Podcasts vs. Television
The astounding thing about Apple TV (formerly iTV) is why it can succeed. Streaming to the set top box is nothing new, but leveraging all your iPod owners / iTunes users to take a baby step into watching content on television is an easy user acquisition bet.
If you think of Apple TV as "yet another iPod," it makes sense. Essentially, without changing their habits or requiring any learning curve, someone who traditionally has watched time-shifted shows would easy gravitate to Apple's STB.
A classic example is how I watch Revision3's shows, and I'm not alone. I have a modded xbox that I run XBMC on, which is really the only reason I ever had an xbox anyway. It mounts my Mac via SMB. The Mac (via iTunes and other RSS technology) is up-to-date on the latest show releases.
Apple's product is essentially the same thing, with greater stability (albeit less customizable) and newer ports like HDMI. I've heard arguments that the marriage of computer to the STB, rather than having the STB download directly, is a negative... For my use, I'd rather it mount the computer, where I spend my day and arrange my downloads. I don't want to browse a STB menu and slowly try to assign RSS feeds to it... at least until someone designs a better interface for it.
Yes, I'll probably download movies as well. I'm more into Netflix HD-DVD options in my future 1080p world (not there yet), but for now, it's not a bad option. If they aren't available, I can rip to my computer and watch it via Apple TV regardless...particularly in places out of reach of an Ethernet cable.
Where does Revision3 fit into all of this? Once people are accustomed to the idea of television shows delivered to their STB vs. recorded to it, I have to ask, what is the difference between Revision3's InDigital, Pixel Perfect, or Diggnation in HD than any niche cable show? The question is how easy is it to set up, where TV has been at the touch of a single button for fifty years. Now that Apple TV makes it that easy, even for the non-hackers, this has become a short term reality. I would argue that our viewer numbers, which have already exceeded cable type levels, will grow and advertising CPMs along with it, as more people "demand the on-demand."
From a marketing perspective, however, we do have a problem. Podcasting has a connotation of content that is non-professionally produced. Television, on the other hand, has million dollar episode budgets, and people expect high production values. What do you call podcasting with high production value (even if they are low cost to produce)? How will people KNOW that a Revision3 show is different than, say, a ten year old playing with a camcoder?
There are still a lot of unanswered questions...but Revision3 at least is going to try to answer some of them. Digg took a shot at it with the Podcasting section, which is doing quite well... Still, Podcasting may be the wrong term for net-distributed media. Alex Lindsay said to me the other day "start calling it Media, not Television, and not Podcasts!" I think he may be onto something.
If the AppleTV ends up succeeding, I imagine it'll open further advertising dollars to video podcasters as well. I'm thinking most (and different) sponsors might jump at a chance to ride such shows, especially if there's a metric to measure whether your show is actually being pulled by a STB. Having your product placement in media that gets played on PCs and Ipods is one thing, dropping it into the living room is quite another.
Posted by:Jim | January 16, 2007 at 01:08 PM
>>"Podcasting has a connotation of content that is non-professionally produced. Television, on the other hand, has million dollar episode budgets, and people expect high production values. How will people KNOW that a Revision3 show is different than, say, a ten year old playing with a camcoder?" >>
I think they will know just by looking at it.
I think what will happen is, as more and more people begin producing their own content, and as more people begin watching it, more companies will see the value in targeting those niche demographics. As companies start to see this happen, they will continue to pump more money into podcast ad buys. After that, the creme will begin rising to the top.
As a few successful shows begin to make more and more money, they will in turn develop higher and higher production values. They will hire staff, hire writers, build sets. They will buy more cameras and better lighting and sound equipment. We'll start to see different format shows -- like, why aren't there any sitcom podcasts? Or dramas? -- All of this will in turn attract more viewers, more advertisers AND more small time producers looking to start the cycle all over again.
At the same time all of this is happening, we will see the technology starting to catch up. It's great that we've gone from VCR to Tivo and now to Apple TV. But I do truly think that once iptv production really starts to approach it's true value as an industry, you WILL start to see the tech and the services catch up.
You say "I don't want to browse a STB menu and slowly try to assign RSS feeds to it... at least until someone designs a better interface for it."
I really do see a day where you don't have to enter RSS feeds at all, on your TV or your computer. Rather someday, eventually, some yet to be developed service will simply allow us to browse show guides (podcast directories) like we currently can with Tivo or digital cable, but without the current timeslot based matrix we're familiar with now.
Who knows, throw in some sort of social network aspect, or track user preferences, and you can even have others tell you what's good to watch. All at a time that's convenient for you. And hell, as broadband gets faster and faster and storage cheaper and cheaper, who even says it has to download to a disk?
Now that's what I call TV on demand :) I can't wait!
Posted by:Pete Fuller | January 17, 2007 at 12:35 AM
To some degree, Digg is experimenting with ways to simplify the RSS process with the Podcasting section...make it easier to traverse. We'll adjust the front page to be less static soon. In theory, things like the Digg taxonomy might make sense for a STB... Hint hint? Apple? Tivo? Echostar?
Posted by:Jay Adelson | January 17, 2007 at 09:28 AM
Sorry, who he fuck are you?
Posted by:Chris | January 17, 2007 at 08:07 PM
"Sorry who he fuck are you?"
Jay Adelson? um... the CEO of Digg and chairman of Rev3...heard of those?
Posted by:Jack Prominski | January 17, 2007 at 08:24 PM
Doesn't matter who he is, but what he says.
Dufus.
Posted by:dansus | January 17, 2007 at 08:53 PM
Good bloG Jay. I agree with your insight. Great work you're doing, keep it up.
Posted by:jeremy marquardt | January 17, 2007 at 09:21 PM
Jay Adelson also founded NASDAQ listed Equinix, a large, multi-national with datacenters around the world that basically make the Internet run. What are your credentials Chris?? Now all we need it for our refrigerators to have an IPv6 address and we're set! Great article Jay.
Posted by:Joe | January 17, 2007 at 10:13 PM
"Jay spends a great deal of time trying to sucker Kevin Rose out of the world of film and broadcasting into helping kick-start the Internet industry."
What films was Kevin Rose in? TV sure but no films..
Posted by:Jason Sares | January 18, 2007 at 01:18 AM
But why not just watch television online, I mean services already exist like http://www.freetube.us.tc or http://www.tvlinks.co.uk so we know that it's definately the future of the internet lies in podcasts vods and streams.
Posted by:Free Television Online | January 18, 2007 at 01:23 AM
If Diggnation put the couch that Alex and Kevin sit on on a studio-style set with proper lighting, the show would be as professional-looking as any others out there.
Posted by:Corey Clayton | January 18, 2007 at 08:34 AM
We have that option. We chose not to. We like the raw look.
For studio-like looking, see InDigital or Ctrl-Alt-Chicken.
Posted by:Jay Adelson | January 18, 2007 at 09:25 AM
make a rev3 ad
Posted by:Jag | January 18, 2007 at 09:34 AM
Ctrl-Alt-Chicken has a studio feel, I think the guy who does "Food Guru Moments" has a better feel to it.. its almost infomertial like. I agree with diggnaion, I like the raw look of it.
Posted by:Jose | January 19, 2007 at 10:02 AM
It's two guys drinking beer and telling stories, it just wouldn't look right in a studio.
Posted by:Jim | January 19, 2007 at 03:41 PM
Never watched any of your content, but in thinking terms, I agree, terms "podcasting" and "podcast" have a high probability of always smacking of low expectations. I like the "just call it 'media'" thought but that is a cop out at the end of the day. "Indie" has overcome stigma and carries a bit of cachet now, particularly in film, don't you think? The other thought I have, which doesn't solve your problem but might be a useful nugget is the thought that fact that the quality of content is always perceived by who else is watching/liking it.
Good Luck!
Posted by:Andrew Bode | May 02, 2007 at 02:36 PM
Time for another insightful update...
Posted by:Ryan Merket | July 14, 2007 at 04:16 PM
i think jay adelson is way too hot for a CEO of the company. i have a newfound respect for his hotness after watching a video of him being interviewed by FORBES... it's somewhat ridiculous to the point where he starts to replace my fantasies about kevin rose with his. dont poopoo it cause i'm dead serious.
Posted by:female digg fan | July 27, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Obviously you're talking about someone else. I'm going to show that to Kevin, anyway, though... :)
Posted by:Jay Adelson | July 27, 2007 at 06:20 PM
"start calling it Media, not Television, and not Podcasts!"
right
"the medium is the message"
Posted by:skyz | September 15, 2007 at 10:06 AM