Comments on: Murdoch vs. Redstone… Round Two

By: jamescoops

jamescoops — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 17:54:01 +0000

Thanks for the response Robert - interesting ideas around community being commoditised… im going to think about it!

By: Andrew J. Brust

Andrew J. Brust — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:04:10 +0000

I suppoise one could argue that Viacom is attempting to open its vast library through their new URGE music service that will be embedded in Windows Media Player 11.

On the other hand, URGE is also a walled Garden, as you point out MySpace is.

Seems the real issue to overcome for Viacom (and the recorded music industry in general) is letting go of DRM. If they don't let that go, they will not achieve the kind of community ubiquity you say they must achieve to compete with MySpace and NewsCorp/Murdoch.

By: Robert Young

Robert Young — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:03:21 +0000

jamescoop,

That's an excellent question… and here's my response.

As social media sites evolve to the next generation, the value of owning the platform itself will increasingly get devalued. This is because value extraction (e.g. monetization) will increasingly come from third-party tools that further enable self-expression (e.g. widgets, content, etc.). And the platform itself will increasingly become commoditized… essentially into free hosting.

So for a company like Viacom, it's crucial that they begin to measure their success with metrics like "how many Viacom videos are served and monetized per day, regardles of platform". And they need to do so directly with the audience/prosumer, again, regardless of platform.

Hope that makes sense.

By: Perceptric Forum

Perceptric Forum — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:15:07 +0000

Murdoch vs Redstone…

Interesting story at GigaOm speculating about the 'war between the titans' - between Murdoch and Sumner Redstone… and that Murdoch buying MySpace was as much about this as anything else. I think it makes for an interesting conspiracy theory, but a…

By: jamescoops

jamescoops — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:46:51 +0000

im not sure pushing content out onto other people's platforms is the right way forward - surely they'll just be giving youtube, myspace video etc a big shot in the arm in return for a bit of rev share?

Surely viacom needs to own the platforms and communities itself - not just be a content provider?

By: Lee

Lee — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:32:14 +0000

It's a tough call - News Corp. seems to have a better advisory group or team of futurists. They're more of a holding company whereas Viacom is much more conten-focused.

By: CG

CG — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:03:21 +0000

I don't think a drop in ratings at the MTV Video Awards means that MySpace is winning over MTV. I think it means that while MTV does a good job of adapting to its viewers, the MTVA is something that's been around forever, but is no longer popular. Look at how MTV has evolved. They started out showing vidoes. Now with the popularity of "Real World", 95% of their programs are reality based in some way. And it's genius, because the production costs of these shows is next to nil. Yet the ratings are high and the ads rates follow. Viewers are savvy enough now to know that watching musicians they don't like accept fake awards and pretend to be happy isn't interesting to them anymore. They want to see people on TV doing the same things the viewers do every day (which isn't a whole lot). MTV responded with dating shows, prom shows, Laguna-Hills stuff, Pimp my Ride, etc etc.

If I was to own one or the other, i'd take MTV in a HEARTBEAT. MySpace hasn't proven anything to me other than you can create a bogus profile in under 60 seconds.