Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TV Networks Discussing YouTube Rival

Posted by Zonk on from the hard-to-get-that-right dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Reuters is carrying a story indicating that NBC, CBS, Fox, and Viacom are considering banding together to work on a competitive video-hosting site. The goal would be to provide an alternative to Google's YouTube, and presumably direct some revenue in their direction." From the article: "While a deal is still far off, the four media companies envision a jointly owned site that would be the primary Web source for videos from their television networks, the paper said in an online report on Wsj.com, citing people close to the situation. The companies aim to cash in on the fast-growing market of Web video advertising and have also discussed building a Web video player that could play clips, the Journal said. "

6 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. Whatever by Kiba+Ruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And they are going to use DRM. Wow...such a compelling service...NOT!

    --
    Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-RMS
    1. Re:Whatever by Salvance · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Plus, they'll make us watch a 20 second commercial before the video, and 12 30 second commercials during the sitcom. How fun.

      If the networks were smart, they'd encourage viewers to submit good/funny clips from their top shows to Youtube and other video channels. CBS realized the value of posting online with their CBS YouTube channel, which helped to increase TV viewership as well.

      Internet viewers want to quickly scan 100's of videos to find what works, most don't want to sit down in front of their 17 in monitor in the office and watch TV sitcoms with the family. The advertising model that works for TV just doesn't work on the internet, and networks won't understand this. For now, they should ditch their idea and use the internet to drive traffic to their TV shows, which has huge potential (the only reason I watch The Office is because I saw clips online first).

      --
      Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
    2. Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course there will be DRM. It's their IP, they can do what they want with it. You are free not to use their service.

  2. Competitive? by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Reuters is carrying a story indicating that NBC, CBS, Fox, and Viacom are considering banding together to work on a competitive video-hosting site.


    Uh, so just about the entire US broadcast industry is banding together to distribute content through a joint venture. I think the word you want is "anti-competitive", not "competitive".
  3. lame! by mshiltonj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    have also discussed building a Web video player that could play clips

    There *is* a player -- it's called Flash. Why do they need another player? DRM, perhaps? No thank you.

    --
    Software Wars
  4. Not Surprising, But Mildly Impressive by Christopher_Edwardz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The 'big media' conglomerates have always been geriatric/glacial in their movements into new technology.

    I'm thinking this is worthy of note on just how fast they are um... talking about this. They probably see it as targeting a key demographic (the teenager - young adult crowd), which it does and would.

    *deep breath* The reason, I'm guessing, for the seemingly slow movement would be the decision makers are older, fiscal conservatives who are fearful of new technology and systems/processes that transcend general media broadcast methods.

    I had to chuckle over "a Web video player that could play clips". TFA doesn't go into enough detail, but it leads one to assume that it is a web client similar to what we have been using for YouTube. (May the Master Control Program derez it softly into oblivion.)

    However, in the context, the hypothetical player could be either a physical web-appliance (doubtful) or a program that runs on a PC with web connectivity (similar to Media Player Classic).

    I would imagine that they want complete control over the project and will want a proprietary codec/format that they can load with DRM. Given their feelings (and their lawyer's) on the subject, this is fairly obvious. If this were not the case, I'd imagine they would use Apple Quicktime.

    It is also obvious that Walt Disney wouldn't want to join in on this just yet. They are berserk about their intellectual property rights.

    Given their track record, I'm slightly impressed. I think they will mess it up by being over-protective of their rights by having some snake-oil salesman tell them what they want to hear, but I'm still (mildly) impressed.