Google CEO Schmidt takes issue with the idea that the search behemoth is unfairly dominant. It is a giant supercomputer but it's not The Terminator...is it?
BusinessWeek
Google's accelerating lead in search and its moves into traditional advertising are sparking a backlash among rivals. "I don't see the fear," insists Google CEO Eric Schmidt. "There are an awful lot of partners who are busy making a lot of money by virtue of the strategy we adopted."
">Link
Monday, 2 April 2007
Minority Report
Today Media Guardian publish an Ethnic Power List in an attempt to redress the balance against the initially all white Media Guardian 100.
Though I agree this is an important issue and the act of publishing the ethnic list is an important step toward placing some relatively unrepresented individuals within the public sphere. Isn't the point that we have to have two seperate lists the problem. Shouldn't there just be one integrated list that is chosen by a panel with individuals from both white and other ethnic groups?
Link to the full article below.
Monday April 2, 2007The Guardian
It is six years since Greg Dyke, then BBC director general, made his famous "hideously white" comments about the BBC. Since then, the corporation has made significant strides in getting people from ethnic minority backgrounds on screen. Yet at the BBC, and across the British media, the higher reaches of management are almost universally white. Indeed, it is rare to find a black or Asian face in MediaGuardian's annual list of the most 100 powerful people in the British media.
Ethnic minorities make up only 10% of the UK population so it is perfectly understandable that any power list would be dominated by white people. But statistics do not tell the whole story; the British media industry is concentrated on London, where the population is much more diverse. Yet last year's Media 100 had no black or Asian faces. Were we seriously suggesting that no one from any ethnic minority fulfilled the list's criteria - that they should have some kind of "cultural, economic or political influence" in the British media? Where was Sir Trevor McDonald, Meera Syal, Ash Atalla?
With that in mind, and prompted by a suggestion from Lawrence Lartey of Touch magazine, we decided to convene a panel of media observers and practitioners exclusively from ethnic minorities to see if they could come up with names that the Media 100 panel have missed.
">Link
Though I agree this is an important issue and the act of publishing the ethnic list is an important step toward placing some relatively unrepresented individuals within the public sphere. Isn't the point that we have to have two seperate lists the problem. Shouldn't there just be one integrated list that is chosen by a panel with individuals from both white and other ethnic groups?
Link to the full article below.
Monday April 2, 2007The Guardian
It is six years since Greg Dyke, then BBC director general, made his famous "hideously white" comments about the BBC. Since then, the corporation has made significant strides in getting people from ethnic minority backgrounds on screen. Yet at the BBC, and across the British media, the higher reaches of management are almost universally white. Indeed, it is rare to find a black or Asian face in MediaGuardian's annual list of the most 100 powerful people in the British media.
Ethnic minorities make up only 10% of the UK population so it is perfectly understandable that any power list would be dominated by white people. But statistics do not tell the whole story; the British media industry is concentrated on London, where the population is much more diverse. Yet last year's Media 100 had no black or Asian faces. Were we seriously suggesting that no one from any ethnic minority fulfilled the list's criteria - that they should have some kind of "cultural, economic or political influence" in the British media? Where was Sir Trevor McDonald, Meera Syal, Ash Atalla?
With that in mind, and prompted by a suggestion from Lawrence Lartey of Touch magazine, we decided to convene a panel of media observers and practitioners exclusively from ethnic minorities to see if they could come up with names that the Media 100 panel have missed.
">Link
Sunday, 1 April 2007
Digital TV: Recent History & Near Future.
Al Gore may not have actually invented the Internet but he is part of a company whose success is one of many signs heralding a revolution in TV. Not just TV distribution, or TV broadcast or TV features and functionality or TV signal and image quality, but also how TV content is created and produced.
Current TV, a small and premium-only cable TV company, was founded by Al Gore and Joel Hyatt as a channel that would highlight user created content. Nowadays with the phenomenal success of YouTube, that doesn't seem to be such as stretch, but Current TV was founded over a year ago and was instantly lambasted, first by politicos who saw it as a touchy-feely left-leaning network. Then, when it became clear that the channel was completely apolitical, the financial press took over and dumped on its business model and size and potential for making money.
Having lead the charge it appears Al isn't the only one getting in on the act.
Who's been building digital TV?
Niklas Zennstrøm and Janus Friis (The guys who brough us Skype) have been talking about the idea behind Joost for a long time. In early 2006, they started gathering the world's best engineers, web gurus and media visionaries to start building it, under the code name of The Venice Project. More than a year of very hard work later, their vision is ready for public viewing.
In that time, Joost has grown from a handful of people in a small office outside Amsterdam to more than 100 people spread right across Europe and North America. Joost is already a global venture, bringing TV to a global, highly networked community. And according to Joost they're " already...setting new standards for 21st-century entertainment."
So what are the business models they have in place? Where will the proportion of their revenue come from? And in the long run who will benefit?
I asked Amanda Zweerink, Director of Online Community at Current UK.
"Though I’m not at liberty to discuss the details of our financial arrangements, I can tell you that we do have a fairly substantial advertising model in the US, where we have been on air since August 2005. We even have sponsors who allow our viewers to create their advertising, and then air it on the network (and beyond). As we get settled in the UK & Ireland, we’ll be offering similar programs to sponsors and advertisers here."
It is apparent that Current has had a certain amount of success in the states (Recently industry analyst, Derek Baine, with Kagan Research stated that Current TV was already making a small profit and Hyatt has stated publicly that the company is doing much better than expected financially.) while Joost is still finding it's feet in Europe.
The premise behind Current TV is that users create small video – 3 to 7 minutes – upload them and then visitors to the website vote on what videos should make it on to TV. The significance is that this method takes content creation, production and even editorial decisions and puts them in the hands of viewers. And it clearly is a success. Current TV is available to 30 million cable and satellite subscribers and is large enough now to start attracting real advertising revenue.
At the same time, other TV content companies like YouTube are pioneering the creation of content by users although the delivery mechanism is streaming over the Internet and their isn't a clear revenue model yet. Despite that, YouTube has achieved astonishing growth and huge interest from broadcast networks.
But there is also a huge revolution going on in delivery and distribution and in features and functionality. It is already clear that whatever TV and video distribution method wins out, it will involve distribution of IP-based information and traffic. Whether that is streamed, on-demand, over a closed circuit (also called 'walled garden'), wireless, via fiber optic or whatever, it will be packetized.
At every stage, the TV and video industries are undergoing huge transformation. Cable, satellite, telcos, cellular and even media companies are all joining battle to establish the standard delivery platforms. Cable, TV, media, internet and even telco companies are joining battle to establish standard distribution models. If anything, right now there is divergence in these areas rather than convergence.
Consumers and industry participants can expect to see a gradual move toward standardization of the delivery platform and even to some extent the distribution model. But don't expect to see the content and editorial sides of the equation settle down any time soon – rather, Current TV is the simplest and most obvious of the solutions that will be coming to our screens.
More to follow…
Coming up shortly: Revenue Models for Digital TV & Who Benefits?
Nice!
Current TV, a small and premium-only cable TV company, was founded by Al Gore and Joel Hyatt as a channel that would highlight user created content. Nowadays with the phenomenal success of YouTube, that doesn't seem to be such as stretch, but Current TV was founded over a year ago and was instantly lambasted, first by politicos who saw it as a touchy-feely left-leaning network. Then, when it became clear that the channel was completely apolitical, the financial press took over and dumped on its business model and size and potential for making money.
Having lead the charge it appears Al isn't the only one getting in on the act.
Who's been building digital TV?
Niklas Zennstrøm and Janus Friis (The guys who brough us Skype) have been talking about the idea behind Joost for a long time. In early 2006, they started gathering the world's best engineers, web gurus and media visionaries to start building it, under the code name of The Venice Project. More than a year of very hard work later, their vision is ready for public viewing.
In that time, Joost has grown from a handful of people in a small office outside Amsterdam to more than 100 people spread right across Europe and North America. Joost is already a global venture, bringing TV to a global, highly networked community. And according to Joost they're " already...setting new standards for 21st-century entertainment."
So what are the business models they have in place? Where will the proportion of their revenue come from? And in the long run who will benefit?
I asked Amanda Zweerink, Director of Online Community at Current UK.
"Though I’m not at liberty to discuss the details of our financial arrangements, I can tell you that we do have a fairly substantial advertising model in the US, where we have been on air since August 2005. We even have sponsors who allow our viewers to create their advertising, and then air it on the network (and beyond). As we get settled in the UK & Ireland, we’ll be offering similar programs to sponsors and advertisers here."
It is apparent that Current has had a certain amount of success in the states (Recently industry analyst, Derek Baine, with Kagan Research stated that Current TV was already making a small profit and Hyatt has stated publicly that the company is doing much better than expected financially.) while Joost is still finding it's feet in Europe.
The premise behind Current TV is that users create small video – 3 to 7 minutes – upload them and then visitors to the website vote on what videos should make it on to TV. The significance is that this method takes content creation, production and even editorial decisions and puts them in the hands of viewers. And it clearly is a success. Current TV is available to 30 million cable and satellite subscribers and is large enough now to start attracting real advertising revenue.
At the same time, other TV content companies like YouTube are pioneering the creation of content by users although the delivery mechanism is streaming over the Internet and their isn't a clear revenue model yet. Despite that, YouTube has achieved astonishing growth and huge interest from broadcast networks.
But there is also a huge revolution going on in delivery and distribution and in features and functionality. It is already clear that whatever TV and video distribution method wins out, it will involve distribution of IP-based information and traffic. Whether that is streamed, on-demand, over a closed circuit (also called 'walled garden'), wireless, via fiber optic or whatever, it will be packetized.
At every stage, the TV and video industries are undergoing huge transformation. Cable, satellite, telcos, cellular and even media companies are all joining battle to establish the standard delivery platforms. Cable, TV, media, internet and even telco companies are joining battle to establish standard distribution models. If anything, right now there is divergence in these areas rather than convergence.
Consumers and industry participants can expect to see a gradual move toward standardization of the delivery platform and even to some extent the distribution model. But don't expect to see the content and editorial sides of the equation settle down any time soon – rather, Current TV is the simplest and most obvious of the solutions that will be coming to our screens.
More to follow…
Coming up shortly: Revenue Models for Digital TV & Who Benefits?
Nice!
More on democratic media: Internews
Law and Policy
Internews has worked for the adoption and implementation of fair media laws in 21 countries making the transition from a formerly totalitarian or autocratic state towards a more democratic society.
A country's legal infrastructure is a key factor in media's ability to fulfill their "watchdog" function. However, most of the emerging democracies since the early 1990s have completely lacked a legal base that would allow non-governmental media to defend their newfound abilities to present alternative and often critical points of view.
In addition to working for fair media laws, Internews has also helped create 112 national media associations, which advocate for just and open media laws, defend the civil rights of journalists, and promote industry reform.
In post-war Afghanistan, Internews has advised the government and media organizations on setting media policy in which independent media can thrive and journalists can report without fear of government reprisals.
With the involvement of the Journalists' Association of East Timor (TLJA), Internews played an integral role in lobbying the Constituent Assembly to enshrine media freedoms and freedom of speech into the new constitution of East Timor (Timor-Leste).
Internews Network’s U-Media Project in Ukraine founded the Kyiv Media Law Institute to support the development of media law and strengthen democratic standards of freedom of speech and access to information in Ukraine through legislative work, research and education.
Internews Pakistan's media law team is comprised of Pakistan's foremost media law specialists, knowledgeable in such areas as policy formulation and advocacy, broadcast and cable television licensing and regulatory schemes, and broadcasters' and journalists' defense issues. They work with the private broadcast sector, legislators and regulatory authorities to enable an improved media law environment for Pakistan's growing private media sector.
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
Current TV
The TV channel without programmes
By Kevin Young Entertainment reporter, BBC News
A TV channel co-founded by former US Vice-President Al Gore, which relies heavily on its audience to supply its content, has launched in the UK.
But Current TV - running in the US since 2005 - will not broadcast programming in the traditional sense, showcasing instead short films created by the public.
So what will viewers actually see when they tune in?
Imagine you asked a dozen strangers to make a short video describing an unusual aspect of their life, an interest of theirs or a person they considered noteworthy.
Then imagine you watched all 12 films in a row, knowing neither what was coming next nor if it would capture your attention.
This is roughly how it feels to watch an hour of Current TV.
There are several telltale signs that the channel is aimed at impatient young people, or "a media-grazing audience", as one of its executives puts it.
'Shuffled'
Firstly, each "pod" - there are no programmes in the traditional sense - lasts an average of three to eight minutes.
A bar on the screen shows how long has elapsed since that "pod" began, and when the next one is coming along.
And the scheduling is entirely random - or "shuffled", to use the broadcaster's own word - so you never know what to expect.
So far, so iPod - although the management was very careful to avoid references to Apple's iconic portable media player at a news conference to launch the channel.
This random nature means that a satirical animation parodying news events is scheduled beside footage of a "guerilla gardener" who plants flowers at the dead of night to enliven run-down parts of London.
And a hard-hitting interview with a Kenyan prostitute, struggling to feed her children, is followed by "a day in the life" of The Edge, specially filmed by the guitarist's U2 bandmate Bono.
Chart
The main structure to the schedule comes from a mini-chart show every half an hour, which counts down the most popular terms from online search engine Google.
These can revolve around serious topics - the most-read stories on Google News that day, for instance - but at other times, they are more light-hearted, focusing on a particular term linked to topical events.
Some 'pods' might only have a life of an airing or two on the network, and some will air dozens of times over a lengthy period of time. It just depends how popular they are David Newman, President of Programming, Current TV
If Current TV had been running when Forest Whitaker won his Oscar for acting, you imagine it would have dedicated one of the segments to Google's most popular forests.
"And at number three, it's Nottingham Forest..." - you get the idea.
The other thing which viewers should notice about Current TV is how modern it is - or rather, how current, according to its strong, on-screen branding.
The network's name is wrapped around every possible slot, so the Google link-up is known as Google Current and films about serious, topical issues appear under the News Current banner.
People with strong views can be heard on Current Rant, while those describing their unusual interests or activities come under the term Current Maverick. Currently, anyway.
'Fresh material'
Mr Gore, who was heavily involved in the creation of the channel, believes his programming team will not struggle to fill airtime.
"I don't think you'll have the experience of thinking, 'that's repeating too often', because they're going to be tuned in to that.
"Traditionally cable and satellite programming has had a higher repeat rate but there's so much fresh new material," he told the BBC News website.
And the schedulers can quickly arrange the output "according to what they think the British public wants to see", adds David Newman, the channel's president of programming.
"Some 'pods' might only have a life of an airing or two on the network, and some will air dozens of times over a lengthy period of time. It just depends how popular they are."
The opening flurry of material on offer looks promising.
Now the channel must wait to see if this "democratisation" of television proves a hit with UK audiences.
And viewers will be hoping for a consistency in the quality of material offered - ironic, perhaps, for a channel so reliant on unpredictability.
Current TV is available in the UK on Sky Digital channel 229 and Virgin Media channel 155.
By Kevin Young Entertainment reporter, BBC News
A TV channel co-founded by former US Vice-President Al Gore, which relies heavily on its audience to supply its content, has launched in the UK.
But Current TV - running in the US since 2005 - will not broadcast programming in the traditional sense, showcasing instead short films created by the public.
So what will viewers actually see when they tune in?
Imagine you asked a dozen strangers to make a short video describing an unusual aspect of their life, an interest of theirs or a person they considered noteworthy.
Then imagine you watched all 12 films in a row, knowing neither what was coming next nor if it would capture your attention.
This is roughly how it feels to watch an hour of Current TV.
There are several telltale signs that the channel is aimed at impatient young people, or "a media-grazing audience", as one of its executives puts it.
'Shuffled'
Firstly, each "pod" - there are no programmes in the traditional sense - lasts an average of three to eight minutes.
A bar on the screen shows how long has elapsed since that "pod" began, and when the next one is coming along.
And the scheduling is entirely random - or "shuffled", to use the broadcaster's own word - so you never know what to expect.
So far, so iPod - although the management was very careful to avoid references to Apple's iconic portable media player at a news conference to launch the channel.
This random nature means that a satirical animation parodying news events is scheduled beside footage of a "guerilla gardener" who plants flowers at the dead of night to enliven run-down parts of London.
And a hard-hitting interview with a Kenyan prostitute, struggling to feed her children, is followed by "a day in the life" of The Edge, specially filmed by the guitarist's U2 bandmate Bono.
Chart
The main structure to the schedule comes from a mini-chart show every half an hour, which counts down the most popular terms from online search engine Google.
These can revolve around serious topics - the most-read stories on Google News that day, for instance - but at other times, they are more light-hearted, focusing on a particular term linked to topical events.
Some 'pods' might only have a life of an airing or two on the network, and some will air dozens of times over a lengthy period of time. It just depends how popular they are David Newman, President of Programming, Current TV
If Current TV had been running when Forest Whitaker won his Oscar for acting, you imagine it would have dedicated one of the segments to Google's most popular forests.
"And at number three, it's Nottingham Forest..." - you get the idea.
The other thing which viewers should notice about Current TV is how modern it is - or rather, how current, according to its strong, on-screen branding.
The network's name is wrapped around every possible slot, so the Google link-up is known as Google Current and films about serious, topical issues appear under the News Current banner.
People with strong views can be heard on Current Rant, while those describing their unusual interests or activities come under the term Current Maverick. Currently, anyway.
'Fresh material'
Mr Gore, who was heavily involved in the creation of the channel, believes his programming team will not struggle to fill airtime.
"I don't think you'll have the experience of thinking, 'that's repeating too often', because they're going to be tuned in to that.
"Traditionally cable and satellite programming has had a higher repeat rate but there's so much fresh new material," he told the BBC News website.
And the schedulers can quickly arrange the output "according to what they think the British public wants to see", adds David Newman, the channel's president of programming.
"Some 'pods' might only have a life of an airing or two on the network, and some will air dozens of times over a lengthy period of time. It just depends how popular they are."
The opening flurry of material on offer looks promising.
Now the channel must wait to see if this "democratisation" of television proves a hit with UK audiences.
And viewers will be hoping for a consistency in the quality of material offered - ironic, perhaps, for a channel so reliant on unpredictability.
Current TV is available in the UK on Sky Digital channel 229 and Virgin Media channel 155.
Monday, 26 February 2007
UKFC Film Box Office Statistics
Below is a complete archive of the statistics that we have been publishing on the site, for weekend nationwide box office grosses for films released in UK cinemas sorted, latest first. Click the links for details.
The box office grosses are in £ sterling and cover the three day weekend, Friday to Sunday. The statistics show the % increase or decrease in the box office for each film compared to its previous week on release and the cumulative figure represents a film's total cinema box office gross in the UK to date.
Statistics are provided to the UK FILM COUNCIL's Research and Statistics Unit by Nielsen EDI.
You will need Acrobat reader to view files marked 'PDF'. To download these files: PC users - right click on a link and use command 'save target as'; Mac users - sustain a mouse click on a link until the menu appears, then select 'download link to disk'.
(1) 2 3 4 5
UK Film Box Office Feb 16-Feb 18, 2007
UK Film Box Office Feb 09-Feb 11,2007
UK Film Box Office Feb 02-Feb 04, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 26-Jan 28, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 19-Jan 21, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 12-Jan 14, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 05-Jan 07, 2007
UK Film Box Office Dec 29-Dec 31, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 22-Dec 24, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 15-Dec 17, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 08-Dec 10, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 01-Dec 03, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 24-Nov 26, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 17-Nov 19, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 10-Nov 12, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 03-Nov 05, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 27-Oct 29, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 20-Oct 22, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 13-Oct 15, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 06-Oct 08, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 29-Oct 01, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 22-Sep 24, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 15-Sep 17, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 08-Sep 10, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 01-Sep 03, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 25-Aug 27, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 18-Aug 20, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 11-Aug 13, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 04-Aug 06, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 28-Jul 30, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 21-Jul 23, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 14-Jul 16, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 07-Jul 09, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 30-Jul 02, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 23-Jun 25, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 16-Jun 18, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 09-Jun 11, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 02-Jun 04, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 26-May 28, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 19-May 21, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 12-May 14, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 05-May 07, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 28-Apr 30, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 21-Apr 23, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 14-Apr 16, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 07-Apr 09, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 31-Apr 02, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 24-Mar 26, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 17-Mar 19, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 10-Mar 12, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 03-Mar 05, 2006
UK Film Box Office Feb 24-Feb 26, 2006
(1) 2 3 4 5
The box office grosses are in £ sterling and cover the three day weekend, Friday to Sunday. The statistics show the % increase or decrease in the box office for each film compared to its previous week on release and the cumulative figure represents a film's total cinema box office gross in the UK to date.
Statistics are provided to the UK FILM COUNCIL's Research and Statistics Unit by Nielsen EDI.
You will need Acrobat reader to view files marked 'PDF'. To download these files: PC users - right click on a link and use command 'save target as'; Mac users - sustain a mouse click on a link until the menu appears, then select 'download link to disk'.
(1) 2 3 4 5
UK Film Box Office Feb 16-Feb 18, 2007
UK Film Box Office Feb 09-Feb 11,2007
UK Film Box Office Feb 02-Feb 04, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 26-Jan 28, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 19-Jan 21, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 12-Jan 14, 2007
UK Film Box Office Jan 05-Jan 07, 2007
UK Film Box Office Dec 29-Dec 31, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 22-Dec 24, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 15-Dec 17, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 08-Dec 10, 2006
UK Film Box Office Dec 01-Dec 03, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 24-Nov 26, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 17-Nov 19, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 10-Nov 12, 2006
UK Film Box Office Nov 03-Nov 05, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 27-Oct 29, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 20-Oct 22, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 13-Oct 15, 2006
UK Film Box Office Oct 06-Oct 08, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 29-Oct 01, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 22-Sep 24, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 15-Sep 17, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 08-Sep 10, 2006
UK Film Box Office Sep 01-Sep 03, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 25-Aug 27, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 18-Aug 20, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 11-Aug 13, 2006
UK Film Box Office Aug 04-Aug 06, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 28-Jul 30, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 21-Jul 23, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 14-Jul 16, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jul 07-Jul 09, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 30-Jul 02, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 23-Jun 25, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 16-Jun 18, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 09-Jun 11, 2006
UK Film Box Office Jun 02-Jun 04, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 26-May 28, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 19-May 21, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 12-May 14, 2006
UK Film Box Office May 05-May 07, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 28-Apr 30, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 21-Apr 23, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 14-Apr 16, 2006
UK Film Box Office Apr 07-Apr 09, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 31-Apr 02, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 24-Mar 26, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 17-Mar 19, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 10-Mar 12, 2006
UK Film Box Office Mar 03-Mar 05, 2006
UK Film Box Office Feb 24-Feb 26, 2006
(1) 2 3 4 5
YouTube: The talk of Tinseltown
The video upload company is on everyone's lips at a gathering of entertainment and media companies.
By Greg Sandoval Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: March 30, 2006, 1:53 PM PST
SANTA MONICA, Calif.--More than just teenagers and 20-somethings have begun flocking to YouTube, the fast-growing video-sharing site. The 13-month-old company has begun winning fans from within some of the country's largest media outfits.
Executives from heavyweights such as Yahoo, America Online and Turner Broadcasting were buzzing about YouTube's sudden success at the Digital Hollywood conference here this week. Even though it's not clear exactly how YouTube will make money, no company generated as much excitement at the gathering of Hollywood studios, electronics manufacturers and Internet media companies.
High Impact
What's new:
Video upload company YouTube, the latest Net buzz generator, is on the minds of media executives at the Digital Hollywood conference in Santa Monica, Calif.
Bottom line:
YouTube has sped past a host of competitors by tapping the public's thirst for reality programming. But some executives wonder how it plans to fend off the likes of Google, iFilms and Atom Entertainment--and nobody knows how it plans to make money.
During one conference panel discussion, Oren Katzeff, a business development manager at Yahoo, was asked to identify a company that he believed was successfully exploiting broadband technology.
"YouTube is the company that has definitely caught my attention in the last six to eight months," Katzeff told about 60 conference attendees Wednesday. "It's the site my younger sisters just seem to spend hours on."
YouTube has sped past a host of competitors by tapping the public's thirst for reality programming. By mixing some professionally made clips, including music videos and movie trailers, with homemade content, YouTube has seen the number of viewings on the site shoot up from 3 million a day to 30 million since the Web site's December launch, according to YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan.
Not everyone at the conference was impressed, however. Plenty of executives wondered how the San Mateo, Calif., company plans to fend off the likes of Google, iFilms and Atom Entertainment, all of which possess far more resources. And nobody knows how YouTube, which has 20 employees, plans to make money.
There is still no advertising on YouTube; it doesn't charge to view or upload videos; and its executives so far have been mum on their business plan.
Trevor Kaufman, CEO of Schematic, an interactive services firm, also noted skeptically that other Internet companies have temporarily caught fire with the teenage market before flaming out.
"I remember Bolt.com was once the place where all the kids used to go," said Kaufman, referring to the once high-flying community site that has fallen far behind MySpace.com and others. "I just don't know whether the company's brand is going to be able to stand up to others in this space."
Nonetheless, YouTube is proving its popularity. According to numbers provided by traffic-tracking company ComScore Networks, YouTube received 4.2 million unique visitors in February. Those numbers are good enough to outpace Apple Computer's iTunes (3.5 million) and put it within spitting distance of eBaumsworld.com (4.4 million) and AOL Video (4.7 million), both of which have been in business longer.
YouTube received a huge public-relations boost from a minor controversy after two skits from NBC Universal's "Saturday Night Live" appeared on the site. Both clips drew a lot of traffic before YouTube took them down at NBC's request. For the record, YouTube officially denounced piracy and said it has a strict user agreement that prohibits the posting of copyright content.
So, how does the company plan on cashing in on all this popularity?
Supan said that hasn't been decided yet.
"We're experimenting with different business models," she said. "It's not going to be a traditional model, that is for sure. Right now, we don't want to disrupt the user experience. But eventually, we're going to introduce extremely relevant ads that will benefit users and won't disrupt the service."
Lately, the company has indicated that it might attempt to charge entertainment companies to promote content on the site. YouTube announced on Tuesday that it is hosting clips from the E Entertainment channel's satire show "Cybersmack."
"We've been meeting with almost every TV network, record label and movie studio to talk about ways to partner and help them reach a broader demographic," Supan said.
What about Kaufman's suggestion that YouTube could be a flash in the pan?
Katzeff isn't buying it.
"It's scary because those 13- and 15-year-olds watching YouTube today are going to be the 20-year-olds in five years," he said. "I think somehow, you're going to see (YouTube) lasting."
By Greg Sandoval Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: March 30, 2006, 1:53 PM PST
SANTA MONICA, Calif.--More than just teenagers and 20-somethings have begun flocking to YouTube, the fast-growing video-sharing site. The 13-month-old company has begun winning fans from within some of the country's largest media outfits.
Executives from heavyweights such as Yahoo, America Online and Turner Broadcasting were buzzing about YouTube's sudden success at the Digital Hollywood conference here this week. Even though it's not clear exactly how YouTube will make money, no company generated as much excitement at the gathering of Hollywood studios, electronics manufacturers and Internet media companies.
High Impact
What's new:
Video upload company YouTube, the latest Net buzz generator, is on the minds of media executives at the Digital Hollywood conference in Santa Monica, Calif.
Bottom line:
YouTube has sped past a host of competitors by tapping the public's thirst for reality programming. But some executives wonder how it plans to fend off the likes of Google, iFilms and Atom Entertainment--and nobody knows how it plans to make money.
During one conference panel discussion, Oren Katzeff, a business development manager at Yahoo, was asked to identify a company that he believed was successfully exploiting broadband technology.
"YouTube is the company that has definitely caught my attention in the last six to eight months," Katzeff told about 60 conference attendees Wednesday. "It's the site my younger sisters just seem to spend hours on."
YouTube has sped past a host of competitors by tapping the public's thirst for reality programming. By mixing some professionally made clips, including music videos and movie trailers, with homemade content, YouTube has seen the number of viewings on the site shoot up from 3 million a day to 30 million since the Web site's December launch, according to YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan.
Not everyone at the conference was impressed, however. Plenty of executives wondered how the San Mateo, Calif., company plans to fend off the likes of Google, iFilms and Atom Entertainment, all of which possess far more resources. And nobody knows how YouTube, which has 20 employees, plans to make money.
There is still no advertising on YouTube; it doesn't charge to view or upload videos; and its executives so far have been mum on their business plan.
Trevor Kaufman, CEO of Schematic, an interactive services firm, also noted skeptically that other Internet companies have temporarily caught fire with the teenage market before flaming out.
"I remember Bolt.com was once the place where all the kids used to go," said Kaufman, referring to the once high-flying community site that has fallen far behind MySpace.com and others. "I just don't know whether the company's brand is going to be able to stand up to others in this space."
Nonetheless, YouTube is proving its popularity. According to numbers provided by traffic-tracking company ComScore Networks, YouTube received 4.2 million unique visitors in February. Those numbers are good enough to outpace Apple Computer's iTunes (3.5 million) and put it within spitting distance of eBaumsworld.com (4.4 million) and AOL Video (4.7 million), both of which have been in business longer.
YouTube received a huge public-relations boost from a minor controversy after two skits from NBC Universal's "Saturday Night Live" appeared on the site. Both clips drew a lot of traffic before YouTube took them down at NBC's request. For the record, YouTube officially denounced piracy and said it has a strict user agreement that prohibits the posting of copyright content.
So, how does the company plan on cashing in on all this popularity?
Supan said that hasn't been decided yet.
"We're experimenting with different business models," she said. "It's not going to be a traditional model, that is for sure. Right now, we don't want to disrupt the user experience. But eventually, we're going to introduce extremely relevant ads that will benefit users and won't disrupt the service."
Lately, the company has indicated that it might attempt to charge entertainment companies to promote content on the site. YouTube announced on Tuesday that it is hosting clips from the E Entertainment channel's satire show "Cybersmack."
"We've been meeting with almost every TV network, record label and movie studio to talk about ways to partner and help them reach a broader demographic," Supan said.
What about Kaufman's suggestion that YouTube could be a flash in the pan?
Katzeff isn't buying it.
"It's scary because those 13- and 15-year-olds watching YouTube today are going to be the 20-year-olds in five years," he said. "I think somehow, you're going to see (YouTube) lasting."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
