Disney Joins NBCU, News Corp. on Hulu -- and why do some people still want to call it Hula

Well, it seems that Disney/ABC decided to sleep with the enemy and agreed to an equity stake in Hulu, along with NBC and Fox. According to the press release from Disney's CEO, Robert Igor, "From our landmark iTunes deal to our pioneering decision to stream ad-supported shows on our ABC.com player, Disney has sought to meet the constantly evolving viewing habits of our consumers, and today's Hulu announcement is the next important step in that ongoing journey."

Now full length shows from ABC, Disney and its other channels will populate Hulu alongside NBC and Fox programming. Certainly this makes Hulu even more of a "one stop shop" for long form broadcast and cable tv and movie programming, but is it necessarily a good thing. While these content giants compete in the linear space, they are each on the board of Hulu. Does that raise any monopolistic issues? How do these giants compete and co-habitate at the same time Is all this power in one place a good thing or not? And should the FCC and the government have a say?

One last line in this article says it all - "The transaction is subject to regulatory review." Interesting to see what is said.

What's The Next Move for Facebook

I can only take so many quiz's, support only so many causes, play so many games, download so many photos, and comment on so many updates. And when friends recommend clips, I actually sometimes click and watch. So should Facebook work a deal with Hulu or TV.com or Disney to enable full length shows to be watched inside the Facebook page with an ability to comment on it and recommend others watch full episodes too.

Is that another opportunity to enhance the relationship that Facebook has with its users and its users have with one another. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing those recommendations.

But perhaps, the very next move is to change back the home page to its previous version. I've tried it and frankly don't find it an improvement at all. I feel like I am no longer seeing enough of what my friends are doing and saying. I miss the older version.

WSJ Sees Circulation Increase

What is The Wall Street Journal doing right? As other newspapers and magazine see falling circulation and for some closures, The Wall Street Journal has succeeded. "Editor & Publisher publishes the top 25 list here, which shows that the Wall Street Journal was the only newspaper in the top 25 to report a circulation increase. Its increase was modest — 0.61% — but an increase nonetheless."

Top 5 newspapers by circulation percentage increas or decline, October 2007 -March 2008:

USA TODAY -- (-7.46%)
WALL STREET JOURNAL -- 0.61%
NEW YORK TIMES -- (-3.55%)
L.A. TIMES -- (-6.55%)
WASHINGTON POST -- (-1.16%)

And not only did they do it right on the print side, they have been equally as successful with their web business. Where once it was foolish to require internet subscription to view content, that is exactly what the WSJ did and proved the skeptics wrong. With content behind a walled garden, WSJ makes it more valuable to be a subscriber in order to receive both print AND web content.

Perhaps it is that the WSJ represents a more niche audience of business readers. Unlike a more general interest paper with sections devoted to metro, sports, and business, the WSJ writes more national news and business pieces. It is this niche that may be their salvation.

There was some talk that the WSJ might add more general content including a sports section to their news. I'm not sure this will increase their audience. I view the WSJ has a companion paper to other news. By copying a NY Times or USA Today format, The Wall Street Journal might actually hurt their credibility and value. Their circulation strength may be a result of not being a general interest paper; so far those papers are seeing declines while WSJ retains its audience.

The Long, Slow Liberation Of The Cable Set-Top Box

Tru2way, formerly OCAP, was designed to enable other consumer electronics to interface with cable. But to date, we have yet to break free from the cable box if we want to enjoy our digital TV channels and interactive choices like the interactive guide and VOD. The cover story seems to indicate that with Tru2way, cable companies are no longer tied to Motorola or SA for cable boxes, open to work with more partners. More competition, lower costs, more innovation.

So what is taking so long and why do cable companies still want to buy and lease cable box devices to consumers. Why can't we as consumers determine which box we want to use. Why can't I buy an HD set with a cablecard reader that gives me all the functionality inside my TV set. Or allow me to buy the DVR of my choice, Tivo or another provider, to access all the features on cable. The article contends that Tru2way will let us breakfree, but frankly there doesn't seem to be anything to be excited about.

Rather, TV manufacturers are designing TV sets that can access the web directly, creating an interactive experience WITHOUT cable. Cable and the set top box are simply speaking, "a day late, and a dollar short" The cable box is a brick that most consumers would do without if they could. It minimizes the TV set, not enhances it. Tru2way and OCAP has been discussed for quite a while, but it hasn't made any impact yet. How quickly will the consumer see opportunity; I suspect it will happen around cable and the set top box, and not because of it.

Replay And Regret: Rainbow COO Warns Of DVR Dangers

The DVR is a product of our own doing. Television's desire to grab more money from advertising resulted in not only more expensive ad spots but also more advertising minutes per hour. And it is this latter element that caused someone to innovate a solution - program copy and playback later so as to fast forward through ads to watch content. As Rainbow's research has disclosed, "70% of people skip because they are tired of the same commercials playing so often; 60% suggested pods are too long; and 65% said the commercials are 'boring.'" For me personally, I would have ranked them differently with pod length the biggest issue. Once I fast forward commercials, I am hard pressed to tell you what the commercial is that I skipped or whether it is boring or creative. How could I know. I've skipped the ads because the pod length is long. TV networks made their bed and now they must deal with the DVR consequences.

If commercial breaks were :60 or less, I might be less inclined to reach for the remote. Rainbow's COO suggests that "commercials might also improve effectiveness if addressable advertising got more wind at its back." At that point more creative ads targeted to me might work; but if pod lengths remain long, I won't see those ads either, even if it is "customized" for me; I'll be fast forwarding through the break to get to my show.

Now I know I represent a particular demographic. My children enjoy the ads with their shows. They inform them of new toys and games, movies to see and shows to watch. They are naive to the marketing behind the message. They see it as credible information. I see ads as a nuisance.

Frankly, I got the DVR to time shift my shows to watch them when they were most convenient to me; ad skipping was the added incentive. Reduce the number of ads per hour and more people will watch ads. Otherwise, I'm sure we will see a greater reliance on product placement in shows and perhaps even commercial overlays. We've already gotten accustomed to seeing these bugs on the corner of our screen promote what's coming soon; why wouldn't ads be next.

TiVo Promotes Ads It Hopes You’ll Talk to, Not Zap

Tivo, the company that encouraged its subscribers to skip ads and get more TV for your hour of viewing, now wants to be a better friend to advertisers; well its own advertisers anyway. Sure keep skipping through ads, but if you use a trick feature, like pause or fast forward, you'll be encouraged to click and interact with a particular ad message. "Advertisers can choose the specific show or genre they want their pause ad to appear on — Mercedes-Benz USA used it to promote a new car during football games earlier this year. TiVo also offers ads that appear when viewers fast-forward through shows." Networks are probably not happy that their own ads are being challenged by their distributors ads.

"It is in a footrace with other companies, including Cablevision, Cox Communications and DirecTV, to offer interactive alternatives to the zapped-through television spots. The ads are called interactive because they ask the viewer to do something — enter in a new channel number, press a button on the remote — to get more information." Cable also has started a joint venture, Canoe, to assist them.

So what do the networks, both broadcast and cable, think of this capability. Will advertisers pull their ads off the networks to utilize the technological capabilities of the various distributors? Or will they have to partner with these same distributors to assure their piece of the interactive ad marketplace? And ultimately, will the viewer interrupt their show to watch an ad, even one that is positioned for them, or simply skip through it as they do now? Interactive advertising - fad or future?

The Way To Save Newspapers? Kill Some More Of Them

Newspapers will survive technological change. But as this article correctly predicts, consolidation will save the newspaper industry. We have seen this same consolidation occur across many other industries as well. The cable industry is a great example. Where once every community seemed to have its own cable system, today it is dominated by a few. The accounting industry once included "the big 8"; but now most are gone. Even the auto industry was once populated with many manufacturers; not today.

Newspapers can return a healthy profit. "Industry EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization) margins are 14% to 16%, according to a recent J.P. Morgan analysis of public newspaper companies. While that's well below the peak of 25%, newspaper companies are generally still reasonably profitable." Who survives and who doesn't will have to be left to who best manages through these tough economic times. Will the New York Times survive; I bet they will.

Amazon Launches HD Movie Rental and TV Show Sales

Have you bought a Hi Def TV lately? Big screen, awesome picture, not much to watch. Even the HD channels aren't always showing HD programming. Perhaps it even encouraged you to upgrade your DVD player to Blu-ray and bought or rented a number of movies. Cable, satellite companies and the telcos are all marketing their number of HD choices, both channels and number of shows. Still it may not be enough to satisfy that HD urge.

Well, more choice is coming! Amazon "said it will add more than 500 HD TV shows and movies to its Amazon Video On Demand service. Titles are from major networks and studios like Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., Sony Pictures, Paramount Pictures and Showtime Networks, with new-release movie titles including 'Twilight' and 'Frost/Nixon' and TV shows such as 'The Tudors' and 'Smallville.'" They can be downloaded directly to some HDTVs or available through the Tivo Series 3 or Roku players.

I have yet to pull the trigger and buy an HD TV set. I know I want a bigger screen and am looking at both the 52" and 55" LCD sets. Or should I reconsider Plasma. I know I don't want to spend a lot of money and am looking at less than $2500. But should I buy a Samsung, Sharp or Sony or look at lesser known brands like Vizio? Or wait till more sets connect directly to the web? Too many choices, too many variables, too many new models scheduled to be released. What to do.

New York Times Co. losses worsen as ad sales plunge 27%

Yesterday, the New York Times was awarded 5 Pulitzer Prizes for their exceptional journalism and today they reported a disastrous financial picture. "The owner of The New York Times, The Boston Globe and 15 other daily newspapers said Tuesday that it lost $74.5 million, or 52 cents a share, in the opening three months of the year."

And while declining subscriptions and newspaper sales are a problem, the real hardship is felt in declining advertising revenue. They actually grew circulation revenue by increasing the price of the paper, but are not finding ways to increase advertising. And so the second quarter will not be any better. Costs continue to be trimmed, as are paper sizes but despite many concessions, the situation does not appear to be improving.

So what is next. They have already threatened to shut down one of their papers, The Boston Globe, if union concessions aren't met. But at some point, quality suffers as cost cutting gets extreme.

Perhaps it is time for the NYT and other papers to build synergies with broadcast and cable news networks; perhaps it is time for the NYT to be acquired by CNN or MSNBC; perhaps it is time for print to build more synergies across other media platforms to enhance the advertising value. Or perhaps it is too late. I hope not, I still enjoy reading my morning delivered paper and its different sections of content. But I may have to change my attitude and rely solely on the electronic edition to peruse and enjoy.

TiVo to sell instant data on what people watch, fast-forward

Tivo, the box for people who hate commercials but love TV, is selling research data on people who don't watch the ads that pay the bills. They claim that despite the fast forward button, ad messages do get through, and they certainly reach a passionate TV viewer. So which of the Tivo boxes are getting measured? Direct connects, like the one I own; Direct TV Tivo owners; What about Comcast customers with a Tivo DVR converter? "TiVo says its data will come from most of the DVRs that use its service, including ones that get it from DirecTV. It wouldn't say whether Comcast will participate."

How representative is this audience against national viewership? Todd Juenger, TiVo's audience research and measurement general manager, doesn't worry. "Juenger says TiVo owners tend to be richer, better educated 'and, unfortunately, a little more white' than the overall population, but 'it isn't a gigantic difference.'" Nielsen disagrees. "'Our ratings are based on samples that reflect the viewing behavior of all households, not just those who have DVRs,' says Nielsen spokesman Gary Holmes."

The future is DVR and VOD and live viewership. Whoever best aggregates and analyzes all this data to provide the most accurate research will win.

Actors reach tentative deal with studios

Finally after so many months of infighting, backstabbing, and political fights, SAG may have finally come to terms with the AMPTP. Per the article, SAG lost its leverage and got less than they bargained for. If they had only played it smarter, followed the lead of AFTRA , and recognized quickly from the writers strike and bad economy, that they were not in the position to demand. Well, better late than never.

Deal Brings TV Shows and Movies to YouTube

The future of online video is professional content and though You Tube is best known for user generated uploads, the money lies with advertising against branded content. Recognizing that need, You Tube has entered into partnerships with TV and movie studios, and the space that Hulu has found an important grasp. "The agreements with the studios, which include Sony, Lions Gate, MGM and others, are significant because YouTube dominates online video. Nearly two-thirds of all video views in the United States occur on YouTube, according to the measurement firm Nielsen. Last month the site had more than 90 million visitors, 10 times as many as the next biggest site, comScore said."

In addition, there is finally the recognition that broadband, like cable, requires multiple revenue streams to survive, advertising and subscription. Whether it takes the form of transactional or monthly, You Tube will likely follow the Apple iTune strategy of charging for downloads or streaming.

Despite this plan to seek more revenue sources, You Tube says it is not leaving its bread and butter, amateur videos; "In an interview, Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, said that YouTube would continue to embrace content created by users, even if it was not easy to earn revenue from it, because that content was essential to the popularity of the site." As the leader in online video, Google and You Tube have the deep pockets and the knowledge of the marketplace; what will define their success in building synergy with other content partners. Perhaps one day we will see Google owning a broadcast/cable network.

3.6 Million Homes Still 'Completely Unready' For DTV Transition: Nielsen

June 12 is the current date for digital transition and despite the granted delay from February, 3.6 M homes are still not prepared. Coupons are going out, stores are stocked with digital converters, cable operators are broadcasting ads with offers to cheaply switch to cable to not lose TV signals. But despite all the news and offers, a number of homes will still go dark. The news from Nielsen does show homes switching over. "Nielsen said that Albuquerque-Santa Fe remains the least ready market at 9.13%, while the most prepared is Hartford-New Haven, where "everybody" is ready. Nielsen's survey numbers are based on field staffers in 35,000-plus sample homes -- all of its metered households." The NAB remains critical of the research. According to David Rehr, NAB President, these numbers are overstated.

Should there be another digital delay; I doubt it. Some people just like to wait till the last minute; hello tax filers! At some point you just got to pull the trigger and June 12 will be that date.

The most likely groups that will be hurt are the elderly and poor. Technological change is never easy and while the government coupons help, connecting the converters and resetting the antenna to find the digital signals remain issues for this group. Will cable come up with a marketing program to provide low cost, white glove service to this group; it could just be a great public relations opportunity!

Time Warner Cable Postpones Internet-Billing Trials

Plans to expand the internet usage test into additional markets has been put on hold as public outcry has caused big consumer push back. "Time Warner Cable had planned to initiate usage-based billing trials in Rochester, N.Y., and Greensboro, N.C., in August, followed by San Antonio and Austin, Texas, in October." Besides local politicians getting into the discussion, even their telco competitors used it to their marketing advantage in the two test markets. Who wants to go from an unlimited plan to a usage plan raise your hands? Anyone? Anyone? Really, no one likes the idea. Once the cat is out of the bag it is hard to catch him.

Until Time Warner and other broadband companies can prove that more people benefit with a usage plan with lower bills, it will be hard to gain much support. And as more web sites become more graphic, add more videos and gaming, they will naturally become heavier users. And as consumers recognize their increased reliance on the web for information and entertainment, they will only use the web more. So why would the consumer agree on changing over from an unlimited plan to usage. It makes no sense. Hence the public and governmental outcry.

Remember When Cable Networks Were Niche Programmers

Once upon a time, the premise of cable networks was that each one individually would showcase niched programming, skimming away at the broadcast channels who showed very general shows. Cable would compete with broadcast because the aggregate of these individual channels would enable advertisers to reach effective interest groups at a more efficient CPM. The sum of the parts being greater than the whole.

In the beginning, cable networks brand name told you what they were: Arts & Entertainment (now A&E), American Movie Classics (now AMC), Music Television (MTV), and Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN), to name a few. As cable nets broadened their programming, their names became initials.

This recent review of a brand new TV show on TV Land struck a chord. TV Land was once the place to find the classic black and white TV shows. Over time, new colorized shows appeared. But now, it is the place for movies and original series. It certainly is not your grandfathers TV Land.

But TV Land is not alone in this shift from niche network to "broad" cable network. Bravo was once the cultural arts channel; now it is reality and "pop" culture. AMC was classic black and white movies; today it is the home to original series Mad Men and Breaking Bad. And I am sure you can say the same thing for most other cable networks. The mighty ad dollar has led them down a slippery slope to broaden its niche to grow the ratings. And where does that lead the consumer. Ultimately to new distribution sites including IP TV and the web.

So while I am not making a judgement call about any network, I personally miss when they each were truer to their niche and I could tell what channel I was looking at by watching its show. Now I can't tell the difference unless I see the bug constantly appearing on the corner of the picture. Don't get me started on that!

Boston's Local NBC Affiliate WHDH Will Air Leno At 10 p.m.

NBC was quick to put its foot down and the Boston affiliate acquiesced. And just like that, Boston will get the Jay Leno show this Fall at 10 pm. While this must be a huge sigh of relief to NBC, it also quickly signals to its other affiliates not to follow Boston's lead. And while the threats worked, one must wonder what was agreed to. Was there incentive money involved? Additional local commercial time given? Or perhaps a short term truce to wait and see and give the show 30, 60, or perhaps 90 days to prove that it will deliver a high enough rating and be a profit performer.

And don't be surprised if every other NBC affiliate is reading over each line in their contract to see just what their options are. This fight may be over, but there may still be a bigger war brewing.

N.Y. Congressman Plans Bill Banning Internet-Usage Billing

Ahhh government! Always there to interrupt free market. Not that I think internet usage billing is a great idea; rather, that I think it provides competitive differentiation to let market forces impact its success. Through technological innovation, change will occur. Usage issues can also lead to a whole new type of internet, more efficiently run. Bad ideas lead to failure and business losses, good ideas to innovation and new leaders.

"A New York Congressman wants to make it illegal for Internet service providers to charge subscribers based on the amount of data they download." While politics should be in play to maintain that people play by the rules, they shouldn't force companies, especially those that have competition, to operate a certain way. Cable companies,unlike water and electricity companies, are not utilities. They should have the freedom to set their prices and let the consumer decide who they want to do business with.

I may not agree with usage pricing, but government intervention is not the answer, competition is. Let in more competitors into each community and let the consumer decide which broadband provider they want.

Time Warner Cable Tweaks Bandwidth-Billing Plans

We pay for our usage of electricity, water, even cell phone minutes, why not broadband usage. That is certainly what Time Warner believes; especially as broadband pipelines get clogged up with heavy graphics and video. More users, more usage slows down the pipe, a traffic jam that can slow down speeds and aggravate users at the same time. Usage pricing puts the higher cost to the heavier user, but under the Time Warner plan, grants them faster speeds.

So what is a consumer to do. Well, if you just use your broadband for email and web surfing, probably nothing. Time Warner contends "that about 30% of customers use less than 1 Gigabyte per month", and would be charged a lower rate for service. The MSO will show customers what the usage has been to let them know what package may best serve them. "The MSO also will offer a 'gas gauge' tool to show subscribers how much bandwidth they've used up in a given monthly period."

As for the heavier user, Time Warner's plan is probably more costly. Unless Time Warner can demonstrate that their is more to gain with faster speeds for a higher price, the other option is to switch vendors. And that could prove better news for competitors like Verizon and AT&T. Unless of course they follow a "me too" strategy and move to a usage model, too.

Time Warner says that other countries follow a broadband usage model. But the all you can eat model has been around here for a while so may prove difficult to gain acceptance. Most may find it a convenient reason to switch. The question to Time Warner might be are heavy users highly correlated with being triple tier customers; that is, are you risking losing your best customers, who are already paying you top dollar, with even higher cable bills. If this research proves true, then perhaps it is not worth the risk of losing this best consumers to your telco competitors.

Magna: DVR Use Will Grow 70% By 2014, VOD By 60%

Just because the web is hot for content doesn't mean that other types of distribution is declining. Television continues to be an important device to the home. The rise of HD, bigger screen TVs, and content when you want it, all makes TV a good business to be in. But with that being said, linear viewing, scheduled at their time, not ours, is not what matters. Magna research shows that on demand viewing, whether through the DVR or VOD channels, will continue to grow at extraordinary rates.

"Magna forecasts that in five years, DVR usage will grow more than 70%, to 51.1 million U.S. TV homes Magna estimates this will reach 43% of all U.S. TV homes in 2014, up from 27% as of the end of 2008...Video on demand, a more mature digital TV product than DVRs, will grow by 61% in five years to 67.2 million households -- about 56% of U.S. TV homes. Currently, at the end of 2008, there were 41.7 million VOD households, or 37% of U.S."

That increase in on demand viewing will absolutely lead to declines in live linear viewing of TV. Still, TV should invest in good content, knowing that the viewer will consume it in different forms, at the scheduled time, DVR at a later date, or picked off the VOD menu. That the advertising continues to get viewed and the eyeballs recorded, will mean that the programmer will continue to get paid.

The DVR device is friendly to the local affiliate because it retains their local ads; the VOD and internet are the enemy of the local affiliate because their local ad does not run. Ultimately, both the DVR and VOD rely on strong content to satisfy viewer interest. For their usage to grow as predicted, the content must remain interesting to the viewer. Why set the DVR if the show has no appeal.

And for VOD, consumers don't have to rely on setting up a recording in advance; they can catch up on their favorite shows on demand. And content doesn't need to be on a linear broadcast or cable channel to be available on VOD. VOD offers the consumer libraries of content not accessible elsewhere. Smaller programmers can distribute their libraries of content without building a 24/7 linear TV schedule. These offerings may range from a few hours to many, but are typically refreshed either weekly or monthly with newer content to enjoy. More choices to satisfy different interests.

As viewers continue to get comfortable with their DVR and VOD boxes, they will start watching on their schedule, not the programmers. And except for news or sports, on demand viewing lets you watch what you want, when you want, fast forwarding, pausing, and rewinding to catch all the dialogue and all the action. To me, it is the ideal way to watch TV!

Front of Los Angeles Times Has an NBC ‘Article’

News or newsworthy, the front page of the LA Times has an ad. So does the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and other publications. The difference is that the ad gave the appearance of being an article. In fact, the ad was designed to subtly confuse despite the fact that it was in a different font, had a typical style ad directly below it, and the NBC logo on top. Clearly it was not a hard news article.

So did it work. It certainly created pr buzz, generating discussion, blogs, and attention; but did it go over the line and harm the editorial side of the newspaper. In the long run, probably not, but it does push them further down a slippery slope. Profit over content; the LA Times might argue, without profit, there is no newspaper and thus no content.

Selling ads on the front page is certainly acceptable; the ad should be more clearly differentiated from what was done. Clearly labeled advertisement at the top of the column and not in font too small to read. Making ads more effective is not unusual, but not to fool the reader. Newspapers need more dollars to stay around. But it still doesn't solve newspapers biggest problem, the loss of readers to the internet. No front page ad/column will solve that problem.

Actors and studios said to be close to new contract

Could it be true. Could SAG and AMPTP be close to a new agreement. Nothing public yet, but the talk is that informal talks have been going on and collaboration is occurring. Good news for all!

NBC Threatens Over Affiliate's Plans To Lose Leno

Legal action is being threatened by corporate parent NBC to the Boston station, WHDH, and its owner Sunbeam Television Corp. Quick and to the point, you will carry Leno at 10 pm or else. And the Boston station response is that their agreement gives them the right.

Why such a public fight; because NBC doesn't want any other of it's affiliates to get the same idea. Nip it in the butt early, publicly and privately, too. "Industry experts said NBC's swift and very public crackdown suggests the network wants to ward off any dissent that may be brewing at its other affiliates, some of which are nervous about how Leno will perform as a lead-in to their late-night newscasts." NBC has not been doing to well in the ratings lately and the local nets fear that cheap and ill conceived programming, especially in the slot right before their news, will ultimately affect local ratings too. The general perception is that most viewers are lazy and don't change the channel from their 10p show to the news. Keep them entertained and they stay for the news that follows. Disappoint and they turn the channel.

"WHDH's Ansin (Ed Ansin, owner of WHDH parent Sunbeam Television Corp.) said a local newscast will draw better ratings than Leno and that airing five nights a week in that time slot would be a financial disaster for his station. The new Leno show will compete against popular scripted shows, such as CBS's 'CSI: Miami.'" How can NBC assure Ansin and their other affiliates that Leno at 10P will perform? And how soon till another affiliate follows suit and copies WHDH? I wouldn't be surprised if every affiliate is also reviewing their legal agreements. High drama indeed...hey, this could be a TV show!

Is This the Future of the Digital Book?

Are digital books more than just electronic ink on a screen? It seems that everything is multimedia, and books fall into that category too. More than just a good story, add music and video and stir together into an even fuller experience. Add to that an online book club and twitter to share your thoughts on a book, magazine, or article, and the written experience is now interactive, too. This is exciting stuff.

New startups, like Vook.tv, WEbook, Fourth Story Media, and others are emerging to enhance the move from written page to digital experience. That means that the Kindle and Sony e-reader are just the first baby steps to a brand new experience. "Ms. Nelson (Sara Nelson, former editor of Publishers Weekly) has seen the Vook prototype and says it is intriguing, but the challenge is to avoid feeling gimmicky. 'If you are going to put video in a book, it has to flow so naturally into the story that readers don’t even realize they are switching mediums,' she said."

Perhaps that is what Facebook and other social networks need to tie into next. Expanding the interactive experience with other types of content, but centralize the experience on your main social page. That partnership could quicken the acceptance of these new products.

New Jay Leno Show Rejected By NBC Affiliate In Boston

Wasn't it just a couple weeks ago that NBC reported that they were meeting with their affiliates to work together to make sure the new Jay Leno show met expectations. Well I guess the Boston affiliate, WHDH, couldn't work out an arrangement. They have now publicly stated that they will air a 10pm news hour rather than the national Jay Leno Show feed. And NBC is obviously mad as hell. "Ed Ansin, who owns WHDH's parent company, told The Boston Globe he did not believe Leno's new show would be successful. He said the station would do better financially with a news show that competes with Fox-affiliated WFXT-TV's highly rated 10 p.m. newscast." NBC says that WHDH is contractually required; WHDH says otherwise.

What the Boston affiliate hasn't said, is what they will air at 11pm. It doesn't seem more news so maybe will be a syndicated sitcom. WHDH believes they can make more money with news at 10p than with Jay. And as the Tonight Show starts at 11:35, WHDH could extend this news show from 10 - 11:05 to keep viewers from switching and then go right into a 30 minute sitcom. And if WHDH is obligated to run the show at some other time, they may choose to move it further into the early morning or weekend hours. Who says it has to be run at 10p.

Deadline Hollywood has more of a take on the story. They offer another interesting perspective. "NBC also trotted out Michael Fiorile, the NBC Affiliate Board Chairman (and Vice Chairman of the Dispatch Group) to give Jay a vote of confidence: 'The NBC affiliates are very excited about the new Leno show weeknights at 10 p.m. Jay is a true star with enormous appeal. We've been engaged in an open dialogue with NBC about the format of the show, and we’re looking forward to working with Jay and the entire team to make it a huge success.' But the sad truth is that the same Michael Fiorile was telling media outlets at the end of 2008 that NBC's beleaguered affiliates had asked the network last summer to give back time, and maybe even days, to them. And to give local content a shot. "

NBC could offer the block to another channel or to its Telemundo affiliate, although that suggestion seems less likely. When you start to cut costs, you sometimes cut more than just the fat, you cut the quality as well. Watch how more expensive news readers and TV reporters are being replaced with younger, less expensive talent. But when it comes to prime time, quality matters. "Estimates are that Leno 2.0 may only cost $2M a week and result in 46 weeks of original shows, compared to the average $3 million per episode pricetag of scripted primetime dramas that air on average 22 original weekly episodes. But the 58-year-old attracts only 4.8 million viewers now on The Tonight Show -- measly by primetime standards, especially in the advertiser-coveted 18-to-49 demographic. The affiliates know that expanded local news or local ballgames might hit a higher number than Leno or NBC's weaker nights -- which is no doubt why WHDH made the decision it did. "

A Jay Leno prime time variety type show could work...ONE day a week. But five nights will only chase viewers away to other channels. WHDH may be the first to announce, but may not be the last.

SAG, AFTRA Reach Tentative Commercial Accord

It can be done; SAG can complete an agreement. Done jointly with AFTRA, the new agreement seems to encompass web, cable, and broadcast issues, as well as Hispanic spots. "We have achieved a deal that brings significant improvements to these contracts," said SAG chief negotiator John. McGuire in a statement. 'Our gains include establishing the first-ever payment structure for made-for-the Internet and new media commercials and significant increases in wages during a very troubled global economy.'" Nicely done.

So now let's get a deal done with AMPTP. The truth is you have no leverage and you aren't going to strike. It is in no one's best interest. You've proved you can work jointly with AFTRA; perhaps, it is best to use their signed agreement to complete yours.