Along with No, You Shut Up w/Paul F. Tompkins, there could be a more than welcome trend of traditionally live action shows parodied with a real life host and puppets starting to come around.
Our first bit of press!
Dear sports writers, knock off the crap! While the “obstruction game” will be talked about for years to come- it is NOT as devastating as 1986 or 2003. (I think it was worse in terms of the manager) but this it NOT life altering, this will NOT haunt Red Sox fan base for the rest of our lives- do you know why? Because WE WON IT ALL.. TWICE!! 1978, 1986, 2003 haunted us because we were so close to finally winning it. Now that we have- it’s simply confusing and unfortunate- but that’s all. Enough with the sensationalist BS.
If you are a “Web series” creator and you are still insisting that House of Cards is a “web series” and this Emmy win will help your series get made, your sort of clueless.
Netflix is a network like HBO, NBC, CBS, FOX, ABC and Showtime. You watch all of them on your TV, your ipad, your phone, Roku, PS3, XBox. All of them have multi-million dollar budgets. All of them hire professional show runners. Content is content. And no, sorry, none of them want your 10 part zombie geek girl series that you shot on your 5D.
Netflix’s House of Cards has gotten 9 well deserved Emmy nominations. I have been reading many articles and blogs this morning about how this is a victory for web series and everything has changed! It hasn’t.
House of Cards is NOT a “web series” or “online series” That term refers to independently made content, made for pennies by people who knew the web was the next great place for content. But that was 10 years ago. 5 years ago. OK, a year ago. Now, it’s simply “content.”
For House of Cards, Netflix is not making this for pennies with unknowns, instead they are using the HBO model: great showrunners, great actors, great writers, pay them a whole lot of money and stay out of the way as they make great content.
Netflix like HBO is a pay model. It happens to not need a cable or sattelite connection, but then again what does these days? You can watch most anything on your tablet, computer, Roku but in the end- it still better look good on a 52” TV or what’s the point?
There is no more “TV” there is simply content and delivery systems.
Congrats to House of Cards, it is one of the best series out there- but web creators don’t kid yourself, it is not a “web series” it is what it is, great content.
The best part about Android phones, the thing that blew away the iphone was the navigation app. Real time traffic, on the fly change of directions for best route. Just easy and safe to use while driving and always exact with its estimated time of arrival.
For some reason, yesterday, Google updated the app to be exactly like the iphone app- losing every bit of functionality that set it apart from all other navigation apps.
It is now difficult to use, no on the fly change of routes, the UI sucks- it’s a mess and it made me not only 15 min late for a meeting- but I almost got in 3 accidents trying to use the damn thing.
Kids: Never use a phone while driving (My lawyers made me throw that in)
Many Android users are pretty pissed, go look at the MAP reviews in the Play Store.
Apple stock looks like a good deal again.
The big share today seems to be the Jimmy Kimmel tricking people at Coachella video “Lie Witness News- Coachella 2013”
The hipsters attending are asked about a fake band and we get to see their moronic reaction. But is that really what we are seeing?
Anyone with any sort of production background immediately sees and hears some hints that the trick is on us, not on the people being interviewed.
Jimmy begins by explaining that “We asked them about a bunch of bands whose names we made up.”
We then cut to 2 girls who are asked about “Dr Schlomo and the GI Clinic” The girls nod there heads “They’re amazing”
But what got my attention isn’t their answer- it’s that clearly they are not actually being asked about this band. The interviewers questions are all done in post.
Listen to the interviewer again, it is very clear, she doesn’t sound at all like she is there in the moment.
How can I tell - a few simple ways:
- Her voice is very clear, it doesn’t sound like she is even in the same place.
- Her mic never moves. She could have had a lav on but the sound would still not be that clear. Man on the street is always back and forth mic.
- The way her hand is when she talks doesn’t move. We all move our hands in someway or another. This is oddly static asking questions or not.
- The angle of the camera is the big give away. It’s an odd angle for a man in the street interview and the first thing that struck me. We never see the interviewer and we always have this hand there, that doesn’t really move when the girl talks.
- The people being interviewed never repeat the name of the band.
I would like to give Kimmel’s producers credit for turning the trick on us “Aren’t they dumb” becomes “Aren’t we dumb” when we all realize we were duped- but it doesn’t seem like this is what they were going for based on Jimmy’s intro.
While Coachella has turned from a premiere music festival into a big VIP party for brands, you still should understand, it’s not the people being interviewed that are the dumb ones here.
Now, they certainly could have had to do ADR in post after since she didn’t move her mic and sound wasn’t picking her up- so in that case I’m the dumb one.
Think before you share. Production knowledge will always be your friend. (or something corny like that)
Notice anything odd about this photo? Look closely.
The subscriber count is gone. Granted I have not updated to the newest YouTube look of the moment yet, but even there, it’s fairly tiny.
For years we have been told that the only thing that mattered on YouTube was subscriber count. But those who worked closely with YouTube as our primary source of business realized that subscribers over the past year were starting to lose their effectiveness. If we were lucky 10-15% of a sub base actually watched a video.
Tay Zonday had a great article about this recently: http://newmediarockstars.com/2013/02/lies-my-youtube-subscriber-count-told-me-op-ed/ (Lies My YouTube Subscriber Count Told Me (Op-Ed)
I have been wondering out loud and on panels over the past few years, “When will YouTube get rid of subscribers? It’s obvious that YouTube wants to grow, and they need to grow.”
And people thought I was nuts.
Why would they possibly get rid of subscribers that have been the backbone of YouTube since 2006?
Let’s take a very quick look at how I see YouTube. (Your thoughts may vary)
YouTube’s biggest returning fan base seems to be young kids from 8-13 who love and idolize their favorite Youtubers. (Just go to VidCon and you’ll understand) It’s a huge base that gives each YouTube star millions of views per video, sometimes rivaling that of network and cable TV shows.
But, is it a good business model? Will 8yr olds who love Machinima videogame walk thrus or 13 year olds who want to see more Smosh videos use Google TV? Will they buy a product that is advertised on YouTube? Can a product like Lexus successfully advertise to the Top subscribed YouTube channels?
And will the coveted 18-49 yr olds who have money, want to watch vloggers like Jenna Marbles on their 52” TV?
But they will watch high quality long form programming like House of Cards.
And YouTube knows this, and knows they had to do something about it.
First they gave money to celebrities and production companies. The celebs BTW had no idea how to use YouTube or how to make content for $300 a minute- so that essentially failed. (Sorry Shaq)
Then they changed the analytics so it no longer favored some of the top YouTube channels in terms of recommended videos
And then they began purging those YouTube celebrity subscriber bases.
And now this.
Simple little changes this are pointing to a bigger picture.
YouTube is growing up and they need their viewers to grow up as well.
Getting rid of subscribers would level the entire playing field back to square one.
Is this what YouTube is doing?
If it is- how do they get retention? Google event calendar integration? Maybe, top featured channels like a DirecTV and everyone else is just sort of hoping to get shared?
What are your thoughts?
Very interesting article showing true reach to subscriber bases on YouTube.
Many companies, brands and even casting agents now look at social media numbers to make decisions on who to work with. These numbers are fairly easy to “fake”/ buy/ whatever you want to call the unethical practice of pumping up your popularity.
With Streamin’ Garage I myself have fallen into the trap of hiring / working with based on social media numbers. “If we can get them on the show- we’ll get huge numbers on YouTube!” It rarely happens. And all too many times we had on a guest or band with 6 figure followers that didn’t come close to delivering 6 figure video views- or even 6 re-tweets.
How can you tell if numbers are real? Well on Facebook if you see a company or brand has 100,000 “likes” yet when they post they only get a handful of comments, you can bet these likes were bought.
Same goes for Twitter. An easy way to tell, search @(Username) If that user has 100,000 followers yet no one ever tweets back to them- then they may as well have 100 followers.
Why do companies do this? For the same reason record labels focused on 1 hit wonder pop boy bands. It’s a quick hit that makes it look like your company is successful, and look how well it worked for the record companies. (cough)