Felicia Day has a good point about production costs and access to content.
Felicia Day has a good point about production costs and access to content. My question is this: if I'm forced to watch advertisements on "cable" and on streaming video, aren't the advertisers paying for the production costs as they've always done?
I'm not sure about shows like The Guild or any other web-based content, how they make their production costs: do they advertise, charge a fee, accept donations?
Originally shared by Felicia Day
Started a big discussion on Twitter about this article on latest move from two TV networks. Basically delaying immediate streaming of Fox and ABC shows unless you verify through your cable subscription.
Most people on Twitter, when I asked how this will affect their viewing habits, answered two things:
-More piracy (especially international viewers, which is a WHOLE separate convo)
-Tuning out by cord cutting or just waiting for the season to be on DVD/purchase
There is a basic principle working here (scary, if you're in the TV business) that I've personally been dealing with on The Guild with a mere 2 DAYS! delay of releasing content: People want content immediately, wherever they like to view things. They don't care if you're trying to pay production bills, they don't care if it's the only way to fund things, they want it NOW, they want it CONVENIENT to them personally. Whether this is a reasonable attitude or not, it's what people are used to in this day of streaming on demand, and it's only going to get worse, because cord-cutters are getting more and more common. Long view=not good.
To me, the cable box seems like Tower Records 10 years ago, or Borders just 2 years ago. Look at how music and books have shifted to digital, on-demand purchasing. Cable companies are the "brick and mortar" place for video, and that business is dying. People don't have enough time for 140 channels, they have enough time for maybe 10 shows, that's it. Why pay 140 bux a month to watch that many shows when you can buy them individually? Or stream The Wire on Netflix for 8 bux a month, because you missed it the first time? Or play a video game? Or just surf the net?
So my question is: What happens to all those shows when they fragment like that? Who is gonna pay to produce them? What is the future? (And "funded by viewers" model is not the answer, only 1% of people ever really contribute, and the up-front costs of producing video are WAY higher than making a record or a book, etc. Believe me, I understand this personally.)
Be interested to hear your thoughts.
http://j.mp/pZOJkm
I'm not sure about shows like The Guild or any other web-based content, how they make their production costs: do they advertise, charge a fee, accept donations?
Originally shared by Felicia Day
Started a big discussion on Twitter about this article on latest move from two TV networks. Basically delaying immediate streaming of Fox and ABC shows unless you verify through your cable subscription.
Most people on Twitter, when I asked how this will affect their viewing habits, answered two things:
-More piracy (especially international viewers, which is a WHOLE separate convo)
-Tuning out by cord cutting or just waiting for the season to be on DVD/purchase
There is a basic principle working here (scary, if you're in the TV business) that I've personally been dealing with on The Guild with a mere 2 DAYS! delay of releasing content: People want content immediately, wherever they like to view things. They don't care if you're trying to pay production bills, they don't care if it's the only way to fund things, they want it NOW, they want it CONVENIENT to them personally. Whether this is a reasonable attitude or not, it's what people are used to in this day of streaming on demand, and it's only going to get worse, because cord-cutters are getting more and more common. Long view=not good.
To me, the cable box seems like Tower Records 10 years ago, or Borders just 2 years ago. Look at how music and books have shifted to digital, on-demand purchasing. Cable companies are the "brick and mortar" place for video, and that business is dying. People don't have enough time for 140 channels, they have enough time for maybe 10 shows, that's it. Why pay 140 bux a month to watch that many shows when you can buy them individually? Or stream The Wire on Netflix for 8 bux a month, because you missed it the first time? Or play a video game? Or just surf the net?
So my question is: What happens to all those shows when they fragment like that? Who is gonna pay to produce them? What is the future? (And "funded by viewers" model is not the answer, only 1% of people ever really contribute, and the up-front costs of producing video are WAY higher than making a record or a book, etc. Believe me, I understand this personally.)
Be interested to hear your thoughts.
http://j.mp/pZOJkm
Comments
P.S. DOWN WITH ADS!