Totally going to watch this. Swoon.
Category Archives: Television
How Apple TV Should Work
The rumor mill has been pulling overtime shifts with reports that Apple is really focusing on making Apple TV a priority. Many suggest this to be a brand new TV. However, I think that is misguided, mainly for the reasons Gruber and others have pointed out. Namely that people don’t replace their TVs very often. And an Apple TV wouldn’t be cheap. People who are nerds and would be interested in paying the premium for an Apple branded TV probably have already spent good money on decent flat panel TVs recently and aren’t looking to upgrade any time soon.
I think Apple should instead relaunch Apple TV the service. Just like the iTunes store and music, it is far more effective to provide a good solution for distributing material and just collect fees. This is how I envision Apple TV should work.
Instead of launching a cable network or a hardware TV, Apple needs to address the problems people have with their current cable company. Chief of those complaints is paying for channels no one watches.
Apple should launch a rebranded “Video Store”. Much like their Newsstand app, it will focus on specific content that is delivered automatically and presented in a central location. Content providers can then make Video Store compatible apps that users open and stream their “channel”. So, in Newsstand, I subscribe to GQ. Every month the latest GQ issue is downloaded to my iPad. I’m notified and the cover changes in the Newsstand. Whenever I’m ready, I open the GQ app and read it. I’m able to pay my subscription through iTunes using the same account I use to buy apps. Simple.
The Video Store would be similar. I could have the HBO app downloaded. I pay a set amount per month for the subscription and open the app when I’m ready to watch. Let’s say I don’t want to pay for all of AMC. I could simply buy the “Mad Men” subscription, and every week when the latest episode comes out, it shows up available to stream on my device.
This doesn’t sound groundbreaking, but it gets to two issues. First, is the universal cord cutter wish of “a la carte” cable choices in subscriptions. Second, it gets around the storage issue of buying episodes in iTunes and having to sync your device to download them. These video files take up huge amounts of space, so it is far easier to put all that server space Apple bought in NC to use and just stream on demand to subscribers. We can see Apple is already doing this with the current version of Apple TV, allowing you to stream episodes you have previously downloaded.
It also allows users who complain about live sports and news to get that content as well. The CNN app streams live CNN and you can subscribe to MLB at bat or NBA Season Pass. The content providers could still get paid – and get it directly from users instead of charging fees to cable operators.
Obviously, it is also necessary to get the content on television screens. Apple should utilize the standard that they already put right in front of our noses – Airplay. So, for those who only want to use Apple for TV – buy an Apple TV plug it in your screen of choice, and subscribe. For those on iPads and iPhones, you can subscribe on your device and “push” to your device the shows you want to watch. This is a key point, because suddenly your television and video content becomes truly mobile. No longer do you have to be home scrolling through your DVR to watch last week’s episode of Community. Now you can catch Boardwalk Empire at the gym and then How I Met Your Mother when you get home on the big screen.
This appeases complaints that content is too locked down in current offerings like Hulu with “PC only” restrictions. No longer do you have to hope that the episode you missed three weeks ago is still on Hulu, or that the one you missed last night is available on Fox.com only after a week has passed.
Will this work? If anyone can do it, it is Apple. They were the only company that could push the music companies into online distribution. Now with even more clout, they might be ready to gently guide the video content companies toward the future.
Oh, It Looks Good!
I don’t know why, but I couldn’t stop laughing at this. You will hear me saying this incessantly for the next month.
You Should Be Watching: Portlandia
Portlandia. A show on IFC that makes fun of coastal liberal SWPL culture. It stars SNL castmember Fred Armisen and musician Carrie Brownstein. Check out some of the funnier clips below:
One about the absurd degree people are taking the organic movement:
Broad and Shallow to Deep and Narrow
NPR has been running stories all week about how technology is affecting society. One of their stories resonated with me. The discussion focused on how because of new technologies we are able to seek out and find entertainment and topics that appeal to us more easily than ever. Because of the ease of finding the specific thing that rings our bell, we can more easily filter out everything that doesn’t.
American culture is sliced up in so many different ways that what’s popular with one group can go virtually unnoticed by another. Univision, for example, is watched by millions of Latinos in the U.S., but millions of other Americans couldn’t tell you what channel it’s on.
Think about it like this. Back when your parents were children they had a choice of 3 television channels. They watched what was on. Because of this many people watched the same things, and had the same “experiences”. Music was delivered via radio stations that decided what to play. Everyone grew up listening to the same music.
Fast forward to today. I can find a youtube channel or blog that is dedicated to my oddest hobby. I can find indie bands producing a specific sound that refuses to fit into any category and probably hasn’t been heard by anyone in my social circle.
My friend described this phenomenon as having fewer grand scale shared culture, but a deeper connection with those who do share our common interests. You might have only one person in your group of friends who likes the same web show, but you two probably know all the catchphrases.
What impact is this having on our society? Do we feel less kinship with greater society because we don’t feel like we share anything with our neighbors? Does this encourage increasingly isolated interests?
In such a fractured society, is America at risk of losing a common culture? Rosenberg of The Atlantic says maybe. But she also thinks it will make us appreciate the mass cultural events that do occur even more, like the end of the Harry Potter series or Michael Jackson’s death.
Is Glee Encouraging Criminal Behavior?
Interesting article on Jack Balkin’s blog by guest blogger Information Society Project fellow Christina Mulligan that makes an argument that the characters on Glee, in real life would be serious violators of copyright law.
In one recent episode, the AV Club helps cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester film a near-exact copy of Madonna’s Vogue music video (the real-life fine for copying Madonna’s original? up to $150,000). Just a few episodes later, a video of Sue dancing to Olivia Newton-John’s 1981 hit Physical is posted online (damages for recording the entirety of Physical on Sue’s camcorder: up to $300,000). And let’s not forget the glee club’s many mash-ups — songs created by mixing together two other musical pieces. Each mash-up is a “preparation of a derivative work” of the original two songs’ compositions – an action for which there is no compulsory license available, meaning (in plain English) that if the Glee kids were a real group of teenagers, they could not feasibly ask for — or hope to get — the copyright permissions they would need to make their songs, and their actions, legal under copyright law. Punishment for making each mash-up? Up to another $150,000 — times two.
The point of the article doesn’t seem to be to examine whether the copyright holder would actually have a civil claim that would hold up in court- I don’t watch the show, could the students have a fair use claim? – but rather to point out, in her opinion, the flaws in the copyright system. Her main points is:
The Constitution allows Congress to pass copyright laws to “promote the progress of science” — a word often used in the 18th century to mean “knowledge”. The stated purpose of the original 1790 copyright statute was to encourage learning. So you tell me — what promotes knowledge and learning: letting people rearrange music and learn to use a video camera, or threatening new artists with $150,000 fines?
I will quibble over this point a bit. Patents cover inventions, copyright covers “art”. She is probably referring to the “copyright clause” of the constitution which states:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
I guess we can use knowledge as an extension of art. If you allow that extension, then yes I believe protecting the copyright holder does encourage art/knowledge. Those Glee kids wouldn’t have anything to emulate if the artists didn’t create those songs. And those artists probably wouldn’t create those songs if they had to make money by working at Bed, Bath & Beyond instead of going to the studio.
Whose argument do you find more persuasive?
Primetime had it coming
This insert was in my 30 Rock Season 3 DVD. It was a promo for his new show, but it has a more ominous foreshadowing to it now that NBC is forcing Conan out to put Jay Leno back on the Tonight Show and has messed up evening programming for NBC to ridiculous levels.
Making NBC More Comcastic
Comcast is one of the largest cable television operators in the United States. You probably don’t know this, but this would not be their first foray outside of the utility part of television and into the content side. They own the E! network and G4.
Comcast is being very progressive and forward looking by getting into the content side of the industry. As more and more television and movie entertainment is offered online by the websites like Hulu and Netflix Streaming, cable companies need to be concerned that people won’t turn to them to provide content. This will likely get more pervasive as time goes on. Why pay for cable TV if you could get most of it online?
Cable companies fear becoming what is known as “dumb pipes” – simply the cable carrying internet or video to your home, and not the content providers – giving you the content packages. By getting into the content market, Comcast is readying itself to be on the right side of the industry as the shift happens. NBC even owns part of Hulu, so this is especially fortuitous for Comcast.
The scary side of this transaction is thinking about what could happen if Comcast thinks it is more lucrative for them to maintain their hold on being a cable provider. It is not out of the realm of possibility for them to realize it is more profitable to charge users for cable than try to make revenue via advertising online. What if they blocked their cable customers from accessing Hulu unless they also have a TV subscription package?
I’d be curious if this merger doesn’t involve some monopoly or anti-trust issues. It is at least concerning.
Verizon FiOS Customers Get A Free Day in the Red Zone
The NFL Red Zone channel is a channel that cuts to whatever game has a team inside the 20 yard line at the time. It seems like a fun, fast paced way to catch a lot of Sunday games, especially since unless you are on DirecTV you don’t have the opportunity to catch most games.
Watch it on channel 835 (in HD) or 335 (in SD)!
Let’s Pray They Don’t Know About Two Girls One Cup
Announcement that there is movement on developing a television show based loosely on “Texts From Last Night” the infamous website where people can submit funny texts they’ve received.
It’s a loose concept. It’s going to be about:
“twentysomethings in that post-college, pre-the-rest-of-their-lives limbo trying to figure out what to do, and texting is a large part of that”
So, really like a slightly older Gossip Girl. Are we going to see a whole slew of new concepts based on internet sites? “F my life” comes to mind.
