Live On YouTube

YouTube has been testing the waters with live video broadcasting over the past few years. 2009 saw U2’s Pasadena Rose Bowl concert broadcast live on YouTube worldwide. 2010 saw this extended to a five-concert series featuring artists such as Arcade Fire and John Legend.

Gigs are one thing, but sports are quite another. In 2010 YouTube broadcast all 60 matches in the 45-day Indian Premier League cricket tournament. These were available to watch in every country outside the U.S., which has little interest in cricket anyway.

There was speculation at the time that this move suggested YouTube had ambitions in the live streaming sector. And that speculation has now been renewed.

Live Sports Online

According to Business Week, Google is in talks with “most pro sports leagues” about getting more live sports events on YouTube. This includes the NBA and NHL, as well as “soccer leagues in Europe.

This is all from an interview given by Gautam Anand, Google’s director of content partnerships for Asia Pacific. None of the companies mentioned is willing to expand on the plans, and there is actually speculation that they’re limited just to Asia, at least in the short-term.

Longterm, however, I think this is a natural progression for the ambitious company.

Conclusions

For Google this would represent the Holy Grail of online video. Live sporting events are insanely popular, and having NBA, NHL, and European soccer games showing live on YouTube would bring in millions of viewers and consequently millions of dollars in revenue.

Will it happen? I have no doubts it will, one day. It will likely begin in territories other than the U.S., and then full games will likely be shown in delay (24-48 hours after broadcast).

Eventually everything will be available online, although it will cost. And I think YouTube will be at the very heart of that revolution.

Related Ad

Buy ‘The Technology of Video and Audio Streaming’ on Amazon

The Power Of Celebrity

Oh to be a celebrity. You get paid a fortune to do whatever it is you do, often a natural talent; you have millions of adoring fans who’ll do (quite literally) anything for you; you get invited to parties and premieres purely because of who you are.

Celebrities have an insane amount of power, which is why they’re so in demand. And it isn’t just old media that wants celebrities involved in their operations, as Google also wants them for YouTube. And is willing to pay an absolute fortune to secure their services.

YouTube Celebrity Channels

According to Vulture, YouTube is seeking Hollywood (and beyond) talent to create and control channels on the site. The channels would be full of original shows, with the celebrity in question retaining the rights to all content.

YouTube is willing to pay handsomely to attract the right people, with figures of up to $5 million quoted. That would be the budget for the channel as well as the wages for the recognizable name, but that’s still a huge amount. YouTube would hope to make the money back by selling advertising.

An insider reportedly said:

“The idea is not so much content acquisition as it is to supercharge content creation: By offering a wider range of better-quality content, viewers are happier, Google’s advertisers are happier, and the talent is happier.”

If true this would be a huge step-up for YouTube and online video in general. Content created by celebrities for the Web isn’t new (think Funny or Die and Will Ferrell), but this would be something altogether bigger and more ambitious.

Next New Networks?

This is just a report at the moment, with Google refusing to comment. However, if true it would put Google’s rumored acquisition of Next New Networks in context, as themed channels is what the latter has made its name doing.

YouTube Content

YouTube loves random videos of cats playing with boxes and dogs running on treadmills, it really does. But what it loves even more is original content, both the kind that has been created purely for the Web and the kind that has been created for TV and repackaged for the Web.

Since Google acquired YouTube it has been trying to up the levels of original content, because that is what the company can advertise against. Its Partner program is already quite strong, with some of the chosen few making a living from their positions, but everything can be improved.

Next New Networks The Next Acquisition?

This is surely the thinking behind Google’s desire to acquire Next New Networks, and it may even have done so by the time you read this. Rumors of a deal emerged in December 2010, but in the last week have come to a head.

Next New Networks has built a host of themed new media networks, including Barely Political, Indy Mogul, and Comedy Thunder. Since the company launched in 2007 it has managed 1.5 billion video views and 5 million subscribers.

Talks are said to be in the final stages, with Google expected to pay tens of millions of dollars for the company. For that, Google will gain access to video-makers and add experts in gaining professional content to its workforce.

Conclusions

Next New Networks currently has 65 independent content creators on its books, and they should be able to help YouTube realize its original programming potential once they come under the Google banner. If they do so, because the deal hasn’t been inked quite yet.

Google, Then Facebook?

It’s no surprise to learn that Google is top, by quite a margin, in terms of traffic referrals to video destinations included in the study. More than 50 percent of all come from Google, and that doesn’t even include YouTube, which TubeMogul hasn’t included in this research.

However, what’s more surprising is the fact that second on the list is Facebook, with 9.6 percent of all referrals coming directly from the social networking site. Facebook has leaped ahead of Yahoo!, the previous runner-up, in the last quarter.

Facebook has done amazingly well, and its ability to compete and beat the likes of Yahoo and Bing shows how social search is becoming very important. However, Google by itself beats everyone else combined.

Newspapers, Games Consoles

The full TubeMogul report includes lots of data, but apart from the Facebook result the most compelling is the news that newspapers upload more videos than broadcast, magazine, or online media properties. Though these are more likely to be short video clips, newspapers also top the number of minutes streamed.

Also gaining in this way are games consoles, with the likes of the Wii, Xbox 360, and PS3 leading in terms of average viewing time. While videos viewed on current-gen consoles are watched for an average of 2:45 minutes, videos viewed on online video sites only have an average of 2:27 minutes.

Which suggests the leanback viewing experience helps prevent people from switching off. At least for an extra 20 seconds or so.

Conclusions

This research shows the state of online video, and that state is a healthy one. Facebook is gaining a foothold in the sector at an alarming rate, and newspapers are finding success by changing from old to new media.

YouTube Vs Viacom

YouTube Vs. Viacom dates back all the way to 2005 when the latter questioned the former over a copyrighted clip that had appeared on the former. The arguments continued for a couple of years before Google acquired YouTube, and Viacom seized its chance to sue for a lot of money.

The case took three years to actually come to court, and when it did so earlier this year, YouTube was victorious. The judge essentially ceded to the safe harbor provision of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), stating that YouTube is protected by that 100 percent.

Viacom obviously disagreed, and the wheels of an appeal were soon set in motion.

Appeal Launched

That appeal was launched on Friday, and Viacom is determined to keep plugging away with the same argument as before. The company is once again alleging that YouTube embraced the posting of copyrighted material in order to help its traffic grow.

Furthermore, Viacom is arguing that the decision to accept the DMCA in this case is flawed, and if the district court’s judgment is upheld, it “would immunize from copyright infringement liability even avowedly piratical Internet businesses.” Which obviously refers to torrent sites and live streaming sites that don’t always stick to the rules.

Conclusions

The problem for Viacom is that YouTube is no longer that kind of site, if ever it was. Had Google not cleaned YouTube up in the way it has thanks to the Content ID system then Viacom would have a point, but the horse has surely bolted, and seeking $1 billion in damages at this point seems way off target.

I cannot see Viacom getting a different result this time, and I hope that is how it turns out. If the safe harbor provision of the DMCA is deemed inadmissible in this case then it could set a dangerous precedent. Which is, I suspect, what Viacom is angling for.

Related Ad

Buy ‘DMCA’ on Amazon to learn about the issues involved.

Google TV

Google TV launched in October after months of speculation. The Logitech Revue set-top box and a range of Sony TVs and other devices enable viewers to bring online video into the living room in a big way. At least that was the idea.

The problem is that all connected TV platforms need content to thrive. Unfortunately for Google, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and Hulu have all blocked Google TV from accessing their online video feeds, and there doesn’t seem much hope that they’ll change their minds anytime soon.

Not that Google is worried. Yet.

Making A Dumb TV Smart

Rather than bitching about the TV companies ruining the launch of Google TV, Google appears confident the mindset will change eventually. In the meantime, the company hopes enough content remains for Google TV to at least gain a foothold.

What Google has done is defend its position against the onslaught of criticism coming its way from the industry. According to NewTeeVee, Eric Schmidt addressed the issue at the Web 2.0 Summit, saying:

“They’ve accused us of trying to make a dumb TV smart. Yes, we’re guilty of that. There’s a fear that this enormous revenue stream is somehow going to be affected by all this Internet content… [But] we don’t want to create a situation where revenue goes to zero. TV is a big business, and… there are lots of new revenue sources there.”

Isn’t it amazing that trying to improve on something, making a dumb box in the corner smart, is seen as a bad thing? I know the TV industry has to protect itself but doing so in this way merely shows it up as being scared and very, very short-sighted.

Conclusions

What Schmidt says is so true. There will obviously be a difficult period of adjustment, but it’s not as though Google TV and the other connected platforms are completely removing the industry’s ability to make money. It’s just that the methods for doing so are going to have to change.

At the moment it seems the TV networks are making the same mistake the record labels previously made: attempting to hold on to a business model that no longer works in the digital age. Sad, really.

Related Ad

Buy a ‘Logitech Revue Google TV set-top box’ on Amazon

YouTube Growth

YouTube has grown consistently since its inception in 2005, and especially since Google acquired the site in 2006.

By the middle of 2007, YouTube boasted six hours of video being uploaded every minute. Which at the time was seen as a colossal amount. It turned out not to be so colossal, however, as the 10 hours per minute milestone was soon reached.

By January 2009 it was 15 hours, by May it was 20, and by March 2010 it was 24 hours, the equivalent of a full day’s worth of video. Now, just eight months later, and YouTube has announced it has hit 35 hours of video uploaded every minute.

35 Hours Every Minute

35 hours of video every minute is a substantial amount of content being uploaded to YouTube. It equates to 50,400 hours every day, or 176,000 feature-length movies every week. In a month it’s the equivalent of three television networks broadcasting 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for 60 years. Wow.

There are some factors which have helped YouTube in this regard: Video time limits increasing from 10 to 15 minutes; File upload size increasing 10 times to 2GB; Mobile phone use; Increased support for YouTube’s APIs.

More To Come

Is YouTube satisfied? No, and it likely never will be, either. So it’s already set its users the next target to hit: 48 hours of video uploaded every minute. My estimation for when this will be achieved? The middle of next year.

YouTube Censorship

YouTube has always fought hard to keep the site open and free of censorship, with the question of legality (be it copyright, indecency, or whatever) being the ultimate yardstick with which YouTube has weighed each individual case on.

This has meant upsetting whole countries on some occasions, with Thailand, Pakistan, and China all having banned YouTube because of videos the authorities in those countries found distasteful.

The most recent example saw Turkey re-ban YouTube just days after lifting a two-year ban because videos deemed as offensive to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk were reposted to the site after YouTube reviewed their removal and came out in favor of the original posters.

Anwar al-Awlaki Videos

However, after intense pressure from politicians on both sides of the Atlantic YouTube has removed some, but not all, videos showing speeches and calls for Jihad by Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

Al-Awlaki is a Muslim cleric who openly calls for a religious uprising against all those who don’t share his faith in Islam. Videos of his hate-filled speeches have been indirectly linked to many violent acts in recent months.

U.S. and British politicians made renewed calls for these videos to be removed from YouTube, and some were removed at the end of last week after YouTube decided they fell under the guidelines prohibiting “dangerous or illegal activities such as bomb-making, hate speech, and incitement to commit violent acts.”

A Start, Not An End

There are still thought to be around 5,000 videos on YouTube showing al-Awlaki, and even those removed from the site are still available to watch on other sites around the Web. So the question has to be asked whether this was actually worth it?

If people are determined enough they’ll be able to find whatever they are looking for on the Internet. YouTube is a start, but it isn’t the end.

Related Ad

Buy ‘Internet Censorship: Protecting Citizens or Trampling Freedom?’ on Amazon

And all because a handful of videos have been deemed as offensive to a guy who died 70 years ago, when the Internet was a figment of a futurist’s wet dream.

YouTube Censorship

YouTube isn’t exactly new to this banning malarkey, with various countries having prevented its citizens from accessing the Google-owned site over the past few years.

Thailand banned YouTube after Google refused to remove a clip deemed insulting to its royal family. Pakistan then attempted to block access to the site over a video deemed offensive to Muslims. And China has banned YouTube a number of times, most recently over a video showing violence against Tibetan protesters.

Turkey, however, provides the best story of all, with its on/off/on again banning drama playing out like a particularly cheap soap opera.

Turkey’s On/Off/On Ban

Turkey originally banned YouTube in May 2008 after four videos made it onto the site which the Turkish authorities deemed as offensive to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder and first president of the country.

Google removed the videos from the Turkish site but that wasn’t deemed sufficient, with the courts wanting the videos removed worldwide.

Fast-forward more than two years and the ban was lifted after the videos were removed from the site by “volunteers” working closely with the government who used Google’s copyright protection to do so.

Unfortunately for the Turkish government, Google reposted the videos are deeming that they don’t actually infringe on any copyrights. And so the same court that lifted the ban on Saturday put it back in place on Tuesday (Nov. 2).

Conclusions

This whole YouTube ban is based on four videos deemed to be offensive to a man who has long been in the ground. And for that the Turkish authorities are preventing 70 million people from accessing one of the most popular sites on the Web. Is it me or is this sheer madness?

Related Ad

Buy ‘Turkey: A Modern History’ on Amazon

YouTube

If you haven’t heard of YouTube then you must have been living under a rock for the last five years. The Google-owned video-sharing site is now ubiquitous and, with the possible exception of Facebook, the first port of call for most people on the Web.

News Round-Up

Turkey has lifted its ban on YouTube after more than two years. The unbanning appears to have come as a result of a third-party removing some of the videos deemed to be insulting to the founder of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, which were the reason for the ban in May 2008.

YouTube co-founder and CEO Chad Hurley is in the process of moving to a more advisory role at the company he created with Steve Chen and Jawed Karim and then sold to Google. He told TechCrunch he’s been making the transition for the past two years.

Google has allegedly moved Google TV over to YouTube, although the company insists it was already a part of the YouTube umbrella and this isn’t a response to the critical reception from broadcasters and networks.

Two milestones were hit this week: 1 billion subscriptions, and 500 million Promoted Video views. The former is gaining a new widget making subscribing even easier, while the Promoted Video effort continues to go from strength to strength.

Conclusions

A truly mixed bag of news, most of which show YouTube still growing and still maturing.

The Hurley story is particularly noteworthy as it shows YouTube is now very much a Google property, with the founders all having moved on either physically or mentally. As for Turkey: Welcome back, we missed you.