November 29, 2006 • 9:05 am
BitTorrent is an impressive way to share big files online. It explains why it has become a favourite among people looking to get the latest episode of Lost or dodgy recording of a Hollywood blockuster, illegally of course.
But there are signs that the media industry is realising it cannot fight the technology, with major studios announcing a deal with the BitTorrent company to distribute their movies.
Under the plans, BitTorrent will set up an online video store in the spring, offering films from studios such as Paramount Pictures, Lionsgate and Twentieth Century Fox Film, as well as TV shows from MTV Networks.
It follows an earlier deal with Warner Bros. The deals are a volte-face from the approach of suing consumers or legal action to squash technologies like Napster. Eric Patterson, BitTorrent’s general manager of consumer services, explains it well:
“Millions of people are using BitTorrent to download content legally and illegally. We know from our research that 30 percent of that audience will pay for content. We’re going to help the studios turn an enormous problem into a viable sales channel.”
The question is whether the service will be priced at the right level and offer the right level of convenience to ween people away from pirated sources. To compete with free, the service is going to have to make it easy to download movies, much like iTunes does with music.
Filed under: internet
November 27, 2006 • 9:21 am
File under news of the obvious. According to a poll for the BBC, Brits who watch video over the internet or by mobile watch less TV.
Unsurprisingly, online and mobile video is far more popular among the young, with 28% of those aged 16-24 saying they watched more than once each week.
This does not mean that TV is going to go away any time soon. But it does mean that the way we watch video is changing, so TV networks are going to have to change as well. From the BBC article:
“The success of sites such as YouTube over the past year has helped open the door for those who want easy ways to find, watch and share videos over the internet.”
Perhaps the popularity of the Star Wars kid points the way. The two-minute clip of a teenager waving a pretend a lightsaber has become the most successful viral video on the net.
How did this happen? By people sending it on to friends, who then sent it on to others. No marketing, no big Hollywood blockbuster budget.
In the words of UKTV channel boss Steve North:
“It’s now official – with viewing figures like this, virals truly are the entertainment of the future. The magic combination of hilarity and notoriety means that these vignettes are forwarded from inbox to inbox around the world.”
Mind you, he would say that, as his channel has commissioned a TV show based on viral videos.
Filed under: YouTube, video
November 26, 2006 • 10:12 am
This video has been around for a while. But I found it again, thanks to Mindy McAdams. It is a take on the War of the Worlds – in this case, it is old media that is facing an invasion from an unseen but numerous enemy. The video is based on Chris Long’s The Long Tail.
Filed under: video
November 24, 2006 • 12:20 pm
One of the big debates in journalism is the question of how in touch news editors are with the audience.
News sites increasingly offer a section which shows the most popular stories with readers.
This neat page ranks how in touch the BBC News website is with its readers.
It works by comparing the top 10 headlines on the front page with the 10 most read stories, pulling the information from RSS feeds. Ben Metcalfe has more on the XML feeds in his blog.
It is an interesting application and shows how technology can be used to offer a different take on news.
Filed under: new media
November 23, 2006 • 10:16 pm
The great thing about podcasts is that you can listen to them at any time, on any device and in any place.
The convenience has led to a growth in the number of people who say they download podcasts, according to a Pew Internet study. Now 12% of American netizens download podcasts, up from 7% earlier this year.
But the same Pew study suggests that few are becoming hooked. Few are downloading podcasts with great frequency – apparently just 1% download every day.
This is not that surprising. Radio tends to be something that is on in the background. The difference with podcasts is that you have to make a conscious decision to subscribe to a particular show. It stands to reason that people would subscribe to the few they are most interested in, rather than clog up a hard drive with mass of audio.
Quoted on the BBC News website, senior Pew research specialist Mary Madden said:
“While podcast downloading is still an emerging activity primarily enjoyed by early adopters, the range of content now available speaks to both mainstream and niche audiences. We are at a crossroads of a major transition in the way media content is delivered and consumed.”
The report is available as a PDF.
Filed under: multimedia, podcast
November 22, 2006 • 10:54 am
CBS is getting into a frenzy about YouTube in this press release. The two are best pals now, a month into their partnership that offers CBS clips on YouTube legally.
CBS has uploaded more than 300 clips since the service launched on October 18. It says these have been viewed 29.2 million times on YouTube, which is an average of 857,000 views daily. In the words of Quincy Smith, President, CBS Interactive:
“Above all the other good news, what’s most exciting here is the extent to which CBS is learning about its audience as never before.
“YouTube users are clearly being entertained by the CBS programming they’re watching as evidenced by the sheer number of video views. Professional content seeds YouTube and allows an open dialogue between established media players and a new set of viewers. We believe this inflection point is the precursor to many exciting developments as we continue to build bridges rather than construct walls.”
This is a refreshing approach. But a month in, it may be too early to say this is a successful approach that other TV networks should emulate.
Michael Arrington has a good analysis at TechCrunch:
“It’s clear, though, that all of these press releases and lawsuits are chess pieces in a huge behind the scenes battle going on right now: Content owners are trying to figure out what to do and how to do it before offline television dies. YouTube, in the meantime, divides and conquers.”
Filed under: YouTube, video
November 20, 2006 • 10:02 am
Since when was it a good idea to hand over your key assets to one of your main rivals?
This is exactly what 176 newspapers in 38 US states are doing. As the New York Times reports:
“A consortium of seven newspaper chains representing 176 daily papers across the country is announcing a broad partnership with Yahoo to share content, advertising and technology, another sign that the wary newspaper business is increasingly willing to shake hands with the technology companies they once saw as a threat.”
The deal is great news for Yahoo. It gets its hands on unique content, local news. But what are the benefits for the consortium of seven newspaper chains involved in the deal? This is less clear.
Yahoo is going to make its provide services such as mapping and search to the newspapers’ websites and let them use its technology to help the papers sell online ads. And advertisers will be able to list in a participating newspaper, HotJobs and across the Yahoo network.
I am not the only one who thinks Yahoo has got the better end of the deal. Mindy McAdams is suitably scathing in her blog:
“Aggregating your content into a big bundle does not build audience. It just makes another big mess that the users can’t navigate efficiently.
Giving away your local news. Oh, yeah, brilliant. The only unique thing you’re got, and you’re going to hand it over to people who know how to exploit it — and also cut you out of the equation.”
Filed under: newspapers
So Tom and Katie got married at the weekend. Not, in my book, the biggest story of the day. But this didn’t stop MSNBC TV going overboard with its breaking news alerts.
MediaBistro has a sample of the constant breaking news astons that peppered five hours of “breaking news” coverage on the celebrity wedding.
Among the choice entries:
- Wedding of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes to begin in minutes
- Cruise and Holmes ceremony to begin any minute now
- Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes getting married right now
- Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are officially married
I guess it was a slow day in the MSNBC newsroom.
Filed under: broadcast, news
November 18, 2006 • 4:14 pm
All is not well at the net giant Yahoo. The Wall Street Journal has a story about a senior vice-president bemoaning Yahoo’s current strategy.
A four-page memo by Brad Garlinghouse , SVP of Communications, Communities, and Front Doors, compares Yahoo’s strategy to peanut butter.
Why peanut butter? In his words:
“I’ve heard our strategy described as spreading peanut butter across the myriad opportunities that continue to evolve in the online world. The result: a thin layer of investment spread across everything we do and thus we focus on nothing in particular.
I hate peanut butter. We all should.”
The memo makes some good points, talking about Yahoo’s lack of a cohesive strategy and highlight areas where the company has competing services. Flickr and Yahoo photos anyone?
Looking at Yahoo’s behaviour over the past 18 months, it is clear that the company has been branching in new areas at breakneck speed. Where Yahoo has failed is to bring these different services and ideas together. The risk is damaging some very popular and successful services, such as Flickr.
Brad Garleyhouse’s solution? Focus the vision, restore accountability and clarity of ownership, and execute a radical reorganization. He spells out two key points:
“Blow up the matrix. Empower a new generation and model of General Managers to be true general managers. Product, marketing, user experience & design, engineering, business development & operations all report into a small number of focused General Managers. Leave no doubt as to where accountability lies.
Kill the redundancies. Align a set of new BU’s so that they are not competing against each other. Search focuses on search. Social media aligns with community and communications. No competing owners for Video, Photos, etc. And Front Page becomes Switzerland. This will be a delicate exercise — decentralization can create inefficiencies, but I believe we can find the right balance.”
You can read most of the memo at PaidContent – just in case the WSJ limits its copy to subscribers.
Filed under: online
November 16, 2006 • 4:23 pm
The MediaGuardian has made a bit of a splash with its story that the BBC is going to pay for photos or video sent in by the public.
The article talks about this is a “departure for the BBC” quoting comments by the head of News Interactive, Pete Clifton, from three weeks ago. At the time he said he did not expect to pay for content from viewers.
The new guidelines, available online, mean the BBC would consider making an appropriate payment “on very rare occasions where material is particularly editorially important or unique and depicts something of great significance.”
The change in approach has sparked a debate over whether a publicly-funded body like the BBC should be spending money on material from its audience.
I don’t see what the fuss is about. News is a competitive business and there will be times when someone has taken the must-see photo, or has captured compelling video of an event.
But the new guidelines don’t suggest to me that the BBC is going to start paying for most of the material its receives from the public. If anything, they suggest the opposite – don’t expect any money for sending the Beeb your photos or video.
Filed under: citizen journalism
Recent Comments