Tech upstarts threaten TV broadcast model

Comments (15)
Slammy wrote:

I always thought that one day the computer science department would combine with the drama department and take on the major broadcasters head on. Hence Youtube. Now, technology is allowing people to sidestep the traditional make it, market it and advertise from it model. If it were not for the fact actors, producers, directors and others make millions from this content people might have sympathy for their plight. But do these people really deserve to paid so much for creating an idea that a few actors can follow a script with? Now that the barriers to entry have been eliminated, Hollywood is no longer the super power it once was. I do not expect them to go quietly but what else can the do besides, sue, sue sue.
The music industry could have embraced the itunes or napster business model in the 90′s and likely headed off, or at least delayed, their collapse significantly. But they chose instead to fight evolution and look how that turned out. Now it appears tv is repeating history. Time will tell if they suffer the same fate.

Apr 07, 2013 10:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

I always thought that one day the computer science department would combine with the drama department and take on the major broadcasters head on. Hence Youtube. Now, technology is allowing people to sidestep the traditional make it, market it and advertise from it model. If it were not for the fact actors, producers, directors and others make millions from this content people might have sympathy for their plight. But do these people really deserve to paid so much for creating an idea that a few actors can follow a script with? Now that the barriers to entry have been eliminated, Hollywood is no longer the super power it once was. I do not expect them to go quietly but what else can the do besides, sue, sue sue.
The music industry could have embraced the itunes or napster business model in the 90′s and likely headed off, or at least delayed, their collapse significantly. But they chose instead to fight evolution and look how that turned out. Now it appears tv is repeating history. Time will tell if they suffer the same fate.

Apr 07, 2013 10:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
USA_Evacuee wrote:

Getting your entertainment for free via the Internet is known as “gulching.”

I am a professional gulcher. I do not own a TV, but still see every movie I want, every TV show I want, and every sporting event I want via the Internet.

The ads on the TV shows are not shown, however, the ads are there when I watch live sports.

So…do you want to be a gulcher, too? It is pretty easy!

Just goto the following websites: movie2k.to (for movies and TV) and wiziwig.tv for live sports.

Gulching is GREAT if you can tolerate waiting for your entertainment to load.

Apr 08, 2013 8:04am EDT  --  Report as abuse
elvismoab wrote:

Remember when cable TV meant NO commercials? That’s how it was in the 60′s, 70, and into much of the 80′s. Sorry but If I’m paying for TV then I demand no commercials. I believe Bravo was the last cable network to succumb to screwing over their customers.

Sadly the quality of cable has deteriorated and even Bravo now has scheise 24/7. TLC and the Discovery are jokes and OLN/Versus now resembles Fox Sports Blech.

Too bad the overpaid greedy network execs can’t figure out why people are abandoning cable as well as OTA. Bottom line is that they abandoned their customers.

Apr 08, 2013 8:52am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pavoter1946 wrote:

Broadcast television will respond to fewer and fewer viewers by showing more and more commercials. And then wonder what happened?

Apr 08, 2013 10:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Htos1 wrote:

I stopped owning/watching tv in ’92,when the commercial web winked on.Never looked back.And I’m NEVER going back.There is NO technology/programming,etc.,that can.Scratch that-there IS one thing.If Paramount actually produces the rumored Star Trek-voyager movie,THEN I’ll watch for two hours. ;)

Apr 08, 2013 10:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TVguyMemphis wrote:

It’s very interesting how the worm has turned on this story. Think back to many years ago when the networks and local stations were ecstatic that cable companies would carry their signals for free. Then fast forward to how they themselves put content on the internet for free to reach viewers. Now look at how they beat money out of the cable providers and complain about people watching programs only online. I say they’re short sighted as always and scrambling to catch up with the crowd. Networks and content providers should reinvent the wheel and give people what they really want – just the channels we’re willing to pay for. We don’t all want ESPN, or the shopping channels, or all those niche channels. Maybe even set up a system like Netflix or Amazon where we buy what we want. I’d be happy with that and gladly pay for it. You providers have got to wake up now or pretty soon we’ll all be talking about the old days when there were TV stations and cable channels. Welcome to 2013.

Apr 08, 2013 10:48am EDT  --  Report as abuse
thisbodega wrote:

we no longer watch any of the networks including their sporting events with far too many commercials, saturated to the point where it’s difficult to know who’s even playing. worse yet they’ve all become far too political openly pushing the obama agenda so much so we now see them to be the actual mouthpiece of the regime.

Apr 08, 2013 11:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
stevem0210 wrote:

The New York Times may go under soon, but unfortunately the cable media will outlast them because of cable channel bundling.

The fact is that propaganda is cheap for billionaires. Any number of billionaires could swoop down and save the NYT and fund it out of their own pockets.

Apr 08, 2013 12:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Fox said “the court has ruled that it is OK to steal copyrighted material and retransmit it without compensation.”

They are starting to sound like politicians, lying through their teeth and making completely absurd claims like this. Retransmitting a free broadcast that is on the airwaves is NOT stealing.

Apr 08, 2013 3:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
cb2000a wrote:

My wife and I watch Netflix and Amazon 95% of the time (Roku box). We use an over the air antenna to watch broadcast TV for certain shows and specials. We pay about $15.00 a month for those services. I think the broadcast model has a very limited future. It’s expensive to run and uses lots of bandwidth.

What might happen is that most of the broadcast channels go to live streaming leaving just one as a broadcaster for emergencies. This would free up more bandwidth for data transmission.

Apr 08, 2013 3:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jamesd1234 wrote:

The question should be why do these local network affiliates and other over the air broadcasters get to sell their retransmission rights to local cable and satellite companies? Many people have to subscribe to cable just because they can’t get proper reception of all the channels with an antenna. Why are they being penalized? These local broadcast channels were given free public bandwidth to broadcast. If they want to be an all cable channel they should turn the spectrum back in to the FCC and it can be auction for cell phone companies for 4G broadband use. That’s the trade off, if the business model doesn’t work then broadcasters should turn in their spectrum and be a cable only channel, but they shouldn’t get to be both.

If they want to continue to broadcast over the public airwaves they should then be about trying to make it easier for consumers in their territory to get crystal clear signals.

Apr 08, 2013 5:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
C_Hursh wrote:

“Broadcasters still hope to cut off both services by persuading the courts that they violate copyright laws and breach contracts.”

In a related story, Dinosaurs refuse to acknowledge their impending demise as Earth goes deeper into the Ice Age.

Apr 08, 2013 7:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Auroraforsure wrote:

FINALLY , the promise of what might happen with deregulation 30 years ago may be starting.

Apr 08, 2013 8:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
batmanRox wrote:

Let it die, it’s corrupted, including Reuters.

Apr 08, 2013 9:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.