Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... Last
↑↑↑ Old messages ↑↑↑            ↓↓↓ New messages ↓↓↓
[#] Thu May 27 2010 14:40:50 EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Just saw the finale to Ashes to Ashes; it's one of the few long-running series endings (five years between that and Life on Mars). Very nice ending - characters ended nicely, as well as the story arc. Much better than Lost.

[#] Fri Jun 04 2010 22:32:33 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Television in general is changing. I think the idea of "what's on now" is eventually going to disappear entirely, except for live broadcasts. DVR owners love time shifting, Internet television viewers love having access to what they want when they want it, and because of this I think the idea of channels and schedules will eventually vanish ... people will still have cable and satellite providers but they'll end up being more of a bulk download service.
Disks are big enough that the provider will be able to preload the subscriber's box with tons of programming, either paid for by advertising, or encrypted and then unlocked when the subscriber pays for it.

Captioning in that kind of world would survive because it would still be produced by production houses with the discipline to do so.

Ideally I'd like to see amateur produced content lumped together with the big networks. I'd like to see a world where the only difference between CBS and a ten year old with a video camera is that CBS has a bigger budget and is more well known, but the underlying technology doesn't really distinguish between the two.

[#] Fri Jun 04 2010 22:46:10 EDT from Animal @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There'd have to be some filter on what goes
out there. Look at the amount of crap on
youtube right now.

[#] Sat Jun 05 2010 07:12:08 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Perhaps this discussion is better had in the Television room.

How do you make money in your scenario, IG?  Sure, CBS etc. have larger studios with nicer equipment and all, but they're intending to make money from their content.  If the content is simply given away, you have to rely on advertising to make money (much as they do now).  If DVRs become a norm of some kind, and everyone skips the commercials, who would want to advertise and underwrite the content?

Currently, enough people see the commercials that it isn't an issue.  But as this model becomes more popular, I wonder how content will get funded.  I suspect you'd see more in-content advertising.  Or it could end up sorta like the youtube ads, which could get very annoying (esp, if you can't click out of them).

I suspect there will still be a desire to have playlists of content that comes out much as television does today, but the days of 'reruns' for that stream might be gone (just browse for old content that's being stored on the network's server or something).  I think the network 'stream' will always have new content, someday.  Storage, I think, might become a huge issue... and bandwidth.  Some interesting technical hurdles are coming.



[#] Sat Jun 05 2010 08:21:34 EDT from d'oh @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Two Random thoughts based on ^^^

Somewhere I read a study that says that not nearly as many people with DVRs zip passed commercials than one would think.  I think it has to do with forgetting you are watching a DVR (which happens to me from time to time)  Not to say DVRs become more and more comfortable (and commonplace) that more and more start zipping pased the advertising.

The other one is based on the past.  I like to listen to old radio programs (mainly Jack Benny) and in the early days, there were program sponsors as oposed to advertising.  I wonder if shows started going back to a similar model, they could get more people watching the advertising.  I also remember a few times where a network would place a billboard type ad around the pitcure (I recall one being a soccar match, with no stop time, another being a movie they didn't want to interrupt)  That's another route advertisers could go in.



[#] Mon Jun 07 2010 15:34:25 EDT from Spell Binder @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

As a DVR owner, I'm very much in the habit of fast-forwarding through commercial breaks. However, I will stop and watch a commercial if it catches my eye.
That leads me to believe that advertising may not disappear, but that the ad agencies will simply have to put more effort into creating commercials that grab your attention.

I've also been witness to in-content advertising, too. My father-in-law was watching the Indy 500 race recently on ESPN. Instead of just cutting to commercial, they did a side-by-side layout with the race on the left and the commercials on the right, with a host of statistics placed around the remainder of the screen. I found this to be a very clever solution to handle advertising without interrupting the programming.
Ad Binder

[#] Mon Jun 07 2010 23:16:26 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

"in-content" is super old fashioned, actually ... we might actually see programming in which the advertising is scripted directly in. That's the way it was done in olde tymes.

[#] Tue Jun 08 2010 20:55:16 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There'd have to be some filter on what goes
out there. Look at the amount of crap on
youtube right now.

http://www.theonion.com/video/youtube-contest-challenges-users-to-make-a-good-vi,14288/

[#] Fri Jun 18 2010 18:25:03 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Check this kid out. He;s awesme, he's like the next samuel l jackson.
and he's hysterical.
http://www.google.com/search?q=danny+electric+company&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=eH5&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:official&prmd=v&source= univ&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=4fEbTNy3A8G78gbEkeiDDA&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CDQQqwQwAw

[#] Sun Jun 20 2010 01:18:25 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

He's definitely got a presence. And because it's children's television the language is a lot cleaner than you'd expect from Samuel L. Jackson.

[#] Fri Jul 16 2010 23:21:47 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think I might watch "30 Rock" if it was *only* Meat Cat and no one else.
*Especially* Tina Fey. She needs to be taken off the air permanently.

[#] Sat Jul 17 2010 20:41:50 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

And, already, some folks are making parodies of the Old Spice Guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ArIj236UHs

This one is for a library.



[#] Fri Jul 23 2010 17:28:19 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Nice

[#] Sat Sep 11 2010 08:31:48 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It's kinda hard to decide if you want to laugh or cry while watching these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcnWjQSlzgc

Timmy, whose parents are divorced, visits with his father for the weekend.



[#] Sun Sep 19 2010 08:13:15 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

http://www.balconytv.com/

balcony TV from a balcony next to your location.



[#] Mon Sep 27 2010 03:52:17 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Benson, Who's the Boss, and The Facts of Life, now playing on Hulu :o

[#] Tue Sep 28 2010 00:25:13 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

"Hulu is committed to making its content available worldwide. To do so, we must work through a number of legal and business issues, including obtaining international streaming rights. Know that we are working to make this happen and will continue to do so. Given the international background of the Hulu team, we have both a professional and personal interest in bringing Hulu to a global audience."

Can't tell you how many shows are unable to be aired b/c Hulu hasn't secured "streaming rights"

for the music contained w/in the show. It's not enough they have to have copyright & distribution rights but they need STREAMING rights, too -- for the f'n MUSIC!

[#] Tue Sep 28 2010 00:32:13 EDT from psy-q @ Uncensored

Subject: Re:

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Tue Sep 28 2010 00:25:13 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored
It's not enough they have to have copyright & distribution rights but they need STREAMING rights, too -- for the f'n MUSIC!

Copyright is a wonderful thing. Here in Switzerland, you need to pay the music royalty collection and distribution agency when you play your own music, live on stage, for every single song you pay.

 



[#] Tue Sep 28 2010 00:46:52 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Now that's just ludicrous!

Oh, and apparently, Netflix is also affected by the no-streaming-outside-the-US snafu, as well. (I have some friends on holiday in Canada & Mexico who are discovering this, and reporting, live, about their inability to watch their shows ...)

[#] Tue Sep 28 2010 07:10:59 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Goodness... what do those two agencies actually do for the public, anyway, to charge a poor artist for their own work?



Go to page: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... Last