Notes from iSummit. My thoughts on Television

“People don’t buy a product for its features they buy it for the behaviors that those features allow them.” – (best as I remember it ) from Alex Manu
I am no expert on television or broadcasting (and it may show) but here are my thoughts on the subject from the recent iSummit in Toronto.

This conference was a clash of two worlds. Panelists delegates from traditional broadcasting and the web 2.0 geeks. And neither faction was even speaking the same language. At issue:  Old value chains in music and television are breaking down as the channel universe expands inexorably and ip-delivered content begins to cannibalize the old comfy monopolies the big networks and labels once held over the public’s attention space. People are spending less time watching TV. Television advertising is losing its effectiveness. Consumers are skipping ads, consumers want their entertainment on demand. If the broadcasters ( or, for that matter, the CRTC) aren’t offering them the product they want, those consumers will just route around the damage.

What comes down to is this.

The broadcast industry is going through the same squeeze that the music business has been through these past few years. They’re feeling their market power eroding relative to their suppliers (independent producers, consumers) and their customers (advertisers).

The web 2.0 crowd meanwhile oh chuckles over big media’s nervous crisis. There were any number of celebratory stories shared at the conference from the growing rise of independent music ( finally) to the remarkable and “disruptive” influence of low/no budget success stories like rocketboom.

Is this the end then for big media?

I don’t think so. For the following reasons:

1. “Massive passives” the bulk of consumers won’t change behaviors quickly, they like their media to be easy to use and many many people are still on analog cable. This means there’s still lots of time to figure out the new models.

2. There will always be a demand for long-format, high production value, quality programming. Rocketboom and ask-a-ninja are, I concede, a great way to waste three minutes. But people will still demand well produced programming, that programming will never be free, and so someone will have to be in the business of financing and producing this content ( but like with free-trade debate, the open question being, in a more open market, whether Canadian[or insert nation here] firms can effectively compete against American the manufacturers of content… and whether they can/or can’t or not, and in turn whether that’s a good/or bad thing ( exercise for the reader))

3. There will be too much content. In a world with infinite selection, it’s the filter (aka the editor) adds all of the value. There’s also a value in shared experiences, it’s no fun factor body of the water cooler all watched completely different shows last night. So someone needs to be an aggregator and help users choose their content. This is a role that traditional broadcasters could fill that local, national or worldwide level.

And the future, the same “TV” shows will still be out there, there will be little more selection down the tail of the curve, the way that content is monetized and delivered will shift slowly over time. But it will be monetized and it will be delivered. The question is just whether those currently stuck in the middle of the value chain will have the foresight to set up their business models to seize the value or whether it will all go to the likes of itunes, google/yahoo, or to those that own your set-top-box.