Comments on: What happens when nobody needs a TV?

By: baker

baker — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:41:57 +0000

“What happens when the web starts to replace the television?”

Man, that’s sooooo 1999. The internet will not replace television, but it will eliminate appointment-television news coverage, just as it’s replacing the newspaper. “In this day and age,” If you’re broadcasting at 6 or 11 or arriving on a doorstep, you’re old news. This isn’t actually up for debate anymore, is it?

However, we’re talking about a cultural transformation which trumps the technological one we keep focusing on. LR readers, Jennifer Yarter, analysts and the people they poll on this popular topic do not necessarily represent Joe or Jane America. Nothing will be replaced anytime soon, but over the course of our lifetime (a long time for us, but a blink of history’s eye). Some organizations will adapt and flourish during that time (many already do), many will fail miserably. It will be a long and drawn-out process with exciting innovations and terrible missteps along the way.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:53:51 +0000

They were already ten years ago. Digital TV was nearly stillborn until digital video camcorders came about. It was Jimmy’s baseball games and let’s send the file to Grandma, not any shows.

By: TR

TR — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:00:43 +0000

Using this hypothesis would not Cable and Satellite TV become irrelevent also?

By: John

John — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:41:23 +0000

I think Ryan summed it up. There will always be a need for a broadcast model… the ability to send a program stream to an infinite amount of viewers. Even a tech-savvy 20 something should realize that.

By: tdc

tdc — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:36:14 +0000

tv folks in general seem in the mindset today (as the web moves to video) that newspaper people were in years back when it was text-based—

denial.

By: Hussman

Hussman — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:59:26 +0000

@ Grant… DTV will only really succeed when stations offer something that matches most people’s cable habits. ‘RTN’ and ‘Create’ are cool, but a bit more is needed.

By: theTVaddict

theTVaddict — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:33:59 +0000

For what it’s worth. I just purchased an Apple TV this weekend and am absolutely amazed at the new content available directly on my TV. It’s one thing to watch podcasts and news on my small computer screen. But to now seamlessly be able to watch cnn’s podcast on my HD TV at my own convenience without commercials. In a word, “WOW”

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:10:37 +0000

Regarding quality … ABC has some episodes available in streaming HD. With a fast connection (2Mbs) and a big screen, it’s really high quality. Not ‘HD on a 60-inch screen’ quality, but getting there. That wasn’t possible two years ago, so who knows what two more years will bring?

Bandwidth is going to be the key here. A few hundred people watching HD streams works. A few million would choke our current bandwidth capability.

By: Pete Liebengood

Pete Liebengood — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:00:21 +0000

Making an TV appointment for anything other than a pre-scheduled news or sports event will soon be a concept to be found grazing with the Wells Fargo ponies. Local TV news will evolve into a stable of VJ’s doing stories for a station’s website. No anchors, no sports guy, no weather personality. Those 20-something tech savvy folks are the future.

By: Cory

Cory — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:24:52 +0000

I should’ve pointed this out in the original post, but expand the definition of “internet” to include any video over IP, such as IPTV and gaming consoles.

Networks are cutting these distribution deals sans the affiliates. So as all on-demand delivery of network television skips local affiliates, what is local TV left with?

Local TV news.

Again, my point.

By: Grant

Grant — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:41:37 +0000

Also, I’m a big fan of local news. But I live in Houston; your mileage may vary.

By: Grant

Grant — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:39:43 +0000

Living without cable doesn’t mean living without local TV stations. Once the digital transition is complete, HD transmission power will be boosted and people will be aware that you can get HD over the air. Then they’ll start looking at that huge cable bill.

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:52:28 +0000

I had dinner with a group of 80 year olds the other day. They told me they don’t own a computer and spend their time playing crossword puzzles and shuffle board.

Take that tech savvy 20 year olds.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:09:09 +0000

The reason they live without cable is most likely financial. On a limited budget, cable (versus web and cell) would likely be the first to go.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:04:39 +0000

Come on, are any LR regulars really surprised by this?

Every one of us who is working in a local TV newsroom should be nervous. When TV as we know it and the dead-tree version of the newspaper are gone and the playing field is leveled in terms of distribution, it will be game over. Newspapers will win–if they can last that long. A typical newspaper has about 5-10 times the number of content-producing employees than does a TV station in the same market. When we’re all sending our content down the same fiber-optic line and displaying it to our audiences on the same device, content really will be king and newspapers will rule. The only catch is whether the newspapers can survive until then.