Category: video

Why indy video is better for local TV

According to TechCrunch Joost won’t have User generated content. The company is inking big deals with Viacom and Warner instead. I don’t think this will hurt independent video creators. It will only make them more interesting partners. For whom you ask? For local TV stations that’s who.

Hey TV stations,
Why pay for expensive content from the big three TV dinosaurs? Make your shows local, hyper-relevant, and fresh. Sell new ideas up to New York and LA instead of the other way around. If you work with creative people formally known as your audience you can create a new sustainable business. There are thousands of people out there in your town with video cameras. This pool of content will only change.

If you go with the old way of doing things and franchise Viacom’s content property you’ll have to compete directly with Joost? Can a small business with a licence to only reach a finite physical area compete with that? In a decade or two the majority of the generation used to watching TV sets will have passed on.

(I started this blog post a few months ago and never posted it. It seems even more relevant now that Joost is out. I have a lot more thoughts about this but this will do for now. Watch out local TV!)

Joost beta testing

I got my beta tester email from Joost today. Its a new app for Windows and Intel Macs that plays TV on your computer. (PPC Mac and Linux version supposedly on the way) I downloaded it and immediately told people on Twitter. So far the full screen interface is great. But the choppy audio and video from my work and home broadband connections is annoying. Maybe that’ll improve.

It would be cool if you could download content to your HD and play it there. Not to steal the video content. But to watch it super smooth. Apple’s Front Row can play media on your HD and the trailer streaming is pretty smooth.

The part I’m really excited about are the mash ups people will build with the Joost API. (not quite out yet) I think this could be truly interactive TV come true. Only when users can create their own channels on Joost and upload content THEY created will it be an actual two way experience.

Dig this commercial. The graphics and script are amazing.

Coffee Cam

The Trojan Room Coffee cam was the first web cam. It was set up to see if coffee was ready in another room. Geeks are lazy by nature. Laziness inspires all kinds of great innovation!

Don Sizemore has set up a web cam to see how long a line is at an outside coffee stand. (The camera isn’t pointed there yet. But soon… hopefully.) Our beloved Daily Grind Coffee is in a temporary trailer home. Its cold out right now so why not find out what’s up before you get in line? Fortunately or unfortunately for me I get to work early enough to beat the lines. 🙂

Thanks for telling me about this Paul!

Open your Content: More good advice for the MSM

John Joseph Bachir adds this bit of advice for the mainstream media. See his post, Television talking to bloggers (and: I was on TV!!!!!!!!1111111one), for full context.

WNBC wants to take advantage of a more distributed information collection model. Fine. But this does not bridge the gap between old media (TV) and current media (blogging/internet). The internet is about conversation, removing degrees of separation between people, feedback…. I could go on. If WNBC is serious about participating in our world, they need to make their content accessible and usable after it has aired, allow feedback on their stories either via direct comment threads or forums on the website, and PARTICIPATE in these new tools. Have a presence on their forums. Adapt programming to the feedback… I know, I’m dreaming.

And dream on we will…

If TV stations allowed their video content to be shared, reused, and remixed that would be an excellent offering to their communities. A serious first step towards fair partnerships with bloggers and other content creators.

Put permanent links on your websites to copies of YOUR audio and video files. Encourage people to download the content and make something new with it. We’re already sharing our content. Not its your turn.

I know copyright is complicated. Creative Commons is the answer. It doesn’t circumvent the rights of Copyright holders it augments it.

Video: Building on the Past by Justin Coen

Creativity + Fans x Love = Money

Recently I wrote about the News and Observer’s use of YouTube video on their blog of a Duke game on ESPN. I think its very cool and hope more MSM websites adopt this practice. But my ruminations deal with the legality of this practice among for-profit business. Especially when copyright owners, like university athletic programs, don’t allow fans to take video of their events. I think the differentiation between broadcast video and fan video needs to disappear. At least from a promotion standpoint. i.e. When a fan makes a video of an event they do it out of love not profit. That passion translates into good free event promotion.

Let fans share video and pictures they take of college sports. Encourage it even. You’ll be glad you did later.

Here are a few of my comments on Ed Cone’s blog when this issue was brought up in December 2005. Please read this blog post by Ed Cone for more context.

Dec 19, 2005
(1) “They should encourage fan videos and pics then give them a place to share it…If UNC and the ACC can’t understand this now they’ll have some hard lessons to learn about new media in the near future. The number of these small video cameras will only increase plus younger fans will EXPECT to be able to use them. Banning them would create bad publicity, FAST.”

Dec 19, 2005
(2) “I think it’s important to point out that Ed’s video or others like it aren’t a replacement for real TV coverage. Nor are they ANY real financial threat. I love watching college basketball and wouldn’t watch little vids instead of a higher rez version. These small vids are viral advertisements. A type of social activity that basketball fans, young and old, can enjoy. When you give a community (ie ACC basketball fans) a common activity that layers on top of another (ie following the tar heels) you have a very strong synergy. Creativity + fans x love = money.”

Hat Tip to Ed for the link .

Analyzing Campaign Video Distro Strategies

Matthew Bernius a Visiting Professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology (I checked the RTI directory for confirmation) has written a interesting blog post about the video Edwards and Obama are using online. Its called a tale of two candidate’s video distribution strategies and it compares and contrasts the two candidates use of online video. He also links to our response to the Edward’s announcement video. Here is the part I’d like to comment on.

These examples highlight an interesting problem for candidates: while YouTube offers tools to manage posting comments, you cannot control what content your page links to. In going to “where the people are,” you leave yourself open to direct commentary from the people. Counter-commentary may be located directly beside your stumping. Contrast this to Brightcove’s promise of control, an interface that does not link directly to intertextual documents. Additionally, even when you find commentary on Brightcove, it is coming from established sources. While you might get criticized it is coming from the media, rather than the people you are trying to reach.

To me the trade off of not being able to control people’s response to your message is a fair one. The fact is the Internet and personal publishing (text, audio, and video) has radically transformed global communication, permanently. You can not stop people from sharing their opinions, online or otherwise.

Some old school campaign advisers and PR folks may think that the main stream media has the loudest final word on truth about politicians. Wrong. Perception is an important factor. Word of mouth effects perception more than traditional media. Why? Trust. People don’t trust corporate media as much as they used to.

The democratization of communication has let loose a giant amount of opinions and facts hereto unavailable to so many people. It balances and counterbalances the spin corporate media has on it. The Internet give us choice and teaches us how to be responsible media users. (previously known as media consumers)

Our future will be full of interesting “battles” between main stream media and the media maker “hordes”. If we look at the math I think its obvious that the billions of users-producers will win over the thousands of traditional media producers. Whether the content is good, bad, fair, or unfair the shear volume of content will tip the scales on who we trust.

So why shouldn’t new political candidates WORK WITH the people who will make media and vote? Working with people builds real grassroots campaigns. Right now Edwards is running a netroots video campaign and Obama isn’t. Your analysis may vary.

Hat tip to Ruby for sending me the link.

N&O, ESPN, YouTube, and The ACC

I read the News and Observer college basketball blog ACC Now. Todays post called The final 12.7 seconds contains a YouTube video of the end of the Duke vs Clemson game on ESPN. (see image bellow) Quite a nail bitter. Last minute bucket by Clemson player Hamilton tied the game 66 to 66. I really appreciated seeing this video online because I missed the cool live moment. (Plus I’m a Carolina fan and really only care about the Tar Heels.) 🙂

But this “convergence” moment by Main Stream Media intrigued me. Something happened here that would have corporate lawyers in a giant tizzy just a year or two ago. Maybe they’re still concerned about this, I don’t know.

What would concern lawyers about YouTube video on the N&O site?
The use of copyrighted material that this media player, as far as I know, does not own or have rights to. (if there is a notice of permission on the site I missed please let me know.)

YouTube video on the N$O
Click on image for larger version.

Here’s what happened with this simple blog post. The News and Observer, owned by The McClatchy Company, has a video captured by YouTube user goheels88 on their for-profit website. The video is a copyrighted product of ESPN and the Atlantic Coast Conference. Not to mention the rights of Duke University and Clemson University. You have one media outlet profiting, capturing eyeballs for ad revenue, by leveraging the copyright of two to four owners.

Is posting a YouTube video like this on the N&O site legal?

I hope it is. Its very possible that YouTube, now owned by tech giant Google, has licensed video clips from ESPN that are captured by YouTube users. Or maybe lawyers believe that any content still publicly available on the YouTube site is fair game. Bloggers do it so why can’t businesses?

If all these corporate entities have reached an agreement then I applaud them. If they have just decided its stupid to sue each other when this video promotes everyones interest then I congratulate you. Any way you look at it this is a watershed moment in the commons of information.

Please do me a favor N&O, send goheels88 a case of beer for capturing that video. He’ll need it when the Tar Heels demolish Dook in a few weeks. 🙂

WRAL has blogs and Citizen Video

A while back I participated in a usability test for the new WRAL.com. The site is now up and has some interesting features. No longer are our local newspapers the only news outlets with blogs. WRAL has several like The Skinny on local tech, High School Hoops, WRAL Sports: The ACC & Beyond, and more. They even link to local Political Blogs in their News politics section. (ex. OrangePolitics.org, The Locker Room, Science and Politics.)

The new feature that really caught my eye was the Share Video part of the site. I didn’t find it by browsing but read about it on Dot John — Inside WRAL.com. Right now they have three videos up you can watch in the web browser. Two are promos and one is a video shot of a house fire.

While I love the fact that WRAL is getting into using Citizen Journalist video I’m still concerned. How should Citizen Journalists be compensated? Right now they have awarded an iPod to one person who has uploaded video.

And keep an eye on the page for contests. We already have awarded an iPod to a visitor who shot, edited and uploaded high school football highlights to WRAL.com.

Do all people who upload video get an iPod? I doubt it. What is the reward for the work Citizen Journalist perform? A pat on the back? The satisfaction of having your video on the WRAL site?

I recommend that WRAL treat Citizen Journalists like any other stringer. Publish rates and details of all content sharing deals. This to me is the fair thing todo. WRAL is a for-profit media outlet that will gain one way or another by the hard work of Citizen Journalists. Do the right thing WRAL and compensate everyone who provides you content. Prove to us that having video on your site has advantages over just putting it on our own blogs.

Great job with the new site WRAL! Keep it up.