The reason that I don’t think we need the broadcast concept of a channel is inspired somewhat by the long tail. The long tail is not just about the proliferation of content, but also the filtering of the content by the masses. In other words in the future we will have millions of “channels” that could consist of just one show, but the point is that we would disover these shows though the kind of collaborative filtering like digg, tailrank, technorati etc.

Once the shows and even the channels figure out they can go direct to customers through itunes, video podcasts etc. they will not be so tied to the broadcast metaphor.

TV operates with channels. Each channel has an editor who decides what goes on his channel. The channels compete for the attention of the consumer by trying to make the most interesting mix of content. Although the editors try hard to keep the consumer, we still get 500+ channels delivered to the TV, as a response to the consumers demanding a choice in channels. Effectively the consumers are swapping through channels faster than they click on links on their pc.

What is a blog then? Isn’t that just another channel where some editor decides what to broadcast, with the intention to keep the attention of the consumer on his channel. Although the bloggers claim that they don’t expect consumers to stay, but to freely jump from channel to channel, the bloggers still keeps pride in showing how many readers they have – I noticed that you have 1043 readers today – well done!

I’m sorry Karl, I don’t see broadcasting being dead – if anything I see it being somewhat reinvented, as now the consumer can more easily tell the editor what he likes and doesn’t like. That way the editor can shorten the innovation cycle in adapting the channel to what the consumer is craving and prevent the change of channel or even worse the dismissal of this channel as being interesting. The direct consumer feedback is merely a bit more cost effective way of implementing consumer feedback on your channel, in addition to making the channel more interesting due to the human element. A concept the TV channels have worked on for years with the introduction of reality TV, wheel of fortune etc. – consumer generated content.

I think we are overestimating the innovation in web based consumer generated content – it is more like normal evolution, with a lower barrier of entry in creating your own media channel.

Podcasts: no DRM
Broadcast TV: no DRM (for now)
IPTV: DRMed to hell and back

Until that equation fails or Americans all become rich, IPTV or TV over podcasts will fail as a mass consumer product. I’d also like to see how AT&T and Microsoft will be able to drastically increase the bandwidth to deliver all this TV content over TCP/IP outside of technology field studies in an affordable manner.

Personally I won’t be interested until I can transfer what I record on any device I see fit to view the shows on. The current schemes won’t allow me to do that without breaking the law.

Would be nice though.

by: Karl Long Companies like AT&T and Microsoft are sinking Billions (4+ billion each) into IPTV (internet protocol television), enabling them to deliver TV over the internet. And what exactly are these companies trying to do with those billions&he…