Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

the ugly truth about online video

Expand Messages
  • caminofilm
    interesting article about predictions for online video advertising http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-online-video/
    Message 1 of 23 , Aug 2 8:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      interesting article about predictions for online video advertising

      http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-online-video/
    • Brook Hinton
      I note this, from djoxyk in the comments section: I watch video on Soundpedia and Youtube cause it s free and
      Message 2 of 23 , Aug 2 8:54 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        I note this, from "djoxyk " in the comments section:

        "I watch video on Soundpedia <http://soundpedia.com/> and
        Youtube<http://youtube.com/>'cause it's free and fast services. The
        online video is a big part of my
        life since I spend up to 10 hours a day in the internet.
        I do not watch TV 'cause advertising irritate me. That's the point of using
        online media services."

        Do any of you, when you watch video online, pay attention to ads at all? And
        how many of us will just close the window of an ad we can't skip or get rid
        of? OR refuse to return to something where we know an ad will be IN the
        video episodes?

        If I ask myself "what are the worst things about television?" I come up with
        these:
        1. Advertising.
        2. The influence advertising support has on what gets programmed.
        3. The programming. (which flows directly from 1 and 2).

        It's not like the advertising model has made television such a great thing
        (beyond the expected handful of programs that break the mold) - otherwise
        why are we bothering with an alternative to begin with?

        If online video is really going to provide a compelling alternative to
        television, a mechanism that allows people to focus full time on making
        deep, quality work is indeed important. The current obsession with
        advertising as a means to this, though, just leads me to expect any
        profitable aspect of online video to ultimately devolve to the level of
        television, only smaller and available on demand.

        For everyone making this stuff, from those making video with a more mass
        appeal and an eye on dollars, to those doing personal work, far greater
        benefits (monetary and artistic) will come of finding a business model that
        ISN'T about advertising. In fact, if we can do that, it could leak into
        other media (television itself?) as well, and quality would rise
        accordingly. It could change the whole face of mediamaking.

        I wish I knew what that model could be, but with so many creative and
        innovative people in this hypercommunicative sphere, there is hope for an
        alternative to evolve. I know I'm not going to stop thinking about it.

        Please note that I say this with all due respect to folks like blip who are
        trying to find creative and effective ways to make advertising support
        videomakers in new and less obtrusive ways. I just don't share the optimism.

        Brook



        On 8/2/07, caminofilm <caminofilm@...> wrote:
        >
        > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
        >
        >
        > http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-online-video/
        >
        >
        >



        --
        _______________________________________________________
        Brook Hinton
        film/video/audio art
        www.brookhinton.com


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bill Cammack
        ... http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-online-video/ I already said that back on February 19, 2007:
        Message 3 of 23 , Aug 2 10:09 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@...> wrote:
          >
          > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
          >
          >
          http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-online-video/

          I already said that back on February 19, 2007:

          <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/message/56970>

          No proof of demographics = No sales to advertisers.

          --
          billcammack
        • Chuck
          This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January: http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/ Ad dollars to video is not going to change from
          Message 4 of 23 , Aug 2 10:28 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:

            http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/

            Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but there
            WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.

            Chuck

            --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
            >
            > http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
            online-video/
            >
          • Frank Sinton
            The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics of online video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really - when was the
            Message 5 of 23 , Aug 2 11:03 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics of online
              video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really - when
              was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV show?
              The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks, etc..



              On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for indie
              video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a shift
              b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out having to
              sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old media
              player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is hard to
              say how good of a deal it actually was).



              -Frank



              Frank Sinton

              CEO

              frank@...

              http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/



              http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs

              _____

              From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
              On Behalf Of Chuck
              Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
              To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video



              This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:

              http://newteevee. <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
              com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/

              Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but there
              WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.

              Chuck

              --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
              yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
              >
              > http://mediabiz.
              <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about->
              blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
              online-video/
              >





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Steve Watkins
              I remain skeptical on a number of fronts. For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state
              Message 6 of 23 , Aug 2 12:04 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                I remain skeptical on a number of fronts.

                For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect
                medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are
                likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on your
                ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort.

                Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-top
                boxes, and of course the internet.

                But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or
                desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg mass
                audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the more
                the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be
                interested, and will switch over.

                Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that
                predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at all.
                And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im interested in.
                Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet and
                it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by
                radiowaves, cable, satellite.

                I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the
                internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the
                internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really huge
                audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much more
                choice to fragment the audience.

                On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded their
                own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different
                challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about
                scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it
                were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely
                powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it
                doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining
                multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe the
                solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy
                heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards.

                Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come a
                time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where
                future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then
                theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the bohemoth,
                so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable.

                Cheers

                Steve Elbows
                --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Sinton" <frank@...> wrote:
                >
                > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics
                of online
                > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really
                - when
                > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV
                show?
                > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks, etc..
                >
                >
                >
                > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for indie
                > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a
                shift
                > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out
                having to
                > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old media
                > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is
                hard to
                > say how good of a deal it actually was).
                >
                >
                >
                > -Frank
                >
                >
                >
                > Frank Sinton
                >
                > CEO
                >
                > frank@...
                >
                > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/
                >
                >
                >
                > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs
                >
                > _____
                >
                > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
                > On Behalf Of Chuck
                > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
                > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video
                >
                >
                >
                > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:
                >
                > http://newteevee. <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
                > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/
                >
                > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but there
                > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.
                >
                > Chuck
                >
                > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
                > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
                > >
                > > http://mediabiz.
                > <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about->
                > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
                > online-video/
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Bill Cammack
                See, the problem here is that people seem to think that advertisers are just looking to throw away money. :) I seriously don t know why people expect videos
                Message 7 of 23 , Aug 2 3:29 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  See, the problem here is that people seem to think that advertisers
                  are just looking to throw away money. :)

                  I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                  (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As far
                  as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone
                  knows of one, feel free to post and let me know. What *I* see
                  happening here is MSM picking up people or internet video production
                  companies that have proven their ability to get, maintain and grow an
                  audience. Meanwhile, in the other direction, I see production
                  companies that have been trying their hand at getting into television
                  starting to make series for the internet to get exposure, make
                  contacts and hopefully get a buzz started about their company that
                  will catapult them back into television or Hollywood.

                  Like I've been saying for ~ 6 months, without a way to verify and
                  quantify demographics, you have NOTHING to offer potential
                  advertisers. NOTHING. Your only hope is to have some kind of niche
                  program content that will prompt a sponsor to back your play and
                  support you financially to get your show made. I'm not talking about
                  some adsense dollars or revenue-sharing from viral videos. People
                  seem to be WONDERING when the advertisers are going to show up with
                  their money, and that's going to be AFTER someone can guarantee them
                  the proper ROI.

                  I've seen a lot of talented videobloggers with shows that aren't
                  sponsored AT.ALL. I think conversations that focus on "When are
                  videobloggers in general going to be monetized?" are completely
                  disingenuous. I think a better conversation (and also more useful to
                  the community) is "How is someone going to figure out how to quantify
                  demographics similar to what's done already in MSM so that the
                  talented videobloggers can be properly recognized and sponsored?"

                  I mean, look at public access television. You don't have to pay to
                  have a show on public access..... OTOH, you don't GET PAID either. :)
                  You do it because you like to do it, and there are rules (at least in
                  Manhattan, NYC) that prohibit you from advertising, because you're not
                  paying anything for your broadcast slot in the first place. The
                  question could be asked "When are they going to monetize public access
                  shows?" :D Well... Just because someone has a show doesn't mean that
                  ANYONE feels it's worth advertising on.

                  Meanwhile, you have people that have shows like "Max on Boxing" that
                  do public access for years, and demonstrate their worth and now Max
                  Kellerman's on ESPN. He was the best and most passionate boxing
                  commentator on television on his internet show, AND he was doing
                  CALL-IN shows!!! Not like these guys that sit at a table with papers
                  in their hands with their lines on them and teleprompters on the
                  cameras and earpieces in their ears with producers telling them what
                  to do and say! :D Max Kellerman should have been in MSM way before he
                  actually was, because he was demonstrating passion, ability, knowledge
                  and talent on public access that outdid the MSM sportscasters that
                  were talking about the same fights at the same time.... AND he was
                  giving his opinions on the fly to people that would call in randomly.

                  The same thing's happening here with Amanda and Ask A Ninja and
                  WallStrip and Hayden's new projects. People are demonstrating ability
                  on the internet and getting "picked up". It's not like these are
                  accidents or that they were all lucky. :D People are being selected
                  for whatever their consistent, proven talents are. There's no
                  trickle-down. There's no "matter of time". I think that if someone
                  wants to be supported financially for their videoblog, they need to
                  take a hard look at what they're doing and honestly ask themselves
                  "WHY would ANYONE pay me to do this?"

                  --
                  billcammack
                  http://reelsolid.tv



                  --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <steve@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I remain skeptical on a number of fronts.
                  >
                  > For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect
                  > medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are
                  > likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on your
                  > ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort.
                  >
                  > Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-top
                  > boxes, and of course the internet.
                  >
                  > But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or
                  > desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg mass
                  > audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the more
                  > the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be
                  > interested, and will switch over.
                  >
                  > Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that
                  > predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at all.
                  > And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im interested in.
                  > Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet and
                  > it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by
                  > radiowaves, cable, satellite.
                  >
                  > I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the
                  > internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the
                  > internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really huge
                  > audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much more
                  > choice to fragment the audience.
                  >
                  > On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded their
                  > own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different
                  > challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about
                  > scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it
                  > were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely
                  > powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it
                  > doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining
                  > multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe the
                  > solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy
                  > heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards.
                  >
                  > Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come a
                  > time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where
                  > future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then
                  > theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the bohemoth,
                  > so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable.
                  >
                  > Cheers
                  >
                  > Steve Elbows
                  > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Sinton" <frank@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics
                  > of online
                  > > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really
                  > - when
                  > > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV
                  > show?
                  > > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks, etc..
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for
                  indie
                  > > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a
                  > shift
                  > > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out
                  > having to
                  > > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old
                  media
                  > > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is
                  > hard to
                  > > say how good of a deal it actually was).
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > -Frank
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Frank Sinton
                  > >
                  > > CEO
                  > >
                  > > frank@
                  > >
                  > > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs
                  > >
                  > > _____
                  > >
                  > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                  > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
                  > > On Behalf Of Chuck
                  > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
                  > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:
                  > >
                  > > http://newteevee.
                  <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
                  > > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/
                  > >
                  > > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but
                  there
                  > > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.
                  > >
                  > > Chuck
                  > >
                  > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@>
                  > > wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
                  > > >
                  > > > http://mediabiz.
                  > > <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about->
                  > > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
                  > > online-video/
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  >
                • Markus Sandy
                  Hey Bill, Long time no see. How s it going? ... sometimes things are of interest to an audience larger than expected. For example, wasn t South Park
                  Message 8 of 23 , Aug 2 3:53 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hey Bill,

                    Long time no see. How's it going?

                    On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:29 PM, Bill Cammack wrote:


                    > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                    > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized.


                    sometimes things are of interest to an audience larger than expected.

                    For example, wasn't South Park originally a "christmas card" sent by
                    some ad folks to a few people but it went viral within the industry?

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_park

                    admittedly not your typical case, but it happens


                    --
                    http://tools.ourmedia.org/blog
                    http://SpinXpress.com/Markus_Sandy
                    http://Ourmedia.org/Markus_Sandy



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Bill Cammack
                    ... Hey Markus. :) That s my point, exactly. Not that there isn t any hope for something random to go viral or be seen as something worth funding... but
                    Message 9 of 23 , Aug 2 4:25 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Markus Sandy <markus.sandy@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > Hey Bill,
                      >
                      > Long time no see. How's it going?
                      >
                      > On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:29 PM, Bill Cammack wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                      > > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized.
                      >
                      >
                      > sometimes things are of interest to an audience larger than expected.
                      >
                      > For example, wasn't South Park originally a "christmas card" sent by
                      > some ad folks to a few people but it went viral within the industry?
                      >
                      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_park
                      >
                      > admittedly not your typical case, but it happens
                      >
                      >
                      > --
                      > http://tools.ourmedia.org/blog
                      > http://SpinXpress.com/Markus_Sandy
                      > http://Ourmedia.org/Markus_Sandy

                      Hey Markus. :)

                      That's my point, exactly. Not that there isn't any hope for something
                      random to go viral or be seen as something worth funding... but rather
                      that it's an anomaly.

                      To speak about these things as if they're "regular" or as if they're
                      definitely going to happen at some point I think does a disservice to
                      the community. I keep seeing these posts that imply that everyone's
                      going to get a piece of the pie, eventually... but even in the case of
                      YouTube, it wasn't EVERYBODY that landed "partnership program" deals.

                      --
                      billcammack
                      http://reelsolid.tv
                    • Heath
                      I agree completly Bill, that s why a long time ago, I stopped worrying about someone paying me or advertising on Batman Geek. I mean I get a few hundred
                      Message 10 of 23 , Aug 2 4:26 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I agree completly Bill, that's why a long time ago, I stopped
                        worrying about someone paying me or advertising on Batman Geek. I
                        mean I get a few hundred downloads, why would any advertiser look at
                        me...

                        Now would I like to make money, yep, and that is why I make films,
                        and having been doing a few other things to maybe someday make money
                        at filming stuff...making commerical's etc..

                        Heath
                        http://batmangeek.com

                        --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack"
                        <BillCammack@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > See, the problem here is that people seem to think that advertisers
                        > are just looking to throw away money. :)
                        >
                        > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                        > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As
                        far
                        > as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone
                        > knows of one, feel free to post and let me know. What *I* see
                        > happening here is MSM picking up people or internet video production
                        > companies that have proven their ability to get, maintain and grow
                        an
                        > audience. Meanwhile, in the other direction, I see production
                        > companies that have been trying their hand at getting into
                        television
                        > starting to make series for the internet to get exposure, make
                        > contacts and hopefully get a buzz started about their company that
                        > will catapult them back into television or Hollywood.
                        >
                        > Like I've been saying for ~ 6 months, without a way to verify and
                        > quantify demographics, you have NOTHING to offer potential
                        > advertisers. NOTHING. Your only hope is to have some kind of niche
                        > program content that will prompt a sponsor to back your play and
                        > support you financially to get your show made. I'm not talking
                        about
                        > some adsense dollars or revenue-sharing from viral videos. People
                        > seem to be WONDERING when the advertisers are going to show up with
                        > their money, and that's going to be AFTER someone can guarantee them
                        > the proper ROI.
                        >
                        > I've seen a lot of talented videobloggers with shows that aren't
                        > sponsored AT.ALL. I think conversations that focus on "When are
                        > videobloggers in general going to be monetized?" are completely
                        > disingenuous. I think a better conversation (and also more useful
                        to
                        > the community) is "How is someone going to figure out how to
                        quantify
                        > demographics similar to what's done already in MSM so that the
                        > talented videobloggers can be properly recognized and sponsored?"
                        >
                        > I mean, look at public access television. You don't have to pay to
                        > have a show on public access..... OTOH, you don't GET PAID
                        either. :)
                        > You do it because you like to do it, and there are rules (at least
                        in
                        > Manhattan, NYC) that prohibit you from advertising, because you're
                        not
                        > paying anything for your broadcast slot in the first place. The
                        > question could be asked "When are they going to monetize public
                        access
                        > shows?" :D Well... Just because someone has a show doesn't mean
                        that
                        > ANYONE feels it's worth advertising on.
                        >
                        > Meanwhile, you have people that have shows like "Max on Boxing" that
                        > do public access for years, and demonstrate their worth and now Max
                        > Kellerman's on ESPN. He was the best and most passionate boxing
                        > commentator on television on his internet show, AND he was doing
                        > CALL-IN shows!!! Not like these guys that sit at a table with
                        papers
                        > in their hands with their lines on them and teleprompters on the
                        > cameras and earpieces in their ears with producers telling them what
                        > to do and say! :D Max Kellerman should have been in MSM way before
                        he
                        > actually was, because he was demonstrating passion, ability,
                        knowledge
                        > and talent on public access that outdid the MSM sportscasters that
                        > were talking about the same fights at the same time.... AND he was
                        > giving his opinions on the fly to people that would call in
                        randomly.
                        >
                        > The same thing's happening here with Amanda and Ask A Ninja and
                        > WallStrip and Hayden's new projects. People are demonstrating
                        ability
                        > on the internet and getting "picked up". It's not like these are
                        > accidents or that they were all lucky. :D People are being selected
                        > for whatever their consistent, proven talents are. There's no
                        > trickle-down. There's no "matter of time". I think that if someone
                        > wants to be supported financially for their videoblog, they need to
                        > take a hard look at what they're doing and honestly ask themselves
                        > "WHY would ANYONE pay me to do this?"
                        >
                        > --
                        > billcammack
                        > http://reelsolid.tv
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <steve@>
                        wrote:
                        > >
                        > > I remain skeptical on a number of fronts.
                        > >
                        > > For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect
                        > > medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are
                        > > likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on
                        your
                        > > ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort.
                        > >
                        > > Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-
                        top
                        > > boxes, and of course the internet.
                        > >
                        > > But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or
                        > > desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg
                        mass
                        > > audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the
                        more
                        > > the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be
                        > > interested, and will switch over.
                        > >
                        > > Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that
                        > > predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at
                        all.
                        > > And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im
                        interested in.
                        > > Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet
                        and
                        > > it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by
                        > > radiowaves, cable, satellite.
                        > >
                        > > I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the
                        > > internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the
                        > > internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really
                        huge
                        > > audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much
                        more
                        > > choice to fragment the audience.
                        > >
                        > > On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded
                        their
                        > > own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different
                        > > challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about
                        > > scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it
                        > > were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely
                        > > powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it
                        > > doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining
                        > > multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe
                        the
                        > > solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy
                        > > heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards.
                        > >
                        > > Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come
                        a
                        > > time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where
                        > > future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then
                        > > theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the
                        bohemoth,
                        > > so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable.
                        > >
                        > > Cheers
                        > >
                        > > Steve Elbows
                        > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Sinton" <frank@>
                        wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the
                        demographics
                        > > of online
                        > > > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense
                        really
                        > > - when
                        > > > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about
                        a TV
                        > > show?
                        > > > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social
                        networks, etc..
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge
                        for
                        > indie
                        > > > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it
                        signals a
                        > > shift
                        > > > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out
                        > > having to
                        > > > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for
                        old
                        > media
                        > > > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so
                        it is
                        > > hard to
                        > > > say how good of a deal it actually was).
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > -Frank
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Frank Sinton
                        > > >
                        > > > CEO
                        > > >
                        > > > frank@
                        > > >
                        > > > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs
                        > > >
                        > > > _____
                        > > >
                        > > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                        > > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
                        > > > On Behalf Of Chuck
                        > > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
                        > > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:
                        > > >
                        > > > http://newteevee.
                        > <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
                        > > > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/
                        > > >
                        > > > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight,
                        but
                        > there
                        > > > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.
                        > > >
                        > > > Chuck
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
                        > > > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@>
                        > > > wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > interesting article about predictions for online video
                        advertising
                        > > > >
                        > > > > http://mediabiz.
                        > > > <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-
                        about->
                        > > > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
                        > > > online-video/
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • pouringdownpix
                        ... hi, never YET? never EVER? uninteresting videoblog monetized, if only for a moment: http://pouringdown.tv/?p=161 -- daniel, pouringdown.tv
                        Message 11 of 23 , Aug 2 4:29 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@...>
                          wrote:
                          >
                          > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                          > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As far
                          > as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone
                          > knows of one, feel free to post and let me know.



                          hi,

                          never YET? never EVER?

                          "uninteresting" videoblog monetized, if only for a moment:

                          http://pouringdown.tv/?p=161


                          --

                          daniel, pouringdown.tv
                        • Chuck
                          Bill, I think your points are all spot on, but the landscape is nonetheless going to experience dramatic change over the next few years. That doesn t mean the
                          Message 12 of 23 , Aug 2 4:39 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Bill,

                            I think your points are all spot on, but the landscape is nonetheless
                            going to experience dramatic change over the next few years. That
                            doesn't mean the vlogging community will be the beneficiaries of that
                            change. Big money and big media are no doubt already planning
                            strategies and those strategies don't involve any of us.

                            I think that being a video blogger now and establishing a presence
                            early on is risky in light of the good points you make, BUT - the
                            very nature of change and the "winner take all" dynamics of it will
                            make **some** of us very profitable. That's a *VERY* small
                            percentage of us.

                            I'm reading the "Black Swan" right now by Nassim Taleb
                            (http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/?ml_video=86522) and I
                            really think that this next few years will see some black swans in
                            videoblogging. I know I'd love to be one.

                            :-)

                            Chuck

                            --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack"
                            <BillCammack@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Markus Sandy <markus.sandy@>
                            > wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Hey Bill,
                            > >
                            > > Long time no see. How's it going?
                            > >
                            > > On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:29 PM, Bill Cammack wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about
                            uninteresting
                            > > > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized.
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > sometimes things are of interest to an audience larger than
                            expected.
                            > >
                            > > For example, wasn't South Park originally a "christmas card" sent
                            by
                            > > some ad folks to a few people but it went viral within the
                            industry?
                            > >
                            > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_park
                            > >
                            > > admittedly not your typical case, but it happens
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > --
                            > > http://tools.ourmedia.org/blog
                            > > http://SpinXpress.com/Markus_Sandy
                            > > http://Ourmedia.org/Markus_Sandy
                            >
                            > Hey Markus. :)
                            >
                            > That's my point, exactly. Not that there isn't any hope for
                            something
                            > random to go viral or be seen as something worth funding... but
                            rather
                            > that it's an anomaly.
                            >
                            > To speak about these things as if they're "regular" or as if they're
                            > definitely going to happen at some point I think does a disservice
                            to
                            > the community. I keep seeing these posts that imply that everyone's
                            > going to get a piece of the pie, eventually... but even in the case
                            of
                            > YouTube, it wasn't EVERYBODY that landed "partnership program"
                            deals.
                            >
                            > --
                            > billcammack
                            > http://reelsolid.tv
                            >
                          • Bill Cammack
                            ... Well... Congrats on getting paid to do a commissioned video. :D However, we can nit-pick all day. It s pretty clear from the rest of my post which you cut
                            Message 13 of 23 , Aug 2 4:53 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "pouringdownpix" <daniel@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@>
                              > wrote:
                              > >
                              > > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                              > > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As far
                              > > as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone
                              > > knows of one, feel free to post and let me know.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > hi,
                              >
                              > never YET? never EVER?
                              >
                              > "uninteresting" videoblog monetized, if only for a moment:
                              >
                              > http://pouringdown.tv/?p=161
                              >
                              >
                              > --
                              >
                              > daniel, pouringdown.tv

                              Well... Congrats on getting paid to do a commissioned video. :D

                              However, we can nit-pick all day. It's pretty clear from the rest of
                              my post which you cut out that that's not what I'm talking about.

                              Not being familiar with your videoblog, I don't know if that's
                              something you had already done that they decided to pay you to use for
                              their purposes, or a situation where they saw your work and wanted you
                              to make something for them because they liked your style. Either way,
                              it's commendable. However, I was talking about *advertising*.
                              There's a difference between someone paying you to make a video that
                              THEY USE and someone paying you to advertise on YOUR site.

                              My examples, which again, were cut out by you in your response... were
                              Amanda Congdon, Ask A Ninja, WallStrip and Hayden Black. My point was
                              about consistency, quality, demonstrated ability and other factors
                              adding up to agencies or companies being interested in them BEFORE any
                              form of demographic quantization was available, because it STILL isn't
                              available. I wasn't saying that NOBODY'S going to give ANY
                              videoblogger ANY money to do what they do unless they have similar
                              talents or qualities.

                              Wreck & Salvage has done auctions for advertising space on their show.
                              Galacticast has given out titles to people financially supporting
                              thier show.
                              There are people that have deals with UTA.
                              There are people that have deals with Next New Networks.
                              I'm sure there are people every day that use their videoblog as a
                              resume and get some sort of paying work for video production or post.
                              People are getting ad-sharing revenue from blip, revver, etc.

                              So... We can come up with a million examples of "Someone paid me to do
                              a video", but the thread, which you deleted, was about advertising
                              dollars moving over from MSM to internet video. In order to
                              understand WHY someone would pay someone to make an internet video,
                              you have to understand WHY someone would pay someone to make an MSM
                              video. The reasons are that on television, you can quantify the
                              demographics and tell the advertisers what ROI they're going to get if
                              they place a 30-second ad on such and such a show at such and such a
                              time on such and such a day. You can NOT do that [yet] on the
                              internet, so until that time, unless you demonstrate extraordinary
                              talent, or as Markus brought up, something you do happens to become
                              really popular for some reason, nobody's getting paid [from advertisers].

                              --
                              billcammack
                              http://reelsolid.tv
                            • Bill Cammack
                              ... I agree, Chuck. I m not saying that people shouldn t do what they want to do and what they love to do and HOPE to get paid to do it. I m just saying it s
                              Message 14 of 23 , Aug 2 4:56 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck" <chuckboycejr@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Bill,
                                >
                                > I think your points are all spot on, but the landscape is nonetheless
                                > going to experience dramatic change over the next few years. That
                                > doesn't mean the vlogging community will be the beneficiaries of that
                                > change. Big money and big media are no doubt already planning
                                > strategies and those strategies don't involve any of us.
                                >
                                > I think that being a video blogger now and establishing a presence
                                > early on is risky in light of the good points you make, BUT - the
                                > very nature of change and the "winner take all" dynamics of it will
                                > make **some** of us very profitable. That's a *VERY* small
                                > percentage of us.

                                I agree, Chuck. I'm not saying that people shouldn't do what they
                                want to do and what they love to do and HOPE to get paid to do it.
                                I'm just saying it's more of a longshot than I've seen discussed in
                                this group.

                                --
                                billcammack
                                http://reelsolid.tv



                                > I'm reading the "Black Swan" right now by Nassim Taleb
                                > (http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/?ml_video=86522) and I
                                > really think that this next few years will see some black swans in
                                > videoblogging. I know I'd love to be one.
                                >
                                > :-)
                                >
                                > Chuck
                                >
                                > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack"
                                > <BillCammack@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Markus Sandy <markus.sandy@>
                                > > wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > Hey Bill,
                                > > >
                                > > > Long time no see. How's it going?
                                > > >
                                > > > On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:29 PM, Bill Cammack wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about
                                > uninteresting
                                > > > > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized.
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > sometimes things are of interest to an audience larger than
                                > expected.
                                > > >
                                > > > For example, wasn't South Park originally a "christmas card" sent
                                > by
                                > > > some ad folks to a few people but it went viral within the
                                > industry?
                                > > >
                                > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_park
                                > > >
                                > > > admittedly not your typical case, but it happens
                                > > >
                                > > >
                                > > > --
                                > > > http://tools.ourmedia.org/blog
                                > > > http://SpinXpress.com/Markus_Sandy
                                > > > http://Ourmedia.org/Markus_Sandy
                                > >
                                > > Hey Markus. :)
                                > >
                                > > That's my point, exactly. Not that there isn't any hope for
                                > something
                                > > random to go viral or be seen as something worth funding... but
                                > rather
                                > > that it's an anomaly.
                                > >
                                > > To speak about these things as if they're "regular" or as if they're
                                > > definitely going to happen at some point I think does a disservice
                                > to
                                > > the community. I keep seeing these posts that imply that everyone's
                                > > going to get a piece of the pie, eventually... but even in the case
                                > of
                                > > YouTube, it wasn't EVERYBODY that landed "partnership program"
                                > deals.
                                > >
                                > > --
                                > > billcammack
                                > > http://reelsolid.tv
                                > >
                                >
                              • Chuck
                                Absolutely.
                                Message 15 of 23 , Aug 2 5:01 PM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Absolutely.

                                  --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@...>
                                  wrote:

                                  > I agree, Chuck. I'm not saying that people shouldn't do what they
                                  > want to do and what they love to do and HOPE to get paid to do it.
                                  > I'm just saying it's more of a longshot than I've seen discussed in
                                  > this group.
                                  >
                                  > --
                                  > billcammack
                                  > http://reelsolid.tv
                                  >
                                • Brook Hinton
                                  That s a zillion times *more* interesting than most monetized video. Brook ... -- _______________________________________________________ Brook Hinton
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Aug 2 5:04 PM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    That's a zillion times *more* interesting than most monetized video.

                                    Brook

                                    On 8/2/07, pouringdownpix <daniel@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > never YET? never EVER?
                                    >
                                    > "uninteresting" videoblog monetized, if only for a moment:
                                    >
                                    > http://pouringdown.tv/?p=161
                                    >
                                    > --
                                    >
                                    > daniel, pouringdown.tv
                                    >












                                    >



                                    --
                                    _______________________________________________________
                                    Brook Hinton
                                    film/video/audio art
                                    www.brookhinton.com


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Steve Watkins
                                    The thing is that I cant actually think of many people here who believe otherwise. OK maybe occasionally someone who hasnt put in insane amounts of effort into
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Aug 2 5:28 PM
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      The thing is that I cant actually think of many people here who
                                      believe otherwise. OK maybe occasionally someone who hasnt put in
                                      insane amounts of effort into their vlog, wonders why they arent being
                                      noticed and propelled to the giddy heights, but generally it seems
                                      like most people know that it will take a certain something to make a
                                      show with a large audience and h potential to make money via advertising.

                                      There is of course a natural desire for some people who get so hooked
                                      on vlogging and related arts, to want to do it all day, and so to
                                      wonder what ways may exist to make money. But most people are quite
                                      realistic, they may not know demographics but they know the
                                      approximate size of their own audience.

                                      What may also have encouraged talk of people getting paid here, and
                                      the view that many vloggers believe this will happen as if by magic,
                                      is the businesses that have got a lot more riding on this. These
                                      companies, and their associated media & blogs, are the ones that need
                                      this stuff to happen, and they are going to talk things up. And when
                                      they buy eachother for insane amounts of money, or get a load of VC
                                      money, or do advertising deals that sound lucrative, the people who
                                      make the videos wonder about their cut. But like with so much of web
                                      2.0, there can be some very big numbers involved which arent actually
                                      based on any revenue stream, just the expectation that there will be
                                      revenue in the future.

                                      At this stage my concern is not about how many people are going to get
                                      rich, but about whether the infrastructure for easy vlogging will
                                      survive ok if the buzz dies and the income to the companies that do
                                      the hosting etc doesnt materialize. I was sarcastic about the sheer
                                      number of video hosting companies that appeared once videoblogging
                                      become big, but choice is good, I like variety. Its not going to be
                                      very nice if at some point some video hosting sites get unplugged
                                      forever and people face losing or having to reupload all their stuff.

                                      Cheers

                                      Steve Elbows

                                      --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck" <chuckboycejr@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Absolutely.
                                      >
                                      > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@>
                                      > wrote:
                                      >
                                      > > I agree, Chuck. I'm not saying that people shouldn't do what they
                                      > > want to do and what they love to do and HOPE to get paid to do it.
                                      > > I'm just saying it's more of a longshot than I've seen discussed in
                                      > > this group.
                                      > >
                                      > > --
                                      > > billcammack
                                      > > http://reelsolid.tv
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • Bill Cammack
                                      ... advertising. ... Yes. I ve noticed this. For instance, there are a few different meetups http://meetup.com for new media in NYC. Depending on which
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Aug 3 6:04 AM
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <steve@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > The thing is that I cant actually think of many people here who
                                        > believe otherwise. OK maybe occasionally someone who hasnt put in
                                        > insane amounts of effort into their vlog, wonders why they arent being
                                        > noticed and propelled to the giddy heights, but generally it seems
                                        > like most people know that it will take a certain something to make a
                                        > show with a large audience and h potential to make money via
                                        advertising.
                                        >
                                        > There is of course a natural desire for some people who get so hooked
                                        > on vlogging and related arts, to want to do it all day, and so to
                                        > wonder what ways may exist to make money. But most people are quite
                                        > realistic, they may not know demographics but they know the
                                        > approximate size of their own audience.
                                        >
                                        > What may also have encouraged talk of people getting paid here, and
                                        > the view that many vloggers believe this will happen as if by magic,
                                        > is the businesses that have got a lot more riding on this. These
                                        > companies, and their associated media & blogs, are the ones that need
                                        > this stuff to happen, and they are going to talk things up. And when
                                        > they buy eachother for insane amounts of money, or get a load of VC
                                        > money, or do advertising deals that sound lucrative, the people who
                                        > make the videos wonder about their cut. But like with so much of web
                                        > 2.0, there can be some very big numbers involved which arent actually
                                        > based on any revenue stream, just the expectation that there will be
                                        > revenue in the future.

                                        Yes. I've noticed this. For instance, there are a few different
                                        meetups http://meetup.com for "new media" in NYC. Depending on which
                                        ones you attend, it's either media makers talking about their projects
                                        or people doing "startups" that are trying to find out how they can
                                        get people to put videos on their sites in order to look like a
                                        progressive company and score some VC funding. It's exactly what you
                                        said. The startups have no revenue stream, but if they can convince
                                        someone that they have a viable idea, they can get money based on
                                        their hopes for the future.... Which, as you very interestingly point
                                        out... leads to THIS! =>

                                        > At this stage my concern is not about how many people are going to get
                                        > rich, but about whether the infrastructure for easy vlogging will
                                        > survive ok if the buzz dies and the income to the companies that do
                                        > the hosting etc doesnt materialize. I was sarcastic about the sheer
                                        > number of video hosting companies that appeared once videoblogging
                                        > become big, but choice is good, I like variety. Its not going to be
                                        > very nice if at some point some video hosting sites get unplugged
                                        > forever and people face losing or having to reupload all their stuff.
                                        >
                                        > Cheers
                                        >
                                        > Steve Elbows

                                        Excellent point. I hadn't thought about this at all. Somebody could
                                        "invest" their videos into some new video-sharing site, especially one
                                        where you record right into the site, and you don't have a "hard copy"
                                        of your video stored somewhere IRL, and then what happens if that
                                        company folds? What happens if "the buzz dies", and they can't get
                                        any more "trust me, we're going to get you a return on your
                                        investment" money? Very interesting. Definitely something to consider
                                        when choosing where to post.

                                        Personally, I'm not concerned with that since I post my video to blip,
                                        AND I have backups of all my videos anyway. Living in the same town
                                        with the blip folx, I happen to know that their work ethic is
                                        outlandish! :D We're still talking shop over brews at 2am, or that
                                        might be when one of them SHOWS UP because something happened in the
                                        middle of the night, and they hopped to dealing with the issue. They
                                        focus on the needs of the community, make progressive updates to their
                                        services and infrastructure and are clearly dedicated to (and very
                                        good at) doing what they're doing, so I'm not concerned about blip.

                                        Some other sites, that just seem to have tossed together a user
                                        interface so people can start uploading videos and try to "go viral"
                                        while they PRAY for VC money..... We'll see if any of them disappear. :D

                                        --
                                        billcammack
                                        http://reelsolid.tv


                                        > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck" <chuckboycejr@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Absolutely.
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@>
                                        > > wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > > I agree, Chuck. I'm not saying that people shouldn't do what they
                                        > > > want to do and what they love to do and HOPE to get paid to do it.
                                        > > > I'm just saying it's more of a longshot than I've seen discussed in
                                        > > > this group.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > --
                                        > > > billcammack
                                        > > > http://reelsolid.tv
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • missbhavens1969
                                        Totally off-topic, but, jeez: Max! That kid is on ESPN? (you can tell I don t have a tv) Well, it s about freakin time! Max goes way, way back. Like high
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Aug 3 8:47 AM
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Totally off-topic, but, jeez: Max! That kid is on ESPN? (you can tell
                                          I don't have a tv) Well, it's about freakin' time! Max goes way, way
                                          back. Like high school back. Jr. High School, actually.

                                          Public Access. Gotta love it. Man, MSM is slow.

                                          Bekah

                                          > Meanwhile, you have people that have shows like "Max on Boxing" that
                                          > do public access for years, and demonstrate their worth and now Max
                                          > Kellerman's on ESPN. He was the best and most passionate boxing
                                          > commentator on television on his internet show, AND he was doing
                                          > CALL-IN shows!!! Not like these guys that sit at a table with papers
                                          > in their hands with their lines on them and teleprompters on the
                                          > cameras and earpieces in their ears with producers telling them what
                                          > to do and say! :D Max Kellerman should have been in MSM way before he
                                          > actually was, because he was demonstrating passion, ability, knowledge
                                          > and talent on public access that outdid the MSM sportscasters that
                                          > were talking about the same fights at the same time.... AND he was
                                          > giving his opinions on the fly to people that would call in randomly.
                                          >
                                          > The same thing's happening here with Amanda and Ask A Ninja and
                                          > WallStrip and Hayden's new projects. People are demonstrating ability
                                          > on the internet and getting "picked up". It's not like these are
                                          > accidents or that they were all lucky. :D People are being selected
                                          > for whatever their consistent, proven talents are. There's no
                                          > trickle-down. There's no "matter of time". I think that if someone
                                          > wants to be supported financially for their videoblog, they need to
                                          > take a hard look at what they're doing and honestly ask themselves
                                          > "WHY would ANYONE pay me to do this?"
                                          >
                                          > --
                                          > billcammack
                                          > http://reelsolid.tv
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <steve@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > I remain skeptical on a number of fronts.
                                          > >
                                          > > For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect
                                          > > medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are
                                          > > likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on your
                                          > > ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort.
                                          > >
                                          > > Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-top
                                          > > boxes, and of course the internet.
                                          > >
                                          > > But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or
                                          > > desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg mass
                                          > > audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the more
                                          > > the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be
                                          > > interested, and will switch over.
                                          > >
                                          > > Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that
                                          > > predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at all.
                                          > > And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im interested in.
                                          > > Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet and
                                          > > it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by
                                          > > radiowaves, cable, satellite.
                                          > >
                                          > > I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the
                                          > > internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the
                                          > > internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really huge
                                          > > audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much more
                                          > > choice to fragment the audience.
                                          > >
                                          > > On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded their
                                          > > own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different
                                          > > challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about
                                          > > scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it
                                          > > were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely
                                          > > powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it
                                          > > doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining
                                          > > multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe the
                                          > > solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy
                                          > > heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards.
                                          > >
                                          > > Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come a
                                          > > time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where
                                          > > future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then
                                          > > theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the bohemoth,
                                          > > so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable.
                                          > >
                                          > > Cheers
                                          > >
                                          > > Steve Elbows
                                          > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Sinton" <frank@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics
                                          > > of online
                                          > > > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really
                                          > > - when
                                          > > > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV
                                          > > show?
                                          > > > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks,
                                          etc..
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for
                                          > indie
                                          > > > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a
                                          > > shift
                                          > > > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out
                                          > > having to
                                          > > > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old
                                          > media
                                          > > > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is
                                          > > hard to
                                          > > > say how good of a deal it actually was).
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > -Frank
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Frank Sinton
                                          > > >
                                          > > > CEO
                                          > > >
                                          > > > frank@
                                          > > >
                                          > > > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs
                                          > > >
                                          > > > _____
                                          > > >
                                          > > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                                          > > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
                                          > > > On Behalf Of Chuck
                                          > > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
                                          > > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                                          > > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > http://newteevee.
                                          > <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
                                          > > > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but
                                          > there
                                          > > > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Chuck
                                          > > >
                                          > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
                                          > > > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@>
                                          > > > wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > http://mediabiz.
                                          > > >
                                          <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about->
                                          > > > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
                                          > > > online-video/
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                        • danielmcvicar
                                          Great comments Bill, Frank, Steve and Chuck. I don t know what to add, except Make Video Be Happy. D ... etc.. ...
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Aug 3 8:58 AM
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Great comments Bill, Frank, Steve and Chuck.
                                            I don't know what to add, except Make Video Be Happy.
                                            D

                                            --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@...>
                                            wrote:
                                            >
                                            > See, the problem here is that people seem to think that advertisers
                                            > are just looking to throw away money. :)
                                            >
                                            > I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting
                                            > (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As far
                                            > as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone
                                            > knows of one, feel free to post and let me know. What *I* see
                                            > happening here is MSM picking up people or internet video production
                                            > companies that have proven their ability to get, maintain and grow an
                                            > audience. Meanwhile, in the other direction, I see production
                                            > companies that have been trying their hand at getting into television
                                            > starting to make series for the internet to get exposure, make
                                            > contacts and hopefully get a buzz started about their company that
                                            > will catapult them back into television or Hollywood.
                                            >
                                            > Like I've been saying for ~ 6 months, without a way to verify and
                                            > quantify demographics, you have NOTHING to offer potential
                                            > advertisers. NOTHING. Your only hope is to have some kind of niche
                                            > program content that will prompt a sponsor to back your play and
                                            > support you financially to get your show made. I'm not talking about
                                            > some adsense dollars or revenue-sharing from viral videos. People
                                            > seem to be WONDERING when the advertisers are going to show up with
                                            > their money, and that's going to be AFTER someone can guarantee them
                                            > the proper ROI.
                                            >
                                            > I've seen a lot of talented videobloggers with shows that aren't
                                            > sponsored AT.ALL. I think conversations that focus on "When are
                                            > videobloggers in general going to be monetized?" are completely
                                            > disingenuous. I think a better conversation (and also more useful to
                                            > the community) is "How is someone going to figure out how to quantify
                                            > demographics similar to what's done already in MSM so that the
                                            > talented videobloggers can be properly recognized and sponsored?"
                                            >
                                            > I mean, look at public access television. You don't have to pay to
                                            > have a show on public access..... OTOH, you don't GET PAID either. :)
                                            > You do it because you like to do it, and there are rules (at least in
                                            > Manhattan, NYC) that prohibit you from advertising, because you're not
                                            > paying anything for your broadcast slot in the first place. The
                                            > question could be asked "When are they going to monetize public access
                                            > shows?" :D Well... Just because someone has a show doesn't mean that
                                            > ANYONE feels it's worth advertising on.
                                            >
                                            > Meanwhile, you have people that have shows like "Max on Boxing" that
                                            > do public access for years, and demonstrate their worth and now Max
                                            > Kellerman's on ESPN. He was the best and most passionate boxing
                                            > commentator on television on his internet show, AND he was doing
                                            > CALL-IN shows!!! Not like these guys that sit at a table with papers
                                            > in their hands with their lines on them and teleprompters on the
                                            > cameras and earpieces in their ears with producers telling them what
                                            > to do and say! :D Max Kellerman should have been in MSM way before he
                                            > actually was, because he was demonstrating passion, ability, knowledge
                                            > and talent on public access that outdid the MSM sportscasters that
                                            > were talking about the same fights at the same time.... AND he was
                                            > giving his opinions on the fly to people that would call in randomly.
                                            >
                                            > The same thing's happening here with Amanda and Ask A Ninja and
                                            > WallStrip and Hayden's new projects. People are demonstrating ability
                                            > on the internet and getting "picked up". It's not like these are
                                            > accidents or that they were all lucky. :D People are being selected
                                            > for whatever their consistent, proven talents are. There's no
                                            > trickle-down. There's no "matter of time". I think that if someone
                                            > wants to be supported financially for their videoblog, they need to
                                            > take a hard look at what they're doing and honestly ask themselves
                                            > "WHY would ANYONE pay me to do this?"
                                            >
                                            > --
                                            > billcammack
                                            > http://reelsolid.tv
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <steve@> wrote:
                                            > >
                                            > > I remain skeptical on a number of fronts.
                                            > >
                                            > > For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect
                                            > > medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are
                                            > > likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on your
                                            > > ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort.
                                            > >
                                            > > Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-top
                                            > > boxes, and of course the internet.
                                            > >
                                            > > But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or
                                            > > desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg mass
                                            > > audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the more
                                            > > the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be
                                            > > interested, and will switch over.
                                            > >
                                            > > Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that
                                            > > predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at all.
                                            > > And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im interested in.
                                            > > Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet and
                                            > > it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by
                                            > > radiowaves, cable, satellite.
                                            > >
                                            > > I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the
                                            > > internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the
                                            > > internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really huge
                                            > > audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much more
                                            > > choice to fragment the audience.
                                            > >
                                            > > On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded their
                                            > > own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different
                                            > > challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about
                                            > > scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it
                                            > > were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely
                                            > > powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it
                                            > > doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining
                                            > > multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe the
                                            > > solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy
                                            > > heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards.
                                            > >
                                            > > Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come a
                                            > > time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where
                                            > > future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then
                                            > > theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the bohemoth,
                                            > > so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable.
                                            > >
                                            > > Cheers
                                            > >
                                            > > Steve Elbows
                                            > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Sinton" <frank@> wrote:
                                            > > >
                                            > > > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics
                                            > > of online
                                            > > > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really
                                            > > - when
                                            > > > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV
                                            > > show?
                                            > > > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks,
                                            etc..
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for
                                            > indie
                                            > > > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a
                                            > > shift
                                            > > > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out
                                            > > having to
                                            > > > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old
                                            > media
                                            > > > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is
                                            > > hard to
                                            > > > say how good of a deal it actually was).
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > -Frank
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > Frank Sinton
                                            > > >
                                            > > > CEO
                                            > > >
                                            > > > frank@
                                            > > >
                                            > > > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs
                                            > > >
                                            > > > _____
                                            > > >
                                            > > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                                            > > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
                                            > > > On Behalf Of Chuck
                                            > > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM
                                            > > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
                                            > > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January:
                                            > > >
                                            > > > http://newteevee.
                                            > <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/>
                                            > > > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/
                                            > > >
                                            > > > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but
                                            > there
                                            > > > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that.
                                            > > >
                                            > > > Chuck
                                            > > >
                                            > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
                                            > > > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@>
                                            > > > wrote:
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising
                                            > > > >
                                            > > > > http://mediabiz.
                                            > > >
                                            <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about->
                                            > > > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-
                                            > > > online-video/
                                            > > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > >
                                            > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                            > > >
                                            > >
                                            >
                                          • Kath O'Donnell
                                            (late reply) I think one day people will be shooting / making video / media as stringers and sell that to people who need video / media, likely businesses who
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Aug 5 1:53 PM
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              (late reply)

                                              I think one day people will be shooting / making video / media as stringers
                                              and sell that to people who need video / media, likely businesses who can
                                              afford to pay. another layer to news program's stringers/freelancers but on
                                              any topic, not just news. ala Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. so people will
                                              be taking videos for themselves and to upload and be paid if someone
                                              uses/downloads it. when archive.org started I was reminded of this also -
                                              "The Library" - a collection of clips from creative minds & people uploading
                                              as they will. so the utubes and googles et al will become clip libraries.
                                              most will be noise, but some will be useful for others. it happens in a
                                              small way now, how many of you have had people see a clip or video and ask
                                              if they can use it? similar with photos. eg I've had people see a photo and
                                              remember a place or a personal memory and ask if they can use it. after a
                                              while of people posting videos / photos / media - patterns will develop and
                                              certain topics / styles / genres will be sought after. anything is possible
                                              - the niches, the popularist content, the everyday life, the world around
                                              us. in the future when the world is different people will want to see how it
                                              was. I wonder also if it'll affect our memories & the way our brains connect
                                              thoughts & images as the ease of storing photos/videos to trigger memories
                                              is different now to even say 30 years ago, but that's probably another
                                              thread. I wonder then if it'll lead to obsession ala until the end of the
                                              world when Claire became obsessed with watching her recorded dreams on her
                                              portable video player. I think the two ideas (book/movie) will merge &
                                              expand.

                                              I think this has all been mentioned here before - a while ago.. so a
                                              refresher. but, I think it's getting closer. especially with google etc &
                                              their searching capabilities and tagging / metadata so common place these
                                              days. if I were a big business this is the way I'd be going anyway.

                                              kath

                                              > ,___
                                              >

                                              extract from Snow Crash (by Neal Stephenson) about the library..

                                              "The business is a simple one. Hiro gets information. It may be gossip,
                                              videotape, audiotape, a fragment of a computer disk, a xerox of a document.
                                              It can even be a joke based on the latest highly publicized disaster."

                                              "He uploads it to the CIC database -- the Library, formerly the Library of
                                              Congress, but no one calls it that anymore. Most people are not entirely
                                              clear on what the word "congress" means."

                                              "And even the word "library" is getting hazy. It used to be a place full of
                                              books, mostly old ones. Then they began to include videotapes, records, and
                                              magazines. Then all of the information got converted into machine-readable
                                              form, which is to say, ones and zeroes. And as the number of media grew, the
                                              material became more up to date, and the methods for searching the Library
                                              became more and more sophisticated, it approached the point where there was
                                              no substantive difference between the Library of Congress and the Central
                                              Intelligence Agency. Fortuitously, this happened just as the government was
                                              falling apart anyway. So they merged and kicked out a big fat stock
                                              offering."

                                              "Millions of other CIC stringers are uploading millions of other fragments
                                              at the same time. CIC's clients, mostly large corporations and Sovereigns,
                                              rifle through the Library looking for useful information, and if they find a
                                              use for something that Hiro put into it, Hiro gets paid."

                                              "A year ago, he uploaded an entire first-draft film script that he stole
                                              from an agent's wastebasket in Burbank. Half a dozen studios wanted to see
                                              it. He ate and vacationed off of that one for six months."

                                              "Since then, times have been leaner. He has been learning the hard way that
                                              99 percent of the information in the Library never gets used at all."






                                              --
                                              http://www.aliak.com


                                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                            • Kath O'Donnell
                                              oh, also, which is why I think ads on videos is an old media way of thinking. like ads on tv. (which will phase into product placements soon enough). people
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Aug 5 2:07 PM
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                oh, also, which is why I think ads on videos is an old media way of
                                                thinking. like ads on tv. (which will phase into product placements
                                                soon enough). people will still use them now whilst they make money
                                                from them but I don't think they'll be necessary or used in future as
                                                they'll be regarded as spam. similar to what was mentioned earlier,
                                                people ignore spam on the net now, so in the future when the
                                                generations change, they'll lose their power. the information /
                                                message will be the currency. & hopefully the creative mind! :)

                                                On 8/5/07, Kath O'Donnell <aliak77@...> wrote:
                                                > (late reply)
                                                >
                                                > I think one day people will be shooting / making video / media as stringers
                                                > and sell that to people who need video / media, likely businesses who can


                                                --
                                                http://www.aliak.com
                                              • Mike Moon
                                                I haven t been following this thread, but did catch your thoughts on vloggers having a marketable commodity for the mass market. I recently did a vlog that
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Aug 5 9:08 PM
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  I haven't been following this thread, but did catch your thoughts on
                                                  vloggers having a marketable commodity for the mass market.

                                                  I recently did a vlog that speaks about our community selling
                                                  Lumiere's to Digital Picture Frame consumers.
                                                  http://vlog.mikemoon.net/2007/07/thinking-lumieres.html


                                                  Mike
                                                  http://vlog.mikemoon.net

                                                  --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Kath O'Donnell" <aliak77@...>
                                                  wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > (late reply)
                                                  >
                                                  > I think one day people will be shooting / making video / media as
                                                  stringers
                                                  > and sell that to people who need video / media, likely businesses
                                                  who can
                                                  > afford to pay. another layer to news program's stringers/freelancers
                                                  but on
                                                  > any topic, not just news. ala Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. so
                                                  people will
                                                  > be taking videos for themselves and to upload and be paid if someone
                                                  > uses/downloads it.
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.