Recently in Television Category

Wikinomics bookATLANTA - I recently attended a presentation by Don Tapscott, author of the best selling book "Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything". Tapscott explained how businesses can tap the potential of the emerging networked economy and its self-organized, mass-participatory communities. A digest of some of the more interesting insights I heard from Tapscott, along with my own observations:

  • The corporation as an institution chosen to create goods and services is going through massive change.

  • At the same time, the knowledge, resources and computational power of billions of people are self-organizing into a massive collective force. The Internet is becoming the first global platform for collaboration in history, interconnected and orchestrated through blogs, wikis, chat rooms, peer-to-peer networks and personal broadcasting.

  • Businesses that know how to tap into this self-organizing ecosystem of partners will co-create and peer-produce value for customers in ways that companies relying on internal capabilities and tightly-coupled partnerships will not be able to match.

  • A fundamental change in technology: the old web was accessed via the PC. The new web is accessed via smart communication devices.

  • The next generation is driving change. Kids today have no fear of technology because it is like the air - it is just there. The population isn't merely aging as many people think, it is bifurcating: getting older (the baby boom generation) and getting younger (the baby boom echo). In fact, the echo (80 million strong) is larger than the boom, and these kids are going to dominate the twenty first century. Their defining characteristic: they are the first generation to grow up online.

  • For the echo generation, time spent online is taken away from time spent watching TV. The echo generation comes home from school and turns on the computer and multi-tasks. They watch TV differently - it is passive and in the background. Most important, they process information differently during a key developmental stage for their brains, and this affects synapses.

  • Tapscott says that when he was a child, he was "an expert on model trains"; kids today are experts in every institution! Unlike previous decades known for their "generation gap", today there is a "generation lap". For the first time in recent history, kids and their parents listen to the same music on their iPods, with overlapping musical taste. Having said that, kids are lapping their parents in everything digital.

  • Looking at the audience of mostly boomers hearing Tapscott's presentation, I couldn't help but think that they are indeed being lapped. And worse, they don't know what they don't know. Are YOU part of the boomer generation and are you being lapped? How will YOU keep up? My prescription: experiment with new ways of communicating and collaborating. Start a blog. Try out Twitter or Facebook. As I often say in my keynote speeches: "Change means the time to innovate is now."

  • A young panel participant once told Tapscott: "E-mail is yesterday's technology. Today's generation communicates by text message, IM and Facebook. A good use of e-mail? "Sending a thank you to your friend's parents," she said. Interestingly, even I am using text messaging and Twitter much more, often replacing e-mail with those a text or Tweet. I recently guest lectured at Kennesaw State University and asked them what they thought about the trend. That group, born in the late 1980's, said Tapscott's young panel participant is not representative of their generation. Sure, they use text messaging and Facebook (some of them multi-tasking during my lecture!). But they all use e-mail regularly.

  • The Internet is a platform for collaboration, and Tapscott banned the word "websites" in his company. "None of you should have websites," Tapscott said. "You should have communities." That's an interesting concept. When I was building the online sports network Rivals.com in 1999, the secret of our success was we didn't just create team sport websites, we created communities of fans around topics. I found most traditional journalists who grew up in the world of print struggled with creating and growing online communities, while people who had immersed themselves in online discussions were naturals with online communities.

  • All this affects how we innovate and invent new products. It used to be that we all worked for companies because the transaction costs for finding the right information, coordination and collaboration were higher outside the company than inside the corporation. All that has changed with mass collaboration on the Internet - and companies need to act as peers instead of superiors. Mass collaboration requires: peering, being open, sharing some of your intellectual property and acting globally.

  • We're in the age of the wiki workplace and we need to transform how we do technology inside the corporation. "If you have people wasting time on Facebook, is that a technology problem?" What a great opportunity to figure out how to use social networking in the workplace. Unleash the power of human capital locked into old constraints.

  • Tapscott says everyone in a company should have a blog. Believe and trust in your people. In three years, his company hasn't had any problems with that approach. I compare that with CNN, which reportedly recently fired producer Chez Pazienza for blogging. CNN's policy as described in published reports: employees may not write anything that appears elsewhere, without first having it reviewed through CNN's "Standards & Practices Department". This centralized command and control management is in stark contrast to the Tapscott's recommendations.

  • One of my favorite comments from Tapscott: at his company, they don't have management meetings, instead the run the business via a wiki. With everyone traveling and based in different locations and time zones, this works well for them. Think about your own company: do you run the company via centralized management meetings? Could you experiment with replacing the meetings with an online wiki? I'd love to hear from you if you've tried this, how did it work out for you?

  • Tapscott concluded by saying that there is a crisis of leadership. "Welcome the future, for soon it shall be the past."



    Bookmark and Share


    What are YOUR thoughts about Don Tapscott and Wikinomics? Post your thoughts in the comment section.


  • Newsday has a good read, "TV or more TV?" The article focuses on the changing ways you can watch TV now that you can watch your favorite shows on your computer, cell phone or iPod.

    The video-cable iPod is credited with getting the ball rolling last October, with ABC offering downloads of "Lost" and "Desperate Housewives," commercial-free for $1.99 per episode. CBS and my industry colleague Brinley Turner then jumped into the fray, offering fee-based episodes online of new "Survivor" episodes immediately after their airing, while NBC and other cable channels have joined ABC on the iPod bandwagon.

    With video now on the Internet, iPods, VOD and cell phones, the article questions if the current flurry of high-tech innovation seems to be outpacing viewer desires and the ability to follow the fast-moving developments.

    "Basically, some products are being pushed forward," says media analyst Phillip Swann of TVPredictions.com, "not so much because consumers are rising up demanding it, but because the technology could create it."

    But David Katz, head of sports and entertainment for Yahoo! Media Group, (and formerly of CBS where he and Scott Ehrlich formerly of RealNetworks got together five years ago to pioneer the leading edge live online video "Big Brother 24/7") notes: "If you look at high-definition TV sets, they all have Ethernet jacks in the back for you to put a high-speed connection in. ... That then kind of blurs the line. Are you getting content from a network? Are you getting content from a Web site? Does it really matter to you?"

    abc_logo.jpg

    In today's media news: ABC television network will offer some of its most popular shows, such as "Desperate Housewives" and "Lost," for free on the Internet in a two-month trial.

    ABC already sells digital downloads of its highest-rated TV shows on Apple's iTunes and this is an opportunity for ABC to learn about the free-to-consumer paid advertising model.

    From a macro perspective, this is interesting in terms of potential to create a viable "cable bypass", as CBS CEO Leslie Moonves calls it, by going through the Internet rather than over cable or satellite services.

    From a paid content perspective, I'm asked all the time: should media companies offer their programs online to viewers free of charge, monetized through advertising embedded in the streams? Or should companies charge the consumer on a pay per view or subscription basis?

    My answer: It depends on the type of programming - and the strength of the advertising market.

    As Larry Kramer, president of CBS Digital Media, observes in an article on CNNMoney.com: what advertisers want is a large enough audience to matter.

    Programming that is popular and mass market - think the NCAA men's basketball tournament, Desperate Housewives, and Alias - can attract a large enough audience and can work well with an ad-supported model online.

    When you put such programming behind a pay wall online, you're typically cutting off 99% of the interested audience who won't otherwise pay for content - thus making the product less interesting to advertisers.

    Like It's 1999?

    One thing I don't hear a lot of people talking about: to what extent is free video enabled by an up advertising market?

    Advertising has cyclical ups and downs. Today, video inventory is in relatively short supply for advertisers. When the advertising market drops again - will media companies find they set themselves up for excess inventory, bandwidth costs- and an audience re-conditioned to everything being free?

    The rush to offer programming free to consumers monetized by advertising reminds me a little of 1999. Remember when the online ad market tanked in 2000?

    Related:

  • Users Prefer Ad-Supported Video (ClickZ)
  • @ NCTA: Interview: Anne Sweeney, Co-Chair, Disney Media Networks/President, Disney-ABC Television Group (PaidContent.org)

  • TV on the Net

    | | Comments ()

    What is the future of Internet TV?

    The Patriot-News published an article yesterday based on a speech by Phil Swann, entitled "Video Without Borders."

    Swann is publisher of TVPredictions.com, and his premise is that in the next few years, television will experience a revolution with the emergence of Internet TV. Swann predicts that viewers will be able to download thousands of shows and movies from the Internet directly to their TVs.

    Swann also revealed his secret formula for making predictions about the television industry, a three-part test for how to evaluate new technology:

  • Is it easy to use and understand for the consumer?
  • Does it add convenience to someone's life?
  • Does it add entertainment?

    With that in mind, Swann had some harsh criticism for Apple Computer Inc.'s video iPod.

    The original, audio-only iPod passes all three tests, he says. But the video iPod, with its 2.5-inch screen, "is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. It's a classic case of technology flaunting," Swann told The Patriot News.

    "Cell-phone TV is even dumber than the video iPod," Swann said.

    Whoa, hold on there Swanni. There are more than a few people who would have to disagree on that last observation. Namely the more than 500,000 paying subscribers to MobiTV, which provides the mobile TV service for Sprint and Cingular.

    I expect we're going to find that many people who like TV... will like mobile TV. But there's more that needs to be done before mobile services deliver a user experience that passes Swann's three rules.

    Related Links:

  • The Washington Post hosted a live chat with Swann, covering the topic of HDTV, and it makes for a good read.

  • This article was originally published on PaidContent.org on November 17, 2004.

    sports.media.tech.logo.175

    I recently attended the 6th Annual Sports Media & Technology conference and this is a second in a series of reports blogging some of the more interesting panel presentations.

    Tuesday morning we heard a panel presentation about "Set-Top Boxes and The Future of Interactive Television".

    -- Dave Clark, Director of Product Strategy at Scientific Atlanta noted that the key to interactive applications and DVR capabilities is the horsepower of the set -top box. Each year, set-top manufacturers such as Scientific Atlanta roll out more powerful set-top boxes at a lower cost. The practical constraint: cost vs. capability.

    Clark described the set-top box with DVR and HD capability as having a $400-$500 cost basis. With a 160 GB hard drive needed to support high definition (which fills 10GB/hour). "You can never give people enough storage, they'll always fill it up," said Clark. The question is: will the distributors subsidize part of the cost of the box?

    A trend to watch: more mobile content, video to-go to catch up with your viewing while on a plane as an example.

    And how content rights and DRM are handled is a key issue, according to Clark. There's no doubt, people will increasingly want what they want, when they want it. An interesting side note to expand your thinking on this topic: check out this report by Saul Berman of IBM on a phenomenon he calls the "attention loop" that "will enable successful companies to determine the optimal match of digital content and access rights to consumer needs and demands - and to create reciprocal relationships with alliance partners, vendors and suppliers, customers and consumers."

    -- Paul Nathanielsz, Senior Director, Product Marketing for Bell ExpressVu, observed that consumers view set-top boxes as consumer electronics and as a result are accustomed to the idea of upgrading hardware every few years. Nathanielsz gave examples of multi-camera hockey applications, with the user able to select from three alternative camera angles, jump back 45 seconds in a game, view stats, and more. "You've got to deliver a great show at the end of the day," Nathanielsz said.

    -- John Vartanian, SVP, Technology & Operations for iN Demand, described a NASCAR in-car interactive application with 4 cameras in 7 different cars, enabling the viewer to experience a race from different angles.

    These apps are very cool, but coming back to business reality, this programming is expensive to produce and distribute and consumers haven't yet shown they're willing to pay more.

    In my next report, I'll cover "Expanding the Fan Base with Wireless Applications".

    This article was originally published on PaidContent.org on November 17, 2004.

    sports.media.tech.logo.175

    I recently attended the 6th Annual Sports Media & Technology conference. The folks at Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal do a fabulous job organizing and presenting this conference, and I'll blog some of the more interesting panel presentations here.

    There was a lively panel discussion Tuesday morning on the topic of "Cable Programming and Distribution Issues that Affect the Way We View Sports" (who comes up with these titles, anyway?).

    -- Fred Dressler, EVP for Programming at Time Warner Cable said he sees escalating rights fees for sports programming as the biggest issue within the industry, particularly in light of recent news about NFL rights fees for television ("NFL agrees to six-year extensions with Fox and CBS worth $8 billion"). "It is fascinating to me to read how FOX concedes that it lost money on the last NFL deal," Dressler said. "But it says it is going to make money on this one when it increased its cost by over 30 percent."

    Escalating rights fees are certainly good if you're a sports league and can find a willing buyer. But is this sustainable?

    -- David Meister, Chairman & CEO of The Tennis Channel (a 24-hour cable television network devoted to tennis) said that sports tiers on cable today don't reflect what's driven cable TV in the past: namely, the value proposition of broad consumer choice. Meister says that with tiers today, the consumer ends up paying 2-3 times more, which he described as a flawed value proposition.

    There is reason to believe Meister is correct, but some consumers must wonder is it fair for MSO's to pass along escalating rights fees for sports programming to all subscribers, especially to the majority who dont watch sports programming?

    In my next report, I'll cover "Set-Top Boxes and The Future of Interactive Television".

    This article was originally published on PaidContent.org on November 17, 2003.

    sportstech2003.gif Day One of the Sports Media & Technology conference kicked off Thursday in New York City.

    The day started with fireworks.

    During the first panel session "Sports-Tiered Pricing and the Battle Over Increasing Rates", panelists Leo Hindery (Chairman & CEO, YES Network) and Fred Dressler (Senior VP of Programming, Time Warner Cable) squared off in a heated debate.

    Hindery said sportscasts are worth the highest prices in cable because they bring in the most viewers.

    "Let's put every network on the table and compare their ratings with their costs," said Hindery.

    Dressler said sports programming costs are climbing 12%-15% every year. But Time Warner Cable can't get those expenses back from subs because if the rates to consumers go higher than 5% a year, customers cancel and defect to DirecTV and EchoStar.

    "Just because George Steinbrenner can't say no to a high-priced player doesn't mean I have to say yes to Leo," said Dressler.

    Attendees at the conference were buzzing the rest of the day about the heated exchange during this panel.

    For more on this session, click over to the report in Variety.com (free registration required).

    Other panels including "Understanding the Realities of the HDTV Transition", and "Gaining Control of the Emerging Broadband Sports Revenue Stream" (yours truly was a panelist on that session) were more tame.

    In my next report, I'll cover "The Future of Video Games Online".

    About this Archive

    This page is a archive of recent entries in the Television category.

    Sports is the previous category.

    Travel is the next category.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.