I have not read any of Secret Invasion. I only buy comics that are collected as graphic novels or trade paper backs. That means I will have to wait until next year to read Secret Invation. I am impressed with Marvel's Embrace Change Campaign. It looks Marvel Comics is finding good ways to use the web to market their comics. Not only do they have a website with a cool video, they also have a twitter account.
I like the video, but I am a little sad it is only a voice over. It is cool that other people make there own videos about Secret Invasion. I would like to see the humans speak telling us that they embraced change. If I had time and friends who read comics I might make a video about how we have embraced change. I just do not have that kind of time or skills.
A few weeks ago I watched a you tube video about cloud computing. From what I can figure, idea of cloud computing is that all of the powerful stuff with computing happens on the server. The idea is a networked world gives more power to the computers. The power is without location. Home computers can be less powerful because the power is all upstream.
A few days ago I read a story of how Energy costs for data centers forecast to leap 13-fold by 2012 If energy costs and energy needs keep on going up, will cloud computing still work? Will increased costs keep this change from happening. One of the problems is that running flash and modern web browsers still need powerful machines. It is not like I can dust off my old windows 98 laptop and make youtube work on it. I am not sure people in this video are thinking about what it cost to run a data center. If they are let me know.
I wish I was an expert on this topic so I would write more about it.
Don't look now Ann Coulter, but you might be singing up to work on the Hillary Clinton campaign. After tonight McCain is looking pretty good tonight. I wonder if Ann Coulter is a person of her word.
I will admit that I am skeptical of the Microsoft Surface computer. It looks like I am not the only one. I think this video really hits the idea head on. I think Microsoft has some good ideas here. I think they are looking at user interface in an interesting way. I think that we will be looking at more ways to integrate computers into our homes in the future.
While the Microsoft demo is interesting, I have a hard time seeing regular people buying a system like this. Unless this is just a UI device you hook up to other computers or this can connect with a PC and an X-Box to get everything to work together, it is pretty useless.
Over the last couple of years the trend of all computing has been portable. People want smart phones and laptops. I understand the desire to reduce the computerness of a computer, but I am not sure what this device will look like in a house. I am not sure what Dell or HP would make to carry this OS.
Microsoft has been trying to get into the connect home for years. Their only success has been the X-Box. You would think that would change the way they view this kind of product, but it does not seem to be true. Some people might say that they only put this out because they need to distract people from the iPhone.
You should watch the video for the O-Phone. I do not think this video is funny because it is making fun of Microsoft. It is funny because it is making fun of marketing. It is making fun of the way people try to promote products. It makes fun of how people take bad designs and try to tell you the design it good. That is why this video is worth watching.
I heard today that the shooter in the Virginia Tech shooting mailed a package to NBC between the first and second shooting. I am now counting the hours from now until someone blames this on YouTube. I expect to hear a commentator to say this happened because of our look at me culture. I am expecting the internet and current youth culture to take a big heap of blame. I think all of that is bull.
This was a sick guy who did not get the help he needed. I do not know if he did not want help or if the system failed. This is someone who was damaged and snapped. This is plain and simple. Seeing the footage from the DVD convinces me he was ill. People like this do not need YouTube to snap.
The problem is that does not answer the question Why did this happen. In the end there is no answer to why. The world just works that way. I am sorry to say.
I have been reading about how NBC Universal and News Corp want to dethrone YouTube and Google as kings of internet video. I think this is pretty funny. I have the feeling that people at NBC and News Corp have no idea what makes YouTube successful. Google did not even have a good idea so they bought them. I think Hollywood thinks they can dictate what will be successful. I think that would be a big mistake. I have some advice for this new site. I know that Hollywood is not good at taking advice, but I will give it anyway.
1) On the internet Short is Big
There is a line from the story that jumped right out at me.
When it launches in the summer, the new venture will feature thousands of hours of full-length TV shows and videos for free on AOL, MSN, MySpace and Yahoo shortly after they appear on television networks.
The networks have to remember that there is more than one way to show the same show. When it comes to shows like The Tonight Show, Saturday Night Live, The Simpsons, Family Guy, make sure you cut the shows into segments. It is often single joke of segments that people want to see. If there is a really funny skit on Saturday Night Live, let me see just that skit. Don't make me see the whole show to see it. This is why the Daily Show has been so popular on You Tube.
2) Viral is King
To be honest, the networks do not do a good job at getting me to watch network shows. They also do not do a good job of getting me to network websites. Let me do an exchange table for you.
1 conversation about a clip on the internet = 10 emails about that clip 1 email from a friend = 10 friends blog posts 1 Friends blog post is = 10 Strangers blog posts 1 stranger blog post is = 10 mentions in the media 1 mention in the media = 100 promos on TV.
As much as the promos during the Daily Show tell me to visit their web site, it takes people telling me about "The Internet is not a Dump Truck" for me to visit it. A friend telling me I will like something carries a lot more weight than some network shill telling me it is really cool.
The other important thing about Viral Marketing is that the public decides what is good. The site just puts the clips up and people get to make up their mind. The problem with network TV is that people feel they have no input into the programing. The site just needs to give the users the tools to decide what to watch.
3) Give me Something Special
Since you own the show you can give people extra content. A site like this is the perfect place for special features. Behind the scenes, director commentary, extra content, deleted scenes, alternate endings. All of those things you can try out here. As a bonus you can reuse this footage for the DVDs later.
4) User Control is Important
If I was to run one of these sites, I would give the users a lot of power. The ability to link to the content is really important. That is my biggest problem with the Comedy Central site. I cannot get to specific content.
You also need to give users the ability to embed content on blogs and other web sites. This will help your users find and share content. The long tale is all about users helping users find content. Hollywood should not look past that. This is a great way to leverage content.
If I was running one of these sites, I would give the users the ability to upload content. They should be able to upload their content and parody content. Content like Nobody's Watching would be perfect. It would be great to see Nobody's Watching 24 parody next to actual 24 content.
I would even give users the ability to upload my content to the site. If I was running a site for the Tonight Show or Late Night, I would let the users decide what clips should be up there. Let them be part of the action and they will market for you. I think this is one of the keys that makes You Tube compelling.
I know Hollywood will not take any of my advice. I know that the average marketer will not agree with any idea that is not their idea. Knowing all that, I am still willing to give my advice for free.
Someone in the office bought a Mooninite sign. This one is from Portland not Boston. It is a nice piece of handy work. This is not just a cheap thing. They spent some money on this.
Looking at it I cannot figure out how someone thought it was a bomb. Yes it has batteries and LEDs. It had no where for explosives to be. I know it was hanging on walls, but I just don't see it.
There are lots of funny videos on YouTube about this. Seeing this just shows me how the media is changing. I know that YouTube is a secondary media. They are taking the news and commenting on it again. I wonder if anyone in the regular media looks at this and change the way they look at the way they do their job. My guess is that they do not so far. Maybe they will in the future. This is one of my favorites.
All of this makes me wonder what will come of this. Personally I hope that it makes people think more
It should not suprise you that YouTube/Google and Copyright holders have diffenet views on the Value of content. People might wonder why a company would walk away from something like YouTube. A fraction of a cent per stream is a lot more than nothing, but you need to think like a copyright holder.
Principles matter - Copyright holders don't engage in logical debates about the 'value' of their content. They own it and they establish the value. They have the law on their side and they want their money. It is the principle of getting paid for their work, for every use, that matters. Dick Parsons of Time Warner said "If you let one thing ignore your rights as an owner it makes it much more difficult to defend those rights when the next guy comes along."
The question is can one or two fo the big eight break away and change the dynamic. I am not sure if that would change the world or not.
I think of the reasons that YouTube has taken off so much is because the users have so much freedom. I am not sure what will happen to a site like this if the customers do not have that level of freedom.
I was at the SFlickr meetup and ... was asking people for a definition of Web 2.0. At first no one could define it. I said that web 2.0 is just tags. The were only one succinct answer, Web 2.0 web sites are focused around user contributed content.
I was struck at how easy that answer was. If I think about the Web 2.0 sites that I use, they are about about user content. Look at YouTube, Yepp, del.icio.us, dodgeball, Upcoming.org, and Flickr. All of the interactions on these sites are about users sharing information. There is nothing to share information about if there is no content.
I think something has changed in the way people have been using the internet over the last two years. About four years ago users started to take control again. Now websites are trying to fine way to give users control in ways that are useful. I think that is what Web 2.0 really is.
There are lots of things which I do not agree with Henry Rollins about, but this is not one. I really hope that Ann takes Henry up on his offer. That would be a great couple.
