With YouTube as the second largest search engine on the Web, it’s apparent that Web TV is growing in value and usage. Although trends also show that the quality of the content has moved beyond the infamous silly cat videos, the quality of Web TV still has room for improvement. But, what should it look like?
Should the quality of Web TV be just like the quality of traditional television? Please share your thoughts.
According to Dina Kaplan, the Co-founder of blip.tv, “Content [Web TV] that does well shouldn’t just look like television production made with less money.”
She went on to say that people should not embrace Web TV as a last resort to not having the budget for traditional TV. There is actually a big difference between the two and each option has its own advantages and disadvantages.
For instance, Web TV has more freedom than traditional television has. (Kevin Pollak addressed this aspect in an interview here.) Traditional television, on the other hand, typically has more resources than Web productions have.
But again, these advantages and disadvantages are a result of the differences between the two offerings. For example, both Web TV and traditional TV serve two completely different audiences. Web TV shows serve a very specific audience and can establish personal connections with its viewers.
Fans that watch Web shows have the ability to write comments that provide immediate influence on the plot of a series. However, by the time a traditional television show reaches its audience, the next several shows have already been filmed.
Because traditional television and Web TV are so different, Kaplan said they “should look different.”
“I think we’ll see over the next year Web shows really emerge as their own form of media… and it will look, act, feel, smell very different from television,” she added.
Do you agree with her and believe that Web TV will evolve into its own form of media within the next year?
0 comments:
Post a Comment