TVissimo | Internet and Television Convergence Discussion Blog

Clicker Brings You What’s On Online

Clicker is a search service to find what is available in video on the Web. There motto is “What’s On Online.”  At the site you are greeted with a simple Google style search filed as well as links to what’s new, what’s hot, recommended and your playlist if you have signed up for the premium service. The basic features are free. You can search by show or by topic. Clicker indexes television shows, movies, music videos, and original web content. 

 Clicker recently received $11 million in expanded venture capital funding. The series B round was led by Jafco Ventures. Benchmark Capital and Redpoint Ventures also participated. The company has now raised approximately $19 million since its launch in January 2009. The site does not provide video itself. It links you to the growing amount of content that others are producing. The Clicker catalog now includes more than 600,000 episodes from 10,000 shows. It lists those titles in more than 14,000 categories.

Jeremy Scott provides a nice Clicker review at ReelSEO,  Clicker Wants To Be Your Web TV Search Engine – They’re Mine. He writes that Clicker solved his frustration in finding out what is on the Web after he dropped cable. Jeremy gives the example of searcing for his favorite show, Lost. It “reveals a host of options.  The first thing you’ll notice are some brief stats:  there are apparently 129 episodes of Lost available online for free, with another 86 available for purchase.”  Plus there was a lot of related content on the same theme.

This is a nice discovery and one that will make Web video content much more attractive to me. It is the same concept that led to the design of TVissimo to address the issue of what is on in broadcast television and our listing of selected Web video sites such as Hulu. It will be interesting to see how Clicker evolve as the Web and broadcast TV continue to converge. 

Demand for TV and Web Convergence on the Rise

Rob Paterson recently wrote about TV and Radio and the web on the Fats Forward blog. He reported some interesting survey data. The desire to hook up their TV to the Web is rising in US Internet users. In 2009, the percentage of US interest users that would like to hook up their TV to the Web:  ages 14-26 – 74%,, ages 27-43 – 71%, ages, 44-62 – 59%, and ages 63-75 – 46%. In talking with a number of people in their 20s and 30s, they say that they only watch TV in the OnDemand mode. I have tried this and it was a great way to watch and tape the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Concert.

Rob wrote that he has cancelled his cable access and has been connecting directly to the web for 2 months now. He writes that the reasons for doing this are: greater control, , no ads, no paying for unwanted content, and plenty of good Web TV content. Also the the pathways there – iTunes, Veoh, YouTube are good enough and getting better. He uses a simple mini connector on his MacBook to link to his TV set and uses the screen management feature to synch the screens. I can do the same on one of my TV sets, the one I purchased in 2009. Rob adds that in 2010 even these simple technical hurdles will go away.

Rob predicts that in 2011 the Web will be the channel for TV. Others have said it will happen in 2010. For example, eMarketer CEO Geoff Ramsey writes in his 2010 Predictions Round-Up, “The Consumer Electronics Show in early 2010 will usher in TVs with direct Internet connectivity, or with on-screen access to content portals such as YouTube, Blockbuster and Netflix. As online video becomes intertwined with the living-room TV experience, download and streaming services will take on a prominent role in the home entertainment ecosystem.”

I am looking forward to this as I watch Van Morrison’s live performance of Astral Weeks on my TV through DVD. It should only get better. 

TV Rose in Popularity in 2009

Television does not seem to be suffering the same way as the newspaper,  its older mainstream media cousin. Deloitte’s 2009 “State of the Media Democracy” survey reports a 26 percent increase in the Americans choosing TV as their favorite type of media compared to the previous year. This is likely influenced by the recession. More than 70 percent of those surveyed rank watching TV in their top three favorite media activities. When ranked alongside activities such as surfing the Web, listening to music or reading, 34 percent of consumers place it at the top. This is a substantial increase from last year and more than double those selecting the number two choice, the Web, which came in at 14 percent. 

When watching their favorite TV shows, 86 percent of respondents prefer watching on their television set, either live, via their DVR/TiVo, or using an “On Demand” feature.  While less than 10 percent of Americans say they prefer watching the same content online, a growing number of consumers are using online platforms to watch their favorite TV shows. 

Consumers are watching close to 18 hours of television programming on their home TV in a typical seven day week — up notably from less than 16 hours last year. Looking at the interest in TV – Web convergence, 65 percent of respondents would like to be able to easily connect their home TV to the Internet so that they can view videos or downloaded content. This is a significant trend that has gained strength over the last three years. Of course, the reverse could occur with more TV on computers.  A move in this direction would allow for more search and data mining capabilities. 

The report also looked at advertising. TV still holds strong here with 83 percent of consumers identifying TV advertising as one of the top three media with the most impact on their buying decisions.  In the online world, over half of all U.S. consumers believe that online customer reviews and ratings influence their buying decisions more than any other type of online advertising, and 51 percent have purchased products based on an online recommendation. In addition, 24 percent of U.S. consumers would like to have an online service that recommends a product based on other consumers’ preferences.

Boxee Brings Us a Set-Top Box

Boxee is software that lets you watch media from the internet or your local hard disk. VentureBeat reported in, 2010’s hottest contenders: 8 products to watch, that it announced that it will sell a set-top box. It went on to write that as devices on which TV can be seen will proliferate, Boxee can potentially expand into not just your home TV, but also cell phone, mobile TV, and car TV. This is more likely because Boxee is primarily a software solution unlike some of its competitors. If Boxee can create a compelling solution for these other platforms, and strike partnerships with content producers and hardware vendors, it can become the central platform for the internet TV. There are a lot of ifs here but it more likely that the Nets making the playoffs.

A second post, 3 reasons TV is about to get a facelift, that when Boxee delivers its promised box, you will “able to watch MTV Music, Youtube, CNN, MLB.com, and several other internet “channels” seamlessly on my TV. That’s a game changer.” It certainly seems so. I might go get one for my biggest screen TV. . 

Sagan Predicts TV Survival Means Hyper-Local Online Video

The MediaPost recently reported that Akamai Technologies CEO Paul Sagan warns that television is about to experience the equivalent of the Big Bang, Akamai Technologies facilitates more than one-fifth of the world's Web traffic so they have a good view on the subject. What will cause this transformation? The article states that, “the ability to match high-def TV picture quality with Internet interactivity is creating a sea change for online video that will begin rippling through the television industry in 2010. Only TV station owners that leap to the new arena, playing the strength of their hyper-local connections, will survive.”

I am reminded that is a past transformation when the telegraph appeared, the news outlets of the day came together to form the Associated Press to capitalize on the new technology and share its promise.  It does not seem that a similar event will happen here. Now it is everyone for themselves.

Traditional television content producers and distributors that are among Akamai's deep client base are in peril according to Sagan. The audiences for this content are rapidly moving to the Web. The article goes on to report that, “too many broadcasters are obsessing about cannibalizing their content instead of using the efficiency and convenience of interactivity to expand their local power base. While increasing numbers of TV stations are going online with real-time and on-demand local news, sports and other live events, they do not have the interactive online advertising in place to fully monetize their content.”

This sounds like what happen to the Rocky Mountain News.  There is a way out. Take advantage of the ability of the Web to address the long tail of specialized content.  The large players are global and generic. Sagan says that “the window is still open for broadcasters to create long- and short-form programming that -- when expertly presented and searchable -- can be monetized and generate a new audience and new revenues.”

However making effective use of interactive advertising is essential for hyperlocal online broadcasting to become a viable business.  They are not there yet but must make the transformation to realize this opportunity. The increased complexity of programming could benefit from a comprehensive television search capability such as TVissimo. 

More Predictions on TV and the Web for 2010

Peter Cashmore, CEO of the popular analyst site, Mashable, recently shared his 10 Web trends to watch in 2010 with CNN. One of the ten concerned, Internet TV and movies. Peter predicted:

“Is 2010 the year the majority of our television starts coming to us via the Internet? There's certainly more activity here than at any other time: Among the early-adopter set, Hulu, Boxee, Apple TV and Netflix's Roku box lead the field."

Hulu in particular has sustained remarkable growth this year, while the movie studios are getting on board with the launch of Epix, a Hulu for films.”

This is consistent with Steve Rubel’s predictions for 2010 in Forbes we covered last week. Tvissimo is designed to work well in this environment and provides content information on Hulu and other web providers. 

Will 2010 be the Year of Social TV?

This is the time of year for predictions and Steve Rubel predicts that television will integrate social media (see: What To Watch In 2010: Social TV). Television has always been a focal point for conversations. It is a common experience that people often like to discuss. New media work often get a great start when they offer new ways to do this we have been doing all along.  So far social media and television have been largely separate e. People certain talk about TV on the Web and through social media but the is discussion has not been integrated into the TV set itself. Now this will change as I have been discussing on this blog from time to time.

Oprah is getting in on it so we know it is big.  There will be the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN), a joint venture between Discovery Communications and Oprah Winfrey launching January 2011. This goes along with her departure from traditional TV. OWN is betting that the hundreds of thousands of viewers that have participated in Oprah's Webcasts will partake in other social experiences. And that social TV, more so than the Web, "could provide the right vehicle for advertisers who want to combine the reach and audio-visual power of television with the engagement and two-way dialogue offered by social media," said Robert Tercek, president of digital media for OWN quoted by Rubel.

Mark Kroese, general manager in the advertising business group of Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division, believes that Oprah's departure from network TV is a sign of the times. Rubel quotes him. "The lines between television, video and gaming are beginning to blur," wrote Kroese on Microsoft's blog. "When the entertainment history books are written, and the long, inexorable decline of The Big Four (networks) is a well-documented Harvard Business School case, I think we're going to look at the creation of OWN as the tipping point. And I predict 2010 will be the year that most major brand advertisers shift substantial portions of their budgets toward more targeted, measurable, engaging and accountable mediums."

It will not just be traditional television sets that will be more social. The gamers are getting involved. In October, XBox Live updated the platform to pull in users' Facebook and Twitter streams. Rubel writes that already, it's a hit. Microsoft last month said more than 2 million Xbox Live users logged into Facebook.  Next we may have social refrigerators where we can discuss what to cook for tonight, There are already social scales that lets us share the outcome of these meals (see Tweeting Your Weight - But Not Mine). 

The Race is on for Clickable TV

TV has always been a "push" medium, where its content and advertising is pushed out to its mass audience. With the introduction of Web 2.0 with social media and user-generated content, a major paradigm shift has occurred with the introduced "pull" marketing, where a two-way dialogue allowed users to identify and control the content they found meaningful. Ron Callari writes about the Race for Clickable TV to develop a two way capability for television.

Ron notes that "while the evolution of TV has taken more than 60 years to make this transition, the internet has moved from contextual ads (banner advertising) and behavioral targeting (user clicks) to consumer-generated content in less than a decade."   The is relatively fast for both as it took over 2,000 years to make use of an index in book publishing. Every new media takes time to have people discover its potential but this evolution seems to be getting s with new medium.

Clickable TV will naturally accelerate the convergence of the Web and TV.  Ron writes that BackChannelMedia invented Clickable Television, and according to the founder Michael Kokernak, "other interactive services are being launched by several companies that could complement BackChannelMedia's product and service." Michael also notes that, "Verizon FIOS and DirectTV are both launching TV widgets. Whereas Canoe Ventures, a consortium of the five largest cable companies, also have plans for further research and development in this space."

Clickable TV's developments also taking advantage of the recent US transition from analog to digital-only broadcast. It works like this, when cable companies download BackChannelMedia's software, they can use the data stream to link TV content to web pages/ Then consumers can control through what happens with one click of the button on their remote control.

This will certainly set the stage of Web services to better support TV such as TVissimo's Tv schedule search capabilities.  We look forward to it. 

Will We Get iTunes TV in 2010?

Here is more on 2010 predictions. I am a great fan of Apple. I have a Mac, and iPod, and an iPhone. Now there are rumors about Apple taking its already big iTunes library of TV shows and its Apple TV hardware device and greatly expanding what content they offer and what they can do. Rumors are surfacing in such posts as: 2010’s hottest contenders: 8 products to watch, iTunes turned the music market on its head. Could iTunes TV do the same for TV?, and more aggressively, Apple May Be On The Verge Of Kneecapping The Cable Industry. Finally. This move would certainly enhance the convergence of TV and the Web I have been discussing from time to time.

Venture Beat writes that iTunes TV is “likely to do for TV what iPod did for music industry. Apple, as usual, will bundle the service with its hardware to sell more Apple TVs. In the meantime, better broadband speeds and dedicated hardware will make the internet-TV watching experience comparable to TV quality on cable. Key, however, will be Apple’s ability to get content producers on board.”

There are a number of hurdles here. For now the Apple TV hardware device has limited functionality. I looked at it myself in an Apple store and could not see the reason to get one yet.  However, this could change if Apple was able to bring in more quality content partnerships. They could do what they do with music: break even on the content to sell more hardware. This hardware could be several devices, just as iTunes music is a driver of iPhone sales as well as iPod sales. Apple has the best hardware (outside of TV sets), including computers, iPhones, and iPods to play the TV shows.

I am listing to iTunes on my computer as I type this and play iTunes on my iPhone in my car or whenever else I am away form my computer.  Goodbye CD player. I already have a big screen monitor next to my laptop when I am home. Will these devices also become my TV player?  Of course I would need a lot more memory but that is likely doable. Another option mentioned is to move iTunes(TV) to the cloud.

Once all these delivery issues get worked out, the strategy of cheap content to sell hardware would allow Apple to give better deals to the quality channel provides than the cable companies.  However, expect a knock down drag out fight here. The cable companies have seen what Apple did in the music industry. Hopefully the consumer comes out the winner here and quality content gets good distribution. 2010 will be an interesting year to see what happens in this space.

 

Will Computers Replace TV or Will TV Sets Replace Computers?

As broadcast television and online video continues to converge, will we be watching TV shows on our computer or will we be surfing the net on our TV? Paul Graham places his bets on the computer in the post, Why TV Lost. He writes, “About twenty years ago people noticed computers and TV were on a collision course and started to speculate about what they'd produce when they converged. We now know the answer: computers. It's clear now that even by using the word "convergence" we were giving TV too much credit. This won't be convergence so much as replacement. People may still watch things they call "TV shows," but they'll watch them mostly on computers.”

Paul attributes the victory of computers over television sets to four factors. The first reason is the open market place created by the Web. Anyone can build what they what so innovation and speed is on the side of computers. This make sense so far.

Second, is Moore's Law, which has worked its usual magic on Internet bandwidth allowing for fast access to video. (see my post, Will Phones, TVs, Music Players and Computers Really Converge by 2017 and ReadWriteWeb, In 8 Years, Online Video Consumption Will be Measured in Exabytes). One other winner might actually be the hand held device formerly known as the telephone.

Paul writes that the third reason computers won is piracy. Users prefer it not only because it's free, but because it's more convenient. YouTube has already trained a new generation of viewers (off all ages) that the best place to watch shows is on a computer screen.

He writes that these first three are predictable. The fourth, and less predictable one, is social media. We have already written about social media can enhance television (see for example, Social Media Changing Late Night TV Landscape and More). People like to discuss and share their views on shows and other things than appear on television such as political and sports events. Social media offers the means to do this.

This is also why we designed TVissimo to let you know what is on television through your computer but also to use social media such as twitter and even old fashion email to share your favorites and receive alerts to upcoming shows. We agree with Paul.

He closes with an interesting point. Television shows will change dramatically when they come through the Web. He writes, “On the Internet there's no reason to keep their current format, or even the fact that they have a single format. We'll get whatever the most imaginative people can cook up. That's why the Internet won.”

Television through computers will basically be a new medium. The networks will no longer be gatekeepers but that is just the start. Radio first offered stage shows and television first offered radio shows until the new medium found its own capabilities. I wonder what “television” through computers will do?

Comcast Preparing for TV Web Convergence with NBC Merger

The well-publicized attempt by Comcast to acquire several cable networks (such as CNBC, Bravo, and the USA Network), a leading Hollywood movie studio (Universal Pictures), and a major broadcast television network (NBC) will impact how we watch television.  However, it may be that forces are in play that will drive these changes and Comcast is just positioning itself to between ride the new wave as TV and the Web converge.

Mark Guarino at the Christian Science Monitor recently discussed the move in “Three ways the Comcast-NBC merger could change television.” He outlines these impacts: more content, fewer subscriptions since the new company would have both Hulu and Fancast to access online content. There will also be more ne-stop viewing. Like AT&T, Verizon, and other carriers, Comcast offers bundled deals involving broadband internet, cable, mobile, and landline phones. Finally there will be more online viewing outside the television. Comcast will be able to integrate its cable, Internet, and mobile phone services with its new library of content, allowing subscribers to access a vast number of TV shows and movies in new ways.

All of these impacts reflects the Web – TV convergence and will only provide further support for it. I found the quote from Paul Levinson, a media analyst at Fordham University in New York especially telling, “In the next five years, more people will be seeing ‘The Tonight Show’ online than on their television sets.” The convergence will be so extensive that in 10 or 15 years, we won’t be talking television screen versus online because they’ll all be the same screens.”  This is what we have been saying for some time and it sets the stage for an online TV schedule search engine such as TVissimo.

We look forward to seeing how this unfolds. Rick Munarriz, senior analyst for The Motley Fool noted that some 95 percent of Comcast’s current revenue comes from cable subscriptions – a business model that is “not sustainable,” he says. Targeted ad revenue can come through a search engine such as TVissimo as it knows what people are looking for and obtains a profile to match against these moves. 

The Web overtakes TV to become biggest advertising sector in UK

The UK has become the first major economy where advertisers spend more on internet advertising than on television advertising, with a record £1.75bn online spend in the first six months of the year according to the Guardian.  The paper notes that this change marks a watershed for the embattled TV industry, the leading ad medium in the UK for almost half a century (or perhaps a waterloo). It has taken the internet little more than a decade to become the biggest advertising sector in the UK.

It is somewhat ironic to read this in another embattled media that is being challenged by the Web (see for example, Who killed the Rocky Mountain News? John Temple at WebCom 2009).  The Guardina reports that the Web now accounts for 23.5% of all advertising money spent in the UK, while TV ad spend accounts for 21.9% of marketing budgets. I wonder what percentage traditional print newspapers account for.  Also, it would be interesting to see what portion of the Web advertising comes from online versions of newspapers.

Newspapers are starting to participate more in Web ad revenues as a way to stay in business. TV could do the same with online services such as the type of TV schedule search that TVIssimo offers. It can be very targeted to local areas and specialized interests based on what people search for. 

Online Video Moving Closer to Television?

Here is another angle on the convergence of TV and the Web. The digital marketing firm eConsultancy asks the question, Is online video destined to look like television programming? They quote Brian Stelter in The New York Times today: "News Web sites are starting to look a lot less like newspapers and a lot more like television." Brian also writes that online ads are booming, if they’re attached to a video.

They report that traditional television has been impacted by commercial fast-forwarding, but with online it does not work quite the same way. And as much as people complain about pre-roll ads, they are increasingly watch them instead of skipping through them.

Digital video earned $477 million in revenue in the first half of 2009, which is an increase of 38% from the same time period last year. By online standards this may seem small as online search is estimated to be a $10 billion market this year. However, this growth is good news for struggling media companies. Especially since online views are not poaching traditional TV viewers. During the daytime, online is popular, but at night viewers are switching to television. I think people will switch to online videos as a diversion while working on their computers but will prefer the bigger TV screen for more devoted recreational viewing.

I have written elsewhere that traditional media cannot not simply reproduce itself on new media (see Here is a Creative Blend of Mainstream Media and Social Media and The Misplaced Fear of the Mainstream Media) and this post agrees. It points out that in the longterm, merely reproducing TV content online at a quicker pace is not likely save the networks. They quote Todd Teresi, chief revenue officer at Quantcast: "We need to get to solutions that are as elegant as search. The power of the search marketplace is that Google does not sit there and tell you what you should buy. Google gave people control. That fundamentally is why that marketplace works so well."

I wonder if traditional TV will ever gives us the same control and the online world? It could be a very powerful move. Will hardware be the driver or content?  (see TV Moving Closer to Mobile Phones and the Web).

TVissimo applies search to TV scheduling and can potentially bring that focused revenue model to the table. 

A Counter View on Internet TV Convergence and a New Hope

Matt Richtel offers a counter view in his New York Times article, What Convergence? TV’s Hesitant March to the Net. Matt pointsout that you find the Web on almost all the screens we use today except perhaps the biggest one in our lives, the television. He writes that there is movement by chip makers to spur a new generation of TVs with full browser capability, like a personal computer. Intel released its own TV-centric chip in October 2008 and many other semiconductor designers and manufacturers are following them. However, Matt adds that television manufacturers such as Sony and Sharp do not seem to want this TV and Web convergence to occur. They claim that people are not ready for this. We find that hard to believe.

Matt speculates that television viewers do not want Web viruses to infect their TV during the Super Bowl, a valid point. He adds that TV viewers are used to a passive relationship with their TV and would not want to have the active involvement the Web brings. We think most people would welcome it. He also writes that TV manufacturers do not want to added cot of adding TV functionality to an already thin margin activity. Perhaps so but that is punishing the consumer. Let them decide.

For these reasons few TV manufacturers are using the new Intel chip. We think the winners will be the ones who do. TV makers risk losing control of the process if they do not figure out a solution soon enough. Perhaps cable boxes will allow for a work around. There is hope as Gordon Campbell’s new company, Personal Web Systems, is now shipping its first product, a $150 adapter that will attach to televisions to make them fully Internet-enabled. They are reducing the technology included in the TV adapter device into a single stamp-size semiconductor that would enable full Internet access in TVs in more developed markets. We see promise here.

TV Moves Closer to the Web and Mobile Phones

I asked, Will Phones, TV, Music Player, and Computers Really Converge? Information Week ran an article, Comcast Pushing TV To Phones, that addresses part of this question. Comcast CFO Michael Angelakis said it would eventually allow its cable television subscribers to watch shows via the Web at no additional charge. This would also be open to cell phones via a mobile browser, or potentially as applications on devices like iPhone or BlackBerry smartphones. Angelakis also said he could envision the company's On Demand video service having a wireless component in the future.

So here is more evidence of TV moving to both computers and mobile phones. Information Week said that “mobile television services have long been popular in markets like Japan, but the service has yet to significantly take off in the United States despite strong investments from the likes of AT&T and Verizon Wireless. One inhibitor of this service is that it has generally carried a monthly fee of $10 or more, but there are signs that the market is poised to grow.”

Other carriers like Sprint are getting into the act. If it Comcast adds wireless voice services, it will be able to offer customers the "quadruple play," where one company provides users with home telephone, mobile phone, cable TV, and Internet services. Others can already do this. If these services are offered by one provider, it will also increase the likelihood of the services coming through the same hardware device.

TV and Internet Simultaneous Use Continues to Rise: What Does It Mean?

Nielsen recently reported that 57 percent of TV viewers in the U.S. who have Internet access use both mediums at the same time at least once a month. That translates to more than 128 million U.S. consumers (see Viewers hunger for Web and TV at same time: study). This is yet more evidence of the TV Web convergence.

Because of this trend, TV industry executives and marketers are considering ways to adjust their broadcast shows and play into viewers' simultaneous use of the Internet. One medium can be used to reinforce the other. Broadcasters hope some viewers will turn to the Web to learn more about their shows, but they have to be wary of losing the attention of their viewers. The Nielsen study found the average TV viewer who uses the Internet simultaneously does that for 2 hours and 40 minutes a month, and that 28 percent of the time they are on the Web at home, they are also watching television.

Based on my own sample of one, most of the time the viewer is just multi-tasking and there is no connection between the TV viewing and the Web use. That is the case as I watch sports on TV while I write this post. However, the two channels are open, the first step toward taking advantage of the dual channels. You can encourage people to look up background information on TV shows and check schedules, something I have done on a number of occasions.

At some point the channels may converge on the same hardware (see Will Phones, TV, Music Player, and Computers Really Converge?). Nielsen said even as viewership of videos on the Internet and on mobile phones increases, Americans still prefer to watch video on their television, as shown by how many more hours they spend in front of the tube. It will take some more innovation in technology and creativity in programming to realize the complete convergence. These are the issues we are working on at TVissimo.

Will Phones, TVs, Music Players and Computers Really Converge by 2017

Good thing I got my iPhone. According to ReadWriteWeb in 8 Years, Online Video Consumption Will be Measured in Exabytes. They say that one exabyte is a billion gigabytes. Oh well, I should have gotten the 32 gigabyte model. Coda, the U.K.-based research firm claims that mobile broadband users accessing the net via laptops and netbooks will consume 1.8 exabytes of video per month.

ReadWriteWeb says that the bandwidth problem will get worst before it gets better, but it will get better. Thye go on toe argue that bandwidth speeds have accounted for many of the major revolutions the internet has seen including the abundance of high-speed data connections in 2005 that made the video-sharing site YouTube a hit. Then by 2007, Hulu, was launched as a video-streaming site for commercial content in an effort to compete with pirated peer-to-peer downloads as well as iTunes, which by now was serving up TV shows and full-length movies. Next, in 2008, the launch of the 3G iPhone brought the high-speed internet to the mobile phone and my iPhone.

Ironically, the major use for my iPhone so far, besides being a telephone, is a greater mobile music player. I now use it instead of a car radio or CD player and now have music wherever I am with no need for electricity or wifi. I have my entire iTunes library on the iPhone. I should have gotten the 32 byte version, then I could do movies and downloaded TV shows better.

Now they predict that by 2017 with the promise of 4G, the mobile phone could deliver things like live streaming HDTV. It will really no longer be called a phone and the convergence of computers, TV, and telecom will be close to complete. We may look back at today and wonder what it was like when these devices and channels were separated.

Stanford Debate: Will Web and Television Converge?

Here is an interesting debate on the convergence of the Web and Television from Stanford University. There are two people representing both sides. They first point out that television is both a medium and a transmission system. TV is used to refer to the screen that you watch, as well as what you see on that screen. The Web on the other hand is a system for transmitting bits, and is different from the device that receives those bits, the computer. It is not enough to say that you can see TV content on your computer as that is already the case. They point out that “For the two to truly converge the content that can be received by both devices should be the same.”

They go on to say: “First, computers and televisions must be able to be content interchangeable. That is, computers must be able to view and use television content, and televisions must be able to view and receieve Internet content. Second, people must be sufficiently interested in being able to view the same content on both device to make implementation of this interoperability commercially viable.”

I like the pro arguments better. They point out that the more difficult question is whether a television will be able to display web content. This convergence means that the television in the living room will no longer be just a television, but it will be an "information" appliance. Both sides admit that the technology issue are the minor ones and can be solved. It depends on whether people will be able to mentally converge these media. I think it will happen.

TV Web Convergence During the Oscars

Here is some interesting data from last year’s Oscars harvested through Nielsen’s “Convergence Panel” – a sample of homes in which we measure both television and Internet in the same households. A study was done to monitor the people in the panel who were simultaneously following the Oscars on live television and over the Internet. They found that:

More than 1 in 10 people (11%) watching the Oscars this year did so while logged onto the Internet. This is nearly four times greater than the normal rate of simultaneous usage they observe.

While there was some expected surfing to places like IMDB for more information on movies, the true winner of the night was Facebook. People who used Facebook during the broadcast used it for an average of 76 minutes. This compares to a little more than 30 minutes on average for MySpace, and just a little more than 20 minutes for the major portals. People who used Facebook while watching the Oscars watched about 50% more of the broadcast than the average Oscar viewer.

Also more than 100,000 messages were sent via Twitter during the broadcast - that’s more than 400 message per minute, or nearly 7 per second. Tweets came in from all over the world in a range of languages. It was a true world wide event and yet the content reflected what you might find in conversations in the average living room.

We discussed the possibilities earlier in the post, Twitter and TV – a Good Combination – Making TV More Social. It seems that twittering about TV while watching is not limited to the Oscars. Darren Waters in a BBC blog post, TV becomes social again, discussed how, “Last night I was watching Eurovision with Twitter running on my
laptop. In real time, my Twitter friends and I shared comments and made observations about the event as it was happening. Twitter was being used to extend the experience of watching the event together, but also for people to share links to sites with backstory, or explainers etc.”

The possibilities are interesting. In fact according to the Wall Street Journal, Verizon is working making Twitter feeds available on TV screens to its FIOS subscribers as we reported in Twitter Coming to TV? What is next?

As Television and Computers Convergence Search Becomes More Important

Tom Wilde recent wrote in Search As Television’s Savior? that one critical need for the new multi-screen reality (when people use computers and TV at the same time) is “a new metaphor for programming, and this is where search can play a vital role.” He points out that users are increasingly in control of the content they consume so search is the perfect approach to delivering individualized content discovery. To be successful publishers need to be aware of how their content is discovered and organized across the multi-screen reality.

He goes on to outline some useful search optimization techniques. Having a robust search capability such as provided within TVissimo is another way to bring more control to users. Having both is the ideal way to go. Nielsen Research came out with interesting statistics on overall video consumption last week indicating that total TV consumption reached record levels when considering traditional broadcast video, time shifted video, web video and mobile video. People want to the content ad they do not want to miss what is important to them. The web gives them an increased desire for control. Search can put more of this control in their hands.

Google’s Moves TV Web Convergence Closer with Purchase of Video Compression Provider On2

Google recently purchased video compression provider On2 Technologies for about $106.5M. As Gartner’s Andrew Frank writes, this is a “relatively small sum in the heady world of Internet valuations, for a company that’s been steadily losing money on less than $20M in annual revenue.” However, they have an interesting technology and the On2 purchase may be the clear signal of the plans Google has to enable video beyond the computer, taking it out of the home office and into the living room.

Google appears to want to be a player in the future of television. They must believe that video distribution to TVs and mobile devices will evolve to be more like the Web, Google favorite playground. So far in video, however, Google has admitted that profit from YouTube has proven more elusive than originally thought.

YouTube has been slow to get off the computer and penetrate home television, where the real money is. Working with microprocessor designer MIPS Technologies, Google has already positioned Android for set-top deployment, while also raising its involvement with addressable TV advertising with pioneer Visible World.

Andrew Frank outlines three things benefits form the On2 purchase:

First, Google gets some important embedded infrastructure through On2. It brings a wealth of online video distributor relationships who have been licensing its technology for some time, including Adobe, whose Flash platform continues to power the majority of online video Sun Microsystems, whose JavaFX platform is embedded in the infrastructure of most standard advanced television platforms.

Second, it’s important to Google’s home television goals that the public Internet continues to develop into a reliable way to deliver high-definition video to TVs in a “net-neutral” way: in other words, without cable, satellite, or IPTV telcos charging for quality of service or otherwise limiting video access to screens.

Third, as Google moves to balance control of video standards among companies that include Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe, ownership of On2 gives them leverage to ensure its platforms (Android, Chrome browser, Chrome OS, Apps and Gears) include native video capabilities that are independent of control or licensing by any of its potential competitors.

See Frank’s post for more details. We look forward to see where this goes. A player like Google can certainly make things happen.

Verizon Looking to Sell TV Programs for Computer Use

According to Bloomberg News, Verizon’s FiOS television service will soon start offering applications for a fee through its new online store, taking a cue from Apple Inc.’s approach to selling virtual games and tools. It is also exploring the expansion of its rights to offer TV shows and other content over multiple devices so it can beam TV programs to laptops and other mobile devices and it may work on the project with Verizon Wireless. Verizon believes that next year is going to be a big year for a broad variety of content on different devices, another signal of the convergence of TV and the Web.

When Will Web TV Really Take Advantage of the Web?

The New York Times reported again on the increasing convergence of TV and the Web, in Rise of Web Video, Beyond 2-Minute Clips. Brina Stelter wrote, “When motion pictures were invented at the end of the 19th century, most films were shorter than a minute, because of the limitations of technology. A little more than a hundred years later when Web videos were introduced, they were also cut short, but for social as well as technical reasons.”

We always tend to first use new media like old media. In this case, we were reluctant to first use Web TV like broadcast TV for the reasons noted. Now broadcast TV is increasingly moving to the Web. The article says that by some “estimates, one in four Internet customers now uses Hulu, an online home for NBC and Fox shows, every month. “Dancing With the Stars,” the popular ABC reality show, draws almost two million viewers on ABC.com, according to Nielsen.”

It goes on to quote Dina Kaplan, the co-founder of Blip.tv, “People are getting more comfortable, for better or for worse, bringing a computer to bed with them.” I have not done this yet even though I have a TV in viewing distance of bed. However, this newer trend is doing what is usually done, simply using the new medium to convey content form the old medium. The first book captured the current version of the epic poems of Homer.

The next move is the take advantage of what the new medium offers. This should happen now that the money and audiences of TV are starting to migrate to the Web. This is what we are doing at TVissimo but proving a comprehensive search tool to explore television schedules.

Watch Shows and Movies on YouTube

You Tube has announce a new destination for television shows and an improved destination for movies on YouTube. They are working with partners like Crackle, CBS, MGM, Lionsgate, Starz and many others to provide thousands of television episodes and hundreds of movies to watch. You can also do the other YouTube social functions such as comments, favorites, and sharing.

This addition is one of many efforts underway at You Tube to expand the offerings from bedroom vlogs and citizen journalism reports to music videos and full-length films and TV shows. 

To help navigate through all this content, they are also introducing two new tabs to the YouTube masthead: the "Shows" tab allows you to browse shows by genre, network, title and popularity, while the "Subscriptions" tab will grant logged-in users one-click access to fresh content from their favorite creators. 



There is also a wider roll-out of in-stream ads, which they have been testing since October, to support their shows and movies content -- not unlike what you might see when viewing this type of content on TV. The difference between the Web and TV continues to blur.

Web TV Revenues Up In 2008

Liz Gannes reported that according to a new report on the U.S. content market by Convergence Consulting, TV networks made $1.63 billion on web advertising last year. This amounted to 2.4 percent of total U.S. broadcast and cable TV advertising revenue, which Convergence pegged at $66 $67.6 billion. The web figure increased from $1.27 billion in 2007, and it includes both display and video advertising on everything from local news to full-episode viewing of prime-time shows.

Convergence estimates online ad revenue will nearly double by 2011, to $3.23 billion, or 4.6 percent of total TV ad revenue. They forecast that the growth will be driven more by increasing usage than increasing volume of ads; Convergence thinks 4 minutes per half hour is the max people will tolerate online.

We found more interesting that on average, 15 percent of people who watch TV on a weekly basis also watched full episodes online in 2008. That number is expected to rise to 24 percent in 2011, a slight bump over last year’s prediction. This is a big shift and will open up new opportunities. They revenue will climb to be closer to the usage numbers as people figure out new ways to monetize this trend.

More Tools to Support Web and TV Convergence

NYConvergence recently posted that Boxee is Now Available for Windows. The online video platform and NYC-based startup, allows users to watch television shows from the Internet on their televisions. It has released an alpha version of its software for Windows. The new version can be downloaded here once you have registered.

In addition, Boxee users will now be able to watch Major League Baseball games live and on-demand from MLB.TV and the company has new content partnerships with Digg, allowing users to watch videos that have been "dugg," and Current TV, making shows, including The Rotten Tomatoes Show, infoMania, Vanguard, and the SuperNews animated series, available to users.

This in an excellent move to further support this convergence.

Twitter Coming to TV?

In yet another example of TV and Web convergence, according to the wall Street Journal, Verizon is working making Twitter feeds available on TV screens to its FIOS subscribers, The WSJ mentioned that Verizon is testing a service that will show a stream of real-time Twitter posts related to the show a viewer is watching. The Twitter TV “widget” is in beta now, and employees are trying it out, but Verizon has bigger plans. It quotes Jen Byrne, director of business development for Verizon, “This seems to be an experience people really want.” I would agree.

Now you can tweet about a TV show while it is happening and see everything on the same screen. Like many other Twitter add-ons, Twitter says it officially has “little to do” with the project.

Twitter May be Joining Reality TV

Twitter may be coming to a television near you according to the Hollywood Reporter. Reveille and Brillstein Entertainment Partners have announced they have partnered with the social-networking and micro-blogging service to develop the first TV series that incorporates Twitter into the action of the show.

The series is created by novelist Amy Ephron, sister of Nora and Delia Ephron, It will feature ordinary people competing while on the trail of celebrities. The Hollywood reporter wrote that the untitled series will be executive produced by Reveille managing directors Mark Koops and Howard T. Owens, Brillstein CEO Jon Liebman and Lee Kernis, Ephron, Kevin J. Foxe and Steven Latham.

"Twitter is transforming the way people communicate -- especially celebrities and their fans," Owens said. Some people feel that the introduction of celebrities has compromised Twitter, others feel that it has given it more exposure. Perhaps both are right but this will certainly take the exposure a step further.

More on Convergence of the Web and TV

Gant Robertson wrote on the movement from the Web to your TV set in the Globe and Mail. He noted that Aux TV will become what is believed to be the first Internet broadcaster to be converted to an actual television station in Canada about a year after it was created online. He added that the “Internet has always been seen as the next frontier for television, but the move by Aux marks a shift in the other direction, where a channel is tested first online, then draws enough of an audience that the cable companies want in.”

We see this movement in both directions continuing as the distinction between TV and the Web continues to blur. They are both channel for video based content and increasingly they are carrying some of the same content. Each channel influences the other. It is nice to see the movement go the other way with Aux TV. Grant notes that In the “fiercely competitive world of television, where dozens of prospective broadcasters vie for placement on the dial, ideas can be tested online without having to first convince regulators or cable and satellite distributors.”

The Web opens up a great sandbox for the low cost exploration of concepts for television. Then the successful ones can migrate to TV and then back again through vehicles like HUlu and Joost. Some high-profile investors are betting on this through Aux TV, including Toronto venture capital firm JLA Ventures and several well-known names in the broadcasting sector, who combined to inject $5-million of capital. I think they are making a safe bet on the trend. We will have to see if the content on Aux TV makes them a real success story.

David Purdy, vice-president of television services at Rogers, expects to see more of the Aux TV model. He is quoted, "I think you're going to see an increasing cross-pollination from TV to PC, and PC to TV…And ultimately everything is going to be available on a mobile device. So where something started, which platform it started out on, is probably not as important." Wise words.

What Television Audiences Can You Reach with Twitter?

I came across an interesting article, TV Twittering: a Subtle Art by Daisy Whitney on TVWeek. She wrote about the social media campaign that Fox ran to promote the TV show, Prison Break. In this case, the studio posted clues on social forums rather than issuing a blatant promotional message. Daisy pointed out this effort was consistent with the findings of a study that suggests networks will likely have more success using social networks for brand building, as Fox did, than for directly driving audience.

The research firm Knowledge Networks reports that Twitter is best used by TV networks to connect to influential people, such as bloggers, reporters and critics, than it is to encourage viewers to tune in at 8 p.m. Despite Twitter's meteoric rise, the service is still only accessed regularly by a small percentage of the population. A recent Nielsen study found that 60% of people who sign up for the service stop using it after one month.

Of course that means that 40% continue and that percentage is becoming part of a bigger pie. However, David Tice, vice president of the media practice at Knowledge Networks was quoted by Daisy, "With Twitter, people don't succeed with the hard sell. It needs to be more subtle.”

This TV story is consistent with what I am seeing in other areas. For example, Wyndstorm used Twitter and a variety of other social media to promote, Moogis, an Allman Brothers inspired music site where you can see concerts among other things. Wyndstorm felt was likely that many of the Allman Brothers fan base are not avid social media users. So they reached out through social media to the people who know have a strong reach to this audience such as Twitter followers of Rolling Stone magazine, bloggers and PR people in the music space, message boards in social networks that fit the demographics of an Allman Brothers fan, and the web communities of similar bands.

Wyndstorm began Twitter conversations (through twitter/moogis) with 50 people in this space that also included NFL radio stations, TV syndicates and IPTV sites, as well as retail ticket sites. After this Twitter campaign and the other social media efforts, 58% incoming traffic to the Moogis site came from sites where they did not have ads and this is not typical.

So they used Twitter to reach influencers and it worked. However, they needed to have an appealing message and product. At least, the Allman Brothers appeals to me. This will not work if all you are offering are the get rich quick on Twitter schemes that seem to be expanding.

Being subtle is also is also key, as I have heard from many others (see for example, Central Desktop Using Twitter for Sales, Service, and Brand Monitoring Conversations).

Social Media Changing Late Night TV Landscape and More

Josh Catone of Mashable recently posted an interesting article, How Social Media is Changing the Late Night TV Landscape. New “Late Night” host Jimmy Fallon is someone you understands the power of social media. His debut was one of the best for a late night show, beating Ferguson’s 2005 premiere, and Jimmy Kimmel’s debut on ABC in 2003. Josh suggests that one of the reasons Fallon might be doing so well, so quickly, is his superior use of social media compared to his competitors.

One of the reasons Fallon might be doing so well, so quickly, is his superior use of social media compared to his competitors. Jimmy is one of the most followed people on Twitter, with just over a million followers. He is how according to Josh:

“In January, when Twitter’s traffic was about 25% of what it is today and largely made up of a more tech-oriented audience, Fallon began making key appearances on web sites whose users are generally active in social media. His CES video with Engadget editor Joshua Topolsky received over 100,000 views, for example, and a week after that he appeared on geek-favorite web video show Diggnation. Later, Fallon invited Diggnation hosts Kevin Rose and Alex Albrecht on his show as guests during its first week, and helped turned a random audience member into a Twitter star (that person’s follower count went from 7 to over 30,000 in just a couple of days). He also won the 2009 “Webby Person of the Year” award for being the celebrity who is “most actively engaging with his audience online.”

This is a brilliant case study and stands in sharp contrast to Dave Letterman’s luddite approach. Why does this matter? Look at what Josh goes on to say: Fallen’s efforts “could be very valuable down the road as more eyeballs shift from the television screen to the computer screen. Because make no mistake, that is slowly happening. In February, Nielsen — the company that measures TV audience numbers — released their first-ever web TV rankings, because as Nielsen Online CEO John Burbank said, people are “using the web like it’s a giant DVR.”

This is spot on and what we are saying here, TV and the Web will merge. Those that understand this will emerge the winners.

Twitter Search vs. Google

I recently came across an interesting article, Twitter and Local Search: A Status Update, by Michael Boland, Search Engine Watch. Michael conveyed the idea that Twitter search brings structure to all the noise on the Web with an index of real time conversations. I agree and now, at times, I get better results on a niche topic through Twitter search than through Google.

Michael points out that while Google spiders are quick to index new content, it still takes hours or days rather than seconds. He adds that's perfectly okay if you're researching a new flat-screen TV, or the history of Mongolia.

But it could be less effective in emergency situations or where to get the best pizza in San Francisco. Twitter search covers conversation, while Google search covers topics. Search is becoming more refined and spreading to more areas. It is the second most common activity on the Web after email. Search needs to continue to evolve to stay up with the rest of the Web. But really struck me was one of the last paragraphs.

“… So what's the message for search engines? Don't become the yellow pages, having gotten fat and happy from years as a de facto standard. Search was born on the heels of other online media, such as email and content portals. Keep sight of how things have evolved and how they'll continue to grow…”

This triggered some thoughts about the state of search for television schedules that we will discuss in our next post. In the meanwhile, when do you use Google search and when do you use twitter search. What has been your experience?

Google TV Ads Goes Online

Google recently announced the beta launch of Google TV Ads Online. This new feature of Google TV Ads lets advertisers place commercials into the ad breaks of TV programs watched online. It works in the same way as Google TV Ads: advertisers can target specific programs and select their cost-per-thousand (CPM) bid. Based on their targets, budget and bid, ads are inserted in the same program breaks that were designed for advertising when the programs first aired.

As Google notes, “these days, many full-length television programs are also available for Internet users to watch online. These programs may appear in various places, including the websites of the networks which originally broadcast them and on other sites that specialize in video content.” This extension of Google TV Ads allows an advertiser to reach the audience of a particular program, no matter whether they're watching on a television or online. This is a good idea.