It’s my shortest blog of the year – but I think the point is solid.
Here’s just one of the many reasons from NYMAG.com
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Lloyd Blankfein Is A Douche
The Emmys Are A Joke
I had to interrupt my summer hiatus (I’m working on a book so I haven’t been posting in this space for a few weeks) to say the Emmys Are A Joke.
I’m not talking about the nominations – for the most part, it’s the same actors year after year after year. TV comedy is in big trouble. The only broadcast shows nominated are getting really old. New comedy doesn’t exist on broadcast.
But that’s not at all the point I want to make it.
This is my point:Â “HOUSE OF CARDS” IS NOT A TELEVISION SHOW!
It is a series of webisodes.
High-quality webisodes.
It was not produced for television…
It did not air on a television network…
It is not a television show.
“House of Cards” is an internet series produced for online and mobile delivery. The last time I checked, TV shows are produced and distributed for satellite, cable and over-the-air broadcast networks.
The TV Academy can’t just cherry pick internet webisodes that it likes and call them TV shows.
And the TV Academy shouldn’t be claiming the Internet as their own – even though on their website they say: “The Television Academy, the only major organization devoted to the television and broadband screen entertainment industry…”
In reality, they have as much claim over the Internet as I do.
And it would be impossible for the guys in the TV Academy to watch all of the content produced for the Internet (so, to make it easy on themselves, they just give the nominations to Internet content that features big stars – Kevin Spacey, Jason Bateman, Zach Galifinakis, etc.).
Can you imagine these TV Academy members sitting with their iPads watching every series produced by comedy improv troupes around the freakin’ world? “Hey, did you guys see this one from some guys in Des Moines that make fun of working in an office? It’s hysterical! It should nominated for an Emmy!”
On top of that, the TV Academy refuses (because of arrogance) to even acknowledge The CW as a legitimate producer of programming (how “The Gilmore Girls” on old The WB never got a nomination is still one of the great injustices in entertainment history – and that’s no platitude) and yet they’ll throw a few nominations to Netflix to prove some kind of point. To show that the TV Academy is aware of the future and is very much on the cutting edge of content production.
But they’re not. When you think of the TV Academy – you still think it’s just a room of old white guys longing for the days of Norman Lear and the three powerful networks that everyone watched. Remember when the cable industry had to form their own pathetic award show (the Cable ACE Awards) because the TV Academy didn’t allow cable shows to be nominated?
Now, anyone can be nominated for an Emmy. Maybe I’ll produce a series of webisodes about my dog and submit it for consideration. It won’t even be looked at because my dog doesn’t look like Kevin Spacey.
You never know, maybe the TV Academy is changing with the times – and if they are – maybe they should change their name.
“The Transmedia Academy Of Arts & Sciences!”
Now THAT has a ring to it.
A couple of years ago, I wrote “Broadcast Networks: On Death And Dying” to illustrate that Broadcast Networks are in complete denial that one day they will just be another button on the grid – the master grid that gives equal weight to every type of format imaginable on our connected TVs (broadcast, cable, YouTube, Netflix, games, family videos… everything equal).
Ted Sarandos of Netflix is absolutely correct when he says: “Television is what’s on the screen – not how it gets there.”
But that doesn’t mean “House of Cards” should get an Emmy nomination.
It’s not a TV show!
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
The Integrity Of Golf?
The PGA and professional golf, in general, is an absolute joke.
How many times during The Masters did we hear that Tiger Woods should withdraw himself from the tournament in order to protect the ‘integrity of golf’?
This is such bullshit.
First of all, the officials missed the call and it wasn’t until after Woods gave an interview that some caller alerted the Augusta Nationalist (my spelling) Golf Club officials that Woods incriminated himself.
Some caller? I can imagine this was the way the scene played out:
Augusta National Golf Course – 19th Hole
Inside a paneled lounge, several white men with southern drawls are drinking scotch and smoking cigars. There is a general laughter that never seems to die down.
Suddenly, a perspiring office worker bursts into the lounge.
OFFICE WORKER: Gentlemen, someone has just called and said Tiger Woods admitted during an interview to stepping back a yard to take a drop.
An Augusta Member (we’ll call him Scooter) drops his smile.
SCOOTER: Aw, Bubby, can’t ya see we’re having our scotch and smoking our cigars. Tiger’s a good ol’ boy and a surprisingly good golfer.
OFFICE WORKER: But more people are calling in. And they’re Tweeting, too!
Another member (we’ll call him Hootie) puts down his scotch and turns grave.
HOOTIE:Â Tweetin’? Gentlemen, we had better address this issue. Can someone please get a copy of that videotape or film of this interview and set it up in the Hogan Room anti-chamber for our immediate review? Bring your glasses, gentlemen. I have decided that scotch will be allowed for one time only in the Hogan Room.
Etc etc etc (I could go on forever with these guys).
We all know what happened. Tiger got a retroactive two stroke penalty and basically was removed from the tournament – at least in spirit. Commentators no longer praised his play or got excited when he made a good shot.
Golf Channel analysts called his decision to keep playing a disgrace and an error in judgment that will follow him the rest of his career and taint his legacy.
Oh, really? What would have made the situation right?
Maybe they should have put him in stocks outside of Butler Cabin for the duration of the tournament and he could have been released by the new champion.
Maybe Tiger should have performed hara-kiri like a Japanese samurai on the 18th green because of what he has done to the great game of golf.
Has the great game of golf and its legacy of racism and exclusionary policies really taken a hit here?
You know what hurts the integrity of golf? The Augusta National Golf Club and its past policy of excluding women and minorities and doing VERY LITTLE to correct the problem (adding Lynn Swan and Condoleezza Rice doesn’t really get you there).
You know what hurts the integrity of golf? The hypocrisy of all those who point a finger at Tiger Woods for cheating on his wife when half the field at The Masters is on wife number 2 or 3 or 4 – with countless girlfriends in between (or during).
You know what hurts the integrity of golf? Old white men commenting that the sole black golfer competing in the tournament should quit when you know they wouldn’t ask that of Fred Couples if he committed the same infraction.
You know what hurts the integrity of golf? Playing a tournament at a club that was founded by a man – Cliff Roberts, the first Augusta Chairman – who once said: “As long as I’m alive, all the golfers will be white and all the caddies will be black.”
You know what hurts the integrity of golf? Those crappy looking green jackets that are mythologized to appear as though they were made by the hands of God.
The Masters – ‘a tradition like no other’ – and golf, in general – had better change its ways or it will be going the way of the dinosaur and the Republican party before too long.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
The Pathetic, Sleazy World Of Facebook ‘Likes’
Companies who believe that having millions of “Likes” on Facebook is important to their bottom line have it absolutely wrong.
 “Liking” Coke or “Liking” The Avengers on Facebook isn’t going to make a person drink more Coke or see The Avengers more times – it just means they’re going to get nothing but product blasts for the rest of their lives.
I would argue it might actually make you drink less Coke because you’re so fucking annoyed with the relentless marketing from the Coca-Cola Company.
Social media would be incredibly valuable if companies would just leave it alone, make products people really like (not “Like”) and stay out of our faces.
People talking with each other (real people) and texting and emailing and chatting, etc. is the greatest marketing tool ever invented (and it wasn’t actually invented by anyone – save God). And companies are figuring out new and clever ways to fuck that up.
If you mention in your status that you are running out to Starbucks – there is really good chance your Picture and Status Update will appear in one of your friends News Feed as ads.
So, you are now, unwittingly, a Corporate Shill for Starbucks. Most people don’t like to be Corporate Shills. The term “Corporate Shill” is not a term of endearment. It makes your real friends hate you just a little bit more than they did before you pushed a product on them.
I did a little experiment over the past month. I decided to accept everyone who requested to be my friend on Facebook –Â http://www.facebook.com/jill.kennedy.5095
I had my own little circle of work colleagues and college friends (around 30) – but decided to accept all comers in the hope that I could expand the number of “Likes” on my newly-created Company page –Â http://www.facebook.com/MankaBros
So I accepted and sort of went begging for “Likes” as so many people do. “If you ‘Like’ my page I’ll like your ebook or Erotic Blacklight Art Page in return…'” etc. etc. etc.
This was an eye-opening and humiliating experience – I now have 768 Friends (and counting) and not many “Likes.”Â
But, surprise, suddenly there was pornography in my News Feed.
There was every kind of racist Poke imaginable. Scary sexually advances. (And, to be fair, a few genuinely nice people.)
But, in general, a stunning display of what’s really out there.
Not pretty.
Are these the people Coke wants to “Like” them?
The marketing world’s latest buzz phrase is “Big Data” – gathering everybody’s information. Seriously, there are people out there whose information should never be shared except with some type of law enforcement.
Personally, I can only speak for big media companies (and myself), but I can imagine it applies to every company (and person) out there – be careful what you wish for when you start your social media campaigns because once people “Like” you, they never leave you alone.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
P.S. – “LIKE” ME ON FACEBOOK!” –Â http://www.facebook.com/onmedea
NBC Is Saved!
OK – I know NBC has been on a really bad run lately – but things are definitely looking up!
I just received an email alert from the Hollywood Reporter announcing that Christina Ricci has agreed to star in…
wait for it…
wait for it…
GIRLFRIEND IN A COMA
After 87 years, NBC finally has a show to be proud of.
Bob Greenblatt has proven his brilliance and I can’t to hear what’s next:
Could it be –Â “My Boyfriend’s Got A Nail In His Head”?
“Dad’s Bleeding From The Ass… Again”
“What’s That Thing On Molly’s Face?”
The possibilities are endless.
All joking aside… Here’s who is really in a coma:
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Manti Te’o and the End of Truth
First, an acknowledgement:
This is a quote by Tom Brokow right after the first Gulf War started in 1991 and CNN had the only reporters on the ground during the initial bombing of Bagdad: “CNN used to be called the little network that could. It’s no longer a little network.”
This can now be said of Deadspin.com. “Deadspin.com used to be the schlocky little sports blog that could. It’s no longer a little blog (though still somewhat schlocky).”
As of this writing, the Manti Te’o story has been read over 3,000,000 times on the site – (read it here, it’s awesome). To put it in context, a story about the 34 Hostages killed in Algeria (including Americans) has been read 27,000 times on Gawker (the parent of Deadspin.com).
So congratulations to everyone at Deadspin.com. You win. The rest of sports media loses.
The reporters at Deadspin.com (Timothy Burke and Jack Dickey) said they got an anonymous tip that there was something fishy (my word) about the Manti Te’o girlfriend story. They did an initial Google search and found no stories about his supposed girlfriend (Lennay Kekua) except those that mentioned Manti Te’o. It was as though she only existed through her involvement with Manti Te’o. No other connection or mention. That is fishy.
But there could have been other mentions.
If those who masterminded the hoax had wanted to create old media stories about her and old websites and old social media profiles, etc., they could have. It is so easy to create a false persona that everyone believes is real… they might as well be real.
They could have created a very rich, detailed, full life of Lennay Kekua that would fool everyone. People would say stuff like “oh, good for her,” “oh, I didn’t know that about her,” etc. And they would believe it because they don’t care if she’s real or not. She’s on the internet – so she’s real. End of story.
Everything that everyone says as a fake persona on the internet is true because who is going to investigate it? There aren’t enough Deadspin.coms in the world to look into the millions and millions of fake people out there.
If a fake person says on Facebook “I am eating a hamburger” – who’s going to believe it’s not true. It’s not possible, of course, because fake people can’t eat. But no one is going to question it. Because no one cares.
Everything Deadspin.com writes on the internet is as true as everything the New York Times writes. We may not agree with what they write but we don’t question the validity – there just isn’t enough time (unless it’s The Onion – and who is to say that stuff’s not true).
Deadspin.com’s story of Manti Te’o was actually questioned immediately by “the established media” because Deadspin.com didn’t have a strong journalism reputation (to say the least) and most people never heard of it.
But now, they are a go to source for breaking sports journalism – and, going forward, most won’t question what they write next.
Maybe the writers at Deadspin.com aren’t real either – no one seems to be inquiring about that – but it would be really easy to create “journalist characters” who act like they’re breaking real news stories until one day they actually do break real news and become “legitimate.”
Who is Timothy Burke and Jack Dickey? Sounds fishy to me. Extending it to television, who believes Charlie Rose is real? He looks like he’s been dead for years.
The internet is a fantasy world where people can be happily anonymous or happily real. It’s all the same.
It’s a massively multi-player online role-playing game (MMOPG) that we all play every day of our lives.
And no matter how many times Facebook asked for a phone number or a driver’s license or passport for users on their site to make sure only real people are there, the truth is, 20 or 30% of people there are not real. And never will be real and most of us never question it because we want the fantasy to be reality. We want our dogs to have Twitter accounts. We want to interact with “Shakespeare.”
It looks to me like Manti Te’o got caught up in that world and really fucked up his life in the “real world.”
Lennay Kekua had to die because someone would have eventually wanted to meet her OFFLINE – and that is where there is still some truth in the world.
Online, there is no truth and there never will be – and that’s the way we like it.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
NICKMOM – R.I.P.
It’s very possible Nickmom will set the record for the world’s shortest running network.
There is no other option for this laughable disgrace than a total cancellation.
In fact, there are only three absolute certainties in this life:
1) The sun will rise in the east;
2) July 4th will occur every year on… July 4th; and
3) Nickmom will be shut down.
Such a complete creative and business abomination cannot possibly survive.
The tombstone graphic here may be a bit premature but it’s guaranteed to be accurate.
So, for the readers who have no idea what I’m talking about – what is this Nickmom that is almost universally hated by parents (mostly Moms)?
Nickmom is a primetime adult-skewing programming block (airing on the same channel as Nick Junior) designed for exhausted moms looking for a laugh or some edgier entertainment after the kids go to bed.
What’s wrong with that, Jill?
What do you have against exhausted moms looking for a laugh?
Absolutely nothing. I’m a proud exhausted mom myself who loves HBO.
But when you make a corporate decision to put on a programming block of comedians talking about sex and cocktails, shows called “Moms Night Out,” etc. etc. right after “Dora The Explorer” signs off, you clearly do not understand how the media landscape works.
Nickmom starts airing at 4pm in Hawaii for God’s sake! And 7PM in California (which is definitely before my daughter’s bedtime).
The biggest problem I have with Nickmom is not a content issue (though it’s really awful – painful to watch). The biggest problem I have with Nickmom is that it is a stupid idea badly executed.
And the ratings are bearing that out as noted by the Wall Street Journal (this is becoming a national story) – 74% decline in two weeks.
There is also a website that has been launched by angry parents – CancelNickMom.com.
Hey Viacom – are you hearing any of this?
People hate it. Drop it. Bring back “Bubble Guppies!”
I always wonder how these epic fails in business happen. This one is stunning.
Nickmom is an idea obviously hatched by out-of-touch corporate executives who think whatever they throw up on the screen (‘throw up’ being key words) will be gobbled up by the masses. They probably imagined their in-boxs filling up with “Thank yous” from weary, under-entertained moms from around the country.
They probably sat there at lunchtime brain-storming sessions falling off their seats with laughter when the suggestion for a tagline came up… “What about ‘Motherfunny’?” Â “‘Motherfunny’? Oh, my God, that is fucking hilarious! It sounds like “mother fucker” but it’s actually “motherfunny!”
The room cannot stop laughing for several minutes. The coldcuts, fruit plates and cookie platters just sit there as middle-aged men (and a lucky female or two including the female VP in charge of Nickmom) howl with laughter at how awesome they are.
And then a branding exec chimes in: “But it’s perfect for what we’re trying to accomplish. We’re making mothers laugh.”
Another exec: “And no one needs laughs more than mothers!”
A marketing exec chimes in to make it all relevant: “And ‘motherfunny’ gives it that edge we’re looking for. These aren’t your father’s mothers anymore. Advertisers are going to eat this shit up!”
I’m not going to pound the point anymore and this isn’t a cry from a concerned parent who is worried about the moral fabric of our country – I know how to keep bad stuff away from my daughter, thank you.
But, face it, this is a horrible idea and it needs to killed.
And… it will be. Soon. Guaranteed.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Facebook Is Irrelevant
So… Facebook has announced it has passed ONE BILLION USERS.
Sounds like a reason for a huge celebration. What an amazingly awesome global community!
We should all rejoice together because we built it… together!
But unlike the supermarket that rewards its one millionth customer with balloons, gifts and plaques and everyone is so happy for the store, the only reaction to Facebook’s announcement is people commenting “Facebook sucks!” “Are they counting all 10 of my accounts including my dogs?” “I quit Facebook months ago.” etc. etc. etc.
Facebook has a problem and it’s one that it will not overcome.
Facebook is irrelevant.
Nobody cares about it anymore. There are no balloons, no cheers, no tears, just… meh.
Sure, people use it to post photos of drinking, of babies and bike riding for charity but we, the connected world, have moved past that boring old shit that used to be slightly cool.
I’m sure to that comment Facebook would say – “No, no, wait, you’re wrong, Jill – people also post funny sayings and signs that they find amusing.”
Indeed, they’re right. How am I supposed to know I should “have an awesome day” if I didn’t see it posted in the morning by one of my “friends”?
In the past, I have written that Facebook Is Worthless, Overvalued, and Must Be Stopped – but now, I just don’t care about it anymore.
I have become Facebook indifferent – it means absolutely nothing to me.
That’s not the way it was supposed to be.
The swagger and smirking of the executives and investors before the IPO made it seem like this was a company like no other on the planet – a truly game changing experience that would actually… change the world.
The world did not change because of Facebook.
We all have the same problems that generations before us had. Politicians still use the same rhetoric. American flags are still burned at overseas Embassies. Famine and hurricanes still occur.
The only positive thing Facebook ever did was allow us to see what our high school and college friends look like today. It doesn’t mean we’re going to have dinner with them or have an actual conversation. But we do get to see if they got fat. That’s it and I suppose that’s worth something.
During the first Presidential Debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney the social media winner of the night was… Twitter.
Nearly all the media outlets and pundits were talking about what happened on Twitter during the debates. Not Facebook. Not LinkedIn. Not Google Plus.
To be serious, I have no idea how they add their numbers to conclude that one billion people are on Facebook.
Perhaps they should say one billion accounts have been set by about 200 million people? We all know people who have multiple accounts (almost everyone) – accounts for dogs, literary characters and just plain fake names that we all use to hide from our “friends” and supposedly Facebook is cracking down on this practice. (By the way, you can “friend” me here.)
And that’s another reason the site sucks – who wants to be completely real on Facebook?
We’re not trying to get a job. We’re not running for office. We’re just trying to spend a few minutes out of our day looking at drunken babies and trying not to be monetized.
So congratulations, Facebook on one billion users – one billion bored, indifferent, and dissatisfied users.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
P.S. – I just thought of a way Facebook could be relevant… they could buy Twitter.
Should We Believe Facebook’s Earnings?
Today is a big day for FB:NASDAQ.
The first earnings release after a pretty crappy IPO.
Needless to say, earnings and guidance must destroy expectations.
This is important for everyone who has a stake in the company – from those who had blind faith in the IPO and bought whatever meager shares they could, to the early investor billionaires and millionaires who were counting on a lot more than they’ve received thus far (greed’s a real pisser), to all the Facebook employees that have lost a bit of their swagger (and future riches) over the last couple of months.
In fact, Silicon Valley as a whole has lost its swagger a bit because of this IPO flop.
A blow-out earnings report would allow all those who were doubted and shunned to say “nah nah nah nah naaaah – told you so – we rock you suck, etc.”
Which makes me wonder, if, indeed, this is a blow-out earnings report despite what many analysts are predicting (consensus: not a blow-out), should the numbers be believed?
Is there a temptation by management and the number crunchers to goose things a bit for this very important first earnings report? Juggle some things. Move stuff around – make it up later. I’m sure they feel they’re smart enough to get around that little “random regulatory audit thing.”
They’ve got millions of made-up users – why not millions of made-up dollars?
There must be that temptation, right? I mean, how much could the SEC fine be in the scheme of things?
I’m sure the immediate reaction to such a wild, speculative (and probably fictional) premise is – “I’m shocked! Â How dare you presume that Facebook – with its long history of supreme ethics and outstanding morals would even dream of such a thing?”
Maybe it’s just me.
But if we hear on Thursday that there are now over 1 billion users – I’m just not going to believe it (especially when you take out the 200-300 million users that are either animals, aliases or fictional characters).
If they say that people are spending more time than ever on Facebook – I’m just not going to believe it.
If we hear on Thursday that advertising on Facebook has never been better and will continue to grow into 2013 – I’m just not going to believe it.
It is Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg’s job on Thursday is to convince us that things are awesome and getting ‘awesomer’ every day.  And when they say that, I am not going to believe it.
But, truth be told, I am not the most bullish person when it comes to Facebook.
After all, I did write “Facebook And The Disappearing Valuation (A Fairy Tale),” and “Facebook Is Worthless,” and “Facebook Must Be Stopped,” and “All The Facebook’s Men,” and “Advertise On Facebook And Reach More People Than 10 Super Bowls,” and “Facebook To Reach 7.3 Billion Users By 2015,” and “Y Combinator Is a Stupid Idea” (I just threw in that last one for fun).
But you do have to wonder – it is soooooo important NOT to disappoint and pressure is coming from everywhere to make sure that they don’t.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
YouTube’s Original Content Strategy Is Working
That’s a frightening headline for the Hollywood studios.
It wasn’t supposed to work.
It was an ill-planned experiment that was supposed to fail.
Seriously, who would watch that crap?
Well… give one point to Silicon Valley in the Great Content Wars of 2012. Â
(This doesn’t mean I’m giving any sort of credit to that jerk Paul Graham – who issued a war on Hollywood. Â Graham and Y Combinator, in my opinion, represent all that is bad in Silicon Valley.)
When YouTube announced last year that they would put up $100 million dollars to fund original content channels, no one in Hollywood gave it much notice.
What most people expected was something like Paul Rudd walking around, eating Doritos and throwing out non-sequitors.
Basically, that no one would give a shit or watch – and if they did, big companies certainly wouldn’t throw any advertising money at it.
“We’re saving our big dollars for high-quality, professional Hollywood content, goddamnit!” (Imagine them saying it with big cigars  in their mouths for greater effect.)
Cut to one year later and there is something real going on at YouTube – and they are just getting started (see all the “Coming Soon” labels on the left graphic of the channels yet to launch).
Channels are launching with the buzz normally generated for broadcast TV or feature film premieres – and for a lot less money.
Here’s a snapshot of the numbers (July 4, 2012). These are significant numbers.
Granted, this new “premium” content on YouTube is NOTHING EVEN CLOSE to the quality of a major studio feature film or TV series. Â Everything about it screams “slapped together.”
So if that’s true, then why should Hollywood be scared?
Because the generation growing up with YouTube does not distinguish between NBC, ESPN, Hulu, iPhone Apps, etc.
Eyeballs can only look so many places at one time and Broadcast Networks are asking you to keep them locked for three hours at a time (and watch the ads).
That’s fine for my mom (and, frankly, fine for me, too – though my iPhone is in my hand while I watch) but not fine for my daughter.
No chance does she one day turn to me and say “You know what, mom? I’ve become a Broadcast Network junkie. Those shows are what I love to watch the most.”
And this is true all around the world.
The kids who are playing online games, watching videos and surfing around the various social networks are not suddenly going to watch Broadcast Networks when they turn 30.
“Now that I’m older and finished with my wandering gadgets, I’m ready to settle in my easy chair and watch quality programming and check out some of the interesting advertising that happens during those shows.”
Never going to happen.
And, of course, duh, the big media companies know this is never going to happen.
But here’s the kicker: Â Most who grew up with the Internet really don’t care about quality. If they did, Zynga would have never become popular and MP3s would have been shunned immediately for their lack of decent fidelity.
The youth of the world have been raised not to care about such things (of course, I realize there are exceptions).
A couple of years ago, I wrote a piece called  “Broadcast Networks: On Death and Dying” and regardless of the few breakout hits that do exist on Broadcast (which results in big profits from International markets and off-net syndication), it’s really expensive content to produce and it’s just not a long-term strategy.
But don’t get me wrong – studios would be foolish to give up this extremely profitable business model while the market is still there. (“Two Broke Girls” just got $1.5 million an episode from TBS – who could give that up?!)
It’s a real conundrum.
Hollywood studios can’t abandon a dying business when it’s still so profitable. But they can’t plan for the future – because the future is the death of their current business model.
And attempting to replicate what YouTube is doing would be a downright embarrassment for studios used to creating such high-priced, high-quality content.
It would be quite a step down.
Next year is crucial for content business. Trends may become irreversible and the next ten years could become crystal clear.
It is possible that both worlds can exist and make a lot of money (one with super high margins, the other with less).
The ratings for this year’s crop of Broadcast fall premieres will be heavily scrutinized. (October 17 update: Ratings have started off terrible with all networks except NBC experiencing double-digit declines without much hope for improvement.)
New shows need to emerge more than they ever have in the history of television (no platitudes here, man). Syndication pipelines need to remain full with bidding wars from multiple channels and station groups.
If that happens, old media and the current way of operating survives for another five years or so.
If not, there’s only so many more spring upfronts that advertisers will show up for.
Next year, I guarantee, the YouTube upfront presentation will get as much press as CBS’ upfront – regardless of how many more stars CBS pulls onto the stage.
Why is that?
Because it’s new. Â It’s exciting. Â And new and exciting always wins.
And, remember, this is a reality TV world (created by Hollywood) where everyone can be a star.
And now those stars don’t need Hollywood anymore.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea