, and you are no longer in control. So, be honest, laugh at yourself, act with humility and you may win renewed respect.
Driven by the success of User Generated sites like YouTube, Revver, Yahoo, Google Video, AOL UnCut Video, Jumpcut, Grouper, Eyespot, Wallop, Clipshack...the list is becoming endless. Most content is amateur content, some of it is pro-am. All of it is drawing millions of eyeballs.
As a result,more marketers are using video in place of simple banner ads and Google is making a big push toward the technology from both a video display and media buying standpoint. Adoption is growing and the shift of content viewer-ship has just tipped over to the internet with the 18-24 demographic watching more video content online than on TV. The 18-34 demographic is not far behind.
The statistics are showing that online video is more engaging, memorable & measurable, giving marketers a better bang for their buck. Those on the cutting edge are getting in early in order to seat themselves before the internet convergence completes itself within the next 3- 5 years.
The focus for brands is on bringing value to their customers. Videos that bring value and are viewed as authentic are the most requested, watched, and are ultimately the ones being passed around. Viewers are watching the videos all the way through and they have the highest recall...Repurposed television spots running within a banner are bombing in comparison.
Watch two guys from the midwest as they film their discovery of what happens to a bottle of Diet Coke when you drop in a few Mentos. Irreverent & funny. The combined videos have been viewed 6 million times & counting. The combined media value of this to both brands was in the millions and they got it all for free.
http://one.revver.com/browse/Most+Watched#_show_video_27335
As a brand, there is NO WAY that you can afford to not be a part of this right now. Those that are participating are reaping huge rewards by creating their own valuable content that consumers are asking for. But brands beware, this is now a two way dialogue, and you are no longer in control. So, be honest, laugh at yourself, act with humility and you may win renewed respect.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Is owning media the wrong model?
It's no surprise that retail entertainment outlets have been in trouble for a long time. I have not bought a CD myself in over 4 years. So, what do HMV, Virgin, Tower & Blockbuster have in common with iTunes? You still buy stuff.
Why own anything? It's not like we are buying a car that we could recoup our cost on in a few years. The hurdle we have to get over here is purely psychological. Think about it. If I said that you could play any song in the world whenever you wanted via a simple subscription, would you do it? Of course it depends on how much that subscription is. Rhapsody does that now for $9.99 a month with access to over 2 million songs. For music lovers, meaning those of us who buy some music once a month, this will save you money provided the song you want is hosted. It is just a matter of time before the major labels work through the growing pains, along with the digital rights technology enabling us to take our music with us on mobile devices like iPods & cell phones.
I was thinking about all this as I was starting to write about the move to make full movies available for purchase online via download. Aside from the headache of waiting for a file that size to download, the headache of playing some formats on any device will prove challenging for most of us. And then why would I want to buy one movie online for $19.99 anyway, when I can get an unlimited amount of movies from Netflix for the same amount every month? Netflix has it right for the most part, now if they can only figure out a way to not have to ship all those pesky DVD's. Imagine if Netflix had Video on Demand technology to stream movies right to your laptop or TV. Now we're talking! Subscription combined with VOD.
If you can stream something, you do away with the whole rights management issue unless you want to take something with you on a portable device that is not connected to the internet. But it will only be a matter of time before all portable devices are connected via WiFi or WiMax anyway. Imagine never having to store your media? To be able to play it wherever or whenever you want, with or without a Slingbox? How about never having to physically loan something out to a friend, to never get it back?
From the consumer standpoint, engagement should rise as the affordability comes down, while the hard costs of manufacturing, shipping and the realities of retail come down on the corporate side. Unfortunately this will kill the current digital rights management business, as all media will only reside on the servers of those that own it - not necessarily a bad thing.
So, what's my point? My point is, buying anything is the wrong model moving forward. It makes no sense financially for either the consumer or the manufacturer.
If only Netflix was into Music too......if only you could get it online......if only......
Check out these sites if you don't know of them already for some interesting twists on the current model:
http://www.rhapsody.com/
http://www.pandora.com/
http://www.urge.com
Why own anything? It's not like we are buying a car that we could recoup our cost on in a few years. The hurdle we have to get over here is purely psychological. Think about it. If I said that you could play any song in the world whenever you wanted via a simple subscription, would you do it? Of course it depends on how much that subscription is. Rhapsody does that now for $9.99 a month with access to over 2 million songs. For music lovers, meaning those of us who buy some music once a month, this will save you money provided the song you want is hosted. It is just a matter of time before the major labels work through the growing pains, along with the digital rights technology enabling us to take our music with us on mobile devices like iPods & cell phones.
I was thinking about all this as I was starting to write about the move to make full movies available for purchase online via download. Aside from the headache of waiting for a file that size to download, the headache of playing some formats on any device will prove challenging for most of us. And then why would I want to buy one movie online for $19.99 anyway, when I can get an unlimited amount of movies from Netflix for the same amount every month? Netflix has it right for the most part, now if they can only figure out a way to not have to ship all those pesky DVD's. Imagine if Netflix had Video on Demand technology to stream movies right to your laptop or TV. Now we're talking! Subscription combined with VOD.
If you can stream something, you do away with the whole rights management issue unless you want to take something with you on a portable device that is not connected to the internet. But it will only be a matter of time before all portable devices are connected via WiFi or WiMax anyway. Imagine never having to store your media? To be able to play it wherever or whenever you want, with or without a Slingbox? How about never having to physically loan something out to a friend, to never get it back?
From the consumer standpoint, engagement should rise as the affordability comes down, while the hard costs of manufacturing, shipping and the realities of retail come down on the corporate side. Unfortunately this will kill the current digital rights management business, as all media will only reside on the servers of those that own it - not necessarily a bad thing.
So, what's my point? My point is, buying anything is the wrong model moving forward. It makes no sense financially for either the consumer or the manufacturer.
If only Netflix was into Music too......if only you could get it online......if only......
Check out these sites if you don't know of them already for some interesting twists on the current model:
http://www.rhapsody.com/
http://www.pandora.com/
http://www.urge.com
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Branded Entertainment Update...
...and the BIG news is of course seeing a major brand take matters into their own hands as Anheuser-Busch moves into the content creation business. They are not simply contracting it out through one of their agencies or other strategic partners, but are actually launching a full service, in-house film & TV production company.
They will focus on producing humorous shorts and sitcom-type programs to be broadcast over the internet and to cellphones that could branch into full-length films.
While they have dabbled in content before -- particularly in sports TV, where its Bud Productions division recently produced National Football League preseason games for the St. Louis Rams -- this initiative is the brewer's most ambitious by far. They have the money, with funds being drawn from their $1.56 billion marketing budget.
-----
Paris Hilton launched the video single from her debut album on a special YouTube channel. In a twist, News Corp paid to advertise a new TV series next to the video of Hilton cavorting in the surf, producing revenue shared between her label, Warner Brothers, and YouTube. Within days, Hilton's song had been watched a million times and her album is climbing the charts.
-----
Walt Disney Company's new cellular offering, Disney Mobile, is designed to rein in your kids' cell phone use and abuse. But you might not know about the many other parent-friendly features it offers. After all, you can only communicate so much in 30 seconds.
-----
Southern Comfort has produced eight short films that tell the personal stories of musicians living in New Orleans, the city of its origin. The project will benefit theSouthern Comfort Music Fund.
-----
OfficeMax, trying to stand out in the pivotal back-to-school selling season, is shunning traditional TV advertising in favor of a branded-entertainment project called "Schooled" that plays a "Punk'd"-style prank on a class of eighth graders. They will be Partnering With Google & Disney for the Upcoming Back-to-School Special.
-----
Wall Mart have given the green light to a new quasi-social online network for teens designed to let them "express themselves." It's called "School My Way," but it's nothing like MySpace, which is clearly hopes to imitate. All content is screened, parents are alerted once their kids join, and users, called "hubsters," are forbidden from e-mailing each another. Wal-Mart wants teens to create MySpace-like profiles that let them post pages about themselves and their favorite Wal-Mart clothes, as well as personal videos.
-----
Food Brands Lure Kids With Games & Web Sites Kids find online games like Pop-Tart Slalom and Chips Ahoy Soccer Shootout fun. The traffic to game sites is huge. The Kaiser Family Foundation, a food-industry watchdog, singles out such games that make kids the subject of marketing efforts to sell food. Marketers hope that by playing their so-called "advergames," kids will remember their brands the next time they feel like having a snack.
-----
For NBC, YouTube & Nobody's Watching, it was a win-win all round.
To the established media industry, YouTube has proved itself as a place to test new ideas. In July, the pilot episode of new US sitcom Nobody's Watching was offered online. The show, which had failed to find a national US broadcaster, has now been resurrected by NBC.
-----
...and so, apologies for those of you expecting a story on Victoria's Secret, maybe next time...
They will focus on producing humorous shorts and sitcom-type programs to be broadcast over the internet and to cellphones that could branch into full-length films.
While they have dabbled in content before -- particularly in sports TV, where its Bud Productions division recently produced National Football League preseason games for the St. Louis Rams -- this initiative is the brewer's most ambitious by far. They have the money, with funds being drawn from their $1.56 billion marketing budget.
-----
Paris Hilton launched the video single from her debut album on a special YouTube channel. In a twist, News Corp paid to advertise a new TV series next to the video of Hilton cavorting in the surf, producing revenue shared between her label, Warner Brothers, and YouTube. Within days, Hilton's song had been watched a million times and her album is climbing the charts.
-----
Walt Disney Company's new cellular offering, Disney Mobile, is designed to rein in your kids' cell phone use and abuse. But you might not know about the many other parent-friendly features it offers. After all, you can only communicate so much in 30 seconds.
-----
Southern Comfort has produced eight short films that tell the personal stories of musicians living in New Orleans, the city of its origin. The project will benefit theSouthern Comfort Music Fund.
-----
OfficeMax, trying to stand out in the pivotal back-to-school selling season, is shunning traditional TV advertising in favor of a branded-entertainment project called "Schooled" that plays a "Punk'd"-style prank on a class of eighth graders. They will be Partnering With Google & Disney for the Upcoming Back-to-School Special.
-----
Wall Mart have given the green light to a new quasi-social online network for teens designed to let them "express themselves." It's called "School My Way," but it's nothing like MySpace, which is clearly hopes to imitate. All content is screened, parents are alerted once their kids join, and users, called "hubsters," are forbidden from e-mailing each another. Wal-Mart wants teens to create MySpace-like profiles that let them post pages about themselves and their favorite Wal-Mart clothes, as well as personal videos.
-----
Food Brands Lure Kids With Games & Web Sites Kids find online games like Pop-Tart Slalom and Chips Ahoy Soccer Shootout fun. The traffic to game sites is huge. The Kaiser Family Foundation, a food-industry watchdog, singles out such games that make kids the subject of marketing efforts to sell food. Marketers hope that by playing their so-called "advergames," kids will remember their brands the next time they feel like having a snack.
-----
For NBC, YouTube & Nobody's Watching, it was a win-win all round.
To the established media industry, YouTube has proved itself as a place to test new ideas. In July, the pilot episode of new US sitcom Nobody's Watching was offered online. The show, which had failed to find a national US broadcaster, has now been resurrected by NBC.
-----
...and so, apologies for those of you expecting a story on Victoria's Secret, maybe next time...
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
The New Syndicators...Googled again?
Google sent shock waves through the media industry last week with its announcement that it would begin to syndicate MTV content to hundreds of Web sites. Under the MTV partnership, Google will distribute MTV clips from Laguna Beach, Nickelodeon's SpongeBob SquarePants and other shows to hundreds of targeted Web sites in Google's AdSense network.
Now, to those of you not familiar with the developments in online syndication, that's a brand new approach to online video. The syndication strategy relies on a three-way revenue split between Google, the content owner and the Web site. It also expands the number of options Google offers TV networks and content providers because the online giant already offers ad-supported video clips and lets users buy videos for download.
It is a HUGE move for online video distribution as new players position themselves for the eventual internet/televsion convergence - possibly leaving the traditional players in broadcast out in the cold.
Top of that syndication list is:
Brightcove: http://www.brightcove.com/
Dovetail: http://www.dovetail.tv/
Mochilla: http://www.mochila.com/
Clip Syndicate: http://www.clipsyndicate.com/web/index.php
Syndication of online video also has HUGE ramifications for traditional broadcast and content developers. Take the three-way syndication deal for "Arrested Development". The critically-acclaimed but low-rated former Fox show sold syndicated rights to HDNet, G4 and MSN, marking one of the first syndication deals to include a high-definition network, a standard definition network and an online service.
This model speaks to both the tough sell the show faced and also to the opportunities content owners now enjoy with multiple distribution venues. With only 53 episodes and a small, though loyal, following, "Arrested Development" would have faced a steep hill in traditional broadcast station syndication. While the deal is unique to the show's particular quirks, it is also a precursor of what's to come with syndication not being as narrowly defined as it may have been in the past.
Other examples include "Entertainment Tonight" providing clips for Yahoo and cell phone providers and Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution deal to let local TV stations stream episodes of "Two and a Half Men" on their web sites.
Once again, this spells out as a great opportunity for all content developers & website (webchannel) owners to challenge the networks. (Publishing companies - wake up already!)
As for Google, my guess is that they will service the niche that caters to automation. When it comes to syndication of creative and the political barriers & competitive disadvantages that often go along with that - portals will want a more hands on approach when carving up the online territory they aim to own.
Now, to those of you not familiar with the developments in online syndication, that's a brand new approach to online video. The syndication strategy relies on a three-way revenue split between Google, the content owner and the Web site. It also expands the number of options Google offers TV networks and content providers because the online giant already offers ad-supported video clips and lets users buy videos for download.
It is a HUGE move for online video distribution as new players position themselves for the eventual internet/televsion convergence - possibly leaving the traditional players in broadcast out in the cold.
Top of that syndication list is:
Brightcove: http://www.brightcove.com/
Dovetail: http://www.dovetail.tv/
Mochilla: http://www.mochila.com/
Clip Syndicate: http://www.clipsyndicate.com/web/index.php
Syndication of online video also has HUGE ramifications for traditional broadcast and content developers. Take the three-way syndication deal for "Arrested Development". The critically-acclaimed but low-rated former Fox show sold syndicated rights to HDNet, G4 and MSN, marking one of the first syndication deals to include a high-definition network, a standard definition network and an online service.
This model speaks to both the tough sell the show faced and also to the opportunities content owners now enjoy with multiple distribution venues. With only 53 episodes and a small, though loyal, following, "Arrested Development" would have faced a steep hill in traditional broadcast station syndication. While the deal is unique to the show's particular quirks, it is also a precursor of what's to come with syndication not being as narrowly defined as it may have been in the past.
Other examples include "Entertainment Tonight" providing clips for Yahoo and cell phone providers and Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution deal to let local TV stations stream episodes of "Two and a Half Men" on their web sites.
Once again, this spells out as a great opportunity for all content developers & website (webchannel) owners to challenge the networks. (Publishing companies - wake up already!)
As for Google, my guess is that they will service the niche that caters to automation. When it comes to syndication of creative and the political barriers & competitive disadvantages that often go along with that - portals will want a more hands on approach when carving up the online territory they aim to own.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Niche by the Millions...
In 2005, 1.1 million people in the U.S. purchased mobile video content. That number is expected to grow to more than 30 million people by 2010, according to research firm In-Stat.
As impressive as that number is, it is a very low estimate. Consider how fast YouTube has grown in just the past year. They have surpassed 100 million videos served per day. For now, they are the runaway leader in online video, each lasting two to five minutes. YouTube commands 29 percent of that market and its videos account for 60 percent of all video watched online. MySpace lies second behind YouTube in the online video market, with a 19 percent share. In June, 2.5 billion videos were watched on YouTube. More than 65,000 videos are uploaded to the site daily, while about 20 million unique users visit the site each month, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.
So, how about we up that 2010 figure?
For those of you that have not read The Long Tail by Chris Anderson, I recommend you do. With this many people accessing and participating in the generation of video content, what he has to say will take on staggering perspective.
Niche channels like MAC Experience will become market forces with access to numbers like these (NO, that is not short for Macintosh, but is the premier, global martial arts inspired multi-channel broadband video destination).
http://www.macexperience.com/
Also check out the G-Living Network for some great programming on a contemporary green lifestyle.
http://gliving.tv/
Channels like these are taking off and will most likely splinter the networks at some point. There are many nice channels out there like them, but these are great attempts.
The big networks are also participating in a big way along with all of the Mobile carriers.
All this spells out real opportunities for anyone with a web-presence, especially those with a large subscriber base. (Leaving me with a lot less time to write this blog :-)
ABC adding shows to broadband service
http://news.com.com/ABC+adding+shows+to+broadband+service/2100-1026_3-6102245.html?tag=st_lh
MobiTV expands to Windows Mobile
http://news.com.com/MobiTV+expands+to+Windows+Mobile/2100-1025_3-6089568.html?tag=nl
As impressive as that number is, it is a very low estimate. Consider how fast YouTube has grown in just the past year. They have surpassed 100 million videos served per day. For now, they are the runaway leader in online video, each lasting two to five minutes. YouTube commands 29 percent of that market and its videos account for 60 percent of all video watched online. MySpace lies second behind YouTube in the online video market, with a 19 percent share. In June, 2.5 billion videos were watched on YouTube. More than 65,000 videos are uploaded to the site daily, while about 20 million unique users visit the site each month, according to Nielsen//NetRatings.
So, how about we up that 2010 figure?
For those of you that have not read The Long Tail by Chris Anderson, I recommend you do. With this many people accessing and participating in the generation of video content, what he has to say will take on staggering perspective.
Niche channels like MAC Experience will become market forces with access to numbers like these (NO, that is not short for Macintosh, but is the premier, global martial arts inspired multi-channel broadband video destination).
http://www.macexperience.com/
Also check out the G-Living Network for some great programming on a contemporary green lifestyle.
http://gliving.tv/
Channels like these are taking off and will most likely splinter the networks at some point. There are many nice channels out there like them, but these are great attempts.
The big networks are also participating in a big way along with all of the Mobile carriers.
All this spells out real opportunities for anyone with a web-presence, especially those with a large subscriber base. (Leaving me with a lot less time to write this blog :-)
ABC adding shows to broadband service
http://news.com.com/ABC+adding+shows+to+broadband+service/2100-1026_3-6102245.html?tag=st_lh
MobiTV expands to Windows Mobile
http://news.com.com/MobiTV+expands+to+Windows+Mobile/2100-1025_3-6089568.html?tag=nl
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Gaming - The Perfect Foil!
There has been plenty of debate over whether gaming can be a legitimate venue for brands to communicate.
Given our relationships with brands, I can think of no better place. Think about it? Brands are ingrained in our lives in ways we do not care to admit. It is why we buy the cars we buy, travel to the places we travel to, and desire who we desire...Why else would be be embarrassed to be seen wearing one thing, while proud of another?
The Walter Mitty in us emulates what we associate ourselves with. Anyone who spends any time playing video games knows that in the game we do exactly the same thing with one exception. We do it sans-disguise. In other words, video games help us come out of the closet. In these worlds, we openly pretend to be what we are not. We will overtly and admittedly associate ourselves with the brands that fit our alter egos.
Games are a perfect marriage of the two worlds (real & brand worlds). A place for the alter ego & subconscious we do not want to admit to, to be able to roam freely...
For brands that play with authenticity, they can become the drivers.
They are our avatars - the perfect foil!
Given our relationships with brands, I can think of no better place. Think about it? Brands are ingrained in our lives in ways we do not care to admit. It is why we buy the cars we buy, travel to the places we travel to, and desire who we desire...Why else would be be embarrassed to be seen wearing one thing, while proud of another?
The Walter Mitty in us emulates what we associate ourselves with. Anyone who spends any time playing video games knows that in the game we do exactly the same thing with one exception. We do it sans-disguise. In other words, video games help us come out of the closet. In these worlds, we openly pretend to be what we are not. We will overtly and admittedly associate ourselves with the brands that fit our alter egos.
Games are a perfect marriage of the two worlds (real & brand worlds). A place for the alter ego & subconscious we do not want to admit to, to be able to roam freely...
For brands that play with authenticity, they can become the drivers.
They are our avatars - the perfect foil!
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Longer is better...
Contrary to popular opinion, longer ads are more effective.
In preparation for the eventual convergence of television & online video (the only thing holding us back is bigger bandwidth), the media powers are battling it out online, trying to figure out 'the standard' & 'the model'.
When it comes to advertising in video form, pre-roll, mid-roll or signature 'spots' are being placed within online content giving the consumer no choice but to watch it as the video loads. Many brands have been repurposing their existing 30-second TV spots for these platforms, with the consensus being that 15, 10, or even 5 second ads will become the norm down the road, as advertisers work to capture the short attention spans common to these media - along with Bad Consumer Karma (BCK) in the process.
This thinking is flawed. As bandwidth increases, computers will become the new DVR's alongside your big screen. One will simply need to wait for the video to load, before being able to skip through all pre or mid-roll commercials much like we do with Tivo today. In other words, technology will always afford us the opportunity to skip what we do not want to see. So why keep producing stuff people do not want to see - especially when they are able to skip past it? What is emerging, is proof that people will seek out content produced by a brand if it offers value and fulfills something they are interested in - especially if it is longer. See my article on 'Brands...The New Executive Producers' and Nike's endless soccer chain.
In fact, a new report - 'Introduction to Brand Exposure Duration', finds that viewers of both video on-demand content delivered via cable boxes and video delivered on the Web actually gravitate to longer ad spots, and that advertisers have more to gain by producing longer form creative executions. The white-paper was presented at the Advertising Research Foundation's Audience Measurement Symposium in New York by The Atlas Institute, a division of aQuantive if you want to find out more info.
So, in many cases, while longer spots might drive down the raw number of users who are willing to sit through such ads, the total amount of viewing by those that do chose to watch actually increases with longer spots, since the most engaged viewers end up watching multiple times. Remember, this is on demand - the consumers has chosen to see it, which inherently leads to a better relationship and more purchasing power between a brand and its consumer.
Once again, creative quality is more important than ever, with authentic, valuable experiences boding well for brands that look to entertain first and brand second.
In preparation for the eventual convergence of television & online video (the only thing holding us back is bigger bandwidth), the media powers are battling it out online, trying to figure out 'the standard' & 'the model'.
When it comes to advertising in video form, pre-roll, mid-roll or signature 'spots' are being placed within online content giving the consumer no choice but to watch it as the video loads. Many brands have been repurposing their existing 30-second TV spots for these platforms, with the consensus being that 15, 10, or even 5 second ads will become the norm down the road, as advertisers work to capture the short attention spans common to these media - along with Bad Consumer Karma (BCK) in the process.
This thinking is flawed. As bandwidth increases, computers will become the new DVR's alongside your big screen. One will simply need to wait for the video to load, before being able to skip through all pre or mid-roll commercials much like we do with Tivo today. In other words, technology will always afford us the opportunity to skip what we do not want to see. So why keep producing stuff people do not want to see - especially when they are able to skip past it? What is emerging, is proof that people will seek out content produced by a brand if it offers value and fulfills something they are interested in - especially if it is longer. See my article on 'Brands...The New Executive Producers' and Nike's endless soccer chain.
In fact, a new report - 'Introduction to Brand Exposure Duration', finds that viewers of both video on-demand content delivered via cable boxes and video delivered on the Web actually gravitate to longer ad spots, and that advertisers have more to gain by producing longer form creative executions. The white-paper was presented at the Advertising Research Foundation's Audience Measurement Symposium in New York by The Atlas Institute, a division of aQuantive if you want to find out more info.
So, in many cases, while longer spots might drive down the raw number of users who are willing to sit through such ads, the total amount of viewing by those that do chose to watch actually increases with longer spots, since the most engaged viewers end up watching multiple times. Remember, this is on demand - the consumers has chosen to see it, which inherently leads to a better relationship and more purchasing power between a brand and its consumer.
Once again, creative quality is more important than ever, with authentic, valuable experiences boding well for brands that look to entertain first and brand second.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Publishers - The Next Networks - Part 2
WIth the FCC out of the way & the internet giving the ability to anyone to start a web-channel, in Part 1 (Publishing companies...the next networks?) I wrote about the advantages that traditional publishers have in doing so. By adding proprietary video content, with captive, worldwide audiences - they are poised to becoming the new niche networks. Competing with the networks we know today.
When talking to publishers about the evolution of print, I mention talk about technology that will help to push this all forward. Prototypes for flexible screens are making their way around technology circles. In the not too distant future, we will not print on paper, but carry a flexible screen that we can fold up in our briefcases or purses. These screens will accept a signal similar to WiFi or WiMax in order to be able to download the latest edition of any of the 'publications' we subscribe to. The look and feel will be very similar to paper, except for the fact that there will only be one page. No more problems with the Sunday Times blowing away in the breeze while we idle our time away on a park bench...and think of all those trees being saved!
The main point is, these screens will be a window into a new world. A world that is carving itself up right now via our computer screens. The big publishers that embrace the online channel concept now and stake a claim along with the networks online, will surely win (meaning you are no longer a printed publication surviving on just the written word - so wake up!). The laggers will be left behind as younger, more agile, start-up 'publications' produce intriguing content - for pennies on the dollar.
Most people have never seen or heard of this, and I often come across as an alien when describing the concept. One of the most layman friendly articles I have read on the subject is below. Read it, then stop looking at me as if I were E.T.
Nanocrystal Displays & Flexible Screens
Using quantum dots to make vibrant, flexible screens.
This is the stage of development for flexible screens. These will eventually build out as screens we can roll up like a newspaper to receive any magazine or newspaper wirelessly - saving our trees and forests. Books will all be on subscriptions and the world's libraries will all move online.
http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=16830
When talking to publishers about the evolution of print, I mention talk about technology that will help to push this all forward. Prototypes for flexible screens are making their way around technology circles. In the not too distant future, we will not print on paper, but carry a flexible screen that we can fold up in our briefcases or purses. These screens will accept a signal similar to WiFi or WiMax in order to be able to download the latest edition of any of the 'publications' we subscribe to. The look and feel will be very similar to paper, except for the fact that there will only be one page. No more problems with the Sunday Times blowing away in the breeze while we idle our time away on a park bench...and think of all those trees being saved!
The main point is, these screens will be a window into a new world. A world that is carving itself up right now via our computer screens. The big publishers that embrace the online channel concept now and stake a claim along with the networks online, will surely win (meaning you are no longer a printed publication surviving on just the written word - so wake up!). The laggers will be left behind as younger, more agile, start-up 'publications' produce intriguing content - for pennies on the dollar.
Most people have never seen or heard of this, and I often come across as an alien when describing the concept. One of the most layman friendly articles I have read on the subject is below. Read it, then stop looking at me as if I were E.T.
Nanocrystal Displays & Flexible Screens
Using quantum dots to make vibrant, flexible screens.
This is the stage of development for flexible screens. These will eventually build out as screens we can roll up like a newspaper to receive any magazine or newspaper wirelessly - saving our trees and forests. Books will all be on subscriptions and the world's libraries will all move online.
http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=16830
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Branded entertainment done badly....
First, watch Brawny's execution at online branded entertainment at ‘The Brawny Academy’:
http://www.brawnyacademy.com/episode1.html
Now, it is easy to criticize others....so right off the bat, I would like to tip my hat to a brand willing to take a risk along with it's agency. Efforts like this will get us there...eventually!
Not that I have said that...what were they thinking? Gratuitous branding within branded entertainment will kill any attempt at connecting on an authentic level with the consumer. You need to entertain & bring value first and let the branding almost come off as an afterthought.
Did the agency forget that the shows that are watched most on the tube are things like The Sopranos, Lost & The Apprentice? Did they forget that the consumer has evolved along with entertainment. Why does it look like we are watching a poorly written, badly staged, reality show from the 70's? "You can call me Brawny Man!" Please!
Who knows what happened here? Perhaps the agency did present something edgy and the client just watered it down - or made the agency put in another logo, or perhaps this proves that agencies are not yet ready to create a provocative narrative. (Advertising is really VERY different from the entertainment business!). Whatever the case, attempts like these, while they may bring us closer, may eventually kill the immediate opportunity as brands get burned in the immediate future - and retreat until another, hopefully well planned idea, gets executed.
Because change is scary and we all sit on the fence, we need to stay there until we are ready to stand up and take a risk. We must present and execute bold ideas that are authentic to an audience. Stand up to our clients, and clients need to trust the people they have hired.
Make no mistake, our future depends on it.
An example of a well executed online piece of branded entertainment comes from Nike.
"The Longest Soccer Chain" is so simple it is brilliant. Nike invites users to upload a video of themselves kicking a soccer ball around and passing it to 'someone' else. This is accomplished by cutting one piece against the next. What we end up with is a world-wide community of soccer fans, all playing around with the ball - connecting with one another. A forum for the game's collective creativity that takes advantage of social networking. I first wrote about this as part of ‘Brands...The New Executive Producers’. You can see the Nike site here:
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/siteshell/index.jsp#,us,0;jogatv,,0,0,0
http://www.brawnyacademy.com/episode1.html
Now, it is easy to criticize others....so right off the bat, I would like to tip my hat to a brand willing to take a risk along with it's agency. Efforts like this will get us there...eventually!
Not that I have said that...what were they thinking? Gratuitous branding within branded entertainment will kill any attempt at connecting on an authentic level with the consumer. You need to entertain & bring value first and let the branding almost come off as an afterthought.
Did the agency forget that the shows that are watched most on the tube are things like The Sopranos, Lost & The Apprentice? Did they forget that the consumer has evolved along with entertainment. Why does it look like we are watching a poorly written, badly staged, reality show from the 70's? "You can call me Brawny Man!" Please!
Who knows what happened here? Perhaps the agency did present something edgy and the client just watered it down - or made the agency put in another logo, or perhaps this proves that agencies are not yet ready to create a provocative narrative. (Advertising is really VERY different from the entertainment business!). Whatever the case, attempts like these, while they may bring us closer, may eventually kill the immediate opportunity as brands get burned in the immediate future - and retreat until another, hopefully well planned idea, gets executed.
Because change is scary and we all sit on the fence, we need to stay there until we are ready to stand up and take a risk. We must present and execute bold ideas that are authentic to an audience. Stand up to our clients, and clients need to trust the people they have hired.
Make no mistake, our future depends on it.
An example of a well executed online piece of branded entertainment comes from Nike.
"The Longest Soccer Chain" is so simple it is brilliant. Nike invites users to upload a video of themselves kicking a soccer ball around and passing it to 'someone' else. This is accomplished by cutting one piece against the next. What we end up with is a world-wide community of soccer fans, all playing around with the ball - connecting with one another. A forum for the game's collective creativity that takes advantage of social networking. I first wrote about this as part of ‘Brands...The New Executive Producers’. You can see the Nike site here:
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/siteshell/index.jsp#,us,0;jogatv,,0,0,0
The New Channel Guide...
Many of you have asked me about the different online video websites I have been tracking. Things are moving so fast, even with a certain amount of selectivity I add several new sites each week to my list. The networks never imagined consumers to be uploading content as much as downloading. Over 57% of teenagers are creating content for the net. We have entered an age of cultural richness and abundance of choice that we have never seen before. Consumer driven content aside, talent is definitely the new limited resource. I have divided the list below into 4 areas that I hope are helpful to everyone: 1.Online Video Search, 2.Branded Channels, 3.Network Channels with closed content & 4.Open Channels allowing anyone to upload content.
( I apologize beforehand to all of you who are unable to read embedded links within your browser, but this would have been too onerous a post without doing so...)
1. Online Video Search: The best search engines for online video content are not necessarily Google or Yahoo. These sites may turn out to be the best online TV-Guides of the future.
TVEyes-Search
Podscope-Search
PODZINGER-Pod & Videocast search engine
blinkx video search
Video Detectiver: Find Movies and DVDs Fast
2. Branded Channels: Brands that have started their own channels are popping up all over the place. Not many of them are executed well. If brands want to become a destination they need to come from a place of authenticity and offer value & entertainment 1st and sell 2nd.
Welcome to Scripps.com: Scripps Web sites
Living.com-GMC
Progresso Soup: Home Sweet Cube
Dentyne.com : Home Page
IBM ForwardView Showmail
ABSOLUT.COM - ABSOLUT TRACKS introduces Lenny Kravitz
CBS & Coke.com
GE Picture a Healthy World
StageSide(tm) - Coke
HGTV Bath Design: Bath Design Ideas, How-To, Shop, Instructional Videos
P&G: Home Made Simple on TLC
..:: Dove Calming Night ::..
National Lampoon -- TOGA!
nike :: NIKEFOOTBALL
Jeep: Meet the Mudds
Nordstrom Silverscreen Home
MountainDew.com -
mycokerewards - home
MyCoke
3. Network Channels (Closed Content): Online channels started by an existing 'old world' network like ABC, NBC & CBS or new world channels like HEAVY. Network channels are generally closed to consumer generated content and tend offer their own programming despite the fact that they may encourage or host contests for users to send in their own content.
The networks are also releasing traditional programming online, such as Warner Bros. Two and Half Men. They'll be selling both the small screen off-net rights and the internet rights. In addition to the standard TV rights, stations who pick up the show will be able to stream episodes on their websites 5x week, after their initial airing of the episode on television. Stations will also have local inventory in the webisodes
Disney-ABC Television Group's Touchstone Television will produce Lost Video Diaries, original mini-episodes inspired by the ABC series Lost. The Lost Video Diaries are created for an initial release on mobile devices, and they will chronicle stories from the island inspired by ones from the broadcast series.
CBS.com - Innertube
IFILM - Video, Movies, Trailers, Music and Viral Videos
AtomFilms: Watch the best short films & animations -- free!
The Strand::Venice CA
Oxygen.com: Homepage
Oh! Baby: Homepage
(( Shipwreck Central ))
The ManiaTV! Network
JumpBoxTV-Gobi's friend
24 Mobile
[adult swim]
Heavy.com: Humor. Videos. Music. Games. Featuring Pimp My Weapon
tank.tv / now showing
Happy Tree Friends
Binary Revolution - The Revolution will be Digitized!
THE FIX TV
Rocketboom
mtvU.com
MTV Overdrive
AOL Television: In2TV
AOL Television: In2TV MAIN (BETA)
Roo TV - On-Demand Video Portal
Try URGE | Free Music Downloads For 14 Days
New Jersey Wildcats
Beeline TV - Watch Online Television - Free Internet TV Channels
xobile - Adult movies on mobile!
Making Fiends-Flash Animation
Ripe TV
CBS: TheShowBuzz.com - Breaking Entertainment News Headlines and Video
IGN TV: Episode Guides, Video Clips, Pictures and Previews for Television Shows
4. : Consumer generated content channels. With YouTube being the most famous and Yahoo & Google jumping on the bandwagon, there are dozens of sites offering to host and catalogue consumer driven content.
SelfMadeTV.com
Current TV - Al Gore Owns
AddictingClips – Related to Atom Films
IFILM - User Video
FireANT | Not TV
C H A N N E L B L A S T :: the future of internet television
NewzViewz
GUBA - Usenet Search - Easy access to Usenet Pictures and Videos
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
Revver
Yahoo! Podcasts - Beta
Google Video
Channel101 - The Unavoidable Future of Entertainment
Official Google Video Blog
Welcome to Vimeo!
Myspace-Film
Break.com - Funny Pics, Hot Chicks, & Cool Flicks
GoFish - Watch videos, upload your own and share with friends
AddictingClips – Play and share habit-forming video, animation, and Flash games
Webcams around the world
OfficePirates.com
movie clips • viral clips • funny virals • funny clips • email attachments
Metacafe: Funny Movies & Videos
Zango – You’re Good to Go. Unlimited Free Games, Free Videos and Free Downloads.
Veoh - The First Internet Television Peercasting Network
Wallop
AOL UnCut Video
blip.tv (beta)
Buzznet: Blogs, Friends, Music, Video Sharing, Photo Sharing
Castpost: Web Video Solutions
ClipShack
Dailymotion - Share Your Videos
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
Ourmedia Homepage | Ourmedia
Streamload - Free Online Storage - Share Videos and Photos - Online MP3 Storage and Access
vpodtv
vSocial - The Video Clip Sharing Community
motionbox
PodShow
And if that is not enough info for you, related articles from the past 30 days that are worth a read:
TiVo Announces Revolutionary New Service, TiVoCast; Bringing Broadband Video Content to the TV
http://www.streamingmedia.com/press/view.asp?id=4874
Scripps Hammers Home Web Power
http://www.adageglobal.com/digital/article.php?article_id=109618
Video Consumption Up 20%
http://www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3608446
MySpace Aims To Extend Into TV
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=42343&Nid=19860&p=350414
Microsoft Teams Up With Hollywood to Offer Original Web Shows
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/arts/03micr.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
Are Five-Second Ads the Future of Web Marketing?
Metacafe and Other Video Sites Develop a Fresh Idea to Bolster Online Advertising
http://adage.com/article.php?article_id=108765
( I apologize beforehand to all of you who are unable to read embedded links within your browser, but this would have been too onerous a post without doing so...)
1. Online Video Search: The best search engines for online video content are not necessarily Google or Yahoo. These sites may turn out to be the best online TV-Guides of the future.
TVEyes-Search
Podscope-Search
PODZINGER-Pod & Videocast search engine
blinkx video search
Video Detectiver: Find Movies and DVDs Fast
2. Branded Channels: Brands that have started their own channels are popping up all over the place. Not many of them are executed well. If brands want to become a destination they need to come from a place of authenticity and offer value & entertainment 1st and sell 2nd.
Welcome to Scripps.com: Scripps Web sites
Living.com-GMC
Progresso Soup: Home Sweet Cube
Dentyne.com : Home Page
IBM ForwardView Showmail
ABSOLUT.COM - ABSOLUT TRACKS introduces Lenny Kravitz
CBS & Coke.com
GE Picture a Healthy World
StageSide(tm) - Coke
HGTV Bath Design: Bath Design Ideas, How-To, Shop, Instructional Videos
P&G: Home Made Simple on TLC
..:: Dove Calming Night ::..
National Lampoon -- TOGA!
nike :: NIKEFOOTBALL
Jeep: Meet the Mudds
Nordstrom Silverscreen Home
MountainDew.com -
mycokerewards - home
MyCoke
3. Network Channels (Closed Content): Online channels started by an existing 'old world' network like ABC, NBC & CBS or new world channels like HEAVY. Network channels are generally closed to consumer generated content and tend offer their own programming despite the fact that they may encourage or host contests for users to send in their own content.
The networks are also releasing traditional programming online, such as Warner Bros. Two and Half Men. They'll be selling both the small screen off-net rights and the internet rights. In addition to the standard TV rights, stations who pick up the show will be able to stream episodes on their websites 5x week, after their initial airing of the episode on television. Stations will also have local inventory in the webisodes
Disney-ABC Television Group's Touchstone Television will produce Lost Video Diaries, original mini-episodes inspired by the ABC series Lost. The Lost Video Diaries are created for an initial release on mobile devices, and they will chronicle stories from the island inspired by ones from the broadcast series.
CBS.com - Innertube
IFILM - Video, Movies, Trailers, Music and Viral Videos
AtomFilms: Watch the best short films & animations -- free!
The Strand::Venice CA
Oxygen.com: Homepage
Oh! Baby: Homepage
(( Shipwreck Central ))
The ManiaTV! Network
JumpBoxTV-Gobi's friend
24 Mobile
[adult swim]
Heavy.com: Humor. Videos. Music. Games. Featuring Pimp My Weapon
tank.tv / now showing
Happy Tree Friends
Binary Revolution - The Revolution will be Digitized!
THE FIX TV
Rocketboom
mtvU.com
MTV Overdrive
AOL Television: In2TV
AOL Television: In2TV MAIN (BETA)
Roo TV - On-Demand Video Portal
Try URGE | Free Music Downloads For 14 Days
New Jersey Wildcats
Beeline TV - Watch Online Television - Free Internet TV Channels
xobile - Adult movies on mobile!
Making Fiends-Flash Animation
Ripe TV
CBS: TheShowBuzz.com - Breaking Entertainment News Headlines and Video
IGN TV: Episode Guides, Video Clips, Pictures and Previews for Television Shows
4. : Consumer generated content channels. With YouTube being the most famous and Yahoo & Google jumping on the bandwagon, there are dozens of sites offering to host and catalogue consumer driven content.
SelfMadeTV.com
Current TV - Al Gore Owns
AddictingClips – Related to Atom Films
IFILM - User Video
FireANT | Not TV
C H A N N E L B L A S T :: the future of internet television
NewzViewz
GUBA - Usenet Search - Easy access to Usenet Pictures and Videos
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
Revver
Yahoo! Podcasts - Beta
Google Video
Channel101 - The Unavoidable Future of Entertainment
Official Google Video Blog
Welcome to Vimeo!
Myspace-Film
Break.com - Funny Pics, Hot Chicks, & Cool Flicks
GoFish - Watch videos, upload your own and share with friends
AddictingClips – Play and share habit-forming video, animation, and Flash games
Webcams around the world
OfficePirates.com
movie clips • viral clips • funny virals • funny clips • email attachments
Metacafe: Funny Movies & Videos
Zango – You’re Good to Go. Unlimited Free Games, Free Videos and Free Downloads.
Veoh - The First Internet Television Peercasting Network
Wallop
AOL UnCut Video
blip.tv (beta)
Buzznet: Blogs, Friends, Music, Video Sharing, Photo Sharing
Castpost: Web Video Solutions
ClipShack
Dailymotion - Share Your Videos
Jumpcut [Make Amazing Movies Online]
Ourmedia Homepage | Ourmedia
Streamload - Free Online Storage - Share Videos and Photos - Online MP3 Storage and Access
vpodtv
vSocial - The Video Clip Sharing Community
motionbox
PodShow
And if that is not enough info for you, related articles from the past 30 days that are worth a read:
TiVo Announces Revolutionary New Service, TiVoCast; Bringing Broadband Video Content to the TV
http://www.streamingmedia.com/press/view.asp?id=4874
Scripps Hammers Home Web Power
http://www.adageglobal.com/digital/article.php?article_id=109618
Video Consumption Up 20%
http://www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3608446
MySpace Aims To Extend Into TV
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=42343&Nid=19860&p=350414
Microsoft Teams Up With Hollywood to Offer Original Web Shows
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/arts/03micr.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
Are Five-Second Ads the Future of Web Marketing?
Metacafe and Other Video Sites Develop a Fresh Idea to Bolster Online Advertising
http://adage.com/article.php?article_id=108765
Saturday, June 10, 2006
...Get Your World Cup Soccer Here!
Watch world cup soccer at your desk for FREE thanks to broadband online video access...
So, for some weekend & midweek fun, ESPN will be streaming 52 of the 64 World Cup soccer games live on ESPN360, the Disney unit's broadband video channel. However, ESPN360 is only available to a small handful of broadband providers--the majority of which could be classified as "local." Verizon is the largest national provider that makes the list, but no Cox, no Comcast, and--sorry, New York area folks--no Time Warner cable. Luckily, Wired Magazine is telling die-hard fans how to see the games on the Web. We have Chinese hackers to thank for "almost exclusively" pirating WC streams and rerouting them through servers in Israel - go figure! One shouldn't expect the commentary to be in English, however. To see BBC broadcasts--which purists who prefer English commentators will enjoy--GHacks.net offers a way to use public proxies to fool the BBC into thinking you're in the U.K. Wired mentions that it's unclear whether any of this is illegal in the U.S., but FIFA--the soccer's world governing body that's responsible for the massive show--would certainly "frown upon" it.
Either way, to learn how to enjoy the games FREE while you are at work in the coming weeks, follow Wired's simple instuctions here...
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/internet/0,71112-0.html?tw=rss.index
So, for some weekend & midweek fun, ESPN will be streaming 52 of the 64 World Cup soccer games live on ESPN360, the Disney unit's broadband video channel. However, ESPN360 is only available to a small handful of broadband providers--the majority of which could be classified as "local." Verizon is the largest national provider that makes the list, but no Cox, no Comcast, and--sorry, New York area folks--no Time Warner cable. Luckily, Wired Magazine is telling die-hard fans how to see the games on the Web. We have Chinese hackers to thank for "almost exclusively" pirating WC streams and rerouting them through servers in Israel - go figure! One shouldn't expect the commentary to be in English, however. To see BBC broadcasts--which purists who prefer English commentators will enjoy--GHacks.net offers a way to use public proxies to fool the BBC into thinking you're in the U.K. Wired mentions that it's unclear whether any of this is illegal in the U.S., but FIFA--the soccer's world governing body that's responsible for the massive show--would certainly "frown upon" it.
Either way, to learn how to enjoy the games FREE while you are at work in the coming weeks, follow Wired's simple instuctions here...
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/internet/0,71112-0.html?tw=rss.index
Monday, June 05, 2006
The agency model is dead...will we be able to reinvent ourselves?
Most of us cannot remember the 3 martini lunch, or the indicators of the industry heyday that surrounded it. While every industry goes through economic cycles, some never survive that era's industrial or technological evolution. Today's technological evolution is focused around communication & information and will effect the advertising & communications industry more than any other. This technological evolution - best associated with broadband access and the evolution of online search, places us in the middle of a revolution not seen since the industrial age. Think of what happened to the railway lines at the advent of the automobile and the building of roads.
While the income within our industry has evolved to include multiple revenue sources, it is grounded in the concept of the media buy. As a testament to that, accounts up for review are still listed based on the size of their annual media budgets. From an agency perspective this has to change.
Unless agencies are prepared to invest heavily in technology solutions to rival the likes of Google & Yahoo they will eventually be cut out of most media buying. It will not be long before fully automated solutions touch traditional media buys such as publications and television. These traditional media buys will then become as much of a commodity as the online media marketplace has become today.
Our position will be farther weakened as management consultants like McKinsey & Co, Accenture etc. start to chip away at an organizational level within our clients marketing departments...and marketing budgets. For example, Accenture has recently been engaged by Wal-Mart to better align their ad spend and help select an 'agency' or grouping of 'agencies' to service their needs.
The form of advertising will also change completely, with brands having to integrate their message more seamlessly into online and offline offerings. In other words, the messages will not take the form of advertising as much as content. Remember, this is driven by technology and the consumer is now in control. 'Advertising' will undergo a creative convergence within content. Authentically so. Few large agencies do this well.
Smaller shops with lab-like environments will harbor artisans that come together to create bespoke solutions within this new media content mix. Bespoke - not just in content, but in form. These creative shops will live and breathe within the new media solutions such as: wikis, blogs, RSS & mash-ups, as well as be responsible for inventing new ones. How many of you are familiar with Renkoo, Gahbunga, Ning, and Squidoo? If not, get cracking!
Brands will allow their agencies to produce content that offers value to consumers first and advertise second. To win back respect and take control of the market from clients, agencies must share in the risk. In order to bring about true partnership, agencies should be willing to take compensation risks for quantifiable solutions. Not being willing to stand behind your own work is not a good sign. Without this alignment, opportunity will fall by the wayside like more junk mail. The new agency’s role will essentially be that of the Brand's associate producer - with the Brand as executive producer.
There are signs within the industry that we are paying attention, and not just to the shifting media dollars online away from TV. This years Lion's television commercial submissions are down 3%, while online submissions are up by 30% - a good sign our industry is reacting to the future.
In order to take control of what it is we know how to do best, the following needs to happen:
1. We must partner with our clients in paying for the development of our branding & line extension ideas. We can do this by lowering our fees, while taking a piece of the back-end. By doing so we are essentially going into business with them and aligning our interest with theirs.
2. Get away from our traditional approach to media and it's fast approaching commoditized media marketplace.
3. Change our fee for service vendor mentality.
4. We must invest in, develop and monetize intellectual property.
5. Creative is king!
In a nutshell, creativity & shared risk...our last hope........again!
Management Consultants Push Further Into Ad Business
http://adage.com/article?article_id=109690
Honda Sponsors Internet Reality Show
http://www.broadbandenterprises.com/news/detail.asp?NEWS_ID=8
A Sponsor and Its Show, Intertwined
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/17/business/media/17adcol.html?ei=5070&en=883e48b6f64ad909&ex=1145937600&adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1145314394-XXiSK8AHcddL0V/9GqAiSg&pagewanted=print
While the income within our industry has evolved to include multiple revenue sources, it is grounded in the concept of the media buy. As a testament to that, accounts up for review are still listed based on the size of their annual media budgets. From an agency perspective this has to change.
Unless agencies are prepared to invest heavily in technology solutions to rival the likes of Google & Yahoo they will eventually be cut out of most media buying. It will not be long before fully automated solutions touch traditional media buys such as publications and television. These traditional media buys will then become as much of a commodity as the online media marketplace has become today.
Our position will be farther weakened as management consultants like McKinsey & Co, Accenture etc. start to chip away at an organizational level within our clients marketing departments...and marketing budgets. For example, Accenture has recently been engaged by Wal-Mart to better align their ad spend and help select an 'agency' or grouping of 'agencies' to service their needs.
The form of advertising will also change completely, with brands having to integrate their message more seamlessly into online and offline offerings. In other words, the messages will not take the form of advertising as much as content. Remember, this is driven by technology and the consumer is now in control. 'Advertising' will undergo a creative convergence within content. Authentically so. Few large agencies do this well.
Smaller shops with lab-like environments will harbor artisans that come together to create bespoke solutions within this new media content mix. Bespoke - not just in content, but in form. These creative shops will live and breathe within the new media solutions such as: wikis, blogs, RSS & mash-ups, as well as be responsible for inventing new ones. How many of you are familiar with Renkoo, Gahbunga, Ning, and Squidoo? If not, get cracking!
Brands will allow their agencies to produce content that offers value to consumers first and advertise second. To win back respect and take control of the market from clients, agencies must share in the risk. In order to bring about true partnership, agencies should be willing to take compensation risks for quantifiable solutions. Not being willing to stand behind your own work is not a good sign. Without this alignment, opportunity will fall by the wayside like more junk mail. The new agency’s role will essentially be that of the Brand's associate producer - with the Brand as executive producer.
There are signs within the industry that we are paying attention, and not just to the shifting media dollars online away from TV. This years Lion's television commercial submissions are down 3%, while online submissions are up by 30% - a good sign our industry is reacting to the future.
In order to take control of what it is we know how to do best, the following needs to happen:
1. We must partner with our clients in paying for the development of our branding & line extension ideas. We can do this by lowering our fees, while taking a piece of the back-end. By doing so we are essentially going into business with them and aligning our interest with theirs.
2. Get away from our traditional approach to media and it's fast approaching commoditized media marketplace.
3. Change our fee for service vendor mentality.
4. We must invest in, develop and monetize intellectual property.
5. Creative is king!
In a nutshell, creativity & shared risk...our last hope........again!
Management Consultants Push Further Into Ad Business
http://adage.com/article?article_id=109690
Honda Sponsors Internet Reality Show
http://www.broadbandenterprises.com/news/detail.asp?NEWS_ID=8
A Sponsor and Its Show, Intertwined
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/17/business/media/17adcol.html?ei=5070&en=883e48b6f64ad909&ex=1145937600&adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1145314394-XXiSK8AHcddL0V/9GqAiSg&pagewanted=print
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Brands...The New Executive Producers.
Are brands going to be the new executive producers...and will they use UGC (User Generated Content) as their new talent pool?
In the 50's, Marlin Perkin's 'Wild Kingdom' was not just sponsored by, but actually produced by Mutual of Omaha. They were intricately involved in the production of the show. Those were the early days of television. Days when the consumer actually loved the shows and the commercials in between. Remember Kraft Television Theater or Colgate Comedy Hour?........never mind...
The point is, they did what brands still strive for today. To build a deep, authentically emotional connection with their audience. The audience did not mind the sponsorship or the commercials because they were being given something of genuine value.
Who feels that way about any of today's commercials or sponsorships?
What goes around comes around - and for good reason. While a few of us experiment with buying shows, sans commercials, off of the likes of iTunes, this will most likely play out to be an exception to the rule. Why own something when you will most likely only want to watch it once, especially when most things will most likely be available on demand anyway? Most consumers are used to and will continue to prefer to get their 'TV' for free. So, we need sponsors & advertising. It pays for things. So, how to execute it in a way that is not intrusive, and makes the treasured connection in a new, but lastingly authentic way...
Brands as the new executive producers and solo sponsors of entertainment makes sense for a number of simple reasons. For starters:
1. It will render DVR & Tivo ad skipping as irrelevant.
2. Brands can now engage consumers on an authentic level, bringing them value. Pull vs. Push.
3. TV/Internet convergence will be all about niche markets, and brands know these segments even better than the networks.
As for UGC (User Generated Content) as the new talent pool? The convergence will bring a two way dialogue with a 'TV' audience in the same way that social networking influences the internet now. So, yes, it makes sense to use UGC if it starts to bring this two-way conversation. It does NOT make sense to use UGC as the answer to ill thought out marketing campaigns.
Two recent Nike pieces illustrate this. The first is a spot shows Ronaldinho, one of the most recognized figures in soccer, breaking in some new Nikes with extraordinary feats of his soccer skills. It is an amateur attempt, and the problem became that it was found out that digital manipulation was used in exaggerating the skills of this already skilled athlete - rendering the brand as unauthentic. That hurts the brand because it is fake. Shown here on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6h4WACknkY&search=nike%20ping%20pong
Alternatively, "The Longest Soccer Chain" is so simple it is brilliant. Nike invites users to upload a video of themselves kicking a soccer ball around and passing it to 'someone' else. This is accomplished by cutting one piece against the next. What we end up with is a world-wide community of soccer fans, all playing around with the ball - connecting with one another. A forum for the game's collective creativity.
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/siteshell/index.jsp#,us,0;jogatv,,0,0,0
Now, the 'Longest Soccer Chain' is a simple idea and hardly constitutes a whole show, but it is a start. It could even be the start of a channel. It engages, is entertaining, and is forming that illusive connection with their audience in a way that is authentic and unobtrusive.
Now, NBC & ABC have both launched in-house brand integration departments in order to bring brands back to the table. If they don't participate, they risk brands running off and doing it on their own. Remember, it is the internet & TV convergence I am talking about here- and nothing will stop ideas like these from becoming the next channels when they do. The networks and advertising agencies must participate in bringing ideas like these to brands or risk losing out. The brands that take matters into their own hands will be sitting pretty, and their audience will love them for it.
So, perhaps what goes around does come around, albeit in another form...
More food for thought...
More Video Ads Move Online, Rivaling TV.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052300045.html
Procter to teach on the tube.
http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/04/24/daily56.html
TLC Creates a show inspired by their Home Made Simple online newsletter.
http://www.homemadesimple.com/en_US/tvlanding.do
More Marketers Using Branded Entertainment
http://www.adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=108717
In the 50's, Marlin Perkin's 'Wild Kingdom' was not just sponsored by, but actually produced by Mutual of Omaha. They were intricately involved in the production of the show. Those were the early days of television. Days when the consumer actually loved the shows and the commercials in between. Remember Kraft Television Theater or Colgate Comedy Hour?........never mind...
The point is, they did what brands still strive for today. To build a deep, authentically emotional connection with their audience. The audience did not mind the sponsorship or the commercials because they were being given something of genuine value.
Who feels that way about any of today's commercials or sponsorships?
What goes around comes around - and for good reason. While a few of us experiment with buying shows, sans commercials, off of the likes of iTunes, this will most likely play out to be an exception to the rule. Why own something when you will most likely only want to watch it once, especially when most things will most likely be available on demand anyway? Most consumers are used to and will continue to prefer to get their 'TV' for free. So, we need sponsors & advertising. It pays for things. So, how to execute it in a way that is not intrusive, and makes the treasured connection in a new, but lastingly authentic way...
Brands as the new executive producers and solo sponsors of entertainment makes sense for a number of simple reasons. For starters:
1. It will render DVR & Tivo ad skipping as irrelevant.
2. Brands can now engage consumers on an authentic level, bringing them value. Pull vs. Push.
3. TV/Internet convergence will be all about niche markets, and brands know these segments even better than the networks.
As for UGC (User Generated Content) as the new talent pool? The convergence will bring a two way dialogue with a 'TV' audience in the same way that social networking influences the internet now. So, yes, it makes sense to use UGC if it starts to bring this two-way conversation. It does NOT make sense to use UGC as the answer to ill thought out marketing campaigns.
Two recent Nike pieces illustrate this. The first is a spot shows Ronaldinho, one of the most recognized figures in soccer, breaking in some new Nikes with extraordinary feats of his soccer skills. It is an amateur attempt, and the problem became that it was found out that digital manipulation was used in exaggerating the skills of this already skilled athlete - rendering the brand as unauthentic. That hurts the brand because it is fake. Shown here on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6h4WACknkY&search=nike%20ping%20pong
Alternatively, "The Longest Soccer Chain" is so simple it is brilliant. Nike invites users to upload a video of themselves kicking a soccer ball around and passing it to 'someone' else. This is accomplished by cutting one piece against the next. What we end up with is a world-wide community of soccer fans, all playing around with the ball - connecting with one another. A forum for the game's collective creativity.
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/siteshell/index.jsp#,us,0;jogatv,,0,0,0
Now, the 'Longest Soccer Chain' is a simple idea and hardly constitutes a whole show, but it is a start. It could even be the start of a channel. It engages, is entertaining, and is forming that illusive connection with their audience in a way that is authentic and unobtrusive.
Now, NBC & ABC have both launched in-house brand integration departments in order to bring brands back to the table. If they don't participate, they risk brands running off and doing it on their own. Remember, it is the internet & TV convergence I am talking about here- and nothing will stop ideas like these from becoming the next channels when they do. The networks and advertising agencies must participate in bringing ideas like these to brands or risk losing out. The brands that take matters into their own hands will be sitting pretty, and their audience will love them for it.
So, perhaps what goes around does come around, albeit in another form...
More food for thought...
More Video Ads Move Online, Rivaling TV.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052300045.html
Procter to teach on the tube.
http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/04/24/daily56.html
TLC Creates a show inspired by their Home Made Simple online newsletter.
http://www.homemadesimple.com/en_US/tvlanding.do
More Marketers Using Branded Entertainment
http://www.adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=108717
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Traditional Media Buying - Dead in the water!
Traditional media buying will soon be on it's last legs...What will replace it?...most likely Media Bidding. Then there are fast emerging mediums such as the online gaming ad space - along with its unlimited real estate - most agencies do not even have gaming on the radar yet.
Let's face it, everyone is just now getting clued on search; and because search needs to be continuously monitored & managed, the cost associated can be prohibitive to most clients, forcing it in-house. In fact, I'll argue that search should only be managed in-house, as it requires a refined understanding of the linguistics associated with the brand. Something that is inherently lost in translation with a traditional agency relationship, along with the inability to turn on a dime.
With traditional media, the days of advertisers accepting standardized ad rates that are based only on yearly readership or viewership audits and not bottom-line business results are coming to an end. Google recently experimented with the offline world on behalf of a group of publishers. It was a bold move that did not pay off as well as it should have, and the industry went back to their snug little boxes confident of the fact that the traditional media model would stay the same. Kudo's to Google for trying to shake things up. I feel sorry for everyone who thinks that will be the last they hear of it...it will be back and when it does, ad inventory will go through the roof, resulting in an even greater complexity than what media buyers are used to today.
It is a scary thought to most agencies and publishers alike. The idea of a purely traded media marketplace. Many clients still believe large media buyers get them better deals. After two years of monitoring about $3 billion in spending from 17 clients -- or about 5% of U.S. TV market -- MPMA, the U.S. arm of Billetts, has found that advertisers often pay vastly different prices for the same inventory. It also found that the ability to fetch low cost-per-thousand rates had little to do with being part of a massive bulk buy: Big advertisers often paid premiums for their spots while little guys got discounts-and vice versa.
From an agency perspective, does the lack of correlation between clout and value undermine the very premise of media-agency consolidation? Anyway, enough of that, I'm just a creative guy without the 'creds' for serious money talk.
The convergence we are witnessing will all end up online, with all traditional channels competing in similar space. In other words, publisher's will end up as the next niche channels competing alongside the networks.
This will allow all broadcast & publisher advertisers to target more effectively, measure results, and connect with the user in ways that were not possible before. If the goal is to produce campaigns with the highest ad completion rates, the highest click-through rates, the highest user interaction rates, and (ultimately) the most sales - there is no other way forward.
Proof of the convergence lives within new alliances such as that between TiVo & Brightcove:
TiVo will now deliver internet broadband video to subscribers. In a partnership with Brightcove, a group of online content providers will be the initial offering to TIVO subscribers who have a Series 2 DVR box connected to the internet.
TiVo is also in the process of rolling out "Product Watch", delivering on the promise of "Advertising on Demand". The premise is simple...self-select a category such as automotive and TiVo finds and files all related/relevant content and commercials on the subject matter. Permission based tagging vs. new marketing.
It is also all going to be about locally targeted, niche markets. The more targeted, the better the results.
Traditionally, most stations have at least 50% of their broadcast time when they schedule their own programming. That's a lot of free time. So, the more they can can create original, local programming that makes that connection, the more they're going to be able to capitalize on that local bond.
Local advertising is a $94 billion dollar market. Brands get about 30% of it. The local online market is a $3.4 billion dollar market and Brands get about 4%; this represents an $850 million opportunity for local television. That's exciting. That's real money.
This will also make media buying much more complex. Think about it...in many cases, the exact same video content can be on multiple sites. Does that make the targeting value of that content the same? Does an ad in "Friends" on NBC carry the same demo target value as an ad in "Friends" on TBS? What about "Friends" on YouTube? The theory behind contextual advertising in current online advertising models like Google's AdSense is that the context of what is on a page matters more than the brand name of the Web site it is on.
The notion that all advertising may become biddable, with portfolio management and technology playing an important role is real. Media buying firms, including search marketing agencies, are going to have to adapt. It may have started with search, but will expand to include fully integrated ad buys that includes Print, Radio, TV, VOD, OOH, Blogs, Podcasting, Online Gaming, etc, etc, etc. To manage this likely scenario effectively will require sophisticated tools (such as optimization technology) and portfolio-management expertise.
The market is maturing and will quickly reach a critical mass of buyers. Search engines will build an integrated marketplace. Advertisers will fast become educated. Media buying companies that do not actively participate in that, will be wiped out.
Media Agencies in Danger of Becoming Obstacles, Not Enablers
Siloed Planners and Buyers Are Lost in a Platform-Neutral World
http://adage.com/article?article_id=108739
Wal-Mart Backs Online Auction for TV Ad Dollars
Retail Giant and Other Marketers Look to Build $50 Million Test System
http://adage.com/article?article_id=109109
Double Fusion Acquires In-Game Ad Firm · MarketingVOX
http://www.marketingvox.com/archives/2006/05/09/double_fusion_acquires_ingame_ad_firm/
Blog Spending Leads Alt Media
http://www.insidebrandedentertainment.com/bep/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002315283
MediaVest, Carat Fusion Tap Klipmart For Scaled Video Campaigns
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=41985&Nid=19676&p=350414
Let's face it, everyone is just now getting clued on search; and because search needs to be continuously monitored & managed, the cost associated can be prohibitive to most clients, forcing it in-house. In fact, I'll argue that search should only be managed in-house, as it requires a refined understanding of the linguistics associated with the brand. Something that is inherently lost in translation with a traditional agency relationship, along with the inability to turn on a dime.
With traditional media, the days of advertisers accepting standardized ad rates that are based only on yearly readership or viewership audits and not bottom-line business results are coming to an end. Google recently experimented with the offline world on behalf of a group of publishers. It was a bold move that did not pay off as well as it should have, and the industry went back to their snug little boxes confident of the fact that the traditional media model would stay the same. Kudo's to Google for trying to shake things up. I feel sorry for everyone who thinks that will be the last they hear of it...it will be back and when it does, ad inventory will go through the roof, resulting in an even greater complexity than what media buyers are used to today.
It is a scary thought to most agencies and publishers alike. The idea of a purely traded media marketplace. Many clients still believe large media buyers get them better deals. After two years of monitoring about $3 billion in spending from 17 clients -- or about 5% of U.S. TV market -- MPMA, the U.S. arm of Billetts, has found that advertisers often pay vastly different prices for the same inventory. It also found that the ability to fetch low cost-per-thousand rates had little to do with being part of a massive bulk buy: Big advertisers often paid premiums for their spots while little guys got discounts-and vice versa.
From an agency perspective, does the lack of correlation between clout and value undermine the very premise of media-agency consolidation? Anyway, enough of that, I'm just a creative guy without the 'creds' for serious money talk.
The convergence we are witnessing will all end up online, with all traditional channels competing in similar space. In other words, publisher's will end up as the next niche channels competing alongside the networks.
This will allow all broadcast & publisher advertisers to target more effectively, measure results, and connect with the user in ways that were not possible before. If the goal is to produce campaigns with the highest ad completion rates, the highest click-through rates, the highest user interaction rates, and (ultimately) the most sales - there is no other way forward.
Proof of the convergence lives within new alliances such as that between TiVo & Brightcove:
TiVo will now deliver internet broadband video to subscribers. In a partnership with Brightcove, a group of online content providers will be the initial offering to TIVO subscribers who have a Series 2 DVR box connected to the internet.
TiVo is also in the process of rolling out "Product Watch", delivering on the promise of "Advertising on Demand". The premise is simple...self-select a category such as automotive and TiVo finds and files all related/relevant content and commercials on the subject matter. Permission based tagging vs. new marketing.
It is also all going to be about locally targeted, niche markets. The more targeted, the better the results.
Traditionally, most stations have at least 50% of their broadcast time when they schedule their own programming. That's a lot of free time. So, the more they can can create original, local programming that makes that connection, the more they're going to be able to capitalize on that local bond.
Local advertising is a $94 billion dollar market. Brands get about 30% of it. The local online market is a $3.4 billion dollar market and Brands get about 4%; this represents an $850 million opportunity for local television. That's exciting. That's real money.
This will also make media buying much more complex. Think about it...in many cases, the exact same video content can be on multiple sites. Does that make the targeting value of that content the same? Does an ad in "Friends" on NBC carry the same demo target value as an ad in "Friends" on TBS? What about "Friends" on YouTube? The theory behind contextual advertising in current online advertising models like Google's AdSense is that the context of what is on a page matters more than the brand name of the Web site it is on.
The notion that all advertising may become biddable, with portfolio management and technology playing an important role is real. Media buying firms, including search marketing agencies, are going to have to adapt. It may have started with search, but will expand to include fully integrated ad buys that includes Print, Radio, TV, VOD, OOH, Blogs, Podcasting, Online Gaming, etc, etc, etc. To manage this likely scenario effectively will require sophisticated tools (such as optimization technology) and portfolio-management expertise.
The market is maturing and will quickly reach a critical mass of buyers. Search engines will build an integrated marketplace. Advertisers will fast become educated. Media buying companies that do not actively participate in that, will be wiped out.
Media Agencies in Danger of Becoming Obstacles, Not Enablers
Siloed Planners and Buyers Are Lost in a Platform-Neutral World
http://adage.com/article?article_id=108739
Wal-Mart Backs Online Auction for TV Ad Dollars
Retail Giant and Other Marketers Look to Build $50 Million Test System
http://adage.com/article?article_id=109109
Double Fusion Acquires In-Game Ad Firm · MarketingVOX
http://www.marketingvox.com/archives/2006/05/09/double_fusion_acquires_ingame_ad_firm/
Blog Spending Leads Alt Media
http://www.insidebrandedentertainment.com/bep/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002315283
MediaVest, Carat Fusion Tap Klipmart For Scaled Video Campaigns
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=41985&Nid=19676&p=350414
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Video games - The future testing grounds.
I've never been into video games. I'm willing to bet that most of you reading this have not either. But we all better start paying attention, not for the obvious reasons like the fact that gaming is one of the fastest growing billion dollar industries, or that it is fast becoming a medium in which brands can advertise in.
There are more subversive 'going's on' - going on. The games with the fastest growing audiences are communal in nature, with the online communal component playing the most important part. These games are becoming less like games and more like constructions of alternate societies living on the web. While the environments are fantasy based, they are all grounded in realities we are familiar with. You pick a character, live a virtual life, earn points for that life, are able to buy virtual land, build virtual companies & make new friends in the process. Think of them like a much more complex, 3-dimensional version of Monopoly. But, like life, the game never ends - it just keeps evolving.
As marketers, we need to pay attention as this is fast becoming an effective, measurable new medium. A new survey, conducted by Nielson Interactive and Double Fusion, says that in-game advertising yields significantly better results in product awareness and purchasing decisions simply because the user is engaged; with a 60 percent improvement in new product awareness, and that 3D advertising creates nearly twice that of static 2D billboard advertising. The spending for online gaming advertising is from USD 35 million in 2004 to a forecast of USD 875 million by 2009, growing to somewhere between $1.6 billion and $1.8 billion in the U.S. by 2010, or roughly 3 percent of total media spending. I think it is underestimated, much like the web.
But there is more to it than that. Think of this as a virtual testing ground. If I owned a large media or consumer research company, I would want to buy a piece of one of these environments, simply to test the receptiveness of my clients brands and campaigns. If I had enough money, I may even want to build an envirmonment of my own. Some product companies are looking to subsidize the virtual development of a line of products within these games. Good for the game, and good for the company wanting to see if a new innovation gets any interest before they actually prototype or manufacture it.
Sort of like how the military uses gaming to test new weapons & strategy. Seems crazy, but it makes sense.
Pharmaceutical companies are looking into gaming to help patients. For example, many patients recovering from a severe car accident suffer from severe trauma. it has been proven that patients recover from the trauma and are much more receptive to getting back into a car if they have been 'practicing' driving within the confines of a game first. Something as simple as racing game works.
For something as intangible as cancer, there are games in development to help child cancer patients visualize the disease and actually fight bad cells with good cells. Initial testing shows that the visualization helps the child’s immune system and may have a significant effect in the receptivity and understanding of the treatment.
Why not tie brands into these applications. The consumer wins as funds from the brand go to developing better 'games' with research that helps patients. The brands win, by giving back and being associated with these free forms of assistance.
There are even games taking on real world political issues. The game below allows students in the middle east to actual battle it out in a virtual environment. Clearly something most brands would want to steer clear of...but you get the point.
Students fight for Mideast peace in video game
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/fun.games/04/24/serious.games.ap/index.html?section=cnn_tech
Gaming demographics have also moved well beyond the 18-34 male. Women are the fastest growing demographic within online gaming and studies have also found that because gaming keeps the mind sharp, the elderly in Asia are 'excercise' their brains with gaming. Another cool opportunity for Pharma companies to give back.
Japan’s Elderly Rides the Brain Craze
http://www.wired.com/news/wireservice/0,70640-0.html?tw=rss.technology
But here is where it gets really exciting. The 'value' created within these games is taking on real world value. On one of the games, a user paid another user $100,000 US to buy a piece of property that was already 'developed' by the first user. It had taken the first user many years and many points to be able to 'build' this virtual property and so had virtual value to someone who did not want to spend that time doing the same. This piece of property (space station), was receiving visits from thousands of other users. The purchaser 'developed' areas within the property where users could have fun (games within the game). He even 'rented' off retail areas for other game-players to create smaller versions of commerce. He also sells advertising space to brands. The space station is now generating $12,000 a month in real revenue. But the money is virtual right? Wrong! Remember, real dollars were paid for the ‘property’ in the first place which means there is real value. So, the gaming company is now creating an ATM card that you can use to get actual cash or use online like PayPal...and so real value is created, generating real opportunities for brands.
Below are articles and links to two of the most exciting online gaming communities. Enjoy!
Second Life
http://www.secondlife.com
Entropia Universe Players Can Cash Their Online Earnings at the A.T.M.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/02/arts/02entr.html
There are more subversive 'going's on' - going on. The games with the fastest growing audiences are communal in nature, with the online communal component playing the most important part. These games are becoming less like games and more like constructions of alternate societies living on the web. While the environments are fantasy based, they are all grounded in realities we are familiar with. You pick a character, live a virtual life, earn points for that life, are able to buy virtual land, build virtual companies & make new friends in the process. Think of them like a much more complex, 3-dimensional version of Monopoly. But, like life, the game never ends - it just keeps evolving.
As marketers, we need to pay attention as this is fast becoming an effective, measurable new medium. A new survey, conducted by Nielson Interactive and Double Fusion, says that in-game advertising yields significantly better results in product awareness and purchasing decisions simply because the user is engaged; with a 60 percent improvement in new product awareness, and that 3D advertising creates nearly twice that of static 2D billboard advertising. The spending for online gaming advertising is from USD 35 million in 2004 to a forecast of USD 875 million by 2009, growing to somewhere between $1.6 billion and $1.8 billion in the U.S. by 2010, or roughly 3 percent of total media spending. I think it is underestimated, much like the web.
But there is more to it than that. Think of this as a virtual testing ground. If I owned a large media or consumer research company, I would want to buy a piece of one of these environments, simply to test the receptiveness of my clients brands and campaigns. If I had enough money, I may even want to build an envirmonment of my own. Some product companies are looking to subsidize the virtual development of a line of products within these games. Good for the game, and good for the company wanting to see if a new innovation gets any interest before they actually prototype or manufacture it.
Sort of like how the military uses gaming to test new weapons & strategy. Seems crazy, but it makes sense.
Pharmaceutical companies are looking into gaming to help patients. For example, many patients recovering from a severe car accident suffer from severe trauma. it has been proven that patients recover from the trauma and are much more receptive to getting back into a car if they have been 'practicing' driving within the confines of a game first. Something as simple as racing game works.
For something as intangible as cancer, there are games in development to help child cancer patients visualize the disease and actually fight bad cells with good cells. Initial testing shows that the visualization helps the child’s immune system and may have a significant effect in the receptivity and understanding of the treatment.
Why not tie brands into these applications. The consumer wins as funds from the brand go to developing better 'games' with research that helps patients. The brands win, by giving back and being associated with these free forms of assistance.
There are even games taking on real world political issues. The game below allows students in the middle east to actual battle it out in a virtual environment. Clearly something most brands would want to steer clear of...but you get the point.
Students fight for Mideast peace in video game
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/fun.games/04/24/serious.games.ap/index.html?section=cnn_tech
Gaming demographics have also moved well beyond the 18-34 male. Women are the fastest growing demographic within online gaming and studies have also found that because gaming keeps the mind sharp, the elderly in Asia are 'excercise' their brains with gaming. Another cool opportunity for Pharma companies to give back.
Japan’s Elderly Rides the Brain Craze
http://www.wired.com/news/wireservice/0,70640-0.html?tw=rss.technology
But here is where it gets really exciting. The 'value' created within these games is taking on real world value. On one of the games, a user paid another user $100,000 US to buy a piece of property that was already 'developed' by the first user. It had taken the first user many years and many points to be able to 'build' this virtual property and so had virtual value to someone who did not want to spend that time doing the same. This piece of property (space station), was receiving visits from thousands of other users. The purchaser 'developed' areas within the property where users could have fun (games within the game). He even 'rented' off retail areas for other game-players to create smaller versions of commerce. He also sells advertising space to brands. The space station is now generating $12,000 a month in real revenue. But the money is virtual right? Wrong! Remember, real dollars were paid for the ‘property’ in the first place which means there is real value. So, the gaming company is now creating an ATM card that you can use to get actual cash or use online like PayPal...and so real value is created, generating real opportunities for brands.
Below are articles and links to two of the most exciting online gaming communities. Enjoy!
Second Life
http://www.secondlife.com
Entropia Universe Players Can Cash Their Online Earnings at the A.T.M.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/02/arts/02entr.html
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
The New Prime Time...thank's to A.D.D.
Do you have A.D.D? Chances are you do, and guess what - there is nothing wrong with you either. A.D.D. is part of our evolutionary makeup - not something to be cured. So, accept it. From this day onward, it is normal to be doing 'too many things' at once, to not be able to focus on one task for very long while being distracted by another, only to come back and finish whatever you were working on in the first place.
Our work habits have changed. Multitasking combined with A.D.D. makes us wander, taking a multitude of breaks. This wandering most often sends us straight to the web. Whether it be for personal errands like travel planning, shopping, or just plain browsing, we are all doing it - while at work. These are short breaks. No time to get up and wander around... So how does the content that is available fit into these new patterns of ours. Most of it does not, but soon it will. We are also evolving into a virtual workforce. More and more of us are available 24/7, 365 days a year. It is not as much that we do not have time anymore, it is that our concept and usage of time has changed. Crack-berry jokes 'not' - withstanding, we are free because we are connected. It may not feel that way, but that is what growing pains are all about.
This accepted new state of being is creating 'The New Prime Time'.
Why? Because it will very likely attract more eyeballs than the prime time we know today. In fact it probably already does, but we are not aggregating it in the same way, because we are not spending as much media online as we are offline - yet.
The New Prime Time will most likely be between 11am-2pm. The time most of us are likely to get restless for an early or late lunch depending on our own personal habits. Content will be 2-3 minutes in length. Perfect!
This new time constraint will suit advertisers way better than offline content. For one thing, it is a 'lean in' experience. This means engagement. This means buying. Because of this, The New Prime Time will be much more effective too. I mean, who goes shopping at night anyway? I don't - do you?
As part of our evolution these things evolve slowly - the changes barely recognizable to us. I'll offer that most recently, changes are happening much faster and are more noticeable than in the past. As most things today are bound to technology in some way, perhaps we are evolving more like the computer chip - "doubling every 18 months".
Fox and Toyota announced they will be teaming up to produce a new short online series, perfect for this emerging Prime Time. They will team up to produce Prison Break: Proof of Innocence, seen exclusive on mobile phones. The series is a spinoff Fox's Prison Break. Each mobisode will be just two minutes long, and each will begin with a 10-second spot from Toyota. The deal also calls for Toyota ads to appear exclusively in several episodes next month as the show nears its finale on May 15. The mobisodes feature different actors and writers than the TV version and will introduce new characters. It will first be available this week to Sprint customers who have signed up for the Sprint video package. After two weeks, the mobisodes will also be available at Toyota.com.
YouTube for online short form video, with almost 3x as many pages being viewed than google in the U.S. All in barely over 6 months.
http://www.technologyreview.com/TR/wtr_16686,323,p1.html
The Emmy's also announced a new award for PC and Hand-Held Shows.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/business/11emmy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1144767611-IgF9eH/Hynvrw2agi6VLuA
...and before we all run off to our shrinks, here are two definitions from Webster's to make you feel better.
attention deficit disorder
: a syndrome of disordered learning and disruptive behavior that is not caused by any serious underlying physical or mental disorder and that has several subtypes characterized primarily by inattentiveness or primarily by hyperactivity and impulsive behavior (as speaking out of turn) or by the significant expression of both.
(...sound familiar?)
...but don't worry you're 'normal', according to Webster's...
nor·mal
1 : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern, occurring naturally
2 : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development b : free from mental disorder
So, if we all have it, it makes us all normal. Feel better? So, if you don't have it yet, don't worry - you'll get it soon enough...
Our work habits have changed. Multitasking combined with A.D.D. makes us wander, taking a multitude of breaks. This wandering most often sends us straight to the web. Whether it be for personal errands like travel planning, shopping, or just plain browsing, we are all doing it - while at work. These are short breaks. No time to get up and wander around... So how does the content that is available fit into these new patterns of ours. Most of it does not, but soon it will. We are also evolving into a virtual workforce. More and more of us are available 24/7, 365 days a year. It is not as much that we do not have time anymore, it is that our concept and usage of time has changed. Crack-berry jokes 'not' - withstanding, we are free because we are connected. It may not feel that way, but that is what growing pains are all about.
This accepted new state of being is creating 'The New Prime Time'.
Why? Because it will very likely attract more eyeballs than the prime time we know today. In fact it probably already does, but we are not aggregating it in the same way, because we are not spending as much media online as we are offline - yet.
The New Prime Time will most likely be between 11am-2pm. The time most of us are likely to get restless for an early or late lunch depending on our own personal habits. Content will be 2-3 minutes in length. Perfect!
This new time constraint will suit advertisers way better than offline content. For one thing, it is a 'lean in' experience. This means engagement. This means buying. Because of this, The New Prime Time will be much more effective too. I mean, who goes shopping at night anyway? I don't - do you?
As part of our evolution these things evolve slowly - the changes barely recognizable to us. I'll offer that most recently, changes are happening much faster and are more noticeable than in the past. As most things today are bound to technology in some way, perhaps we are evolving more like the computer chip - "doubling every 18 months".
Fox and Toyota announced they will be teaming up to produce a new short online series, perfect for this emerging Prime Time. They will team up to produce Prison Break: Proof of Innocence, seen exclusive on mobile phones. The series is a spinoff Fox's Prison Break. Each mobisode will be just two minutes long, and each will begin with a 10-second spot from Toyota. The deal also calls for Toyota ads to appear exclusively in several episodes next month as the show nears its finale on May 15. The mobisodes feature different actors and writers than the TV version and will introduce new characters. It will first be available this week to Sprint customers who have signed up for the Sprint video package. After two weeks, the mobisodes will also be available at Toyota.com.
YouTube for online short form video, with almost 3x as many pages being viewed than google in the U.S. All in barely over 6 months.
http://www.technologyreview.com/TR/wtr_16686,323,p1.html
The Emmy's also announced a new award for PC and Hand-Held Shows.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/business/11emmy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1144767611-IgF9eH/Hynvrw2agi6VLuA
...and before we all run off to our shrinks, here are two definitions from Webster's to make you feel better.
attention deficit disorder
: a syndrome of disordered learning and disruptive behavior that is not caused by any serious underlying physical or mental disorder and that has several subtypes characterized primarily by inattentiveness or primarily by hyperactivity and impulsive behavior (as speaking out of turn) or by the significant expression of both.
(...sound familiar?)
...but don't worry you're 'normal', according to Webster's...
nor·mal
1 : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm, rule, or principle b : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern, occurring naturally
2 : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development b : free from mental disorder
So, if we all have it, it makes us all normal. Feel better? So, if you don't have it yet, don't worry - you'll get it soon enough...
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
The Networks - Better off as the next Studios?
In the online world, publishing companies are in a much better position than the networks because they understand and serve niche audiences. So what is the next step for the networks?
For one, they will not be able to continue to operate as broadly as they have in the past. With an infinite amount of choice online & search becoming more powerful & easy to use, consumers will be able to find whatever they want simply by entering a few keystrokes.
For example, why would a consumer go to ABC, NBC or CBS for news, when NYTimes, CNN or similar news 'broadcaster's' sole focus is the delivery of news content. Film is another example of content the networks have relied upon. Now, most film content will be on demand, accessible directly from the studios of via some middle man like Netflix, Movie Link or Vongo , farther cutting the Networks out of the loop. Sports are another area they will not be able to rely on. Why would the NBA sell the rights to view their games to a network when they can to do so directly themselves. The networks will not be able to compete as before.
For the most part, consumers will most likely rely on the experts in each niche field to deliver the best possible content to them.
So, what are the networks good at? Producing shorter form content like reality shows, Lost, or the sitcoms (shorter than film anyway...). HBO was very good at producing some of the most recent hits amongst most networks over the last decade. Some will argue it is because they are a paid network. True, but I believe their success had more to do with focus. Those in the creative field know what I am talking about. Lately, the traditional networks are back in the game with some big shows of their own. They had to. Imagine what they will able to do without having to worry about the 'Weather', the 'Evening News' or 'Sports'?
In order to survive, the networks will have to re-image themselves as Brands, much like HBO. As part of this, they will all start to focus in different areas, slowly becoming better at different 'genres' perhaps. They will also become much more focused at nurturing the best creative talent to create their programming. My bet, is that they will almost begin to mirror the old film studio setup, with multi deal contracts for talent such as actors, writers & directors. They may even own and trade them like sports stars.
Content owners will rule, and no one can produce mid-length entertainment like the networks - not yet anyway. The scenarios presented here are down the line, but not as far off as we think. The players need to start staking a claim now. They will have plenty of competition, so if they want to stay on top as things evolve, they better get focused.
For more info...take a look at:
It's Showtime--and ABC and NBC and Disney--online
Networks are rushing to offer shows online as TV viewership declines.
http://www.technologyreview.com/TR/wtr_16683,323,p1.html
MySpace Aims To Extend Into TV
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=42343&Nid=19860&p=350414
For one, they will not be able to continue to operate as broadly as they have in the past. With an infinite amount of choice online & search becoming more powerful & easy to use, consumers will be able to find whatever they want simply by entering a few keystrokes.
For example, why would a consumer go to ABC, NBC or CBS for news, when NYTimes, CNN or similar news 'broadcaster's' sole focus is the delivery of news content. Film is another example of content the networks have relied upon. Now, most film content will be on demand, accessible directly from the studios of via some middle man like Netflix, Movie Link or Vongo , farther cutting the Networks out of the loop. Sports are another area they will not be able to rely on. Why would the NBA sell the rights to view their games to a network when they can to do so directly themselves. The networks will not be able to compete as before.
For the most part, consumers will most likely rely on the experts in each niche field to deliver the best possible content to them.
So, what are the networks good at? Producing shorter form content like reality shows, Lost, or the sitcoms (shorter than film anyway...). HBO was very good at producing some of the most recent hits amongst most networks over the last decade. Some will argue it is because they are a paid network. True, but I believe their success had more to do with focus. Those in the creative field know what I am talking about. Lately, the traditional networks are back in the game with some big shows of their own. They had to. Imagine what they will able to do without having to worry about the 'Weather', the 'Evening News' or 'Sports'?
In order to survive, the networks will have to re-image themselves as Brands, much like HBO. As part of this, they will all start to focus in different areas, slowly becoming better at different 'genres' perhaps. They will also become much more focused at nurturing the best creative talent to create their programming. My bet, is that they will almost begin to mirror the old film studio setup, with multi deal contracts for talent such as actors, writers & directors. They may even own and trade them like sports stars.
Content owners will rule, and no one can produce mid-length entertainment like the networks - not yet anyway. The scenarios presented here are down the line, but not as far off as we think. The players need to start staking a claim now. They will have plenty of competition, so if they want to stay on top as things evolve, they better get focused.
For more info...take a look at:
It's Showtime--and ABC and NBC and Disney--online
Networks are rushing to offer shows online as TV viewership declines.
http://www.technologyreview.com/TR/wtr_16683,323,p1.html
MySpace Aims To Extend Into TV
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=42343&Nid=19860&p=350414
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Publishing companies...the next networks?
Are publishing companies poised to be the next networks? I think so...
A little background first. For those of you not familiar with the online video discussion...
The consensus is that in the near future consumers will use one pipe - their internet connection - not only for web surfing & telephony, but also for film & video entertainment. Consumers will then choose (via their wireless network) which screen in the house to watch the content on. Long form will be viewed on a larger screens in a traditional 'lean back' approach. Short form content will be viewed either on a PC or downloaded for viewing on a portable device such as a PDA, iPod or Playstation. This more engaged approach is called a 'lean in' experience. Then there is also the cell phone - with all carriers racing to upgrade their digital networks in order to be able to stream video content anywhere, anytime.
In the ‘old’ world, access to content was limited by FCC regulated networks via cable or satellite distribution. It was expensive to start a network. As a result the networks had to have a broad appeal. With the internet, anyone can start a channel. It is fairly inexpensive, and the technology is available to everyone. This means there will soon be as much video content out there as there are websites now. And like websites, most of it will not be good. So, who will rise to the top?
I believe traditional publishing companies have the potential to be sleeping giants in this new arena. The web is all about choice. Finding what we want. What we want is all different. We all put up with what the networks had to offer because we had no choice. We only watched the shows we liked. Now we will be able to watch whatever show we want, whenever we want. The scale of the internet will allow for what traditional mediums did not - giant, niche markets. Who knows these niche markets better than those publications that have been covering them forever? No one. It is what publications have always been about. We will go to whomever is serving up the best content within our areas of interest.
Think about it. Even with something as broad as the news. Who would we trust to deliver it? CBS, NBC, ABC or a specialized news channel like CNN, New York Times or the BBC? My bet is with the news agencies. This new arena also involves social networking in a big way. Magazines and publications understand this a lot better than the traditional networks, as they have engaged their readers in a two way conversations for years. When it comes to news, the large news agencies also know that much of their content will come from consumers, posing as the new reporters in the field. Read this article from Online Media Daily: Newspapers To Migrate Online.
I am willing to bet that the publications we subscribe to now, we would be happy to read and watch at some point in the future. But big changes are going to have to take place first. In fact, they will have to realize that their survival is not about simply placing an online version of their printed publication online. To begin with, they are going to have to stop thinking of themselves as publications, but channels. They are going to have to recognize that fewer and fewer of the younger demographic read, while more and more of them will want to watch video online. They will probably have to have 2/3 video to 1/3 written content. They will have to build social networks.
The opportunity is there for them. If they don't stake a claim within their respective areas NOW, someone else will, and they will learn the fatal mistake others have made in the past; such as MSN did with Google & search, the music industry did with Apple & iTunes, the telecom companies are realizing with VOIP.
There is no question that it will be about individual tastes, just as marketers have discovered it is all about one to one marketing. So, ask yourselves who is best suited to serve that up with the best quality & understanding...
...and what will happen to the networks, and why is this a huge opportunity for brands? I have a few opinions about all of that too. Stay tuned.
A little background first. For those of you not familiar with the online video discussion...
The consensus is that in the near future consumers will use one pipe - their internet connection - not only for web surfing & telephony, but also for film & video entertainment. Consumers will then choose (via their wireless network) which screen in the house to watch the content on. Long form will be viewed on a larger screens in a traditional 'lean back' approach. Short form content will be viewed either on a PC or downloaded for viewing on a portable device such as a PDA, iPod or Playstation. This more engaged approach is called a 'lean in' experience. Then there is also the cell phone - with all carriers racing to upgrade their digital networks in order to be able to stream video content anywhere, anytime.
In the ‘old’ world, access to content was limited by FCC regulated networks via cable or satellite distribution. It was expensive to start a network. As a result the networks had to have a broad appeal. With the internet, anyone can start a channel. It is fairly inexpensive, and the technology is available to everyone. This means there will soon be as much video content out there as there are websites now. And like websites, most of it will not be good. So, who will rise to the top?
I believe traditional publishing companies have the potential to be sleeping giants in this new arena. The web is all about choice. Finding what we want. What we want is all different. We all put up with what the networks had to offer because we had no choice. We only watched the shows we liked. Now we will be able to watch whatever show we want, whenever we want. The scale of the internet will allow for what traditional mediums did not - giant, niche markets. Who knows these niche markets better than those publications that have been covering them forever? No one. It is what publications have always been about. We will go to whomever is serving up the best content within our areas of interest.
Think about it. Even with something as broad as the news. Who would we trust to deliver it? CBS, NBC, ABC or a specialized news channel like CNN, New York Times or the BBC? My bet is with the news agencies. This new arena also involves social networking in a big way. Magazines and publications understand this a lot better than the traditional networks, as they have engaged their readers in a two way conversations for years. When it comes to news, the large news agencies also know that much of their content will come from consumers, posing as the new reporters in the field. Read this article from Online Media Daily: Newspapers To Migrate Online.
I am willing to bet that the publications we subscribe to now, we would be happy to read and watch at some point in the future. But big changes are going to have to take place first. In fact, they will have to realize that their survival is not about simply placing an online version of their printed publication online. To begin with, they are going to have to stop thinking of themselves as publications, but channels. They are going to have to recognize that fewer and fewer of the younger demographic read, while more and more of them will want to watch video online. They will probably have to have 2/3 video to 1/3 written content. They will have to build social networks.
The opportunity is there for them. If they don't stake a claim within their respective areas NOW, someone else will, and they will learn the fatal mistake others have made in the past; such as MSN did with Google & search, the music industry did with Apple & iTunes, the telecom companies are realizing with VOIP.
There is no question that it will be about individual tastes, just as marketers have discovered it is all about one to one marketing. So, ask yourselves who is best suited to serve that up with the best quality & understanding...
...and what will happen to the networks, and why is this a huge opportunity for brands? I have a few opinions about all of that too. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
