Gruber recently sparked a discussion on the web about video on the web. See Apps are the New Channels, Bloomberg TV+ for iPad, There’s Nothing Wrong With Streaming Live TV by Chris Martucci, and Gruber’s response.
Having a little experience with apps and video on the web while working with StocktwitsTV, I’m going to point the discussion in a different direction.
We all three agree that yes, apps, in a certain sense, are the future of television. Where I differ with those two is what problem Apple is trying to solve.
I think Apple will fundamentally change the way we consume media on our television by improving and democratizing the creation and curation of the content on those screens.
Martucci:
There’s something enjoyable about giving up complete control — “channel surfing,” if you will — being at the mercy of “whatever happens to be on.” It encourages serendipity, stumbling upon an enjoyable program by happy chance.
I love stumbling across something new. But, I realize, when it comes down to it, it’s not entirely chance. It’s curation. The content on our television is curated by a small group of people. The advent of cable, and the ever-increasing number of channels, has introduced a small level democratization in this, but it’s not complete.
The broadcast networks could never make money with a show like Mad Men, The Wire, or Weeds. HBO, AMC, and Showtime can. The broadcast networks need massive audiences to turn a profit. The cable networks less so.
Apple has already started working on democratizing content curation. While it wasn’t done as well as it could have been, Ping is an excellent example of leveraging your social graph for curation purposes. I follow Lady Antebellum because I like their music. They make recommendations of other music and I can consume or not. But, either way, I’m exposed to new content through curation.
The whole discussion of apps replacing TV started as Gruber and Dan Benjamin discussed Apple’s potential TV in the latest episode of The Talk Show. Which brings me to my second point: democratization of creation. And this is where I think Gruber might be missing the boat a little.
Letting each TV network do their own app allows them the flexibility that writing software provides. News networks can combine their written and video news into an integrated layout.
Point is: it’d be better for both viewers and the networks if a TV “channel” were an interactive app rather than a mere single stream of video.
I haven’t had the opportunity to engage him on this, so, I’m not sure where his thesis stops. However, for me, focusing on big networks like HBO and ESPN misses the forest for the trees.
Podcasts and other user-generated content has exploded. It started with text and blogging. It progressed to audio podcasts and now it is moving into video. Apple has played a direct role in this explosion with iMovie, Garage Band, and more.
With the release of iMovie for iOS, we’ve taken another step down the path of democratization of creation. Anyone, yes, anyone can create quality content with that app. Will that content always be of the highest technical quality? No, of course not. But, it’s not about technical quality. It’s about the quality of the content.
Yes, that’s quite an assertion. However, I’ve seen it time and time again. Beyond a certain point, the technical quality of the filming and editing becomes irrelevant. Don’t believe me? Ask David Plouffe.
Ask him and he’ll tell you one of the things he found in 2008 while running Barack Obama’s campaign was that the response to lightly-edited, late-night videos was better than those they spent more time editing.
Now, I have no idea what Apple will do differently with the interface. I’m sure whatever they come up with will be elegant and the background will have texture.
However, I strongly believe that creation and curation will be integral parts of it. They’ve already begun widespread public betas: Ping and Twitter’s deeper integration into iOS for curation and iMovie’s expansion into mobile devices for creation.
In short, it’s social.