7 Comments

Summary:

2007 was a down year for the online video revolution. Nope, we don’t believe it either, but look at the year-end assessments released today by two influential publications, and you’ll find two compelling attempts to devalue our nascent little industry. Time Magazine, attempting to explain why […]

2007 was a down year for the online video revolution. Nope, we don’t believe it either, but look at the year-end assessments released today by two influential publications, and you’ll find two compelling attempts to devalue our nascent little industry.

Time Magazine, attempting to explain why it went from picking “You” as its person of the year in 2006 to Vladimir Putin in 2007, offers up an essay about how 2007 was really more about “Them,” a.k.a. establishment media instead of UGC. It’s good; read it. Meanwhile, the video personalities that topped Forbes’ Web Celeb list last year dropped off this year’s version.

Times’ James Poniewozik writes of 2007,

So if 2006 was the year of You, 2007 was the year of Them. Big media companies (like this one) stuffed their sites with blogs, podcasts and video.

Celebrities became Web entrepreneurs. Hillary Clinton made a Sopranos-parody viral video. In 2006 the Web was a proving ground where new musicians could take their art directly to the public. And maybe it still is, but what band struck it big selling its new album online this year? A little undiscovered combo called Radiohead. Meanwhile, Will Ferrell launched funnyordie.com, where he posted comedy videos starring himself and celebrities like Bill Murray. Because, You know, Ferrell’s comic vision is just too avant-garde for mainstream Hollywood.

We’re not immune to the attraction of declaring UGC to be dead. And it’s true that the trails blazed by indies in online video are attractive to old-tree and network-tubed media.

To some extent, it goes both ways. The easiest way to prove you’ve succeeded in new media is to score an old media gig. But these TV deals have a habit of petering out — web-made stars LisaNova, Little Loca and the Acceptable.tv folks, for example, have all been there and back again. So if it’s any comfort, it seems that web video is the planet whose gravitational pull drew in the conventional headliners, rather than the other way around.

Poniewozik admits: “Maybe what really happened in 2007 was not that They took over from You but that the boundaries between You and Them blurred.”

Agreed. And writers striking and voicing their dissent online and forming VC-funded web studios will only further that trend. Still, I would say Time should take at least a tiny bit of responsibility for its role in anointing user-generated content and in doing so drawing out a buried treasure map for big media to use to strategize, invade and monetize. Anything that hyped is bound to fail.

But early web video stars are also losing interest, or appeal, or both. As for those who’ve dropped off the Forbes Web Celeb list, some — like Jessica Lee Rose and Ze Frank — did so because they took themselves out of the game. Many on the list — Kevin Rose, Xeni Jardin, our boss, Om, Perez Hilton (when he’s not getting yanked from YouTube), and Robert Scoble — make web TV, but that’s not what they’re known for. No new web video-native stars have emerged (at least not yet) to fill the void. In the crowded world of online video, it’s just gotten that much harder for new web personalities to break out in a way that makes any sort of impact.

Still, reality’s not decided by a magazine editorial committee. Success isn’t just about what creators make and do, it’s decided by what viewers want and watch. To that end, poll results released by Harris Interactive today showed U.S. online video viewers want more pro content. When asked what they’d like to see more of online, 30 percent of respondents said they’d be likely to watch “a lot more” TV episodes, and 28 percent said they’d be likely to watch a lot more full-length movies. Meanwhile, only eight percent said they’d be likely to watch a lot more user-generated video, were it available.

With help from Chris Albrecht.

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. Pierre Col – UbicMedia Thursday, December 20, 2007

    The value of UGC is depending on the talent of the U, the users, and we can see on Youtube, MySpace etc that only very few users are talented. UGC sites are a way to filter talented people, which could monetize their talent, from untalented people producing crappy videos or music or uploading illicit material.

  2. It’s Not You, It’s THEM. – GigaOM Thursday, December 20, 2007

    [...] it either, but look at the year-end assessments released today by two influential publications. Continue Reading @ NewTeeVee Share/Send Sphere Print Previous Post Next [...]

  3. Forest Fires | Rob Long Thursday, December 20, 2007

    [...]             Hits are hard.  Liz Gannes over at the NewTeeVee site has a great post about the web video stars of 2007.  Time and Forbes may be (kind of) crowing [...]

  4. Top Posts « WordPress.com Thursday, December 20, 2007

    [...] Web Video is So Last Year…or So Say Forbes and Time 2007 was a down year for the online video revolution. Nope, we don’t believe it either, but look at the year-end […] [...]

  5. This post is very hot, it is high ranked at http://www.adminor.info (daily weblog, weblog post ranking site)

  6. links for 2007-12-24 at iJump.co.nz Sunday, December 23, 2007

    [...] Web Video is So Last Year…or So Say Forbes and Time « NewTeeVee (tags: newmedia onlinevideo video trends web2.0 television) [...]

  7. LUKE FORD » Hits Are Hard Monday, December 24, 2007

    [...] Long blogs: 1. Hits are hard. Liz Gannes over at the NewTeeVee site has a great post about the web video stars of 2007.  Time and Forbes may be (kind of) crowing [...]

Comments have been disabled for this post