Hulu eventually launched
on Wednesday to an almost equal amount of hype and
cynicism.
While some people, such as former CEO of Disney, Michael
Eisner, are convinced that due to emerging services like Hulu, Internet
content will equal television
withinin the next five years, others are less convinced.
Eisner is already producing his second
digital-only series to prove his point. But what’s the reality of
Internet video content?
Dan Frommer at Silicon Alley Insider says he
got rid of his cable subscription,
figuring he can save money in the long run by downloading content
instead.
But as he notes, with Time Warner testing tiered bandwidth
pricing, his broadband expenses may go up as a result.
Is Hulu The Answer?
I’m not convinced Hulu is the answer, or any of the current
content
models. Hulu sounds like a great idea, and since it’s “free” people
sure are enthusiastic. But unlike my cable service with my DVR, Hulu
forces me to watch commercials.
Sure, it lets me
choose
which commercial,
or lets me watch a film trailer instead (hey, it’s still a commercial),
but I thought the invention of the DVR pushed us past this model. Are
we heading backward by going online?
iTunes & Unbox
iTunes has already missed
its promised mark
of having 1000 movies for rent by the end of February, severely
limiting the choices that users have in downloading an online
rental.
And Amazon
Unbox’s recent survey
sent to its users indicated that they are contemplating a retooling of
the type of content they offer as well as how they serve it. (Here’s a
hint, Amazon: untie Unbox from PC/Tivo – only
downloads.)
Too Much Effort
So what is the reality of downloadable content? How many of us
actually use it? The problem, as I see it, is that television in its
current form requires almost no effort to get content; plop yourself on
the couch, hit the remote, and you have scores of channels to choose
from, with the content right at your fingertips.
The downloadable
content model requires more effort, and if TV has taught us anything,
it’s that we are inherently lazy. I may stumble upon a great show
because I don’t like anything that I already know about, but if I have
to go online to download a show, I have to know something about it to
begin with.
Success Stories
Sure, there are always success stories like that of NBC’s The
Office,
which gained a larger fan base from Apple iTunes downloads, but the reality
is that it already had buzz from the passive watchers who were just too
lazy to change the channel after watching the program they wanted to
see.
The other issue is what you are watching the content on. Aside
from plane trips or passive commutes on trains or Google
shuttles, how many of us actually sit and watch a program on a
PC?
If
you are downloading content, either you have a media PC serving content
to your television or you are using something like Tivo and playing it
from there.
Conclusions
I’m generally working or reading emails or paying bills if
the television is on, meaning I’d have to push the content to the
television anyway. And why would I want to tie up system resources
serving programming to my television when cable will do it for me?
While I think the amount of content will certainly equal
traditional
programming as Eisner believes, until they come up with more of a push
model than the current pull, regular old cable or satellite television
isn’t going to disappear any time soon.
This article is based on a Profy post written by Cyndy Aleo-Carreira.
