Live Internet Television

Confused by all the different reports and studies making different claims about whether people are switching their TV viewing to the Internet or not? We all are.

And that’s because the studies all define “Internet TV” differently, so the data suggests different conclusions.

“Online video,” for instance. What is online video? Is it consumer-generated video? Consumer-recorded and published TV content? Commercial would-be “viral video” fare? Does it include archived TV content from the likes of Fancast and Hulu?

At this point in the changing landscape, I’d define “online video” as anything that was made for Internet viewing, and has never run on TV.

So what’s “online TV?” Is it different from “Internet TV?”

Here’s where things get trickier.

To my mind, both online TV and Internet TV are imprecise terms that kinda mean the same ill-defined thing. What we need are two distinct terms that mean two distinct things:

1. The ability to consume your desired TV content, after its first-run airing, via Internet sites and online players. You know what you want or might like, and can search and watch available content whenever you want.
2. The ability to experience TV online — and portably — in the same way as you consume it on the TV: as it airs, in a channel-lineup-with-schedule format.

Any ideas for what these terms might or should be?

I didn’t read the first part of The Wrap’s reality-TV series dealing with contestant suicides, having a tempered interest in the meaning  behind rare occurrences. But I was fascinated with the second part: Win or Lose, Reality Show Competitors Often End Up With Severe Problems.

I appreciate their thoughtful piece and have excerpted pieces below.

People don’t have any idea what it’s going to feel like to have so much of their life exposed to the camera, said [Dr. Michelle Callahan] …”Your persona on the show extends back to your real life. “If you’re on ‘The Biggest Loser’ and the show ends and you’re driving down the street and you stop at Popeye’s, people are gonna say, ‘Hey, you still look fat.’ Your weight issue has become public.”

“We live in an age of disposable people,” [Dr. Jamie Huysman] told TheWrap. “The producers don’t care about the players, they care about the sponsors who want eyeballs, confrontations, meltdowns … That’s why the highest-rated shows are the ones where people get crushed emotionally.

No one tells these people it all will be edited, not just to shorten the running time but to manipulate character development. Character defects may be exaggerated simply by editing down their good qualities.” Some contestants end up being the good guy; others end up as the villains.

“Just like a dramatic series, the producers decide before taping who will wear the white hat and whom the black. The problem is, we all are made up of good and not so good qualities and the contestants don’t get to choose which qualities they want displayed to the audience.”

I am an enthusiastic fan of quite a few reality series.

I love Project Runway, Chopped, Top Chef, Top Design, The Restaurant, Kitchen Nightmares, Hell’s Kitchen, Iron Chef and I have a place in my heart for such fare as Millionaire Matchmaker, Real Housewives of [XYZ], the Bachelor series (did I have to admit that?!), The Cougar, The Hills (minus Speidi), and The Pickup Artist (for sarcastic, gawking reasons, I swear!), The Stagers.

Because of that, I’m going to take a few minutes today to think about how I “consume” reality show contestants, and recommit to nonjudgment of the  people behind the characters the producers create. Besides the contestants, I’d argue the viewers can develop a kind of PTSD of their own: Are we being encouraged to become judgmental, mean jerks who thrill at the sight of bad behavior?

I’m not sure anyone wins when we oversimplify people into cardboard cutouts. I’m not winning if I am training myself to see everyone in 2 dimensions, and I know what happens onscreen has offscreen implications for me as well as the contestants.

After all, with dramatic series, movies, and novels, complexity of motive and character is what draws us in every bit as much as the recognizable character traits. Balancing our love of spectacle with compassion and empathy is a better idea than demonizing someone who doesn’t exist.

Case in point:

Jade Goody, a 21-year-old dental nurse from London who died from cancer earlier this year, was dubbed “the most hated woman in the United Kingdom” during her 2002 “Big Brother” stint and was routinely called out for being bitchy, two-faced and fat.

A newspaper columnist wrote, “Jade is one of the most hated women on British TV and life will be hard for her when she leaves the house but don’t feel sorry for her … vote the pig out.”

And she wasn’t the only one to be targeted: A 15-year-old who had the misfortune to look something like Jade was beaten up after being mistaken for the contestant.

More good reading, fodder for thought:

WKU Herald: COMMENTARY: Reality TV has real problems
The Atlantic: What the snobs don’t understand: The Case for Reality TV

In a serious mood, ready to entertain some heavier concepts?

Ethics & Reality TV: Should We Really Watch?

Is Neilsen putting on another happy face? Image courtesy of One Super Bargain

Genius! Research that pleases everyone! Neilsen has gotten very good at this.

Via MediaPost:

In a finding that appears to defy some conventional industry thinking, new research released by Nielsen Co. indicates the so-called phenomenon of “cord-cutting” — people who replace a portion of their TV viewing with online video streaming — is real, but it also cuts both ways. Since Nielsen began simultaneously tracking TV viewing and online video usage in its national TV ratings sample earlier this year, it has found that nearly as many people have shifted some share of viewing away from online video, as have shifted toward it.

…

In fact, the overall takeaway of the Nielsen analysis should help quell the anxieties of the TV industry that online video is an imminent threat — or by that same token — and significant immediate opportunity for programmers seeking to extend their presence online.

This is an especially suspicious “takeaway,” since online video IS cutting into traditional TV in real ways that are creating real anxiety. The significant immediate opportunity is also creating anxiety as programmers try to find ways to monetize and control their properties online.

So far, we haven’t seen a lot of creativity, bravery, or innovation in a very exciting field.

More evidence that I am right to question the Neilsen numbers for TV retaining its viewership that claim to deny or minimize Internet inroads…

For many American women, television is becoming like Muzak. It’s on a lot, but it’s mostly background noise. That’s the conclusion of a just-released report from research firm Solutions Research Group documenting the media habits of women in the United States.

While women’s time spent with TV is on the rise over last year, attention to shows is dipping, the report said. In fact, many women are often using the computer while watching TV — sometimes even to watch videos online. Compared with a year ago, about 58 percent of women say they spend more time with the Internet and 38 percent spend more time with TV, partly because they’re home more due to the recession.

But while time spent with TV is increasing, it’s harder to get women’s attention. “What women are engaging with more is the computer,” said Donna Hall, a senior director at SRG. “In the context of the upfront and new shows being announced, you have an incredibly fickle audience to impress out of the gate, and while the TV might be on, they aren’t always paying attention.”

(Source: NewTeeVee)

This is not news to me! Ask me why I sometimes need to watch DVR’d episodes of my shows more than once! Not only do I not have time for all-consuming TV, but being at the computer while watching TV lets me seamlessly igonore parts of the show/ads while giving my attention to my work and play on the smaller and nearer screen.

With the proliferation of Adobe Flash-based sites streaming live content, including Hulu’s announcement that it is live-streaming a Dave Matthews concert and other the event-streaming done by IBM (US Open) and Microsoft (Beijing Olympics), it’s an exciting time.

Cable and satellite don’t have to fear Internet content cannibalization … yet.  There are still hurdles that have to be overcome before people will entirely abandon their cable or satellite service.  The user experience and bandwidth costs are primary among them.

At ivi we call the traditional TV user experience “alpha-state viewing.”  Users turn on their television and watch whatever is on.  We estimate that traditional television is 90-percent alpha-state viewing.  Interactive viewing and event-based viewing make up the remaining percentage.  Internet television has made strides towards increasing the user experience in interactive and event-based viewing.  However, Internet television has not yet replicated the traditional television experience of: “Let’s see what’s
on!”

Additionally, until the Internet’s transactional delivery model can be turned into a broadcast delivery model, the cost of delivering large scale, broad-appeal video is going to be both cost and bandwidth prohibitive.  The user experience is the ultimate leg up for cable and satellite providers.  Until somebody creates an “alpha-state viewing” experience for Internet TV, users won’t depart cable and satellite in the high volume contemplated in articles like this.

ivi TV was designed to overcome these hurdles. Live Internet TV will be a reality soon.