Comments on: Exploding TV: The atomic bomb http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/ by Jeff Jarvis Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:54:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: richard http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-328673 richard Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:56:12 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-328673 whats up dudes! whats up dudes!

]]> By: Radio without Radio « Lines from Lee http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-152897 Radio without Radio « Lines from Lee Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:50:47 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-152897 [...] Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine has written much about the explosion of TV and how newspapers need to re-think their role in the changing media landscape. Today I came across another example of how the media landscape is changing, as Desiring God Ministries is taking its daily half-hour radio program featuring Dr. John Piper off the 160 local radio stations that have carried it, and is moving to internet-only distribution (with a CD subscription option for the technologically challenged.) [...] [...] Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine has written much about the explosion of TV and how newspapers need to re-think their role in the changing media landscape. Today I came across another example of how the media landscape is changing, as Desiring God Ministries is taking its daily half-hour radio program featuring Dr. John Piper off the 160 local radio stations that have carried it, and is moving to internet-only distribution (with a CD subscription option for the technologically challenged.) [...]

]]> By: Matt Locke http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-152337 Matt Locke Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:19:31 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-152337 Miso, You've got slightly the wrong impression about my use of the term 'aggregator'. In the talk at Picnic 06, I emphasised that the BBC's core strength was as a storyteller - making great content and being a platform for our audience's stories. To illustrate the 'aggregator' point I showed an internal demo we've built that aggregates all the external content - youtube, flickr, technorati, google news, etc - tagged with one of our brands, in this case Radio 1. This was to illustrate that one of the ways we can reflect the conversations going on *around our content* was to aggregate these conversations, utilising the power of the generic aggregators that are already out there (flickr, youtube, etc). I didn't suggest that we should move into 'generic' aggregation, but that we should be the best place on the web at aggregating the conversations inspired by our content. Of course, if we're not making great content in the first place, there's no point in us doing any aggregation... matt Miso,

You’ve got slightly the wrong impression about my use of the term ‘aggregator’. In the talk at Picnic 06, I emphasised that the BBC’s core strength was as a storyteller - making great content and being a platform for our audience’s stories. To illustrate the ‘aggregator’ point I showed an internal demo we’ve built that aggregates all the external content - youtube, flickr, technorati, google news, etc - tagged with one of our brands, in this case Radio 1. This was to illustrate that one of the ways we can reflect the conversations going on *around our content* was to aggregate these conversations, utilising the power of the generic aggregators that are already out there (flickr, youtube, etc).

I didn’t suggest that we should move into ‘generic’ aggregation, but that we should be the best place on the web at aggregating the conversations inspired by our content. Of course, if we’re not making great content in the first place, there’s no point in us doing any aggregation…

matt

]]> By: Rosenblum http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-151741 Rosenblum Mon, 02 Oct 2006 05:01:08 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-151741 For such a large organization the BBC is probably the most aggressive in terms of its understanding of its necessity of morphing. This is driven by the fact that Mark Thompson and before him Greg Dyke understood all too well that the notion of a TV license fee, paid for the priviledge of owning a tv set in the UK is an anachronism that technology has obviated. While Ofcom has approved the next ten years of the BBC Charter, it is likely that it will be the last approval they will receive. If they dont reinvent themselves, they are likely not to survive. There is no rationalization for asking people to pay £120 a year to see 'television'. Not in an era of broadband. The question now is whether the staff will be nimble enough to make the necessary changes. For such a large organization the BBC is probably the most aggressive in terms of its understanding of its necessity of morphing. This is driven by the fact that Mark Thompson and before him Greg Dyke understood all too well that the notion of a TV license fee, paid for the priviledge of owning a tv set in the UK is an anachronism that technology has obviated. While Ofcom has approved the next ten years of the BBC Charter, it is likely that it will be the last approval they will receive. If they dont reinvent themselves, they are likely not to survive. There is no rationalization for asking people to pay £120 a year to see ‘television’. Not in an era of broadband. The question now is whether the staff will be nimble enough to make the necessary changes.

]]> By: Miso http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-151695 Miso Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:16:36 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-151695 Biggest, most common reactionary mistake big media is making in response to the new media space... "4. Be an aggregator." Wrong. If you are an established original content provider (i.e. NY Times, BBC, etc.), your status is only made more secure by aggregators. With the BBC's of the world, aggregators have nothing to aggregate. After all, all their content is referential, not original. Right now aggregators are sexy, so everyone is panicking. But nothing trumps original content. If the BBC chief really thinks the path to success is becoming an aggregator, they will be spinning their wheels for nothing. Alas, becoming an aggregator (when you're already an original content provider) is indeed doing a "me too" move, just as he advises against. Aggregators are great, but they can only survive with original content sources. Instead of getting scared, original content producers need to simply find ways to simultaneously open their content up for broader user-distribution, and find ways to brand that content so it is harder to strip away its branding identity. Open the content, secure your brand identity, and watch the others flounder in confusion. Biggest, most common reactionary mistake big media is making in response to the new media space…

“4. Be an aggregator.”

Wrong. If you are an established original content provider (i.e. NY Times, BBC, etc.), your status is only made more secure by aggregators. With the BBC’s of the world, aggregators have nothing to aggregate. After all, all their content is referential, not original. Right now aggregators are sexy, so everyone is panicking. But nothing trumps original content. If the BBC chief really thinks the path to success is becoming an aggregator, they will be spinning their wheels for nothing. Alas, becoming an aggregator (when you’re already an original content provider) is indeed doing a “me too” move, just as he advises against.

Aggregators are great, but they can only survive with original content sources. Instead of getting scared, original content producers need to simply find ways to simultaneously open their content up for broader user-distribution, and find ways to brand that content so it is harder to strip away its branding identity. Open the content, secure your brand identity, and watch the others flounder in confusion.

]]> By: bittorent http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-150994 bittorent Sun, 01 Oct 2006 08:41:02 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/09/30/exploding-tv-the-atomic-bomb/#comment-150994 The thing that holds back the BBC is that every innovation must be checked and approved by the BBC Governors and the regulator Ofcom. The BBC iPlayer (which will offer seven days of viewing on a PC) would surely have been launched months ago if it wasn't for this fact. 'Auntie Beeb' is under constant attack from the likes of Rupert Murdoch and other commercial vested interests. The thing that holds back the BBC is that every innovation must be checked and approved by the BBC Governors and the regulator Ofcom. The BBC iPlayer (which will offer seven days of viewing on a PC) would surely have been launched months ago if it wasn’t for this fact.

‘Auntie Beeb’ is under constant attack from the likes of Rupert Murdoch and other commercial vested interests.

]]>