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
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).
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.
"These content creators need to figure out a way to monetize this phenomenon, and fast. Because the genie is out of the bottle, and there's no putting him back in."
It also says something about the schizophrenia in the industry when an exec at a company that's a major shareholder in Hulu is vehemently opposed to their child using said service.
But, hey I can't say anything. I own stock in Intel, and I go to computer stores and smash Intel CPUs to pieces with a baseball bat and then buy everyone AMD chips.
@fauxfilms: It is, but it's a joint-venture between them, Fox and more recently ABC. I don't think ABC has a controlling interest in the company, but they do have a stake in it. Which is to say, what's good for Hulu would be good for ABC in some way or another.
Then again, I know little about how these things work, so I could be wrong. Well, back to chip-smashing.
@OCEntertainment: AMD! AMD! My phenom II rocks! But I digress, I would like to be in a meeting where they were discussing Hulu and other such services. It would be so entertaining.
People are quickly spoiled by having everything "on demand". The idea of waiting to watch your favorite shows is dead with TiVO but why even bother with TiVO anymore? Newspapers, magazines and TV are all doomed to make way for on demand versions. Adapt or die TV execs. It's not like you don't have advance warning.
It's happening to radio, TV, film, music, print and many others. They continue to fight an uphill battle against such change (as billion dollar businesses often do) and it's obvious to everyone but them that they cannot continue along the same path as they have been for generations.
It's been said a thousand times but they need to figure out how to adapt to this change instead of trying to force their previously tried and true methods on something that will inevitably happen with or without their help.
Of course, they don't need to make a leap to cutting out the old ways completely. They just need to realize that transition is hard for any person or company and be prepared to take some losses now before it's too late when the losses will be even greater further down the line.
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
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
Clearly, you've never met Mephisto...
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
But, hey I can't say anything. I own stock in Intel, and I go to computer stores and smash Intel CPUs to pieces with a baseball bat and then buy everyone AMD chips.
12/04/09
12/04/09
Then again, I know little about how these things work, so I could be wrong. Well, back to chip-smashing.
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
It's been said a thousand times but they need to figure out how to adapt to this change instead of trying to force their previously tried and true methods on something that will inevitably happen with or without their help.
Of course, they don't need to make a leap to cutting out the old ways completely. They just need to realize that transition is hard for any person or company and be prepared to take some losses now before it's too late when the losses will be even greater further down the line.
12/04/09
The quote is nice but it could be made more forceful with a properly placed F-bomb.
"You're going to have a television if I have to nail it to your fucking wall."
Now doesn't that just read better?