Online Video Begins To Threaten Television

eldavojohn writes, "The BBC has an article reporting that a survey of 2,070 Britons revealed that online viewing is on the rise against television. From the article: 'Some 43% of Britons who watch video from the internet or on a mobile device at least once a week said they watched less normal TV as a result.' The figures the BBC is reporting are up from last year when they ran the same survey. It seems the digital world has disintermediated Magazines, Music, & Newspapers but somehow never really tapped books. Will the internet also take on the role as the family television?"

Isolation on the rise too

[suso (153703)]

I think that as online TV becomes more popular, people will isolate themselves more and more from a shared experience. So people will end up having even more polarized views of things.

Re:Isolation on the rise too

[grapeape (137008)]

For many watching online is more of a shared experience. How many families really sit down and watch programs together and when they do, how many actually communicate during them. Many of the media sites offering video content have chatrooms, forums, and other collaborative places that are the online equivalent of talking around the water cooler. So yep gone are the days of dad yelling at Jr. to shut up because the fishing show is on, now dad can watch outdoor sportsman and talk to others that like the same thing.

Re:

[Nos. (179609)]

I was going to post something similar, but one other thing that is beneficial when visiting an online forum, is that you get a broader view of things. Depending on the subject it could even be a more worldly view than you could ever get, even watching the show in a public place like a bar. So, in some ways, yes it is less social, but at the same time, it can expand your view more than has been happening before.

Re:Isolation on the rise too

[AKAImBatman (238306)]

See that DVI, HDMI, or SVideo port on the back of your computer? See that DVI, HDMI, or SVideo port on the side of your new TV? Got any bright ideas? ;)

Re:

[LunaticTippy (872397)]

I bought a low-end 3d graphics card for $40 just for the TV-out ability. I figured not wasting time and dvd blanks would pay for itself in a matter of weeks.

Oddly, I'm running 50' of coax and using the plain ol' composite video signal and it looks good!

Not every PC has built-in tv-readable outputs you know.

Re:

[Technician (215283)]

In the USA, with the pending end of analog over the air TV and a bunch of TV monitors, but very few TV sets that can recieve over the air digital broadcasts has been disturbing.

Got any bright ideas?

Yea, lets download and stream content that I can no longer recieve free over the air. Who didn't see this a mile away. One home theatre system simply does not meet the diverse needs of a modern family. Mom wants the soap or gardening show, dad wants the big game or evening news, and the tweens want the latest

Re:

[timeOday (582209)]

Until they start making it easy for Joe Average to pipe Internet based content to the big LCD or Plasma they're been fighting for on black friday for Xmas...I don't see internet streamed content displacing regular, cable or satellite tv.

Coming Soon via Your TiVo: Internet Video on Television [nytimes.com]. And you can bet the Internet/Cable TV companies like Comcast won't be far behind.

Re:

[Lostconfused (1019042)]

But that was the entire point of the parent. The person isolates oneself from outside views or opinions, well its not that drastic but the opinions are very likely to be similar in those chat rooms and forums, if they aren't people would most likely move to some other place thats more agreeable to them. So yeah people are still isolated from different opinions and different points of view

Re:

[deathy_epl+ccs (896747)]

the opinions are very likely to be similar in those chat rooms and forums, if they aren't people would most likely move to some other place thats more agreeable to them. So yeah people are still isolated from different opinions and different points of view

heh. Yeah, 'cause we've never seen a flamewar errupt on a forum before. heheheheh.

To the outside world, the Slashdot users appear to have very similar opinions too.

1. Make inflammatory remark.
2. Take part in erruping flamewar.
3. ???
4. Profit!

Re:Isolation on the rise too

[rucs_hack (784150)]

since starting to watch online content I've found that my friends and I talk far more about video content then we ever did about tv. Links to cool new things get bandied about, and there's a constant hunt to find the next cool thing to share.

Redvsblue is my current favorite for quality comedy online.This was found not through brainless channel surfing, but via a conversation with a friend.

Re:

[Mad Dog Manley (93208)]

For many watching online is more of a shared experience.

Not only is it shared because of online forums, chatrooms, etc, but how many times have a friend or relative sent you a video clip from Youtube or some other site, something funny or interesting or a good TV show that interested both of you? The comments and thoughts and shared experience is real - albeit a very 21st century experience - and will probably only grow in the future, as video allows more thoughts to be expressed without words.

Re:Isolation on the rise too

[CarlJagt (877688)]

as online TV becomes more popular, people will isolate themselves more and more from a shared experience

Instead, I'd say that as online TV becomes more popular, people will timeshift their viewing more and more. This does not eliminate a shared experience altogether, but it does stretch it thinner. But to the point of isolation? Naw. A good series remains a good series, and word will travel.

In fact, I find it refreshing that, at our watercooler, co-workers introduce each other to new shows, as well as help filter out the crud. Instead of a dozen people investing 12 man-hours to all learn that the Such-and-Such show blows ... the investment was perhaps one or two.

Re:

[Captain Splendid (673276)]

Mod parent up. The real danger to old school tv channels isn't where you can get content, but when. I'm currently using Bittorrent a shedload simply to be able to watch the 5 or 6 tv shows I'm interested in without having to contort my life around somebody else's schedule. Once the general perception shifts from "gotta get home, Lost is on soon", to "I'll download it this weekend/I'll wait for the DVD", TV networks as we know them are dead.

Re:

[StikyPad (445176)]

Once the general perception shifts from "gotta get home, Lost is on soon", to "I'll download it this weekend/I'll wait for the DVD", TV networks as we know them are dead.

Except that if nobody watches TV, there will be no "Lost" to download this weekend/wait for the DVD. (Although I'd venture a guess that exponentially more people use a VCR/PVR to record shows anyway.) TV won't "die" until there's both a viable distribution method to replace it, and an unmarketable remaining audience -- something which wil

Re:

[drinkypoo (153816)]

I think that as online TV becomes more popular, people will isolate themselves more and more from a shared experience.

But what is the value of a shared TV viewing experience? A whole family sitting in one room, staring at the same box, that's a shared experience? Sure, in much the same way that sleeping in the same house is a shared experience.

Re:Isolation on the rise too

[siriuskase (679431)]

no, it's more like sharing a meal. We don't watch much TV, but when we do, we do it together. We usually watch DVD, talk while watching, hit rewind if we manage to miss something, etc. It's not exactly educational talk, but fun talk, our own commentary, etc. It's frequently more interesting than the "How was your day?" stuff at the table. Kids talk more when they have something interesting to talk about.

Freedom is on the rise Re:Isolation on the rise

[mrmeval (662166)]

I'm all for not having the same outlook as corprat media wants me to have. Freedom is on the rise and this terrifies the elite.

Re:

[mcrbids (148650)]

I think that as online TV becomes more popular, people will isolate themselves more and more from a shared experience. So people will end up having even more polarized views of things.

I've seen the reverse trend.

Videos online or on our DVR can be paused or rewinded - even when watching something that's not pre-recorded! So if somebody speaks up during the show, it's no big deal to pause it, talk about it, and then continue, or even rewind to pick up a detail that was missed.

This makes watching videos a la Y

Is it online video or internet in general?

[LiquidCoooled (634315)]

I see it as more people having "something" to do with their time than specifically crappy videos.

Perhaps the survey questions weren't correct.

Most people who spend time online have a community - some have slash others have flickr, theres some on youtube and loads in numerous other communities.

TV cannot give the level of participation the web does.

And what is the big deal?

[zappepcs (820751)]

My flatscreen has a pc input...
Just a different source for video feeds...
current content providers will adapt...

News at 11

Disintermediated

[Tx (96709)]

You've just been looking for an excuse to use that word in an article, haven't you?

Re:Disintermediated

[Red Flayer (890720)]

Disintermediated

It's a pretty scary word, too. If we break it down, we see that it is a compound word derived from disinter- (to dig up a corpse) and -mediate (to intercede). Therefore, it's obvious that the digital world is a broker of graverobbing services, not a supplier of porn as commonly assumed.

Re:

[drinkypoo (153816)]

Therefore, it's obvious that the digital world is a broker of graverobbing services, not a supplier of porn as commonly assumed.

Among some circles, those are one and the same.

Is this a surprise?

[grapeape (137008)]

I would imagine that if they looked they would find that Internet Users on a whole watch less TV. Why just sit there when you can do something interactive. I watch video's online but usually they are shoved up in the corner of the screen while im doing something else more productive. I dont really see this as a bad thing, the major US networks are already catching on and are offering much of their programming online.

Isn't this exactly what has to happen for the mythical media/computer convergence to happen that everyone has harped on for the past 15 years? Its survival of the fittest, adapt or die, all media companies have to come to that reality whether is music, movies television, radio, newspapers or even books.

Yes....

[zarthrag (650912)]

...and here is why: Freedom of choice, competition, and expression. If someone cobbles together a good story, and a budget, I don't see why is isn't possible to launch an internet-based "cable television network" that reaches across borders, and is safely tucked away from the likes of broadcast networks (clearchannel and company), the Bush regime, and the FCC. It could be cheaper, and shows that die on Fox (Ahem! Serenity!) would live forever

This is surprising?

[AKAImBatman (238306)]

We live in a world that is no longer as 9 to 5 as it once was (more like 24/7 in three shifts), and people are surprised that television viewers would rather decouple their viewing from "Prime Time Weeknights"? I'm not surprised at all. DVDs laid the groundwork for viewers watching the television they want when they want. Then shows like 24 and Lost further laid the groundwork for story arcs that take advantage of that medium. (i.e. Can't keep with Jack every week? Keep up with him on DVD!)

Now the Internet is threatening to combine the convenience and timeliness of broadcast TV with the time shifting and long-term storage capabilities of DVDs. The result can only be a positive change in the way we view entertainment.

Re:

[kfg (145172)]

. . .more like 24/7 in three shifts

Three shifts? I wish. The great thing about working on the Internet is that someone, somewhere in the world, thinks I've just come back from lunch no matter what time it is here.

The great thing about working from home is that you get to choose which 168 hours a week you're going to work.

KFG

Problem or Opportunity?

[Kombat (93720)]

Anyone want to lay odds regarding whether the TV networks will view this as a problem or an opportunity? Of course, they'll see it as a problem that must be "solved," rather than an opportunity to be seized. There is so much money to be made here for innovative and visionary content providers, so much cross-promotion and integration they could take advantage of, and yet you just know the "old guard" will fight tooth and nail to keep the status quo, even as their marketshare/revenues decline over the upcoming years.

It's sad, really. I would have hoped that the "younger" networks like MTV and Spike would have jumped aboard and shown the path, but the only network I can think of who has even remotely embraced the dual-delivery model of TV and online media is the Comedy Network/Comedy Central.

Re:

[drinkypoo (153816)]

It's sad, really. I would have hoped that the "younger" networks like MTV and Spike would have jumped aboard and shown the path

MTV is owned by Viacom. Spike is owned by MTV, which, again, is owned by Viacom. Amusingly enough, Comedy Central is also owned by MTV/Viacom.

Clearly, Viacom is aware of digital distribution; they likely feel that only Comedy Central is currently capable of providing them monetary benefit. Or, maybe it's just that even MTV's original content uses a lot of content that they do

Logical step

[Damastus the WizLiz (935648)]

This is a logical step really. people will move to online viewing because it offers them the choice of what to watch and when to watch it that fits around their schedual. I think if networks put up their shows for people to watch at any time on the internet with commercials people would watch it with commercials just to be able to watch their favorite shows when they want to not when the network scheduals it.

It's obvious

[spyrochaete (707033)]

Why do we prefer online video over television? Doy! No advertisements!

Magazines and newspapers have non-obtrusive ads that can just be flipped immediately. TV ads must be watched or channel-flipped with the risk of missing content. Most internet video has ads on the site, not in the video.

I can't wait until TV networks get smart enough to put a Pepsi ad in the corner of the screen and allow "TV pirates" to spread the show on the internet. The network is off the hook for the piracy because it's out of their hands, Pepsi gets advertised all over the world, and the audience gladly puts up with the ad being onscreen because it doesn't interrupt the show.

Re:

[Mad Dog Manley (93208)]

The smart tv networks are joining the rush to online video, e.g. CBS. Their television shows are receiving some of the highest views on Youtube. (3 of the 25 highest viewed clips last week were from CBS shows)

Also good to note is the National Hockey League - they offer full hockey games on Google Video 48 hours after they are aired, and allow video clips on Youtube 24 hours after the games are aired. They are the only major North American sports league to do so.

Message to content producers and distributers

Re:

[GoatMonkey2112 (875417)]

Don't give them any ideas. I would bet that as HDTV equipment becomes cheaper and everything is broadcast in HD you will start to see your old standard def shows appearing with some extra crap in the sidebars.

Re:

[Ant P. (974313)]

The BBC doesn't run ads.

Re:It's obvious

[The-Bus (138060)]

the audience gladly puts up with the ad being onscreen because it doesn't interrupt the show.

Not an interruption?

Do you also believe [ How much ladies will love your new ROCK hard action!! [icos.com] Advertisement] that onscreen ads on the internet aren't intrusive? I'd be willing to [ Approve you for best mortgage at prime minus 4%!! Pay nothing! [federalreserve.gov] Advertisement] bet that most people don't share that view. Certainly, I can live without [ hottest mover & shaker stocks - investors shouldn't miss out [nyse.com] Advertisement] them, and sometimes they're not terribly intrusive, but they are still interruptions.

I always liked the way that ZDF in Germany did it. They had a block of time each night were only ads were shown and the ads were interrupted by short 5- to 15-second animated shorts to get the kids to watch. As they wanted people to actually tune in, most of the ads were of Super Bowl ingenuity: actually fun to watch. I believe some of the American HD networks do something like this currently.

Sure it is.

[Rob T Firefly (844560)]

My PC plays DVDs, downloads from torrents and Usenet (shh!) and legit online streams (bless you Adult Swim!) [adultswim.com] My PC plays all the PC games and classic console ROMs I need it to. When I have a video card with the proper inputs, the PC displays my real game consoles as well. My last actual television died about four years ago, and I really never found a reason to replace it.

To be fair I'm not much of a fan of modern mainstream television, and the only two series (not counting Adult Swim) I really follow are British ones I can only torrent in until the DVDs make it here to the States, but with mainstream stuff like NBC's "Heroes" following the legit streaming model I can see standard televsions becoming an endangered species fairly soon.

Many areas currently plan to ditch plain old analog broadcasts in favor of digital, and I imagine that signal is really easy to plug into an Internet server rather than a cable company. I'd love to see a cost comparison of what it costs the networks to stream online versus broadcasting on the dwindling airwaves.

No surprise considering shitty programs

[unity100 (970058)]

that are running among in all channels. Why watch crap, whereas on internet you can choose what you view on what hour ?

Doesn't matter...

[creimer (824291)]

Television is when my Dad comes over to switch the video input from DVD to TV and watch re-runs of COPS before he dozes off. I'm not missing much.

Not so fast!

[bogaboga (793279)]

To me, all this online video hype is just that - hype! What I have found on flash video sites including Google's Youtube is the inability to have any form of video controls. I mean, I have not been able to increase/decrease the following:

• brightness,

• contrast,

• hue level,

• saturation and

• gamma.

Yet some of these videos are really dark and need some work to be viewable in my opinion.

The day this will be possible is the day I "might" even consider taking these videos serious. On the sound front, bass/treble are

basic production failures

[krell (896769)]

"Yet some of these videos are really dark and need some work to be viewable in my opinion."

A lot of it is production blunders. You find it everywhere. Did you ever see the Nintendo 64 version of "Doom"? Even at the max contrast/brightness adjustment, it was almost all black. Now compare "Star Trek: The Next Generation" to "Star Trek: Enterprise". Somewhere along the way between the two, they either cut the lighting technician from the budget or decided to save costs by unscrewing most of the lightbulbs f

Re:

[denis-The-menace (471988)]

I watch everything in Winamp (because the -> key skip 5 secs ahead for boring parts)
And I have the same issues with low brightness settings in some clips.

For me it's worse. I turn down the brightness of my monitor because it hurts my eyes.
When I watch a video, I have to play with the brightness and reset it at the end.
It's a F'ng pain.

Not there yet

[rlp (11898)]

I have a PC connected to the TV that I use as a PVR. I time shift a lot (my family mostly watches TV on weekend evenings). Occasionally we'll look at Google video, YouTube, or some other on-line video. But it's usually just for a few minutes. The content of on-line video still can't compare to best commercial offerings like '24', and 'Battlestar Galactica', 'Modern Marvels', 'Extreme Engineering', etc. It CAN compare with most of the other stuff on TV. Which, along with lack of time, tends to limit ou

What exactly are they watching?

[Have Blue (616)]

A lot of people go to Youtube just to watch content ripped from TV shows. Suppose that was reliably eliminated- would the site's appeal still be as high? If not, then it doesn't really represent a new paradigm, just a parasite on the old.

It's been at least five years...

[eno2001 (527078)]

...since I've watched "normal" television. Ever since I started digitally recording TV shows on my computers, I haven't been at the mercy of ANY of the limitations of standard television. The VCR didn't even do a good job of that as you didn't have random access to your recordings. If you were watching something and fell asleep, you have to spend a good deal of time rewinding/fast forwarding to find the place where you nodded off. This was enough of a time sink that in many cases you either wound up wat

Why is this a problem ?

[Salsaman (141471)]

Why is this a problem for TV companies ? Why not just stream your output on the internet, in addition to broadcasting over radio/cable ?

Threat or Opportunity?

[SuperKendall (25149)]

The increase of online viewing is only a threat to those stupid enough not to provide easy means of viewing shows online!

And by show, I mean any media!

Advertisers seem threatened by online media. Yet how many years ago was it that AdCritic had to start charging because they got too popular? Why is there no modern AdCritic that is free and supported by millions of companies that have ads they want consumers to watch?

The networks have started to air shows online but when will they stop treating online viewers as second class citizens and let the people download a show the moment it airs?

I canceled my cable a year or two ago and have not looked back, because downloading (even by purchase) media is just such an improved way to watch TV, better even than TiVO (which was always merely an intermediate step to true random access of, and within, media).

Re:

[Red Flayer (890720)]

A family cannot really huddle around the PC to watch stuff on YouTube

Why not? It's trivial to set up S-video out to a TV instead of your desk monitor. As people become more accustomed to getting their entertainment content from their computer instead of from their broadcast/cable/satellite companies, more family rooms will be designed to accomodate this.

I regularly string a bunch of funny or otherwise stimulating clips together for the wife and I to enjoy on the big screen in the living room. Or a bunch

Re:

[moore.dustin (942289)]

Money. Ads that are being missed are used to fund the station which produces the show. If the station lost that money that show would not be made. It is a two way street.

Re:

[moore.dustin (942289)]

Yes I know, but that is not what is being discussed really. The issue is that TV studios have yet to really find a way to make money, other than selling (iTunes) the show online. An ad on the online video is not going to yield as much as a traditional ad would. That just needs to change really. When viewership online gets to the point where companies are willing to pay more and more for them, then things will be fine. Right now, that is certainly not the case. Everyone is going to have to adapt or face losi

I've never once consumed a TV show.

[krell (896769)]

"consume Internet BBC content"

The way it works, you just can't consume [reference.com] broadcast content. It's not a good, and does not get used up or destroyed by the act of viewing it.