Comcast Sets Subscriber Bandwidth Limit

How much is 250 Gigabytes/Month? To me, its like asking how much Electricity do you consume per month or how many gallons of water you use. What if those companies limited you to an amount. If you don't know how much you currently consume, how can you know whether it is enough or not. And how would you measure your usage so you don't run out before the end of the month. And what would happen if or when you exceed that amount.

Comcast is painting the picture that it represents more than enough. "To hit the 250-Gbyte ceiling, a customer would have to do any one of the following, according to Comcast: send 50 million e-mails; download 62,500 songs or 125 standard-definition movies; or upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos." It is made to sound impossible to hit, doesn't it. So then why that number? If its so unreachable, why worry.

Clearly, Comcast is most concerned with who they describe as bandwidth hogs. More typical users are meant to feel that it won't affect them. But I look at these heavy users and see opportunity for Comcast, not a problem. These are your best customers, consuming your product at a high rate. "If a customer uses more than 250 Gbytes, he or she may be contacted by Comcast to notify them of excessive use, the company said. 'At that time, we'll tell them exactly how much data per month they had used,' Comcast said. 'We know from experience the vast majority of customers we ask to curb usage do so voluntarily.'" Could their be a way to monetize and manage that important customer base without causing such bad pr. It's almost like you want to drive them away to your competitors. And I'm sure Verizon would love to take them!

To Comcast's credit, they are trying to support the speeds to the many, by limiting the heavy user fews. But today's heavy users will in the near future become the majority. As more of us utilize the web and grow increasingly more comfortable with large file downloads, more of us will be affected by these download limits. It is a bandaid cure to a much bigger problem. A better solution is clearly needed.

More Comcast Systems to Get Tivo

I have both a Tivo connected directly to cable which receives unscrambled signals for my bedroom and a DVR/settop box for my family room. I have a unique opportunity to watch both recording devices perform and frankly the Tivo is the clear winner. Why? For those that have never worked with a Tivo, your DVR is a capable, a "C" student. Tivo, however, is at the head of the class. Its remote is better, its controls easier, its search capability more preferred, and its trick features much better. It understands the viewing experience and even makes suggestions to watch at a later date. Yes, I love my Tivo!

"Comcast, after expanding the availability of its TiVo service in its New England market with limited trials to customers in Connecticut, plans to “light up” a full marketing campaign around TiVo in September and is preparing rollouts in additional markets before the end of the year." I cross my fingers for it to come to my house. Now if they can make it easier to capture the programs I have already recorded on my old DVR and transfer the ones I still want to keep to this new device, then sign me up today.

TV Tomorrow: Navigation and Recommendation

TV continues to be more crowded as new channels emerge through different distribution paths. We need better navigation and recommendations to help the average person find the "stuff" that most appeals to them. We need a weblike experience on the TV set to better move through the myriad of options in front of us. And at the same time, helps to lead us and present to us content and advertising better targeted to our interests. As long as we are okay with the notion that Big Brother may be watching and our viewing patterns are no longer anonymous, our choices may become more "personalized". That should not be a problem as we are already going down that slippery slope and our web surfing patterns are already be watched.

"Forrester lays out a decade-long evolution that will ultimately result in most programming delivered on-demand with targeted ad messages based on location and behavior, along with community functions. This "Personal TV," as Forrester calls it, would also deliver a Web-like experience for consumers, with a portal-like menu of programming options and search functions." Why a decade of change; with so many companies vested in their infrastructure, change to an open architecture where all are welcome to join may take some time to gain full commitment. As an example, Verizon is unhappy with cable's version of an open settop box through its Tru2way platform. Cable's idea of open may not be Verizons.

Beyond better personalization and navigation comes recommendation. Tivo is already on that path, providing suggestions it records for its members of content they might like to watch. Its most recent announcement, a partnership with Entertainment Weekly of its top choices to watch. I, for one, appreciate the suggestion box and the help to find interesting content to watch. "The partnership is part of a growing push by TiVo to differentiate itself from DVRs offered by cable and satellite companies, which have managed to find a bigger audience even though they lack many of TiVo's bells and whistles." It continues demonstrate to me why Tivo is such a better product than the cable DVR today.

Will the quality of the content keep up with the quantity? Probably not. But perhaps it offers a better opportunity to revisit some long forgotten shows from your childhood. It's all out there to be watched again and again.

Preferring the Web Over Watching TV

Kids like the internet. What the telephone was to past generations for social networking, the internet and wireless is to this generation. And while internet usage is growing, I don't necessarily believe it is a zero sum game, where tv viewership needs to decline as a result. Kids have become increasingly masterful at multi-tasking, watching on one medium as they simultaneously surf on the other. But we did it too, watching TV as we did our homework.

So the data may suggest..."For children ages 10 to 14 who use the Internet, the computer is a bigger draw than the TV set, according to a study recently released by DoubleClick Performics, a search marketing company." But is their really a high correlation? I also believe that the internet remains the hot new toy these days. Its the superhighway that allows us easy access to content, research, information and all kinds of stuff. We can rent or buy, consume to our hearts content. And there appears to be a lot of risk taking on the web. From gaming to user generated videos, it is all new, exciting, and still somewhat unknown.

With the exception of the Olympics on TV the past 2 weeks, linear television viewing has been a bore. Yes, the Fall TV season is fast approaching, but there are few shows generating buzz and nothing exciting to capture on the DVR. Blame the writers strike on some of that problem. So far 2008 has been a bust for TV programming. Until broadcasters start to take some risks, we will continue to see a dumbing down of programming and more reason to escape to other media choices. Perhaps that is the real reason viewership is declining and why children are gravitating more to the internet.

AT&T Wants To Set Up TVs, PCs

Very few of us are tech savvy. Most VCR owners seemed incapable of programming the correct time on their machine. We rely on experts and help to advise and teach us on how things work. At the same time, technology has realized the need to build plug and play devices, suitable for the masses to master.

The rise of HDTV, wireless networks, shared devices, and for some, even downloading, can make one's head spin. Companies that work in this new media world that provide full service and true expertise build brand preference and loyalty. Circuit City touts its Firedog service, Best Buy brands its service as Geek Squad. Service matters. Service at a fair price matters more. In my own home, Comcast has been here when DVRs stop working and modems stop blinking. Sometimes getting them in a timely manner is problematic, but they have corrected the problems and have not charged for their service. When Comcast uses their own employees, rather than outsource, the results have been positive. Building on that consistency and touting service support for customers that bring new devices into the home will bring Comcast even greater brand preference and loyalty.

I say this because the article from Multichannel does a disservice to AT&T. "AT&T’s computer and home-network installation services start at $99. TV and home-theater services like flat-panel TV wall mounting and home video installation start at $149. In-home PC repair service, including parts and hardware replacement, begin at $179." Charging customers for service, especially if you are getting them to switch from a competitor to your product, seems problematic. A fee may be necessary for non-customers, but to satisfy and grow your customer base, this pricing model seems excessive.

Comcast to Slow Internet Service at Times to Its Heaviest Users

So let me understand this bit of news, Comcast is going to slow down their download speed to all customers as a cure to reduce congestion on the web. "Top Internet speeds for the heaviest users will be reduced for 10 to 20 minutes to keep service to other users flowing, said Mitch Bowling, Comcast’s senior vice president and general manager for online services." And this will make their customers happy? I think not. As downloads and internet usage soars, web speed equates to consumer satisfaction. The more times the user is exposed to latency in their on-line experience, the greater the consumer will seek out alternatives to the current situation.

As consumers, we don't tend to change our products or services if they provide adequate satisfaction. We are in fact creatures of habit who like to maintain our current way of doing things. We change when it is forced upon us, when we can experiment with new things at a low cost, or when we encounter a bad experience. Bad experience at a restaurant, don't go back. Free sample at the store, test and switch brands if we like it. Slow internet speed, switch providers. And as more consumers are finally getting a choice of providers, cable or telco, for our hi speed service, a bad experience may be the final straw to make a switch.

So it seems counter-intuitive to hurt your current users with a purposefully bad experience. And at a time when both Verizon and AT&T are knocking on the front door and offering a very competitive package; bad cable service will only push the consumer to more quickly switch. And if proved a better experience, news will spread quickly and more users will switch.

Not a smart move for Comcast. But perhaps they expect different results. "A heavy Comcast Web user being impeded would have Internet speeds equivalent to “a really good DSL experience,” Mr. Bowling said. DSL, or digital subscriber line, is an Internet service offered by telephone companies. After a slowdown ended, Comcast would return Internet service to normal." Perhaps they believe that most users won't even notice that a significant slowdown occurred. We never know if our telephone is working unless we constantly check the ring tone. When it is in the cradle, we simply assume it is still working properly. Comcast may believe that this slowdown will have similar results. Most will simply assume that their internet service is working fine. That is to say, most Comcast customers won't notice a measurable slowdown at all.

Still, this seems like a bandaid cure for Comcast. It may work in the short run but over time, more consumers will require more bandwidth for significant file downloads and sharing. A better solution is needed by Comcast to handle this inevitability. Traffic will only keep growing and an improved infrastructure may be needed.

Suburbuzz Announcement in The Item of Millburn NJ

Local women create a 'buzz' with their Web site

Check Suburbuzz out!

Wall Street Journal Goes Mobile On Your Blackberry

In what is sure to be the first of many similar announcements, that Wall Street Journal will provide free viewing of its articles and news, tying in its various websites, and monetizing it with ads. As they test the waters, they may try to find a subscription model, but competition from other news organizations may prevent that model from building. WSJ is not the first to announce a mobile relationship. "Earlier this year, The Associated Press launched an ad-supported service with more than 100 member newspapers to make news stories available on Apple Inc.'s iPhone and other mobile devices."

WIll users prefer reading their news on a blackberry screen? Will this deal be content exclusive to blackberry? Or will users start to carry other devices like the Kindle for their full reading enjoyment? Regardless of which device ends up getting the market share, the direction remains clear. Readers are switching from subscriptions to web and mobile for their news. This is where the WSJ needs to be.

No More Mike and the Mad Dog - Sirius Gets More Branded Content

Mike and the Mad Dog, sports radio fixtures for nearly 19 years, have split up. When I first heard them, I was intrigued and captivated. Their chemistry was so entertaining, it made for great radio, whatever they were discussing or frankly arguing about. Not many duos have had that kind of appeal and energy. Most people have compared them to comedy teams like Martin and Lewis and Abbott and Costello. But for me, their chemistry and banter reminded me of Siskel and Ebert. Divergent opinions on everything! And great radio, too.

But like most teams, egos and personalities don't always mesh. This "marriage" lasted far longer then most expected. They may have initially disliked each other, but they also recognized the power their relationship caused in the media and the audience that grew. It made economic sense to put aside differences for the successes that would come. At the end of the day, pocketbooks matter more.

And for that same reason, Chris Russo has decided that he should make that next financial leap by going solo. And Sirius Radio agrees with him. Sirius's strategy, branded exclusive content, is to differentiate to make the decision to purchase their product a necessity. Can the Mad Dog deliver that same impact? Martin and Lewis broke up and each found individual fame; but Abbott and Costello could not. And when Gene Siskel passed away, their film critic show with Richard Roeper as co-host was never the same. That magic in the bottle was hard to replace.

So the jury is out on how Chris Russo will do as a solo sports talk personality. It's one thing to talk New York sports, but can he do it on a national basis. And will he need to find a partner to bounce off of? "The show will run every weekday from 2 p.m. to 7 p.m. and will be the first original program to air on both Sirius and XM, which combined in July." For Sirius, his acquisition makes perfect sense. Exclusive content is the way to compete against free radio and the iPod. It seemed to work when Howard Stern was brought on board, and now it is Chris's turn. It may be sad to see Mike and the Mad Dog divorce, but it was inevitable.

Unlimited Viewing Choices, Lousy Maps

The 2008 Summer Olympics are really exciting this year. For those capable of watching many hours of TV, plenty of coverage. For those more discerning in which sports they watch, finding the content is harder than it looks. NBC is reporting huge ratings for its linear coverage and claiming strong broadband and mobile views.

Some of the stats through August 15:
—31.2 million video streams delivered totaling 4.7 million hours.
-31 million unique visitors; 6.5 million daily uniques.
-Users spend approximately 13 minutes per visit.

And yet for all this success, VOD usage is not as strong. Why? Are the better events being held back to promote the DVD packaging? Last night, I saw ads for both Michael Phelps on DVD as well as the opening ceremony. Unfortunately I missed some of the opening coverage but could only find limited web coverage of highlights and nothing else. In fact, that best web coverage of the ceremony was from a non NBC site.

With so much choice being offered to us - linear, vod, broadband, mobile - we need better navigation and experts to recommend for us some things we might enjoy. Whether its buying something or simply viewing thousands of hours of Olympic coverage on many different screens, we want service, we want speed, and we want value. Putting us in a giant store and left to our own curiosity, we may or may not find what we are looking for. Perhaps that is what the numbers are really telling us.

Content vs. Distribution

Back on August 10, I wrote that Content is King. And in that analysis of content verse distribution, I noted how many are pushing to separate the two. To date, Time Warner Entertainment is spinning off its cable distribution arm; shareholders at Cablevision want them to sell their programming arm, Rainbow Media. And per a Bloomberg report, analysts are reporting that Disney may sell its owned and operated television stations to focus strictly on content. "Disney owns stations in cities including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago. A sale would depend on at least those outlets in the biggest markets remaining affiliated with Disney's ABC TV network, Miller said. ABC has broadcast agreements with about 231 TV stations in the U.S., he said. ... Disney spokesman Jonathan Friedland called the report ``purely speculative'' and declined to comment."

So the chicken vs. egg question may now be settled; content is more powerful than distribution. Owning content allows more flexibility on how best to share it; by unlocking the distribution side, content creators are no longer limited to where they can place content. And yet, wasn't vertical integration once considered to be a very powerful foothold. To know confidently that you owned not only the content but also had a guaranteed distribution path to the consumer. But You Tube and the internet changed the environment that content creators work in. It eliminated the barriers to the user and opened the pathway to reach them in multiple ways. For Disney, it appears that they no longer need to own the broadcast network to distribute content.

So for Time Warner and maybe soon for Disney, the focus will be content. For Cablevision, shareholder sentiment is leading to a split. So will others follow suit? Will NBC take a similar strategic path and consider selling its O&O networks? Or must NBC first worry about whether GE wants to keep it as a business unit? That question will be settled first before any discussion of a split would occur. Still, it is fascinating to watch the entertainment landscape continue to change. Stay tuned.

Interesting news. Cablevision has just made an announcement, a quarterly dividend of $0.10 to improve its stock value. In the short term it should placate shareholders; in the long run, they still smell blood and want to further unlock the value of the company by splitting distribution from content. Will it happen? With Cablevision, you never know.

How Many Ports Does a Set-Top Box Need?

Once again the fight between Telcos and Cable centers on the interface between TV and the communications stream, the set top box. And it is why some companies, like Sony, want to bypass the box and enable their own TV set to talk to the web. The set top box, the device you love to hate, is today the device that controls what you can and what you can't receive. Tru2way has been described by the cable community as open access; Dish has agreed and is willing to work under this approach, Verizon is not.

"Most vendors, be they carriers, networking gear makers or computer manufactures, view the set-top box as the key to digital content for consumers as ports will dictate how easy it is for consumers to plug their boxes into a variety of networks without adaptors. So as the computer industry and the telecommunications companies get deeper into the digital TV and home networking market, we’ll wait to see if the FCC decides to make Ethernet ports mandatory. Even if they do, a showdown between those in favor of Ethernet and those on the side of cable’s tru2way standard is likely to ensure as each industry seeks to control the home network."

I want devices that can plug and play. Show me that multiple devices can easily talk with each other in a non-technical way, then the consumer will approve and seek out those devices. Make it consumer friendly, and you will get their vote.

Zuckervision

Fascinating article in the September issue of Portfolio on Jeff Zucker, CEO and President of Universal. Definitely worth the read. He has had some hits as well as taken some hits, but he clearly has a plan. From the acquisition of Oxygen and Weather Channel to the creation of Hulu, he has a definite vision of where he thinks NBC needs to be. And he certainly works hard at it. And the TV industry is so different today than it was just 10 years ago. Still, some would argue that while his cable strategy is sound, his broadcast strategy for NBC is not.

Can producing less pilots per year achieve better results. Financially yes, creatively hard to say. In this new world of on-demand, networks don't allow shows the time to develop as they once did. Seinfeld, Cheers and many other shows were not the ratings hits in their first years. But someone had the vision to keep them on. 30 Rock fits into that category today; luckily, a show that continues to get critical praise despite less than stellar ratings so far. Hopefully more people will find this very funny show. I feel that other shows though have been let go before their time and were not given the same time to grow and prosper. It is these tough decisions that Jeff and his team have to make to construct a successful schedule. The writers strike didn't help them, but every TV season provides the chance to have a do-over. So stay tuned for this Fall to see if the NBC magic is coming back.

The Line, Ep 1: The FutureSpace Showdown Begins

From the folks at SNL:



Very funny! There are 7 episodes to enjoy. Some great online content.

VOD vs DVD

When Pay Per View became popular, movie studios worried that movie theater revenue would decline. It didn't. Radio didn't kill TV, on-demand hasn't killed linear TV. Each finds its place as technology changes usage and preferences. And so to read that the movie studios are afraid of losing DVD revenue by releasing the same movies on-demand is simply misguided.

"'We believe VOD day-and-date with DVD would be a grave mistake for the movie industry, as it would dramatically increase the volatility of the business,' wrote Pali Research analyst Richard Greenfield in a report last year. Jeff Bewkes of Time Warner sees it differently, "'No, we have not seen cannibalization so far,' Bewkes said. 'I don't think it's right to think that the margins are lower. So we think that since we haven't seen cannibalization on sell-through, that it's going to increase margins and profitability going to day-and-date.'"

And while I understand Greenfield's fear, I agree with Bewkes. It is stopping their ability to maximize their revenue. As video stores close, consumers not interested in purchasing the DVD will remain patient till the VOD window opens up.

I do believe their are ways to differentiate the DVD experience from the VOD experience enough so that a day and date approach does not cannibalize each others profit margin. What makes the DVD different are the extras, additional footage and features, unique games, and other "exclusives" that simply have to be marketed correctly to the consumer. For the viewer who simply wants access to the feature film, VOD is not only profitable but may also offer another "opportunity" to sell the viewer to purchase later to take advantage of those extras. In short, VOD enables sampling and the ability to rent first before buying. To me, that represents the opportunity to own the customer twice!

Some studios remain cautious to this opportunity, others are embracing it. It remains our nature to be cautious about change; but it is happening and those that take advantage of it will benefit by leading the charge.

Kindle Has A Bright Future

Mobile, On-demand, Futuristic, and potentially, Economical, the Kindle looms as how print content is moving to be consumed. And when the financial community updates its forecast to see the upward potential, it optimistically represents the direction the consumer is headed. Citi's Mark Mahaney "thinks instead of being a $750 million business that accounts for 3% of the company's sales next year, the Kindle will be a $1.1 billion business that accounts for 4%." It could be the Christmas gift to get this year!

I'm interested to see what the next generation Kindle looks like and what Sony, Apple and others do to compete in this space. Kindle is to Amazon's print download as the iPod is to Apple's music download. When you recognize that bits are bits, Amazon should find a way to make its Kindle also be an audio and video device, while Apple creates a reader that embraces print downloads.

"Mahaney's projections are not predicated on Amazon releasing a new version of the device this year. But they are predicated on the Kindle moving 150,000 units in Q4 -- something that's only going to happen if the Kindle becomes a must-have holiday gift. But he figures that's a relatively modest bet, given the success of other gadgets in years past." Should Amazon release a new version prior to the holiday season, I wouldn't be surprised to see these estimates go even higher.

Content is King!

The success of The Dark Knight, the improved profit margin from VOD, premium networks like HBO, have finally convinced Time Warner Cable that its future success is dependent on creating great content. "If you build it, they will come", an oft quoted line from Field of Dreams is the mantra these days. "For now, Mr. Bewkes is staking the company’s future on three big content providers: Warner Brothers, Turner Broadcasting (which includes TNT, TBS and CNN) and HBO. To ramp things up on the entertainment front, he’s also been overseeing internal discussions about acquisitions in film and television — including a possible takeover of NBC Universal, should its parent, General Electric, decide to sell, according to executives and bankers who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose details of the discussions."

At the same time, Time Warner is finally moving forward to unravel itself from AOL, a move that smelled rotten the moment it was announced that AOL was buying Time Warner and not the other way around. "Elsewhere in the company, it’s all about downsizing. Time Warner’s cable operation is being spun off, eviscerating the once-popular corporate notion peddled by business consultants and merger specialists that content and distribution should reside under one roof." Where previously owning and distributing content was a necessary synergy, now it appears that this combination no longer holds true. While Time Warner is spinning off its cable properties, Cablevision shareholders are at the same time discussing the sale or spin off of its programming arm, Rainbow Media. Will Comcast soon be announcing that it too will spin off its various programming nets, E!, Golf, Style, and others?

"For Mr. Bewkes and his team, the core of the strategy is a wager that the media pendulum will swing away from distribution and back toward content." And so we watch as others mimic this strategy and content and distribution separate. But mark my words, this is cyclical and within 10 years, that pendulum and the need for synergy will once again reunite content and distribution. That is the changing entertainment landscape.

Sirius XM: Tune in next year

What was Mel Karmazin thinking? Strategically speaking, they have been talking merger for more than a year. Six months ago, they got approvals from the Justice Department to merge. AND it took SIX months for the FCC to approve the final merger. So in ALL that TIME, Sirius hasn't been PREPARING for what seemed like an INEVITABLE future. Frankly speaking, they are missing the boat. To take another six months to release a new radio designed to receive both Sirius and XM transmissions is outrageous. Mel should be jumping up and down!

"This is a bit of a shocker even to analysts who follow the industry. The companies did promise that the merger wouldn't mean subscribers needed new radios. But some analysts expected broader programming changes and dual-mode radios to be available soon after the merger closed."

In six months, a new version of the iPod could be released. In six months, new phones and radios capable of receiving internet radio signals will be released, in six months, this merger could be the beginning of the end. I call this delay a true missed opportunity and one that they strategically should have been ahead of. Unless they have up their sleeve another method to provide current customers of each device all available content, they are in trouble. "Developing a new radio would have required manufacturers to make a big gamble on the merger's approval. Still, a nine month delay before a full fledged interoperable radio goes on sale could seem like a long time...Oddly, long before the merger, the Federal Communications Commission mandated that the two companies develop an interoperable radio. And in 2000, the companies said they put together a team to develop a dual mode radio. Progress on that front has been somewhat limited as the companies and the FCC spent years squabbling over the interpretation of the rule."

Online First, Newsprint Second

The Philadelphia Inquirer, one of the oldest daily newspapers in the country, doesn't get it. Old school was to print first, share online later; New school is to get the information online first and stay relevant and important to your users. But despite the realities of the today's new media world, "the Inkie plans to buck the trend of online first...the Inquirer risks making itself less relevant for those who already have made the transition online and losing their attention—and with that, becoming less relevant for advertisers." How odd.

While paid subscription is important to revenue, so is advertising dollars. It is apparent that subscriber growth is waning and the current generation prefers online to print. Papers should be working on more online applications like Kindle and distributing breaking news through e-mail alerts to improve its value and reach with its subscriber base. Through this transition, offer print subscribers free Kindle downloads. Or even better, offer discount to purchase multiple Kindles so the whole family can have their own device.

For the Philadelphia news junkie, if The Inquirer doesn't stay relevant, they will seek alternative sites to become their key news and information source. They will kill their brand preference and like their print edition, soon become obsolete.

Let Your Fingers do the Typing - Who Uses The Yellow Pages Anymore

Last night, the new Yellow Pages book was dropped off at the front door. I took it to our hallway desk, placed it on the shelf, and removed last year's copy to put into the recycling box. And then I asked myself, "self, I asked, when was the last time I used this book to get information?" The answer is long enough that I don't remember opening it. So now I wonder, do I really need to keep this current edition.

Frankly, when I need to find something, I Google it on the web. And not only to find out where a store or product or service might be found, but to seek out advice and comments from others online that may have also sought out this same information. The web has become so convenient to get this information, I forgot to even consider using the Yellow Pages directory as a reference.

And I'm not the only one. "The percentage of internet users who use search engines on a typical day has been steadily rising from about one-third of all users in 2002, to a new high of just under one-half (49%)."

The yellow Page book is very Americana. It had the brand identity as the predominant source of information. And yet they have not seemed to capitalize on their brand in the online arena. The Yellow Pages brand, owned by AT&T, exists but has not broken through the clutter to become a well known online search tool. And business does not look good.

When Idearc spun off from Verizon a couple years ago, I thought there was hope for Super Pages to enhance its identity and become the online reference point for consumers. They have not fulfilled that goal either. "Over the next five years, Borrell Associates Inc. are expecting 39% of the ad spending on print yellow pages to vanish. After 12 years as an advertising medium, the Internet has finally reached small-business owners with viable marketing opportunities in the form of keyword advertising, interactive directories and low-priced online video commercials. The recession appears to be triggering the shift."

This transition that consumers are making from print to web extends not only through the yellow pages but to all types of print material that can be better searched, sorted, refreshed, and relevant on the web than as a printed page. It seems to already have happened with the yellow pages, other types of print will follow.

Hulu in Hi Def (Why do some still want to call it Hula?)

Unfortunately not all of Hulu's content is in HD, but I'm sure that will come very soon. Why this is big news at all indicates that it must be a slow news day. Previously, they have added HD movie trailers and clips. So now they have added TV episodes and my favorite video, Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. ABC has already been showing HD content on their broadband player. "And in terms of HD, Hulu, ABC, and CBS all have a leg up on Apple TV and Amazon Unbox, which don't offer any TV episodes in HD. The Xbox Video Marketplace has had HD shows for download since its launch back in fall 2006"

Still it is inevitable that all content will be shot in HD and pitched to consumers. On the receiving side of the equation, consumers are more dependent on the speed of their broadband connection, the player that is streaming the content, and the monitor that the user is watching it on. All those elements affect what the final product looks like.

The bigger news for Hulu is that they are presenting the content without their "limited commercial interruptions". And that obviously won't last for long.

Will the Network DVR Kill Tivo?

The court reversal enabling Cablevision to move ahead with a network DVR has many repercussions. For one, it will enable more homes to take advantage of the DVR capability. And while that may mean more fast forwarding through commercials, technology is already adapting to overlay ads through the various trick features. Network DVRs make this ability easier to manage and more opportunity to adapt the ad message to individual households.

It may also affect consumer purchase decisions to acquire a Tivo box; as its core feature is being replicated. For Tivo, this court reversal was probably expected; they have been working on more download opportunities using their box as an interface to the web. In addition, their superior navigation capability may be something Cablevision might want to partner with to maximize the usefulness of their network DVR device. Tivo has also embarked on an e-commerce strategy with Amazon.

Network DVRs remind me of the direction computer software is also taking. Devices, connected to the web, utilizing centralized business software and sharing data inside network drives. Devices have been dumbed down as network computing allows more sharing and easier exchange of information. It is no surprise that a network DVR approach would follow this trend.

"If the legal process -- which could potentially include taking the dispute to the Supreme Court -- were to eventually permit network DVRs, the ramifications for the TV business could be significant, noted Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett, who called Monday’s decision a 'huge win for cable operators.'” In the short run, Cablevision may still have to wait to proceed with the network DVR; but precedent has been set with Time Warner's Start Over and Look Back and its other network advance services. So all speed ahead with Network DVRs. It is the direction we are headed.

What's Really Killing Newspapers

Like David Carr of the New York Times, I too enjoy reading the Star Ledger to feel more connected to the area, to county and to state issues. But less people seem to need the paper anymore and the cost of lower readership and declining ad revenue means cost cuts and content reduction by laying off writers. The Sunday paper may seem full, but it is all inserts and fluff. He cites the perfect analogy: " 'It’s like a ham sandwich, it’s so thick, with lettuce, pickles and onions.'It may still look like a sandwich, but some of the meat is about to go missing." With less writers talking to its specific constituents, it becomes filler of generic syndicated content. A destructive cycle that only leads to the end of the Star Ledger.

In another article in the New York Times, the survival of the whole industry is questioned. Who would buy a newspaper today? Oddly, Cablevision just bought Newsday. Last year, News Corporation bought The Wall Street Journal. Do they know something, the rest of the world doesn't? "Despite the long-term challenges, analysts and bankers think that buyers will return to the newspaper market, though they may be outnumbered by people who decide to invest in online news start-ups instead."

The folks at Slate seem to recognize the shift away from newspapers as due to technological change. Previously, the newspaper led social change and you would seek out the stories to remain in the loop to key issues. Friends would remark, did you read the story on... Today, social networking is achieved through technological means; digital articles, emailed to friends and associates, social networks and blogs to share opinions and voice concerns, websites to promote ideas and find information. "The social networking that takes place via instant messaging, microblogging, or e-mail further steals from newspapers the mindshare they once owned. You no longer need to rely on a paper for the social currency that a weather report, movie listings, classified ads, shopping bargains, sports info, stock listings, television listings, gossip, or entertainment news provide. As falling circulation indicates, fewer do."

Can the Regional Newspaper Survive?

The Star Ledger faces not only revenue losses, but the loss of jobs and perhaps even the sale of the newspaper itself. "The Star-Ledger announced today that 200 non-unionized employees will have to take a buyout by Oct. 1. If the total is not met, the Newhouses' Advance Publications is threatening to sell the newspaper. Reporters are not unionized, according to a source close to the paper." But who wants to buy it? It's not that newspapers have no value, it's just that it's readers have stopped subscribing to get their news from other sources. And as subscription dries up and the economy deteriorates, the advertising revenue drops.

I personally enjoy the Star Ledger, for its regional and local news; but this same information is also found on the web. And so this need to cut jobs to stay solvent is not the end of the situation for the Star Ledger and other newspapers, simply the beginning of the end. The current model is no longer working; news is far easier to share through other distribution models. We are witnessing a transition from newspapers to digital media. For us newspaper readers, start ordering your Kindle.