Yes, another blog on Stephen Colbert, but this one doesn't debate whether he "spoke truth to power." First, let me say I'm a big Stephen Colbert fan and I watched his address April 29th to the White House Correspondents Dinner on C-SPAN. My wife, who was lucky enough to be at the dinner, confirmed my feeling on his performance, namely that Colbert bombed. Maybe he "spoke truth to power" but he didn't "speak funny to me." I forgive him, though, and I'm still watching his show (his interviews with US House members are pure genius). But there's another, more interesting debate surrounding his speech, as Stacey Higginbotham of The Deal reports on their Tech Confidential blog.

Millions who didn't watch Colbert on C-SPAN or attend the dinner have seen the speech, because of the viral video phenomenon. Higginbotham reports that a clip on YouTube was downloaded 2.7 million times in less than 48 hours. Good news for YouTube, which is desperate to sell ads and not just live off of venture capital, but not so good for C-SPAN, which (a) was doing as they always do, selling videos of the dinner (including Colbert's speech) for $24.95, and (b) had already entered an exclusive online distribution deal with Google Video. Higginbotham noted:

What's important for investors in video sites isn't how fair or not this is, but how the guys who control the content were comfortable going with Google Video rather than an upstart that may or may not have digital rights management protection.

YouTube is crying foul. They say they helped generate publicity for Colbert's speech (true, but there's no saying word wouldn't have spread anyway, given the number of blogs praising Colbert and his own large following) and that they should get the same terms that Google does (this is, of course, an argument often heard that smacks of collective licensing and in no way respects the free market). It's clear from the statements of the YouTube official in CNET that part of YouTube's frustration is losing out to Google; maybe they need to figure out what they can do to entice content providers other than kids producing free home videos of people being kicked in the crotch. Posting videos without consulting the producer of those videos, as happened here, hardly seems a wise way to win friends among content providers, and yes, even in an amateur-to-amateur culture, some of the best content is going to be professionally created. If you think otherwise, explain why YouTube is so upset at losing a professional comedian's performance.

YouTube is quite popular right now, and I have to say I've seen some funny stuff on it. (It's not all crotch-kicking, some of the videos display true talent). I think it should be treated just like any other business, though. NBC was faulted in the Washington Post and elsewhere when they made YouTube take down a Saturday Night Live rap video about going to see The Chronicles of Narnia, but the network then posted it on its own web site, which it was under no obligation of doing. Again, with C-SPAN trying to sell videos, it was under no obligation to release its video online to anyone. Nor does it have to post any videos on its web site. But it does post them, and it struck a deal with Google Video. This isn't the case of some greedy company seeking to maximize profit; C-SPAN is non-profit, and its mission is to allow people worldwide to see what the rest of us can see in person in Washington. It's a public service, and if it feels it needs to manage its intellectual property in a certain way and not allow unauthorized versions to air on a viral site, I support them in that.

Higginbotham once more:

So for all of those invested in the streaming video over broadband market, content will still determine who makes the big bucks and who's stuck with the equivalent of America's Funniest Home Streams populated by techies lip-synching to the Backstreet Boys or staging mock light saber fights. And who knows, when those videos hit with the cultural zeitgeist — as Colbert has — the makers of the videos may take their 15 minutes over to Google instead.

posted by Patrick Ross @ 4:22 PM | DRM & Watermarks, etc., Free Culture Movement, Internet: P2P, Search Engines..., Markets: Business, Investment & Innovation, Media: Video, Music..., Prices, Terms, and Licensing

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment(0)