Television. The wave of the future?
June 11th, 2010 | 
Commodore128
Commodore128
I hate the cable company. I mean I respect their business model, and I bet when not working together the people of the cable company are really quite nice. They probably have picnics and drive mini-vans and stuff. I bet they aren’t even as aloof and quasi-retarded as Mike O’Malley portrays them due to him being a bad actor. (Loved ya in GUTS Mike… mean it!) No dear friends, my long standing hatred of the cable company comes from the simple fact that squeezing the hell out of every one of your customers to make a quick buck just rubs me the wrong way. Now maybe you don’t hate the cable company. Maybe you hate the satellite company, or maybe you don’t hate any of these companies and find your life to be a soothing, unhateful place (well just pin a rose on your nose… I bet you use an iPhone don’t you?). In any case, I think we can all agree that the idea of firing all of these people in favor of digitally distributed television via the internet is appealing to say the least.
Imagine it folks, a place where you could watch all the TV and movies you like, where you could see all of your pictures, talk to your friends, learn a few things, and maybe even buy new stuff to replace your old stuff. Well… wait… come to think of it this closely resembles the way folks thought of the future back in the 50’s. And of course the realization of that dream is the Internet, a place where we can do all of these things… except watch what most of us care to see on TV. Now that we live in a day and age where instant access is the norm and not the exception, the question remains… why do we still need pay television through these companies? I can’t think of any reason either, but if you read on past the break, maybe we’ll figure something out about it together.
Folks, the model we currently operate under with television is the resulting infant child of the metaphorical zygote that was fertilized almost 40 years ago. A bunch of people thought about it and said “Hey, why should we rely on these unreliable over-the-air television signals from local affiliates? Clearly the best option for television is to run a wire straight to each and every person’s home.” As I’m sure someone in the room probably asked at that moment (and certainly sentiments that I would have echoed at the time) “uhhh…. Won’t that be ridiculously expensive and take the better part of 4 decades?” After the questioning dissenters were senselessly thrashed with coaxial cables, thrown into the back of a conversion van, driven to area 51, and then fired in a rocket to Mars (I swear, when I started this paragraph I wasn’t intending this kind of conspiracy theory feel… all of this is a lie) the remaining demonic cable overlords decided to go forward with their plans to lay out the infrastructure of what we now know as cable TV. That’s exactly how it happened. And then Abraham Washington crossed the Danube, thusly inventing cheese in a can.
Well in any case, it was a simple concept right? Run cable to everybody and their mother’s house and constantly pipe in a strong and reliable signal, capable of stably sustaining any of the four channels one could possibly ever want. Or need. Ok, so we have more than 4 channels now, but the model is the same folks. And like it or not, any of you that (like me) have cable are paying a heavy price for the investment that the cable companies made nearly 40 years ago. They put up the money and the ridiculous amount of time needed to build out the infrastructure, and now we pay them craploads of money for it. Well… the world has changed. Just go ask AOL Time Warner… oh. Yeah.
I bet more than a few of you have watched some Netflix movies on one of your home consoles, or maybe streamed some hulu.com content through you PC or TV. This fusion of internet connectivity and streaming content is really quite exciting. Some of the possibilities of this phenomenon have been well-exploited like offering long cancelled classic television series online, or making current episodes of the most popular shows available online for free the following day. For the old TV shows, this allows media companies to make some extra coin from an old license that might not normally have been picked up by a large scale broadcast or premium network, thereby satisfying the niche communities dying to see old shows that might never have even made it to DVD. Win-win. Hulu (and others) have also made movies available along these lines which will hopefully open the door one day for any film being available to watch at any time. This will pay off in droves when you get a hankerin to watch Tootsie, and don’t we all from time to time?
But before we all go pick up our phones and tell our television providers exactly where they can stick our monthly service charges (in their rectums), we also have to realize the limitations of the online services so far. The biggest disadvantage I can think of now is the utter lack of live sports. Sure there’s ESPN 3, but in terms of seeing mainstream sports over the internet, it’s mighty slim pickins these days. Until they rectify this problem I know I won’t be killing my cable company bill anytime soon. However, with rumors circulating about negotiations between ESPN and Microsoft, it is possible that soon we’ll have a way to stream sports events to our consoles. It might not be live sports right away, but it certainly opens the door. The next hurdle is a big one too. Right now all this stuff is free for those with a broadband internet connection. But it won’t stay that way long.
The advertising model isn’t playing out so well so far with this online TV stuff. And the media companies know it which is why they’re tying to find ways to charge for it. As we speak Hulu and Microsoft are in talks reportedly finalizing a deal to bring all of hulu’s content to Xbox Live. This is great, but there will be a monthly charge associated with it that will tack on to our yearly subscription rates. Even you web users shouldn’t get too comfy with your free content online because I think at this point it’s practically a done deal that at some point the likes of Hulu will become subscription based. The owners of services like Hulu will continue (rightfully so I would say) to search for ways to make you pay more for the content they provide. If I were them I’d be doing the same thing.
My last problem with streaming right now is that of bandwidth. Even with the connections that most of us enjoy these days it’s a huge technical challenge to stream true 1080p content to a television. That’s some serious data folks and until we can stream a movie in native 1080p with no technical glitches (and technical glitches are aplenty with the likes of Hulu) while maintaining connection speeds elsewhere on our networks, there’ll be many folks that cling to the old ways. Now just wait till they have to broadcast 3D feeds… yikes. I’ll take my Google Fibre now.
Look, I want to fire my cable company like most other folks. But I think at the moment it’s just not practical unless you either don’t watch much TV, mostly watch broadcast networks only, or you don’t mind spending every Sunday in your local sports bar. I think all of the steps we’re seeing here indicate progress toward the inevitability of net based digitally distributed content, but for now there’s no jumping the old ship if you ask me. Maybe when Hulu offers the entire Pirates of Dark Water series. Anybody out there ready to make the “no-TV service” leap yet?
I dont see myself canceling our satilite subscribtion yet, but only because alot of the shows I watch are still not on the internet. I have found myself watching the old clasics I grew up with on youtube and other sites of the like simoply because cable does not show them anymore or the time is not conveiniant for me.
I actually find this post incredibly interesting. There are so many factors to look at that were not discussed. If you look at the idea of both free (over the air) TV and subscription (cable, satellite, etc) TV, versus internet TV there is a fundamental problem. In my experience, most people seem to think that videos, movies, or TV shows that are viewed through the internet should be free. I am not sure why people think this, but I bet it could all be attributed to that "evil" Napster program that gave so many people access to boatloads of music for free. The internet has come to be a place where everything is free unless it is purchased through iTunes or Amazon. I see this business model failing completely due to the fact that the producers of the content will have no reason to make the content if they are not receiving any sort of compensation for their work. Why would anyone go to the trouble of writing or filming a TV series if they knew that EVERYONE that watched it was going to see 2 or 3 30-second commercials and not really pay attention to them anyways. I truly think that sites like Hulu can only exist if at least network TV if not both network and cable/satellite TV exist too. What is the point in a premier/finale if there are only 3 commercial breaks at one 45-second spot each. It really comes to the point that if one wants good television, he is going to have to pay for it in some way. If the free shows had an abundance of commercials that made it very annoying to watch them for free, that would make sense, but offering shows that someone would normally have to pay for at a reduced "commerical price" just doesn't make sense. In the end, TV is really only made to make money. People don't make/continue TV shows that don't make them money. If internet TV finds some way to replace the traditional commercial with something that generates an equivalent amount of revenue, then I could see internet TV really taking off, but until then, it probably will be stunted. Otherwise we will all be suckered even more with the idea that the TV networks could start up their own verions of hulu and require a subscription for each. That could be very interesting, but in the end would not be free. I do believe I have rambled on enough for tonight. GREAT POST Commodore, it really got me thinking.
Before I moved back in with the folks , I was starting to get tired of over paying for the shitfest on tv we were promised by the big cable companies would be free forever. Fuck them.
I understand they are out to make profit, and I have no beef when a company wants to make their dollar, but don't make promises you can't keep and we can't sue you over.
Great comments all! I have to say that I agree with OvertlyArcane 100%. We have been raised on the notion that anything on the internet should just magically appear for free and the sad reality is that we simply can't support that kind of business model (at least not for television or movies). High quality video entertainment will come with a price online and I am more than happy to pay it, as long as the price is reasonable. I simply find the pricing offered by cable/satellite companies to be unreasonable (and as I said in my post, offensively outdated) at this point in time.
But here's where the real work starts! The changing media markets (and the success of online video) means that media companies really have to challenge themselves to assess how this content can be paid for, reasonably, while maintaining strong distribution. This is a tremendous challenge to say the least. But with the internet changing our lives so rapidly, the only choice other than finding new ways to do business is to go out of business. And companies would do well to remember that...
Thanks for the response!