Why TV is slower to fall victim to Web than music & newspapers (Boxee CEO and me)
Avner Ronen, Boxee's chief executive, shares his thoughts with the Washington Post about the Internet's slower impact on TV compared to its media cousins, music and newspapers: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2009/10/the_web_has_overhauled_newspap.html My theory is more basic: the larger the file size (in megabytes), the slower the erosive impact of the Web on traditional business model related to that media. Music was hit first and hit hard because the MP3 file format squashed songs down to just a few MB's each, making it super easy and fast to spread peer-to-peer on the Web. Similarly, text and image-based news content is easily emailed among friends, posted on blogs, etc. Classified ads, once the cash cow of newspapers, have naturally migrated to free online listing services like Craig's List because they're free and because they've attracted a massive demand market (same with eBay). TV content is very different, of course. Much, much larger file sizes for a half hour or full hour episode, coupled with a much shorter shelf-life for a TV episode (compared to a song). TV executives are taking advantage of this naturally slower business erosion to be more thoughtful on how to best embrace and capitalize on the inevitable transformative power of the Web.
Sent via BlackBerry
Sent via BlackBerry
2 comments
Oct 28, 2009
Brock Henderson said...
I think it also has a lot to do with the technological hurdles of getting a downloaded file to your tv set. Back in MP3's heyday it might have taken half an hour to download a 4 meg file. With the convenience offered by today's bit torrents I really don't think it's a matter of file size as much as the lack of a consistent video format and an easy way to get it to your preferred device.
