Punk is not dead; Five predictions for Web Video in 2008

Time magazine writes, "So if 2006 was the year of You, 2007 was the year of Them. Big media companies (like this one) stuffed their sites with blogs, podcasts and video." We find this view of web UGC about as far-sighted as the people who said, "Oh, TV is just a fad. Radio. That's where it's at".
Sure, the big media companies have rushed to cash in on the legions of online eyeballs there for the taking. With sorta-kinda ubiquitous broadband and much better codecs, web video has undergone an amazing transformation over the last few years. Who didn't expect big media to cash in, or at least try? There's gold in them there broadband connections, and the suits in LA and New York can smell it, even over their D&G cologne.
The rub lies in licensing; both for content, and for the airwaves. Big media is big media simply because they control the means of production. It takes millions to start a TV station and, it takes millions to license a TV episode. For those reasons, TV has to "get it right" nearly every time. Get ratings, or get canceled. That's the Hollywood way.
Web content, on the other hand, can be produced on the cheap. Ok, sure, that means there'll be a ton of terrible content. Really bad, really lousy, really unwatchable content that not even a mother could love. There will also be gems. There are far too many talented writers, actors, comedians, and would-be directors on this little blue orb for us to claim UGC is stillborn. 2008 isn't the year UGC dies; It's the year UGC grows up. Individuals producing content won't win the day, at least not in series form, but small dedicated teams of people with ideas, writing skill and equipment -- which gets cheaper by the day -- will.
We say, with all due respect, screw Time Magazine. Here are our predictions for 2008:
YouTube's lousy quality and miserable interface will cost them marketshare
Either YouTube miraculously gets it right by upgrading their encoding quality, user interface, and tools for sorting through the mountains of unmanageable content they have, or some slippery competitor will. We're constantly amazed at the lack of quality on the popular video sharing sites; And at the lack of visitors to the well-built ones.
High-quality UGC begins to blur the lines between pro and amateur
The amateurs are starting to learn the tricks. Lighting, sound, video quality, editing; The bar is being raised all around by dedicated amateurs. They're out there. The problem is, with lousy quality on the popular video sites (and amazing quality on the unpopular ones) no one sees it. The web is a clearinghouse of DIY information, and those DIY ethics and free sharing of information are just beginning to breed a whole new generation of audio-visual storytellers. There will be a wildly popular web based short comedy series which in some way mirrors what we've seen on TV for years. If not in 2008, then certainly by 2009. The only problem is, if the monetization options aren't there, those brilliant pioneers will be snapped up by big media. Andy Samberg, anyone?
Seesmic will die a horrible death. Complete with French accents
It's all the hype in the hipster blogging community right now, but Seesmic is doomed to fail. People simply will not watch each other monolouge into a camera for very long. There isn't anything interesting about it, there isn't anything captivating about it, and worst of all, you can't really watch it at work. We will continue to burn idle minutes on Twitter but, any rich media Twitter clone will never take off. Seesmic might have had a chance 2 years ago; today it's stillborn.
Great writing + better than average production * reasonable length = gold
We figure the maximum length of watchable web video is around 12-15 minutes, maybe a little less. Adult Swim has already figured out how to produce popular shows in this length format, but they have almost zero depth. Granted, they also have limited audiences which lean towards 18-25 males who love marijuana almost as much as they love their XBox. The winner in this post-UGC explosion period will be the writer-director team who find the magic formula required to squeeze depth, watch-ability, entertainment, and serial value into a 12 minute show.
Semi-pro daily shows will win the 2008 race
It's almost impossible for an amateur to produce a daily show of any quality. Semi-pro or, "web pro" shows not run by the major media companies will win 2008, hands down. Mahalo Daily is already proving that a little hype, a pro-quality correspondent, and some ingenuity can really sell the sizzle. A comedy based, daily produced show will clean up 2008, but it won't be produced by a total amateur. Our money is on something political; especially if the writer's strike lingers well into the new year.
Making quality TV isn't easy, and we won't pretend that anyone can do it. What we will assert is, the people who can pull it off are out there. They're polishing their scripts, charging up their DV20's and rigging lighting systems at The Home Depot. They'll find us this year, and Time Magazine will likely eat its own words.












Comments
12
Subscribe to commentsRobert HeadleyDec 21st 2007 1:27AM
What's holding web video back isn't the creators. Its the medium. I think the future of web content really lies in the hands of Tivo, DirecTV and Dish and others that are making web content available whenever, and wherever you want.
When I want to watch a show, I want do it from my couch, not my moderately comfortable office chair. Give me a way to watch web video on my TV, and I'll jump at it. As long as it doesn't cost and arm and a leg.
One of the people that I watch on youtube has landed an actual movie role do to his popularity. So the talent is there, I think we just need to wait for someone (revision 3 cough) to step up to the plate and put it where I want it to be.
grant.robertsonDec 21st 2007 1:34AM
Great point, but I seriously doubt it'll be Revision 3. Apple TV was promising but, didn't quite hit the public sweet-spot. It's going to take a box as easy to use as a DVD player, which will play H.264+AAC/Mp3 content in 720p or 480i, _and_ has a slick interface to browse not only Youtube, but other sites as well. One of the biggest problems is, it's really hard to develop a 10 foot interface which also lets you quickly weed through the crap. It'll take APIs, a solid and workable monetization layer and something on par with digg/reddit/propeller/et al for video to separate the wheat from the chaff. The infrastructure is _almost_ there, just not quite.
JesseDec 22nd 2007 2:36PM
Just buy a Wii, you can watch all the web video that you want.
JerryADec 22nd 2007 11:02PM
Well, lots of people have media centers hooked up to their HDTVs now. With the high resolution, they make excellent monitors so an old computer or a new slim profile one is a great way to extend your media library and watch downloaded and streaming media in your living room from your couch. I just built my dad a nice slim PC for around $400 that hooks up straight to the HDMI on his HDTV and the audio-in on his home theater. It plays DVDs, streaming media, and is great for web browsing and general purpose use. With wireless keyboard and mouse, you don't need to leave your couch. I've got a similar setup at my house. I just did it with an old PC when I built a new one. A moderately powerful PC with digital video/audio out and a terabye RAID makes for a great media server.
Robert HeadleyDec 21st 2007 1:46AM
What we need a open source hardware/software platform that indeed functions like a DVD player with wifi/lan port.
Who would make such a device? Neuros has always shown themselves to be open to people tinkering with their hardware. Whoever makes it, its got to be extensible, support the latest versions of flash and probably most importantly, be Cheap.
Jason ClarkeDec 21st 2007 2:16AM
I know I'm supposed to, but I don't buy it.
The gems that come about as a result of User Generated Content will be swept up by big business looking for the Next Big Thing (tm), relegating the hordes of mediocre-at-best to wallow in virtual obscurity. Check out Tay in the image used on this post; Dr. Pepper couldn't help but give him a big pay day to cash in on his cache, and be perceived as "hip". It was a sell-out, pure and simple.
Nobody is going to be able to create content in their basement that can compete in terms of quality and production value with something on network television - and if they do, they'll get a network TV gig, since that's where the money is. And let's not kid ourselves: production values are very important in terms of the watchability of a show.
Setting aside the quality debate, let's turn to money. There's a fantastic story to tell about web-based video when it comes to revenue, right? Oh wait, nobody seems to have figured that out yet - at least none of the big guys are making any profit at the moment. YouTube, the granddaddy of them all is a serious cost center at Google. So why the big scramble to be the next YouTube?
One reason: venture capital.
What's that sound? Uh oh...
POP!
ToddDec 21st 2007 10:11AM
What's holding web video back is corruption and collusion at the WC3. They just caved into bullying by Adobe, Nokia and Microsoft by removing Theora support from HTML5:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071210-nokia-wants-w3c-to-remove-out-ogg-from-upcoming-html5-standard.html
Until this changes, web video will continue to be "geeks only".
grant.robertsonDec 21st 2007 11:32AM
I totally disagree, Todd. A standard would have been nice but, Theora is technically terrible. I love Ogg, and I love the Xiph foundation, I really like what they've tried to do, and I respect their values. We need a technically superior solution though, which is capable of delivering 720p and 480p with a minimum of bandwidth, and almost no artifacting. H.264 + AAC is the best thing going, I'm afraid. Apple, on this point, is right.
Victor Agreda, Jr.Dec 21st 2007 12:20PM
Jason, there's hope yet. I mean, if Wayne's World taught us anything, it's that... uh, wait. All I learned was Tia Carrere can't act.
Anyway, a savvy producer may realize that by Hollywoodizing a 'net hit is a sure way to kill it. If you get a producer or network willing to brave it, the web may be fertile ground, and not just for scorched-Earth policies.
True, like in music, a small-timer is going to sign for big bucks when given the chance (any number of punk bands who made it big will tell you they have thoroughly enjoyed their money). But there's nothing saying you couldn't pay folks enough to raise the production values while keeping the heart of the program intact.
The hardest part for the indie is making sales happen while producing a quality product. That cycle has to feed itself in order for the content to stabilize.
M.E. WilliamsDec 21st 2007 3:58PM
I once went on the Adult Swim boards and said that Aqua Teen Hunger Force seemed to be made for people other than me: either high-school students or stoners, and I'm neither. (I love the Venture Brothers, though.) I did not link this to a judgment -- at least, not one about high school students or stoners -- of any kind. I just said that while I enjoyed a lot of AS shows, I didn't "get" the humor in ATHF.
I was compared to Hitler in the first response. ;) Godwin's Law still rules the web!
MaorDec 23rd 2007 7:24AM
I couldn't agree more.
I think in addition to the daily shows, we'll start seeing 24/7 theme channels run by private people. Like the indie music one http://www.virv.tv
Jonathan TrennJan 2nd 2008 5:28PM
I recently wrote my predictions at http://marketingconversation.com/2007/12/18/my-predictions-for-2008-and-beyond/
One of them seems to agree with many above:
More and more broadcast and cable networks will look to develop miniseries that are only shown online. Most will fail.
As more and more of us move our media habits online, big media will follow. But overall, we’re a fickle bunch and despite some good efforts, many will fail initially. Lack of audience, ad models, viewer experience. All will pose some problems and big media will not have enough patience.
I'm going to add a second, admittedly it relates to a client. Online video phone services such as ooVoo.com (the client) really take off because of ease of use. People may get somewhat tired of strictly text communications such as IM. Small groups can communicate at the same time. People wil both like and freak out watching themselves on a computer screen.