Participant Generated Content vs. User Generated Content
PGC or UGC? Which one will it be? To tell you the truth, I have been in this blog business for more than years now and I still can’t get a hang of the terminology.
Are blogs UGC? (Nope) Are Comments UGC? (Yes) …
So, it comes to pass that Robert Scoble, supposed purveyor of cool web tools sporting a freshly minted career along the lines of ‘David Frost meets Jay Leno kind of interviewer/chat show’ decides to write a useful blog post for a change, revealing with a
purposefully accidental flourish that he will soon be leaving Podtech, where he did interviews and other stuff, for FastCompany where he will continue to explore new stuff in video.
Scoble gives out some insights into the Online Video Business and if you like
Jaywalking on the Tonight Show, Smile, you are on Candid Camera, and similar
public involving shows and if you are into
recording rock concerts and other public events on your cell phone and if you dig Road Movies, you will understand where Scoble is heading.
Pointing to sites like Digg.com, Youtube.com, Scoble goes on to say this:
I’m tired of getting used by companies who just use and use and use without giving me anything in return.
… I actually love it when Christopher Coulter calls it “loser generated media.”
Digg users, take note.
But, I still don’t see whether ‘Participant Generated Media’ will make the participants rich.
Can PDC make participants make participants happy? Yes.
But, aren’t Youtube and its clones making from PGC?
Some things never change. Only the terminology does.
Labels: Digg, online video, social news, User generated Content, youtube
Do "Top Videos" lists on Youtube hinder creativity?
Here we go: visiting the
"Superstar Economy", again. Youtube is a phenomenon, drawing in thousands of video uploads in any week but often there have been cases where high quality videos do not get the required exposure in face of the general public's attraction for the popular "top videos" lists on Youtube.
Like MTV Top music videos and Video countdowns of the TV age, these top 10 lists often do not include insightful but 'nichy' videos. Bloggers who write long, insightful pieces face a similar problem.
Nick Douglas has written a useful article on the subject. Particularly, he points to sites such as Vimeo.com, which does not have Top lists and lets users "discover" great stuff.
You might also want to read transcripts of a talk between Nick and Slate readers where he analyzes Youtube and Video sites in detail.
Labels: online video, trends
Looking into online videos' future
Online video is hot. According to Cachelogic, TV shows, YouTube clips, animations, and other video applications account for more than
60 percent of Internet traffic, and some experts say that within two years it will be 98 percent.
In fact there is so much happening in this field that people are discussing chances of
legal P2P networks and
two-tier internet happening in near future.
The new
Forrester report is out and it attacks iTunes as it did
before.
The Forrester report says,
1. The paid video download market in its current evolutionary state will soon become extinct, despite the fast growth and the millions being spent today.
2. Television and cable networks will shift the bulk of paid downloading to ad-supported streams where they have control of ads and effective audience measurement.
3. The movie studios, whose content only makes up a fraction of today’s paid downloads, will put their weight behind subscription models that imitate premium cable channel services.
Is it only me who fails to see any vision in this report?
For starters, it is a bit too far-fetched to think that
enough buzz will be created so that people will stop buying downloaded video and go en-masse for ad-supported online video.
That is old media’s ultimate wet dream.
Looking into the future is a hard job.
At best, these reports are high on
vague generalizations and
aim to create buzz for a particular piece of technology or idea.
The ultimate idea is always to sell overpriced analysis that you can always find easily on Google.
The ongoing
DRM controversy tells us that
consumers like to have control over what they buy.
Moreover,
consumers like owning content. That is why we have so many iPods, DVDs and so on.
In future, we might be carrying our favorite content with us.
While 1.5 billion iTunes songs have been sold, subscription-based services have flopped so far.
When you diss iTunes, aren’t you discounting the huge iTunes user base as well?
Analyzing what the old media corporates would do won’t cut in a world where people have far too many choices over their media diet, and far too many ways in which you can access your choices – PC, Net, Mobile, TV, iPod and like, Apple TV, Tivo, Bittorrent, and so on.
Why not analyze what the video consumer would like to do? Therein lays the clue to how our sons and daughters will access their media.
1. There will always be people who don’t mind advertising interrupting their viewing and those who abhor it.
The 'ad time per hour' rate on TV varies anywhere between 10-20 minutes per hour.
2. There will always be people who like to watch high-quality video on their TV (using DVD, Apple TV, iPod, downloaded material) and those who don’t mind watching online video of indeterminate quality.
3. Some people will go for paid-for downloads, others for streaming and few will go in for subscriptions (subscription based service haven’t made it till now.)
4. When you say that ad-supported shows are in, how do you make sure that there aren’t million channels online, along with a million formats?
5.
It would be too simplistic that the TV channels and the movie studios will be the biggest aggregators online as well, in view of the challenge posed by the likes of Youtube and other layers, who have an installed base. What stops them from starting a comedy channel?
6. Then there is
the cost issue.smart consumers will compare costs for downloading shows, for subscribing to cable programming and for online net usage, and other choices before making a decision.
7. And there is the technology issue.
What is there to stop people from finding an online version of Tivo that removes the ads as the show is being streamed? A user can easily move to the next Firefox browser tab while an ad is being shown on one show.
8. If
pay-per-view is dead and how do you explain boxing shows, porn, educational shows and other niches?
9. The
download option is always available to those who prefer to be master of their destiny, people who must have their own channel.
10.
The Joost effect is to happen soon, so I cannot say how the concept of
‘view whatever, whenever’ will influence models of existing broadcasters and movie producers.
11. What happens to the superstar economy?The present model of broadcasters is also based on paying huge amounts to sport stars, TV stars and movie stars.
I would like to know more about what effects the online revolutions have on the situation. Or, will it be that the Mathew effect holds sway in all forms of activity?
Labels: online video, research report
The hard path to online riches with Online videos
Ok, so you start by putting your show on Youtube, people like it, you start getting a share of ad revenue that Youtube has started to share.
Will that cover your costs and is this your future?Making online videos is much, much different from blogging.
Ultimately, you will want to have your own video site where you don’t have to share ad revenue with others - earning through adsense, sponsorships and deals with select advertisers.
You started selling t-shirts, bags and other merchandise right from the start.
Your ultimate aim has to be one of these three things:1. People pay and subscribe to your show.
2. People buy downloads or DVDs of your show
3. You are able to parlay your online hits into a lucrative mainstream career, something done by Amanda Congdon.
As with other things in life, it is a tough slog, often extending your will to breaking point.
It is now common knowledge that the
aggregators like Youtube hold the real media power.
They act as
destination sites where all the big advertisers and the audience converge.
On your own, you will find it hard to do deals with sponsorships and other advertisers if your traffic is in thousands.
The point: You need the recognition and traffic from the aggregators but you will have to do more to really make it big long term.
Businessweek has an article on the hard road to online profits for content creators.
Related useful linksPaying users of web 2.0 sites19 ways to make social sites payLabels: online video, tip
18 tips to help you become an Online Video Star
Picking up from where
Mashable went some days back, a
WSJ article gives advice on how to be a start on online video sites such as Youtube. Much of the advice is based on the same themes that go in towards making a successful blogger.
Find out for yourself:
1.
Getting in early helps build a better tentpole
2.
Find a niche: For example, the Grammar Girl mixes a beautiful girl taking about grammar.
3.
Word of mouth is important.
4.
Work the virtual room: participate in discussion forums. The creators of the Lonelygirl show started planning comments on other videos under lonelygirl’s name before the show started.
5.
Remix other people’s videos: the lonelygirl people do this often
6.
Professional approach: For example, each 3 minute Lonelygirl video takes 10 hours to make. The Ask a Ninja guys spend upto 18 hours producing a 3-4 minute show.
Now, what makes a successful video?Mashable did a story on it, listing at least 5 ways to be great online:
1. Learn to dance very, very well2. Be pretty: Remember Amanda Congdon?
3. Act stupid in front of the camera
4. Learn to play the guitar really well5. Create a meme: for example, people have made a hit out of taking a photo of self everyday and then aggregating it in a 60-second spot.
What kind of Video shows work online?SimpleGuide has a nice roundup of successful video blogging, listing 7 proven video blogging styles:
1. Tutorials 2. Critiques on Popular TV shows, movies, music 3. Tour the Nation4. Aggregate the best of other Video Blogs and add your commentary
5. The Daily show/Tonight show model: in 3-4 minutes6. The Ask Prudence model: ask weird, outlandish questions
7. Cover live events.Labels: online video, tip
Lesson from the Scientology debate: Let a million Counter Footages bloom
I hope that by now you know about the ongoing ‘Youtubed’
spat between Scientology believers including John Travolta and BBC reporter John Sweeney for the Panorama program on the Scientology cult .
The Cult has often been accused of brainwashing followers, making them undergo series of torturous experiments to wean them away from reliance on Psychiatrists.
As you know, Scientology claims that humans have descended from a race of aliens called
thetans.
First to take the charge were the Scientologists who posted videos on Youtube showing John Sweeney loosing his cool when he was accused of being soft on Scientology critics.
Mr. Sweeney reportedly said,
"Now listen to me. You were not there at the beginning of the interview! You were not there! You did not hear or record all the interview!"
This is what we learn from smart Web 2.0 communication masters.
The Scientology people made sure they taped the interview as well to make sure both versions of the interview was available to the public.
There could even be more versions, if it comes to that.
Lesson #1: What if everyone started taping their own interviews? For example, often in TV interviews, you say some thing else but later they edit it to mean something else.
Carrying a camera phone would be wise and later you can upload your video on Youtube.
Interestingly,
BBC is going to broadcast the ‘angry’ part of the interview.
Going back to
Scientology debate, I am not a big champion of organized anything other than sports and entertainment.
The other interesting thing about this episode is that while the Scientologists attacked the reporter’s impartiality,even going so far as to send the 100,000 decision makers, they had nothing to say about the content of the program itself.
That’s
PR lesson #2 for you. Divert attention.Labels: controversey, online video, tip
Friction TV: The Youtube of Debate
Created by Omar Sheikh, former head of Saatchi & Saatchi interactive and PR consultant Andy West, Friction TV will be
launched this week in U.K. aiming to be the
‘virtual speakers’ destination, where people can upload videos of themselves arguing about and challenging issues that affect them most, including hot popular culture topics such as whether it is indeed OK to have reporters accompanying Prince Harry’s trip to Iraq.
To get things going, the site has already been seeded by videos of some prominent personalities in U.K.
The ad-supported site, which will also be accessible from Mobiles won’t be moderated but the webmasters may remove objectionable racial or personal attacks.
To popularize Friction TV, the promoters plan to erect
Friction TV booths along the lines of Quick photo booths, in public places where people can record themselves without having to go with the hassle of setting things up for recording in their homes.
A related idea: Why not have a Friction TV channel on Youtube?
You get more exposure and can save on bandwidth charges.
Labels: Frictio Tv, online video, youtube
