Television is paving the way for change of established corporations’ approaches to new demands by internet-serviced audiences. Trailblazing deals in the TV industry that signal profound behavioral change among viewers could set a precedent for written media. Or they should at least provide inspiration.
Yesterday’s full-blast launch to US tv audiences of Hulu.com, the YouTube competitor service scrambled together by NBC and Fox, LionsGate and Sony Pictures Television, underpins this. The new site allows American viewers to watch tv shows, including advertising, online for free. Hulu.com already is wildly popular because it allows people to watch shows in their own time, rather than being determined by an agenda set by the tv stations.
In a countermove, YouTube has opened its API to developers so that it will be able to compete through being more widely embedded in other sites. It has also improved its own site. Users now are advised not to download shows for which they don’t have the modem speed, for instance.
Joost.com, a similar service set up by Skype inventors which aims to reach international audiences, also launched a new package yesterday. According to its creators all went better than expected. But other news reports contradict this.
There´s a Twitter tool that allows you to track down all your favorite programs online, called Spoonch.tv. It works in a basic style; you send a tweet to ATspoonch and twitter what you´re watching and the link. Checking the site, you can see what the entire online world is watching - therefore which programs/movies are available.
I am not going to write an entire post about the TV industry, but want to point out the major difference between written media and TV entertainment; written media can also repackage and release its content but it will always remain slightly limited by the clock for news coverage. After all, news is real; it needs to happen before the dissemination process can begin. The platforms that dish out the news are already visited by people who designate their own time to the consumption of the news.
The prime lesson to be learnt perhaps is in the packaging. Throwing stuff from competing institutions together to make an extra valuable tool for targeted advertising appears to be a workable concept. Aggregation logic in the news media runs on totally different numbers, but it always has done, so there’s little to worry over when you see that two major tv stations are having to cluster together to stay competitive. I guess.
Any comments?