We can now transfer data with astounding speed and ease. The full effects of our ability to shuffle content effortlessly around the globe will probably not be appreciable for decades. But the first glances at the future are slipping out as television gets hip: MSNBC, Apple, Cartoon Network's Adult Swim and the BBC all seem to be responding to the new ground rules with verve.
Does this mean we're entering an era where we actually get direct distribution for television, and shows that are cheap or free? Creator-to-Consumer distribution seems like a good thing for most of us, but could it lead to the death of local broadcasting?
Two questions:
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by local broadcasting?
How would direct distribution kill local broadcasting?
It seems to me (assuming local means PBS) that if a consumer would voluntarily pay to have a program broadcast at a time NOT of their choosing, then they would still pay to have the program webcast for consumption at their convenience.
If by local you mean local access, we still might have some version of that (just not broadcast). There is a new medium that is really taking off called "podcasting". Its radio (and some television) shows that are independently produced and available for download on one's iPod.
It seems to me that the only thing that is dying is broadcasting which is a less effective tool for content distribution with current technology.
I meant local meterologists and newscasters, supported as local affiliates to a broad network. My enjoyment of Lost partly subsidizes the local news, which I suspect might not survive without the help of the association.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe you're right, we'll just replace local with citizen journalists, bloggers and podcasters: like this. With our routine complaints about the quality of local news, there probably wouldn't be a noticeable decrease in quality. But without an organization demanding some standards of quality and regular substantive broadcasts, I'm not sure. Lull?
It seems that if the national news can survive online, then the local news can also. Isn't everything going to be the same about the local news, except the method by which the consumers receive it?
ReplyDeleteThey will still videotape/film it, they can still add commercials, the only difference is 1) there might be the change of "broadcast" only at breaking news times, and 2) the consumer downloads it when they feel necessary. It will likely give you more accurate viewer numbers, making it more appealing to advertisers, too.
On a related note, I am VERY excited about this. It hits home to my dream of creating a classroom with all the resources built-in. Now rather than having to go to a library in advance to check something out the potential arises (albeit rather distant) to have libraries inside any classroom with internet access.
The classroom will evolve to a level of high efficiency because multiple students can be presented the same information simultaneously without the distraction of physically passing out each document.
Imagine this: "Okay class look up at the board; I have highlighted the key sections of information from the Paris riots, including who is involved, why they are involved, at what is being done to curtail them."
OR
"Okay class I have photocopied you each this bulletin from BBC.com about the Paris riots. Look down 2 paragraphs, no not including the caption at the top of the page, yes starting with the word unemployment. Okay this helps us understand... What? No, TWO paragraphs down, not three..."
Yes this is a fair depiction of teaching high school. No I am not joking.
Internet distribution is probably here to stay, but it won't kill local media in other forms. The one thing that internet does very poorly is announcing things in the manner of a town crier, and sometimes that is what's needed. Some form of involutary (on the part of the listener) distribution of information.
ReplyDeletePodcasts, streaming audio/video, etc is less efficient for mass media consumption. Each viewer/listener consumes a fixed amount of resources to access the source; for radio and television broadcasts, anyone in a certain locality can tune in without costing anyone any more money. (marginal cost for broadcasts is zero, but extant and non-negligable for internety stuff)
Finally.. keeping tabs on local events is a full time job even if some weeks nothing very interesting happens. You can't count on bloggers to be unbiased monitors who are as actively watching for events as local news media.