Inaugural ratings likely second best

According to preliminary Nielsen numbers, the inauguration of Ronald Reagan 28 years ago was seen by a larger percentage of US households than this week's Barack Obama inauguration. But are we really comparing apples to apples. "Preliminary Nielsen estimates show that 29.2% of U.S. households were watching the presidential inauguration -- easily the largest in decades but below the 37.4 household rating for Reagan. Obama's figures include viewership on roughly 15 broadcast and cable networks, while the Reagan ceremony was viewed only on ABC, CBS and NBC; also, they do not include the huge online viewing this time around, with CNN.com, FoxNews.com and MSNBC.com all reporting record streaming video traffic." And what about sites like Hulu that also carried the stream. While I am confident that number of online viewers is minimal relative to the other outlets, the aggregate of video coverage should be counted in order to make a fair comparison between 1981 and 2009's inauguration.

But I am surprised that the Obama inauguration figures were not higher. Still it ranked higher than most others. With so many places to watch this historical day, it will be interesting to see what the final numbers indicate.

Google Ends Sale of Ads in Papers After 2 Years

Print advertising must be dying if Google can't sell its ads. And while old media is clearly not Google's expertise, you would think that they would be able to build a connection between digital and print and use that synergy to augment the sales process. But unfortunately, the experiment was a bust. “'While we hoped that Print Ads would create a new revenue stream for newspapers and produce more relevant advertising for consumers, the product has not created the impact that we — or our partners — wanted,' wrote Spencer Spinnell, director of Google Print Ads, on an official corporate blog."

For Google, it means stick with what you do best; for print, it may simply spell disaster.

If Content Isn't King, Then Maybe Social Community Is

Terrific article in Business Week that makes a great point, that perhaps as content is no longer exclusive, where it is shared and the community it serves may matter more. Content creators no longer try to make their assets unique to a particular site; rather they seem best served when that content is featured and distributed across many sites. Building partnerships with these communities so that the content can not only be found anywhere but can also be discussed. It is no longer enough to watch or read, it is perhaps more important to interact with it and with others who also access it.

"On TV, content is king. But on the Web, community may reign supreme. Throughout television history, the way to lure most viewers was to air the best shows. It doesn't necessarily work that way on the Web, where many shows can seen on multiple sites." Most video is available non exclusively on multiple sites. NBC, Hulu, and You Tube may all share similar content. Facebook, My Space, and Bebo may all carry some of the same applications. What matters more is that within those sites, the communities that are created foster a bond and loyalty to that site. They become for the particular user their primary point of entry for the content they wish to consume. It's not just about the video they watch or the game they play, but how its members communicate their opinions about what they have watched or played. Perhaps in the game example, it is all about competing with your friends in the community as opposed to with strangers. And for videos, sharing your passions, laughs, and "water cooler" discussions with others you know who may also have watched.

Yes content is king, but where you watch or play and with who matters too.

Charter Cable May File For Bankruptcy

As cable distribution gets more competitive with both telcos and satellite competing with cable operators, and customers preferring broadband to cable for entertainment, Charter must decide what to do next. Do they use bankruptcy protection to revise their strategy and revisit their costs in order to renegotiate better contracts, or do they sell off their cable properties to pay off their creditors? Paul Allen has had a tough time turning Charter into a profitable venture. "Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft Corp., has held a controlling stake since 1998 in the company, which hasn’t turned a profit since going public a decade ago." Is this unexpected for Charter, NO; but it is sad to see another cable operator bite the dust. The landscape is filled with many cable companies no longer part of the landscape: Adelphia, TCI, Suburban, Lenfest, Helicon, Prime, Falcon, Tele-Cable, Wometco, and many, many, many others. Goodbye Charter.

Is the Web A Radio Killer Too?

It's been well noted that the web has caused great frustration to traditional media, print and TV especially. The web has also affected retail as well, with brick and mortar stores like Virgin Records unable to compete with digital downloads. So it should not come as such a surprise that it has affected radio as well. "Los Angeles station Indie 103.1 will cease broadcasting over the air on Thursday, according to on-air announcements, but will continue to broadcast via the Web. " While other radio stations have enhance their reach by also streaming their signal over the web, 103.1 is switching over completely from airwaves to web. Cost may be a factor, declining audience may be another. Certainly there is more to the story...

Hulu, Joost, and Others to Stream Inauguration

While I tend to talk about how streaming video content will change cable's subscription model for access to TV channels, I will make an exception today. While networks have been walking a fine line demanding fees for carriage and then offering the same content free for streaming on the web, it is sometimes in the public good to agree with that irony.

I am speaking about next weeks coverage of the inauguration of Barack Obama. Last night, I asked my son's teacher if they were planning to watch his swearing in and speech in their classroom. She replied that not every classroom has cable TV access, but that they all do have internet access. And so the power of technology will allow these students the ability to watch live what is sure to be remembered as an historic event. "Hulu, the Webcaster jointly owned by News Corp. and NBC Universal, will carry a two-hour stream of Fox Broadcasting's live coverage of the swearing-in ceremony from noon to 2 p.m. ET." And while today it is possible to tape the coverage and replay at a later date, technology has provided us the ability to watch it live through multiple devices. In the days of Kennedy, broadcast or radio were the only means to connect; today, the rise of cable and web access has enabled even more accessibility to this historic event. "'In 2009, the word (for all-news outlets) is ubiquity,' MSNBC's Griffin said. 'We're in places where you don't normally see us.'"

For my son, and other students around the country, I hope TV or web access is available at your school to take advantage of and be part of what is sure to be a long remembered experience for this Country.

SAG Still Squabbling - No Strike Authorization Ballot Yet

Infighting can be the death of any family or any business. The same holds true for the Screen Actors Guild Union. Keep their head negotiator, or fire him, the membership is clearly at odds within their organization but their course of action. "A meeting of the full board of directors of the Screen Actors Guild, which lasted more than 30 hours on Monday and Tuesday, concluded without setting a mailing date for a strike authorization ballot and without the removal of controversial head negotiator Doug Allen." Nor is SAG is negotiation yet with AMPTP with whom they have not had a contract since last June. The only meetings are internal and even those ones can't find agreement.

The course of action is painfully obvious. Analyzing the current economic environment, reviewing the terms of the current signed agreements with other unions, and agree to structure an agreement that emulates their term AND expires at the same time as their agreements. The greatest revenue is still in the hands of traditional distribution and their is no missed opportunity to follow a wait and see strategy. New media is still a nascent business and a few years won't hurt you economically. Structure your new terms to expire concurrently with AFTRA or the Writers Union or both and utilize the leverage of this partnership in the next negotiation. But for now, stop threatening strike and sign a short term contract.

Movies via the Internet, How Can VOD Compete

It is no surprise that Blockbuster is copying the Netflix business model and bringing streaming video to their consumers via the web. But it is also clear that Netflix is light years ahead as the leader of the field and Blockbuster ranks an also ran. As Netflix announces additional partners, Blockbuster is just starting but can they catch up?

It gets me to thinking, where is cable and VOD in this discussion. Netflix does not have the full library to stream and Apple is a transactional business. Cable, on the other hand, provides a huge library of TV and movie product, some free, some with monthly subscription to a premium channel, and the rest transactional. How can cable and VOD maintain its lead and market share in this ever changing distribution pipeline.

I have a number of suggestions:

1. I believe that Netflix and Blockbuster subscribers are also film lovers and most likely also cable customers. Research should be done to determine that overlap. Would a satisfactory experience with one service lead to the consumer to drop the other?

2. Improve the set top box - better search, faster response, cleaner look. Make the set top box smarter so that on demand viewing doesn't switch off if the DVR in the box is recording. And make it easier to move content from one TV set in the house to another. The box is there, adding access to the internet puts you in the game, too.

3. Trick features on VOD films. Sure, disable the fast forward when the ad is in the pre-roll, but in movies especially, enable chapters markers so that consumers can move forward to sections of the film they want to watch rather than fast forward through the entire stream.

4. Content is King. And exclusivity on libraries of content can be merchandised back to the consumer. If you own it, they will come.

5. Interactivity. And when content is universal, how you differentiate it, matters. Adding trivia under a movie, enabling e-commerce, contests, etc. can all be effective tools to make the viewing experience unique to cable.

So as the talk moves to video streaming on the web, remember that cable is already bringing HD quality VOD content to the big screen. It just needs to be better marketed and monetized.

Cable-Ready vs. Internet-Ready TVs

Just a few years ago, all the talk was about cable ready TV sets and cablecards to bypass set top boxes and get direct connections from TV to cable programming. But today, those conversations are barely heard; instead, the talk is around TV manufacturers building sets that connect directly to the web. And while they don't bypass cable programming in the process, they certainly minimize their value and exclusivity, enabling content off the web to be sen on the big screen. Today, most of that content (UGC mainly) is poor, but the rise of Hulu, and other sites with broadcast and professional content, bypasses the linear channel and VOD for what I guess can be called WOD (web on demand). And that will change the business model - "Once the average living-room TV can tune in those sites as easily as NBC or Comedy Central, viewers may be hard-pressed to justify paying $80 a month for the few shows or networks they can't stream for free from the Net. And cable and satellite operators may find themselves having to cut rates after having increased them steadily for years."

The other discussion that has been proposed for years by the FCC has been a la carte pricing, enabling the consumer to purchase individual networks, rather than bundles of programming. "The good thing is technology may soon make this debate obsolete. While channels may not be offered a la carte anytime soon, in many cases, the programming on these channels already is. Take TNT—episodes of its original shows The Closer, Saving Grace, Leverage, and the soon-to-premiere Trust Me can all be seen on TNT's website. Other broadcast and cable networks also offer much of their content for free either on their own sites or other sites." The rise of "WOD" programming and networks (Next New Networks, My Damn Channel, etc.) would indicate that any channel can escape the clutches of poor positioning or bundling on a higher priced tier of networks to connect directly to their viewer via a web network.

The biggest obstacle facing a full blown access of networks on the web, whether streaming or on demand, remains the current cable model of subscription. While the niche and newer networks see access as more important than subscriber fees, the mainstay networks would be hard pressed to lose that substantial revenue source. Viacom and Time Warner just renegotiated their agreement for fees at the beginning of the year. And cable operators, seeing more broadband usage from their customers, will most certainly raise their fees to offset a loss in cable revenue.

Web access is a trend that is not going away. What cable nets did to the broadcast model, web nets will certainly do to the cable model. Remember, early cable programming wasn't strong either, but it did get better. So too will web programming.