Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
I really can't quite get into the heads of some of these publishers. Some days, the "free content" age will destroy their entire industry, others they want desperately to get into this market where demand is booming.
I've known some people with screwed up borderline-domestic-abuse relationships that are more stable than this.
The problem is, advertisers don't see the value in the 30 second spots on Hulu. The Networks are going to have to do a better job selling online advertising to the people paying the bills for broadcast programs. The line between Computer monitor and Television set gets blurrier every year especially now with the prevalence of HDMI which is backwards compatible with DVI which PCs have had for years.
In fact, the networks have brought this upon themselves. I can't stand watching TV live anymore due to the 3 minutes of ads for a bunch of crap I'll probably never ever buy. Not to mention the TV commercials that are so goddamn annoying you want to stop the persons responsible from procreating. Especially that 3 minute Celebrex commercial that explained every minute detail of the drug ad nauseum (they might as well have started a freaking infomercial.)
Then there's a matter of watching TV on my schedule when I want to watch it, not when some network executive says I should watch it. The Internet lets me do that.
What the networks have done is created a competing product with a greater value at the same price point for the viewers. Thus viewers are migrating over to the better product. Both hulu and Broadcast television are free, but Hulu provides a much better value to the viewer in the form of fewer ads and convenience. And the networks should be using that greater value as a means to pry open the wallets of their advertisers just a bit more. (i.e. Viewers get more value from streaming, therefore you should pay more to get your products in their face).
However, this is beyond the narrow thinking of the existing executives at the TV studios. They are still devoted to ye olde bewb tewb.
I'm an old, and I don't have a TV or cable - I watch what I want online. Last time I got cable installed (in NYC), the installer told me that he only used his iPhone, connecting it directly to his TV.
I still have HD cable because it was cheap as part of a package with internet but I find myself watching more and more videos streamed to my TV instead of cable. I prefer choosing what I watch and the limited interruptions.
Still need cable though, as their are no really good HD sports feed (gotta get my Jayhawks in Atlanta/Cali somehow).
There are three TV's in my apartment: two are mine and the third is my roomie's. Not a single one of them is connected to any kind of antenna or cable box. The 32in LCD in my room is connected to my PC and is always playing something, whether it be something on YouTube or through VLC. Same thing for my roommate. The living room TV either plays DVD's, Blu-Ray, games or streaming via Tversity.
I have not had a cable TV bill for months and I haven't even noticed it. So cable executive, you go right ahead and nail another TV to the walls of my house, it sure as hell won't be used for your over priced services.
@Azures: It would be nice if they did, but even with a subscription, I'd bet that they'd still give priority to television releases, strictly because of the big ad slots that accompany them.
@Azures: Perhaps, but take a look at iTunes. On principal, the TV shows you're paying to see should be available the same day the episode is released, but instead is released afterwards, despite the fact that you have to pay for it.
But I agree for the most part. If they go subscription, I have a feeling that the delay alone would make people keep their wallets shut.
Jesus Christ, if so many people are watching Hulu, why are they having trouble getting advertisers? Is the entire media management community this stupid? Hulu presents the opportunity to track viewing habits and target advertising. This is far more valuable than the damn-near random broadcast advertising.
It's like these people are getting dumber every year.
@superberg: Well, not THAT many people are watching Hulu. Even if you assume a majority of people with a broadband connection watch Hulu that still pales in comparison to the amount of people watching on TV.
@superberg: I buy ads on Hulu, as a part of my job. They don't have any problems getting ad dollars, in fact they have sold out their inventory through the end of the year.
@NorwoodIsMyHero: But my point is that these viewers could be worth more. Targeted audiences make all the difference. Look at the money the TWiT network brings in. Leo Laporte is worth something like 5 million. And it's just him and a few nerds.
The problem is that these people don't know how to work their product. They force in nonsense like the Avatar tie-in on Bones. It's forced and obvious, and it just pissed people off. But why not use the interactivity of Flash video to sell the knives used on cooking shows? The wacky hats Frank wears on 30 Rock? The music from the latest episode of Whatever Teen Drama is Really Hot Right Now?
They could open a link to Amazon or their own web store in the background/another tab, or license one-click and let people pick these things up without skipping a beat.
I'm not the first person to suggest this, I know. It seems like they're completely unwilling to diversify their business, even in the face of death. Disney has merchandised themselves to death, and they would not be the giant they are today otherwise. Even though I can watch The Office on Hulu for free, I still pay to download it and carry it on my iPod -- that way, I can watch an episode while I wait in line or take a break at work.
There are options out there, is what I'm saying. Online viewing allows for better viewer data, and it also allows for viewer retention. If they don't want to offer the latest episode of The Office, fine. There are plenty of pirates who will. They need to factor that into their plans, too. Whether they want to admit it or not, there are free options that thousands of people are using that don't bring them any money, and it wouldn't take that much to entice them over to Hulu.
@Kiamat: Let me know when you can get crystal-clear HD on Hulu , formatted to fit your TV screen perfectly. Before then, it's not even worth consideration.
Seriously, how does PVR work in the U.S.? Out here in Canada I can set it to record any show I want automatically on a schedule, then watch it pretty well commercial-free (you can skip them anyway), whenever I want. And it's in HD. How is Hulu an improvement over that?
@Twinder: When I hook my Mac up to my TV, it displays at the correct resolution. It isn't HD, but it is "good enough."
And how can you beat a DVR with a cable connection that you have to schedule your recordings on? Hulu is free (saves me $60/month) and instead of actively deciding what you'll want to watch later, you pick from a pool of programs.
Hulu also has a much nicer interface than the Scientific Atlanta boxes most cable companies force upon you.
@Twinder: My DVR works fine. But sometimes my girlfriend comes over and wants to catch the latest episode of one of her shows that I don't have on my DVR and aren't available on On Demand, yet. While it's not HD, it's very clear and formats just fine to my 16:9 tv.
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
"The Internet"
12/07/09
I've known some people with screwed up borderline-domestic-abuse relationships that are more stable than this.
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/04/09
In fact, the networks have brought this upon themselves. I can't stand watching TV live anymore due to the 3 minutes of ads for a bunch of crap I'll probably never ever buy. Not to mention the TV commercials that are so goddamn annoying you want to stop the persons responsible from procreating. Especially that 3 minute Celebrex commercial that explained every minute detail of the drug ad nauseum (they might as well have started a freaking infomercial.)
Then there's a matter of watching TV on my schedule when I want to watch it, not when some network executive says I should watch it. The Internet lets me do that.
What the networks have done is created a competing product with a greater value at the same price point for the viewers. Thus viewers are migrating over to the better product. Both hulu and Broadcast television are free, but Hulu provides a much better value to the viewer in the form of fewer ads and convenience. And the networks should be using that greater value as a means to pry open the wallets of their advertisers just a bit more. (i.e. Viewers get more value from streaming, therefore you should pay more to get your products in their face).
However, this is beyond the narrow thinking of the existing executives at the TV studios. They are still devoted to ye olde bewb tewb.
12/04/09
12/04/09
The jig is up, people. Cable is dead.
12/04/09
Still need cable though, as their are no really good HD sports feed (gotta get my Jayhawks in Atlanta/Cali somehow).
12/04/09
I have not had a cable TV bill for months and I haven't even noticed it. So cable executive, you go right ahead and nail another TV to the walls of my house, it sure as hell won't be used for your over priced services.
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
But I agree for the most part. If they go subscription, I have a feeling that the delay alone would make people keep their wallets shut.
12/04/09
12/04/09
It's like these people are getting dumber every year.
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
The problem is that these people don't know how to work their product. They force in nonsense like the Avatar tie-in on Bones. It's forced and obvious, and it just pissed people off. But why not use the interactivity of Flash video to sell the knives used on cooking shows? The wacky hats Frank wears on 30 Rock? The music from the latest episode of Whatever Teen Drama is Really Hot Right Now?
They could open a link to Amazon or their own web store in the background/another tab, or license one-click and let people pick these things up without skipping a beat.
I'm not the first person to suggest this, I know. It seems like they're completely unwilling to diversify their business, even in the face of death. Disney has merchandised themselves to death, and they would not be the giant they are today otherwise. Even though I can watch The Office on Hulu for free, I still pay to download it and carry it on my iPod -- that way, I can watch an episode while I wait in line or take a break at work.
There are options out there, is what I'm saying. Online viewing allows for better viewer data, and it also allows for viewer retention. If they don't want to offer the latest episode of The Office, fine. There are plenty of pirates who will. They need to factor that into their plans, too. Whether they want to admit it or not, there are free options that thousands of people are using that don't bring them any money, and it wouldn't take that much to entice them over to Hulu.
12/04/09
My lappy's HDMI port makes it a cinch to hook up to the plasma so there's no hassle getting it onto the big screen
12/04/09
Seriously, how does PVR work in the U.S.? Out here in Canada I can set it to record any show I want automatically on a schedule, then watch it pretty well commercial-free (you can skip them anyway), whenever I want. And it's in HD. How is Hulu an improvement over that?
12/04/09
And how can you beat a DVR with a cable connection that you have to schedule your recordings on? Hulu is free (saves me $60/month) and instead of actively deciding what you'll want to watch later, you pick from a pool of programs.
Hulu also has a much nicer interface than the Scientific Atlanta boxes most cable companies force upon you.
12/04/09