Free Dating Site    

Now can all the people who can live without TV live without their computer and these forums???

Well now home entertainment was my baby's wish
So I hopped into town for a satellite dish
I tied it to the top of my Japanese car
I came home and I pointed it out into the stars
A message came back from the great beyond
There's fifty-seven channels and nothin' on

Well we might'a made some friends with some billionaires
We might'a got all nice and friendly
If we'd made it upstairs
All I got was a note that said "Bye-bye John
Our love is fifty-seven channels and nothin' on"

So I bought a .44 magnum it was solid steel cast
And in the blessed name of Elvis well I just let it blast
'Til my TV lay in pieces there at my feet
And they busted me for disturbin' the almighty peace
Judge said "What you got in your defense son?"
"Fifty-seven channels and nothin' on"
I can see by your eyes friend you're just about gone
Fifty-seven channels and nothin' on...
Fifty-seven channels and nothin'


Copyright © 1992 Bruce Springsteen (ASCAP)

I grew up when TV was first invented and it was a major family activity. We would all sit around and watch Disney and then Ed Sullivan on Sunday nights. We watched the Olympics for the first time on TV. We watched man landing on the moon. We watched educational TV shows about Hawaii's volcanos and earthquakes and polar bears and wolves. We watched Laugh In and Archie Bunker.

" McLuhan's theory was that a medium affects the society in which it plays a role not by the content delivered over the medium, but by the characteristics of the medium itself. McLuhan pointed to the light bulb as a clear demonstration of this concept. A light bulb does not have content in the way that a newspaper has articles or a television has programs, yet it is a medium that has a social effect; that is, a light bulb enables people to create spaces during nighttime that would otherwise be enveloped by darkness. He describes the light bulb as a medium without any content. McLuhan states that "a light bulb creates an environment by its mere presence." More controversially, he postulated that content had little effect on society –- in other words, it did not matter if television broadcasts children's shows or violent programming, to illustrate one example -– the effect of television on society would be identical. He noted that all media have characteristics that engage the viewer in different ways; for instance, a passage in a book could be reread at will, but a movie had to be screened again in its entirety to study any individual part of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan

Television is passive and the Internet is active. This is rule #1 in understanding the trout we're trying to catch, and I cannot possibly overstate its importance. The person with a hand on the mouse is absolutely in charge. You will not, can not overcome this reality. The instant you attempt to sidestep this truth, you've lost the user - and likely for a very long time. Internet users don't want to be held by the hand. They want to use what they've been taught, not sit through lectures they don't need. Nowhere is this truer than with local weather. Give me the forecast, but let me play with the toys you use.

Broadcasters are used to having it their way. They determine what people watch, when they watch it, the number of commercials they have to endure, and so forth. Broadcasters originally denied the influence of remote control devices only to learn that a great many people click the moment their program goes to a commercial break. I know many people who watch several programs at once by simply switching back and forth during commercials. The control an Internet user has is far, far greater than one equipped merely with a remote.

None of the fundamental assumptions of broadcasting apply with the Internet. It's a completely different communications medium. For example:

* All things to all people. The fundamental reality about broadcasting assumes that a single entity can provide programming that will serve the masses. It worked in the early days of TV, but the extent to which broadcasters cling to this belief in the 21st century amazes me. The Internet works on the basis of narrowcasting, but even the 'casting' is erroneous thinking.

* Daypart programming. The Internet allows people to do what they want when they want it. And given the staggering numbers of people who access the Web on-the-job, it's critically important that information providers realize that 'once-a-day' simply can't and won't work. The Internet is 24/7, something smart providers understand completely.

* Managing audience flow. The audience will manage itself, thank you very much. While I think it's possible to promote upcoming events, etc., it's dangerous to do so DURING the process of serving the user's entertainment or information wants and needs. Always remember rule #1. You, as a provider, are not in charge.

* Commercial interruptions. I was in broadcasting when we actually used this term. I like it, because it's honest. It speaks the truth about selling on TV. Programming is interrupted for commercials. Attempts to do this on the Internet are ultimately self-defeating, because of rule #1. I'm a strong supporter of Flash ads on the Web, but the extent to which they interrupt the user's experience is a massive turn-off. There are ways to use the technology to create wonderfully effective ads without interfering with the user's experience. The most important person a station could hire would be the top Flash person in the market to work with the sales department in creating such ads.

* Homogeneity of product. What's slowly killing television news would kill Internet video news even quicker. Information providers simply must tailor their presentations to be hyper-local, and that includes a deep respect for the personality and tastes of the community being served.

* People follow people. This is a critical truth for broadcasters to understand. Given its nature and ability to reach mass audiences, broadcasting has done more to create and maintain celebrities than any medium ever created. It's been a symbiotic relationship since broadcasting first came on the scene, but the nature of the Internet means an information provider doesn't need celebrities to provide quality information to users. This is a bitter pill to swallow, but to Internet users, a quick and easy method of getting information is more important than developing a relationship with the people providing the information. I believe there will always be a place for storytellers in the video news business, but the days of the star anchor are surely numbered.

* More is better. Reach and frequency don't apply, no matter what your mind tells you. You don't need a mass audience to be successful. You merely need to help sponsors sell their products. In fact, the 'more is better' mindset will actually block creative attempts to do business on the Web. This means an entirely new advertising paradigm, but that's the subject of another essay.

* Captive audience. This one directly relates to rule #1. Broadcasters' processes and procedures are built on the assumption that when a viewer is on their channel, they are - at least for the moment - theirs to serve. Nowhere is this more evident than when stations interrupt programming for news bulletins or weather events. The Internet offers ways to alert users without interrupting their experience, and news providers would be wise to accept that.

For the time being, Internet users are above-average in intelligence. The current television-programming trend of appealing to the lowest common denominator is a recipe for disaster on the Internet. Always remember than the mouse is far more powerful than the remote control.

http://www.tvspy.com/nexttv/nexttvcolumn.cfm?t_
nexttv_id=1741&page=1&t_content_cat_id=30