Joost, the online TV site developed by the creators of Skype, has been around for less than a year and it already seems as if it's time has passed. Last summer, when it debuted to an invite-only audience, passwords and invites were being auctioned off on eBay. It was the hottest thing. However, we now see that Joost has been limited by a drought of compelling programming and because the site requires users to download the video player.
Why do all that when you can go to Hulu and watch current, high-quality shows in a streaming format? No extra effort required. That's what online viewers want. It took online video so long to take off because users had so many technical issues - issues which often went beyond bandwidth. Raise your hand if you ever gave up after downloading a piece of software so you could watch some clip that a friend sent you. (Thank you. You made my case. Hands down.)
Give Joost credit. The site's innovative chat function allows fans of a show to interact. Plus, the site features the old GI Joe cartoon. Some of Joost's interactive functionalities have been picked up by Hulu, and it's doubtful Fox and NBC would have had the same foresight as the Joost guys. Ultimately, it always comes down to content and here, Joost just could not compete with Big Media. Joost doesn't have shows that are currently on the air, which is obviously a tremendous disadvantage. Even if it had been able to land cult hit Arrested Development, that would have been a big coup, but it was not to be.
Whither Joost?
Extra, Extra: State of the News Media 2008
The State of the News Media report for 2008 is out. There are several interesting findings from the annual report, including that news is shifting from a product to a service that empowers consumers and that newsrooms are perceived as innovative. That last one surprised us a bit, but since we haven't done the leg work, we trust the folks at The Project for Excellence in Journalism.
The finding that we found most intriguing is that the agenda of the news media has narrowed, not broadened. The question here is, chicken or egg? Does the media not cover a wide range of topics because it is attempting to dictate public conversation or do readers simply have a narrow focus and want stories only on a few topics (the economy, the war in Iraq, etc.)? For our money, we see the reader as the problem -- though not our readers, of course ;). There is no question that news consumers in this country have decided that they want their news from people with the same views as them, talking about the topics that are important to them. If you're conservative, you watch Fox News. If you're liberal, ... you get the idea. The bottom line is that people have a narrowing view of the world and what the news media is covering is simply a reflection of that.
This, of course, is a major problem. The importance of journalism as the Fourth Estate cannot be understated in American history. Watergate, anyone? The exchange of differing opinions and ideas is important on several levels and if we all continue to watch only the views of those like us talking about only the three stories we care about, we lose the chance to broaden our understanding of others. (Deep, huh?) This angle represents the great elephant in the room, the story that journalists seem to avoid. Though we're not the ultimate clearinghouse, we haven't seen too much written on this topic. Then again, maybe it's not one of the three stories we care about.
Loopt: Friend or Foe Finder?
A front-page story in today's Wall Street Journal discusses a new application (named Loopt) for your mobile device that can track where your contacts are at any time. Think of it as Google Maps starring your friends and family. Here's a quick video so you can see how the service works.
Now that you've seen that, are you a little creeped out? In the story, the Loopt founder even says, "It's one of those things, the more you think about it, the more ways you can figure out a creep could abuse it. I think people realize that unlike a telemarketer call, which can be annoying, a location-based service could be an actual physical safety risk." Good times! I'd like to pay an extra $4.95 a month for that.
Obviously you have to opt-in to the service, but it raises some scary issues. And as the Baroness says, "What if you're going to surprise me with something? Then I don't want to know where you are." Hmmmm...Is that a hint? Gotta go work on that, I suppose.
DVR vs. VOD: The Battle for TV Control
The Baroness and I love our DVR. We don't know anyone who has a DVR and isn't emotionally tethered to its greatness. And now comes word that DVR should be in more than one-third of homes by 2012. But is the DVR just a bridge technology?
The same story tells us that VOD will be in more than 50% of homes by 2012. Cable companies love VOD because it's worth much more to them than the $5 per month they receive for DVR. VOD also means that cable companies can supply video on the back end (just when you choose that video) and don't need to worry about putting the large hard drives into cable boxes.
I have a couple of concerns with VOD: 1) As it's currently constituted, only a limited number of episodes for a given show are available at a time. That must change. If I am giving up my DVR, I want to retain control. 2) I don't want to have to watch ads or pay for the content, and with VOD, you have to pick your poison.
I get the sense that the DVR will be surpassed by VOD in terms of usage pretty soon, but that doesn't mean DVR will go away. And if I have to, I could always buy Tivo, assuming they're still in business. You can't underestimate how great it is to be able to pause live TV. I'm not giving that up without a fight.
The Hits Just Keep on Coming: New Google Search Feature
Google rarely does anything without thinking about the ramifications, so it's interesting that the company has launched a search-within-search feature that could end up hurting print publishers.
Basically, when you search on Google for "NY Times," the search brings up the top pages and another box so you can search within the Times page without clicking through to the site. It certainly seems more convenient, but print publishers are unhappy because when you search for certain terms (jobs, real estate), ads pop up on the right for competitor sites. The ads, of course, only pop up for terms where there's real money to be made. If you search terms like sports and politics -- where there are plenty of competitors -- no ad words come up.
The one saving grace is for people to search logically. If people want jobs from the Washington Post, they are likely to search "Washington Post jobs" rather than breaking the process into two steps. When you do that, no ads words appear. It's a small but significant difference.
New Yorker Puts Papers Under the Microscope
Journalism and newspapers get The New Yorker treatment this week. The article (which we located on The Big Lead) has some crazy statistics -- The New York Times Co. has seen its stock price drop 54% since 2004 -- and brings up some good points, but too often it feels like a press release for The Huffington Post.
The article talks about blogs and does give some mention to other blogs, but HuffPost is the central theme when the reporter is not doling out miserable stats about newspapers. On the plus side, there are some incredibly insightful quotes from Rupert Murdoch, which give you an idea that the man really has vision and didn't just get to the top by putting boobs and blood into his papers.
Moreover, the article points out (correctly, I think) that the next few years will be a chaotic time in journalism. For some reason, in other new media (mobile web, for example), we understand that things are going to be in flux for a few years until a working business model emerges. In newspapers, however, we expect the transition to be quick and painless.
The Ecosystem of Old Technologies
Much of what we blog about here is about how new technology is adopted and consumed, and how that affects older technologies. I guess the folks at The New York Times have been reading because they basically took that theme and fleshed into a 15-inch story instead of ongoing blog ethos.
This article deals with how old techs evolve when they are overtaken by new techs. One source in the story even compares it to the evolution of ecosystems, a spot-on analogy. For example, the Beta VCR is often considered one of the great recent tech blunders as it failed to adapt and was overtaken by VHS. But Beta disappeared only in the consumer market. In the B2B world, Beta was often used by TV stations and, I believe, still is in some places.
