Comments on: CBS-YouTube’s impact on affiliates

By: MOJO

MOJO — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:34:18 +0000

Wow, thanks for the excellent information!

By: Denise Litaker

Denise Litaker — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:08:30 +0000

Let us see our David Letterman. If you have a great service available let us see the shows we want to see. Letterman is the only show worth watching anymore on CBS besides the evening news now with Katie Couric. EVEN SHE IS ON the innertube.

By: Lee Aase

Lee Aase — Thu, 23 Nov 2006 14:46:32 +0000

Why not just link to the video on YouTube, as I did on my blog? If I can do it in 5 minutes or less, why don’t the stations just include it from YouTube? CBS has found that having videos on YouTube has increased the audience (They can’t completely prove it is cause and effect, but ratings are up even as the video is available on YouTube.)

Isn’t that the point? If the program ratings go up, doesn’t that mean more revenue for the local ads affiliates get to sell? Why don’t the affiliates just jump on the bandwagon?

That said, I can’t believe that CBS or Worldwide Pants won’t soon let those clips be put directly on the affiliate sites, without the YouTube intermediary.

But stations can drive the process toward that conclusion by posting from YouTube now.

By: Safran

Safran — Thu, 23 Nov 2006 03:11:30 +0000

“Irwin Fletcher” is right. (Hey, Fletch!) I don’t understand why the affiliates think there’s money in it for them to be “portals” to the networks. Silly.

You’ve read it here before, you’ll read it again: In the aggregation game, the only winners are the aggregators.

By: Lucretia Higgins

Lucretia Higgins — Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:54:55 +0000

The affiliates need to lift the video off YouTube and post it ojn their sites. Once the cat is out of the bag there’s not much CBS or WorldWide Pants can do.

I know it’s streaming video but there’s a way to lift it.

By: Irwin Fletcher

Irwin Fletcher — Thu, 23 Nov 2006 01:26:56 +0000

Meanwhile, the Innertube deal with CBS is a joke…

Let me get this straight… I put links all over my CBS affiliate web site to the CBS Innertube site so that people can watch their TV shows online… FURTHER speeding up the process of TV to online viewing shift…

In NO WAY does this create a habit for people to come to my web site or even watch the TV station..

(CBS does pay a very, very, very, very tiny amount for each user sent their way from an affiliate site, but it in no way is worth it.. as soon as someone discovers Innertube, they don’t use our site as a “gateway” to it anymore.. would you? People have bookmarks for that reason…)

By: Vlajbert

Vlajbert — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:34:04 +0000

Isn’t NBC blatently doing this now? They’re creating content for the Inet only, affiliates don’t have access to it.

What astonishes me even more is NBC is going after the affiliates web traffic and they’re jumping on board. First give up one of they’re most popular traffic sections, weather, to nbcweatherplus.com now roll sports up to nbcsports.com. What’s next? Rolling the business section up to cnbc.com and the tech/sci to scifi.com?

By: Safran

Safran — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:33:00 +0000

Still, the affiliates HAVE to recognize that the networks are going around them. Every move the nets make benefits the nets more than the affiliates.

The affiliates have to have a plan to generate more content on their own. What can they offer in the equation that’s unique? Original programming. Meaningful, local content. The future is clear, and it does not include the 1920s model of local affiliates rebroadcasting signals from national networks.

By: Michael Gay

Michael Gay — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:35:31 +0000

Technically, The Late Show with David Letterman isn’t owned by CBS, so I don’t think it’s fair to blame them for not being able to provide rights to the affiliates to stream the content. We’re an O&O and we can’t post Letterman video either. I think World Wide Pants would be the only people who can give permission to stream the show.