Targeted TV vs. Couch Potatoes
So, I was having a beer last night with b5media's Jeremy Wright and a 23-year-old online video entrepreneur, Matt Dickinson, having an animated discussion about the future of TV and how the Web will affect how video is distributed and consumed. An idea I increasingly believe in is how people watch TV will radically change. (Okay, it's not an earth-shattering idea but go with the flow, okay?) Instead of being couch potatoes and consuming whatever the major networks dish out, consumers are becoming far more selective. This is happening for several reasons: one, the 500-channel universe means there is a lot of programming noise, and with so much competition, quality shows that don't immediately attract an audience have little chance of success. (Arrested Development is a fairly good example) It means most programming is middle of the road aimed at a broad audience that simply wants to be mildly entertained. Second, the PVR, video-on-demand, time-shifting, the Slingbox, the iPod, streaming video, IP-TV, etc. mean consumers have more power than ever to watch what they want, when they want. With busier lives and the Web gobbling up hours that used to be devoted to TV, I believe many consumers are watching fewer shows but embracing these shows far more than they did in the past. How so? Well, it's not just the show itself but how the Internet also allows people to build a stronger relationship with the show and its characters/actors through the show's Web site and, of course, blogs where communities can gather to share their enthusiasm. b5media, for example, has a number of popular TV blogs, including 24 Headquarters and Grey's Anatomy News that play right into this trend. So, in a sense, consumers are still devoting a lot of time to TV but it's being divided between the TV and the Web.
So what does this mean for the TV industry? For one, they have no choice but to embrace the Web as a distribution vehicle. Pay-per-view via a Web site or through a video-sharing service such as YouTube will become more relevant as a way to complement traditional TV distribution. Second, the television industry will have to adopt a different, lower-cost programming model as a way to deal with the competitive landscape. The days of the $1-million pilot that fail to get out of the gate may be over. For guys like Matt Dickinson, it's a whole, new world where a 60-episode television series about two backpackers traveling through Europe (produced for about $150K) could become the new TV reality. I'm not suggesting high-production, high-price shows such as House, CSI and Desperate Housewives will disappear but there will be a new wave of lower-cost programming vying for and getting the attention of broadcasters and consumers. Another trend to keep an eye is the emergence of Web TV networks such as Blip.tv and Network2 that will aggregate online shows or produce programming themselves. TV as we know is about to change big-time. As someone who doesn't watch a lot of TV (other than Toronto Maple Leaf games and the NFL on Sunday), I can't wait.
Tomorrow's Media Theme: the New Newsroom - hiring 'em cheap and young vs. a smaller, more experienced team.
Update: Robert Scoble has a post on the challenges facing Internet video business. Other views come from Paul Colligan and Duncan Riley. In other news, YouTube has been asked to take down 29,549 after complaints from several Japanese content owners. A sign of thigns to come?? Steve Gillmor has a post, “TV is Dead”, that offers a more pessimistic view of the TV landscape.
