Archives

Hvorfor TV overlever – en stund til

HVORFOR TV OVERLEVER – EN STUND TIL

I den senere tid, igjen bør kanskje nevnes, har diskusjoner omkring hvordan TV som medie kommer til å utvikles, og ikke minst, hvordan Google med sin tjeneste Google TV kommer til å påvirke vår holdning til dette.

Sigurd Vik, glitrende fagmann hos Red Media, blogget om dette for noen uker siden. Hans konklusjon er dette kommer å skape et paradigmeskifte, også her i Norge.

Denne tanken deler jeg ikke, jeg tror at TV kommer å bestå i sin nåværende form, i hvert fall de kommende 20-30 årene!

Hvorfor?
Jeg tror svaret er todelt; for det første så er TV i dag en sosial ting for oss og den tradisjonelle familien (og her mener jeg både den ‘vanlige’ kjernefamilien og den ‘sosiale’ kjernefamilien). Uansett hva man mener om kvaliteten på programmene så er det en grunn til å sitte hjemme med sine nære og kjære og se, f.eks. Gullrekka på fredagskveldene. Alle finner noe å se på sammen, noe man kan samles omkring og prate, spise potetgull, kommentere hva som er blitt gjort, sunget, sagt osv. Jeg tror at dette stikker så dypt i oss at dette sosiale samværet er noe som vi verdsetter så pass høyt at vi kommer å fortsette med det i overskuelig fremtid. Av samme anledning er det morsomt at man samler guttegjengen, går på en sportsbar – ser på store fotballkamper, Melodi Grand Prix osv, vi ønsker å være sammen og dele en felles erfaring, og foreløpig er det kun det store TV-formatet det som klarer det mener jeg.

Den andre anledningen, fra et kommersiellt ståsted, er rett og slett at det handler om penger. I en artikkel i Wall Street Journal beskriver man forretningsmodellen og hvorfor de store TV selskapene nekter Google TV.
I en glitrende analyse i AdAgeblir det veldig tydelig hvorfor, og jeg skal gjøre en rask oppsummering:

TV selskapene blokkerer ikke Google TV bare for at det er Google. De hindrer Google TV fordi at de viser et web-TV program, med web TV økonomi, på TV, noe som totalt skulle fjerne all form av inntekter for TV selskapene! Derfor blir svaret nokså enkelt; annonseinntekter! De får ikke tilstrekkelig mye inntjening fra nett. Vise vanlige TV-programmer via nett betyr at man erstatter store inntekter i de tradisjonelle TV-kanalene mot lite inntekter på nett-TV, og hvem vil gjøre det?
Ettersom vi som ser TV på nett gjerne hopper over annonseringen hvis vi har mulighet, hvem skal da betale det som det produseres? Derfor tror jeg at det det økonomiske regnestykket er så pass enkelt at dette er en meget sterk grunn til at Google TV, eller Apples TV-tanker, ikke kommer til å forandre måten som vi ser TV på i overskuelig fremtid.
Men igjen, hovedanledningen til hvorfor TV kommer til å overleve neste generasjon er at det er verdens største sosiale nettverk, hvor vi kan se/diskutere/le/reflektere/irriteres i en setting som ikke web TV kan tilby oss.

Is YouTube a parasite ?

According to a report in the Guardian, the former BBC executive Michael Grade, now the Executive Chairman of Britain’s Independent Television, openly attacked Google-owned YouTube at the recent IBC convention in Amsterdam, for stealing and living off the television content created by the UK’s founding commercial network.

Grade also stated that despite the parasitic nature of the video-sharing site that he did not think that these types of companies represented a major threat to TV broadcasting in general because for the most part, they didn’t create their own content.

“They’re all parasites, they just live off our content is what they do. As long as we can create the content, the content is the keys to the castle for us going forward.”

You have to agree that Grade has a point about YouTube being parasites, but it seems that it’s virtually impossible for the video-sharing site to police and remove all the millions of posts containing content that has a as copyright. I suppose the one piece of good news for ITV is that at least the US network executives still value good, or shall we say marketable, content and compensate the many British writers and producers thus allowing American interpretations to be translated, repackaged and sold to a wider audience.

Still, who was it said that imitation was the highest form of flattery? When will there be any discussion in Norway regarding this matter? Or, are we just so into the discussion about Pirate Bay, sharing music, torrents and so on, that this isn’t a matter at all?

Ad’s on the net tops TV-ads

Listening to the radio this morning, one of the biggest news was that companies spends more money on ads on the Internet, than they use on TV ads. Still, most spent money is traditional, ads in the newspapers.
So, what we happen with this in the future, I think it will create a flood of ads on most of the netsites where people are, which in the short term will be extremely annoying for those reading on the net. It will create more opportunities to make good websites, campaigns and so forth – and it will demand a much better structure on how to reach the potential customers/friends/target groups.
You’ll find the article here: .

Why not your own TV-channel ?

It this days where everybody is talking about new social technologies, ranging from blogs to profiles on social networking sites. But almost all of these efforts are one-off technology deployments, instead of being part of a master plan on how to engage customers and employees on a strategic level.

Some ideas on how and why companies need to build their social strategy:

People: You have to understand how your target customer uses social technologies today—and in the future.
Objectives: Given how your customers use technologies, what business objectives can you realistically meet with social technologies? We believe there are five objectives companies can meet better and faster because of Web 2.0 technologies:

1. Listening
2. Talking
3. Energizing
4. Supporting, and
5. Embracing.

Strategy: After identifying your business objective, what is your strategy on how you are going to achieve it? A deep understanding of which Web 2.0 technologies and approaches work for which objectives is essential.

Technology: Once the other steps are done, then, and only then, should companies focus on which technologies to use. All too often, we have companies asking us “Which blogging software should we use?” when the question should be “Why should we have a blog at all?” Knowing your objectives will make winnowing and selecting the right technology vendors a much easier process.

One of the things that I ca me across lately is the idea of making/having your own TV-channel, besides just putting your videos on YouTube.
Instead of Twittering, which I from a business point of view, doesn’t find to have any ‘usp’ (If you have some, please let me know, I curios!), why not use the the TV media to stand out amongst all this social networks. I think it’s an easy way of communicating and really have to use the TV-media for what it’s worth. I know that TV is usually is a passive way of communication, but doing it the proper way, together with an rss-feed for example to downloads and notifications.
Ideas and business cases, let me know.