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 Prank Gone Wrong

Evan Emory is a singer-songwriter and part-time comedian who had an idea for a YouTube video he thought would be funny and could become a hit. Instead, it has led to him being arrested on child sex abuse charges and facing up to 20 years in prison.

Emory gained permission to perform the child-friendly Lunch Lady Song to a class of first-graders in Muskegon, Michigan. Which he duly did. The kids were filmed reacting with delight to the song. When the classroom emptied, Emory performed a different song with explicit lyrics. The two were then spliced together at a later date so that it looked as though the kids had been present for the second song.

The video was uploaded to YouTube (since deleted) where it became an underground hit. Two days later and Emory found himself arrested and treated like a pedophile.

Is This Really A Crime?

Let’s be clear here: Emory did not sing any sexually-themed lyrics to the children. Instead, they watched him perform an entirely innocent song and he then performed the other song to an empty classroom. So what is the crime he had committed? And who is the victim? If the kids aren’t told about what happened then none of them will be any the wiser.

Yes, it was a stupid thing to do, a fact which Emory admits in hindsight. But should this 21-year-old prankster be jailed and condemned as some sort of risk to children for being adept at video editing? Of course not. And the reactions from some people on the issue are preposterous.

Conclusions

If Emory had performed a song about sex to a class of first-graders then he’d deserve some jail time, but even then 20 years would seem extreme. But he didn’t do anything of the sort, making this whole thing a ludicrous example of the law being an ass.

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.

Super Bowl Commercials 2011

The commercials which run in the advertising breaks during the Super Bowl are now just as big a part of the tradition as the actual game is. In fact, many people are more interested in the ads than they are in the actual sporting event that surrounds them.

2011 is no exception, with some amazing ads running alongside Super Bowl XLV. Thankfully it isn’t just on TV during the game that you can see these ads, with most of the brands involved seeking to make use of new media as well.

The Super Bowl commercials for 2011 are on YouTube, and the Google-owned video site is running its annual Ad Blitz contest for the fourth year in a row.

YouTube Super Bowl XLV Ad Blitz

The YouTube Ad Blitz sees all (except the companies not taking part) the Super Bowl commercials lumped in together for Web users to watch after they have aired on television. YouTube users are then able to vote for the ad they enjoyed most and the winner gets a free banner display for a whole day on the site.

You may ask what YouTube gets out of this. As ReelSEO explains, YouTube is trying to entice the advertisers who spend a fortune on a 30-second ad to be aired during the Super Bowl to extend their campaigns using YouTube. After all, advertising on YouTube costs a fraction of the price.

In effect, everyone is a winner from YouTube’s Super Bowl Ad Blitz; the people who want to watch, the companies producing the ads, and YouTube itself.

Conclusions

The YouTube Ad Blitz channel is already live, and the Super Bowl commercials 2011 will be live on the site immediately after they air during the game. My guess is they’ll be more interesting to watch than the football this year.

Related Ad

Buy ‘NFL Super Bowl XLV program’ on Amazon

Music Videos Online

Music videos are insanely popular online. Which is why they have their own entity, Vevo, which allows the record labels to exert more control over the way the videos of their artists are viewed.

The more intelligent artists and labels are using the Web to their advantage, creating videos which will cause a buzz on the Internet and can be shared via social networks such as Facebook and Twitter. And Rihanna is one of those.

Rihanna ‘S&M’ Video

S&M has been banned from TV in some countries, but on YouTube the video is available to watch in full for those with the inclination to do so. But when you click on a link for the video you won’t instantly be given access to the goods.

Instead, a message appears saying, “This content may contain material flagged by YouTube’s user community that may be inappropriate for some users.” To view the video you’re required to sign in or sign up to YouTube. Or you can just visit a site which has embedded the video instead. Like so:

I can’t say I’m all that impressed by the video, or the song for that matter. Then again I don’t think I’m the target audience being a 33-year-old single male who is balding oh so slightly. But that’s not really the point.

Turn To The Web

The point is that this is a music created to rouse interest and cause controversy. I suspect Rihanna, the record label, and all the people involved in making the video for S&M knew this would be banned in some countries. And they knew that would create a buzz which would see more people seeking the video.

And what do those people do? Hit the Web, where music videos are big business and always available virtually on tap. Everyone’s a winner, including YouTube.

Related Ad

Buy the ‘Loud’ album by Rihanna on Amazon

YouTube Movie

The power of online video, especially YouTube with its amazing amount of content which is being added to all the time, is immense but somewhat underutilized at this point in time.

Video outlets on the Web, along with social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, are now beginning to be used for political change, as can be seen in Tunisia and Egypt right now, but what about social change?

Online video can certainly offer an insight into other cultures and the lives of other people in countries most of us will never visit. And that is what documentary film Life In A Day, otherwise known as the YouTube movie, aims to show.

Life In A Day

Life In A Day began life at the beginning of July last year when anyone and everyone was asked to film themselves going about their normal business on July 24, 2010.

In total, around 80,000 people from 192 countries submitted 450,000 hours of footage. This was then whittled down to just 1 hour 35 minutes of footage and compiled into a film by director Kevin Macdonald and producer Ridley Scott.

The end result is a documentary that gets down to the grassroots of film-making, showing ordinary people living out their lives. It sounds boring but it’s actually utterly compelling for its duration.

Watch Life In A Day

Life In A Day had its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival on Jan. 27, and it was live-streamed on YouTube at the same time. It is being rebroadcast on YouTube today (Jan. 28) at 7pm local time.

After that it’ll be some time before you’re able to see Life In A Day, because National Geographic films picked it up for a theatrical release. It’s due to show in movie theaters from July 24, 2011, exactly a year after the footage was shot.

Life In A Day is well worth a watch if the lives of other people is of any interest to you. And unlike other documentaries, this is pure footage, with no gimmicks, glitz, or glamor.

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.

Video Advertising

Video advertising takes many forms. From video ads embedded (often annoyingly autoplay) on sites across the Web, to viral ad campaigns such as the ones for Old Spice and Tippex, video advertising is both varied and increasingly popular.

It makes sense for sites which display online video to use video advertising. Hulu does this extremely well, but YouTube has somewhat struggled thanks to concerns over the type and legality of content on the site.

However, YouTube is confident its new approach is a good one.

TrueView on YouTube

TrueView, as the new YouTube video ad units are called, give YouTube viewers three different ads to choose from. If none appeal, they can instead choose to skip the ad altogether, and the advertiser won’t be charged.

Short-form videos will have in-stream adverts, while long-form videos will have either pre-roll ads or ad breaks spaced throughout. The ad breaks may not be skippable.

This is no doubt inspired by Hulu’s Ad Selector which already allows viewers to choose their own ad. This is currently an option on around 10 percent of all Hulu videos.

Conclusions

The idea of allowing people to choose or skip ads is, at first, a bizarre one. But it actually makes a lot of sense. If someone chooses a particular advert then you can be pretty sure they’re interested in the product being advertised.

And if they choose to skip the ads altogether? Then they were unlikely to be swayed by them in the first place, and the advertiser actually saves money trying to sell something to an uninterested party.

[Via AdAge]

Related Ad

Buy a new ‘YouTube and Video Marketing: An Hour a Day’ 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.