NewAssignment.Net

Join NewAssignment.Net’s Facebook Group.

WHERE WE ARE

BeatBlogging.Org

13 beat reporters build social networks into their beats.

OffTheBus.Net

Help us cover the presidential elections at OffTheBus.net

Broowaha.com

A citizen journalism network to experiment with distributed reporting.

Readable Laws

Explaining Congressional legislation in plain English.

Assignment Zero

Published in Wired News.


Want To Learn More About NAN?

Check out this 7-minute interview with Jay Rosen. Or watch the full presentation at the Berkman Center, also available in MP3, or this five part nicely edited
series.


Browse archives

« July 2008  
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Home » blogs » David Cohn's blog

You Can't Beat YouTube Without the Users

by David Cohn on December 11, 2006 - 12:58am.

The latest buzz circulating through Web forums has a group of media companies teaming up to develop a YouTube killer. PaidContent.org has a nice wrap-up of the developing rumor here.

“The theory is that if you were to aggregate enough exclusive content in one place, you could actually change viewing patterns,” says an executive familiar with the cross-company talks.

Yet all the reports miss one important factor in YouTube’s success. The strength of YouTube isn’t the mass of copyrighted material and television shows, many of which have been purged. Rather, it’s the loyal community of viewers and users who upload content. That’s what Google was buying and what other media companies don’t have.

To this day the most popular video on YouTube isn’t a snarky big budget commercial, or any other traditional media production. It’s this — a homemade movie of a guy performing the history of dance. This is the type of content that makes the YouTube community vibrant and what keeps people coming back for the week’s best videos.

As this New York Times article states: “The most-viewed videos on YouTube are novelty bits, and proudly dorky.”

This isn’t to say that copyright content from media companies aren’t sought after online. And if a licensing agreement is ever made, they will become more popular on YouTube.

Since making first waves, YouTube has even become a way to make news for citizen journalists. And the genie is already out of the bottle. People know where they can go to upload content and my bet is that their loyalty will remain with whatever video portal gives them the best tools to upload. Watching a rerun of last Tuesday’s “American Idol” is probably second on their list of concerns and if the media companies in question don’t realize that — they might as well surrender the fate of television to Google now.
—
Afterthought: Mediashift author Mark Glasner has a great satire of how “OurTube” would work in the year 2008.


You can beat YouTube!

Submitted by Narconon (not verified) on May 23, 2007 - 6:56am.

You can beat YouTube! By suing it! They got sued by a journalist who claims his video of the 1992 Los Angeles riots has been viewed by YouTube users without his permission more than 1,000 times. As many media pundits put it, the current dispute could determine who is ultimately responsible for policing copyright violations online and could imperil the existence of tiny companies like YouTube that have little or no resources to monitor the more than 50,000 video clips its users upload to its site every day.


Original content.

Submitted by What is YouTube? (not verified) on March 10, 2007 - 11:20am.

Just go look at youtube. It’s 99% original content. The only copyrighted material you’ll find there is background music in some slob’s home video of his cat.


What percentage of users publish contnet?

Submitted by Ed Kohler (not verified) on December 14, 2006 - 9:53am.

I’m not convinced that publishers make up a significant enough portion of YouTube’s audience to be the major differentiator today. Eyeballs will follow content, and publishers (and advertisers) will follow eyeballs.


Thanks for the link

Submitted by Alx Klive (not verified) on December 12, 2006 - 11:16am.

David, just wanted to thank you for the link (to the WorldTV Charts).

Love your site.


You tube's popularity certainly would fade-out

Submitted by expectedmiracle (not verified) on December 11, 2006 - 10:53pm.

“People know where they can go to upload content and my bet is that their loyalty will remain with whatever video portal gives them the best tools to upload.”
This sound so-much exaggerated and one-sided view.
The mass can shift from youtube to other video-sharing sites if they provide the features you tube lacks. Its a truth that you tube can’t always reign the worldof videos no matter what. One day some other video-sharing site will take over it.


I think we agree

Submitted by David Cohn on December 12, 2006 - 11:25am.

Expectedmiracle: I think we agree. “their loyalty will remain with whatever video portal gives them the best tools to upload.”

I’m not saying YouTube now and YouTube forever — The mass can and probably will shift. As you say “One day some other video-sharing site will take over.” I’m positing that any site which intends to move in on YouTube’s space will need to keep an emphasis on user-generated content, not big media video.


User Base

Submitted by KB (not verified) on December 11, 2006 - 3:12pm.

I guess I would have to comment here saying that I think you have missed the spirit of the new business venture. I do not believe that the intent of the media conglomerate is to create a site to directly compete in the same market as YouTube.
Their idea is to offer a central repository of content that has already been produced and offer it to their existing market using a new delivery method.

The sites would attack two fundamentally different markets consisting of the same user base. I think that perhaps in the hype the difference between a user base and a market have been confused.


re: user base

Submitted by David Cohn on December 11, 2006 - 4:05pm.

I think the distinction between a user base and a market is wrong.

In journalism we are beginning to refer to our readers as “our former audience,” and the same could be said for video. Users like to interact with content and create it. If this new site is just a central repository for video, what’s the difference between that and TiVo, which I can personalize? I can watch both without commercials at my leisure.

At least on YouTube (if it were legal) the users would be deciding what content gets uploaded. I could then view video recommended by friends — not media companies. It’s a subtle but real distinction. Add the ability to upload original content — and have your own video go viral and you get a loyal user base.

Right now it’s hard to know the mode this possible video site will take, since most of the reports have just been about “talks” between media companies. But if it is just a repository — That’s like putting a newspaper up on a Web site, claiming a job well done and assuming the paper is ready for a future online.


users content rocks

Submitted by Free Video Uploads (not verified) on December 11, 2006 - 3:08pm.

If you take a look at users upload content sites ie YouTube.com, Myzine.com and Myspace.com all have very simple concept “users upload content is a King”

Myzine.com


I disagree

Submitted by Jakob (not verified) on December 11, 2006 - 3:03pm.

I just went to YouTube, clicked the “videos” tab. This showed me the top 20 most-viewed videos today.

It looked like one, maybe two of those videos were uploaded by the person who created them. The rest were TV segments, “sexy” clips, and other miscellaneous virals.

Don’t you think that if a copyrighted video made it to the “Most Viewed (All Time)” page, it would attract attention and get removed?