MTV is turning to cutting-edge art to build interest. In partnership with an arm of MoMA and non-profit Creative Time, the trio will launch 10 original pieces of video art from a series of budding artists. Tabbed “Art Breaks,” MoMA/PS1 and Creative Time commissioned the work, and MTV will distribute it globally on its flagship network, Web site and Facebook and Tumblr pages debuting April 2. It runs for the rest of the year. MTV has a history in newfangled video art, debuting video work from director Spike Jonze. "Creative expression and experimentation are at the core of MTV's DNA … we're thrilled to use the enormous power of television to introduce audiences around the world to this pioneering art work," stated MTV President Stephen Friedman. Looking to excite younger viewers about art, the first five videos come from artists such as Mickalene Thomas, who “explores notions of beauty from a contemporary perspective, influenced by popular culture and pop art,” and Tehran native Tala Madani, who “creates stop-motion animations that utilize the bizarre and surreal to address cultural and gender differences, exploring connections between power structures, law, and language.” "MoMA PS1 is a laboratory for contemporary practice," stated Klaus Biesenbach, the MoMa chief curator at large. He touted the collaboration as a chance to allow "a younger generation of artists to experiment beyond the walls of the museum and onto the screens of a broad, international audience."
There are all kinds of good news-bad news scenarios that makes media a conundrum. The bad news: cable and broadcast audiences are declining. The good news: pay TV and video subscribers and revenues are growing. The good news: audience and engagement measurement is evolving into a more useful science. The bad news: it cannot happen fast enough. The undertow of disruptive innovation and rapid change in media is unprecedented. Netflix, which was given its last rites a year ago, is now being touted by some as the next cable network and content wholesaler. An outlier like Aereo has quickly emerged “the cord cutter’s dream,” sidestepping retrans laws by providing consumers with the antennas and tools needed to stream video on their own. If it survives legal challenges, it will “hasten the transition to long-debated, usage-based pricing for broadband,” notes Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett. More than ever, the end game appears to be ubiquitous video for universal screens. Its measured penetration and effectiveness will be the key that unlocks a windfall of digital value. Bernstein analyst Todd Juenger conservatively estimates $2 billion to $4 billion in advertising inventory is being held back or not counted as traditional TV video gingerly transitions to Internet and cloud distribution. With half of all cell phone-touting Americans using smartphones -- expected to morph to 70% by 2013, according to Nielsen -- media’s future hinges on measuring and mining pocket video and interactivity. Globally, there will be 10 billion mobile Internet devices by 2016, or 1.4 connected devices per every 7.3 billion persons on the planet by that time, according to Cisco. That’s pure opportunity. In more specific company terms, a pure TV player such as CBS can generate an additional $6 billion in enterprise value by continuing to reinvent itself in digital terms, creating new interactive advertising and fee-based revenues. Ironically, Internet display measurement is “horribly worse” than TV measurement with widely varying delivery estimates from competing sources, no duplication of impressions and no demographics, Juenger observes. It is a double whammy, considering how audience fragmentation has strained the currency of television that still supports $60 billion in annual advertising, some of which will increasingly find its way to interactive media venues. Bottom line: more than one in every four local ad dollars will be spent on digital by 2016, according to BIA/Kelsey. That makes hybrid approaches to quantifying those new connections -- and creating value and revenues -- inevitable, but not necessarily more effective. Nielsen proposes combining Internet video and traditional TV into blended impressions to create a single budget and planning process with its new Cross-Platform Campaign Ratings. The kicker is it will include new and emerging forms of video on YouTube, Hulu, iPads and other mobile devices excluded from its baseline C3 audience count – which doesn’t even include traditional TV or cable VOD within three days of the original air date or out-of-home! The mistake is considering these “TV audiences” in isolation rather than as more lucrative, all-encompassing video consumers. It is akin to cramming the Pandora’s box of interactive video into static television’s stable. As content and advertising quantification becomes more holistic with the fusion of data and video across all size screens and platforms, media will redefine itself in economic and creative terms. Then it won’t matter if cable network audiences are off 8% from a year ago or that overall pay TV subscribers are up by half a million or that Netflix’s domestic Web site visitors are up 13% from a year ago while it negotiates with cable operators to be included in movie cable packages. It will all be part of a global connected video experience that will thrive on ubiquitous value creation rather than be stymied by today’s false and failing defense of crumbling silos.
It was a proud moment for the online video industry when Brightcove (or should I say BCOV) made its public debut on the NASDAQ at $14.50 a share last month. The IPO and subsequent debut reinforced not only the value and growth potential of online video, but drew rapt attention from investors and venture capitalists. For me, and others who are as focused on defining the industry as growing their customer base, the spotlight on the category can’t be bright enough. BCOV (which, in the spirit of full disclosure, is a Touchstorm partner) can and will benefit incrementally from the technological advances that will undoubtedly follow. As the category undergoes a maturation process that will likely result in greater capital infusion, high profile partnerships and consolidation, the greatest benefit will be accelerated innovation in the areas of distribution, engagement and analytics. The fragmentation in the marketplace, particularly the lack of standardization as it applies to player technology, makes improved performance essential to these areas of online video production and distribution. From a distribution and analytics standpoint, online video distributors are battling the lack of standardization and racing to claim accuracy and relevance for the measurement they are able to provide. The category’s top priority is to develop and establish a predefined set of video formats, profiles and containers that is still mature enough to support reliable delivery across multiple devices, platforms and browsers. Defragmenting the player will almost immediately deliver scale to the distribution function of online video. While the industry continues to invest in the technology to accurately track results of the videos it distributes to multiple platforms, successfully adopting a standard method of distribution will also provide the advantage of monetizing those results for its clients. Streamlined distribution will lead to streamlined reporting and allow the industry to more granularly showcase the results of its work. As with all marketing campaigns, brands need to know if their online video efforts are boosting the bottom line. Online video distributors and developers are in an arms race to prove that video is not only engaging the right viewers, but also converting those viewers into customers. The domino effect of a defragmented technology offering will create waves rather than ripples in the online video category. Standardized distribution will provide scale and deliver actionable analytics. The data obtained will allow producers to increase engagement levels by gaining insights into what types of viewers are watching what videos, for how long and when. Brands, not surprisingly, have become increasingly focused on the role online video plays in supporting their marketing goals and objectives. Online video technology is becoming incredibly sophisticated, allowing marketers to more clearly measure and track success. As branded information and entertainment become mainstays in the marketer’s toolkit, these newer and better technologies will allow our category to increase the speed of adoption, more easily define success and scale our business models by adding the distribution and measurement capabilities necessary to do so. The notion of online video being mostly consumer-generated content is in our rearview mirror, a direct result of content creators, curators and distributors developing better production and distribution strategies, editorial networks and measurement technologies. The Brightcove IPO, which was up 30% after its first day of trading, will serve as a model for others to learn from -- and its success will determine if it is a model others aim to replicate.
Last week Internet content pioneer TheStreet.com announced layoffs. TheStreet.com competitor Business Insider was quoted as saying that it would “go over the names of people who were laid off, but it's easier to say who is staying.” While we hope those affected will bounce back sooner than later, the company’s recent past is a worthwhile case study. (By way of disclosure, I should state that back in 2007 I met with some of the company’s senior brass to discuss a strategic partnership after CBS acquired Wallstrip --the nascent video content startup that covered stock market themes.) TheStreet.com Paved the Path for Publishers TheStreet.com has been around since 1997. Today the company boasts a market value of $72 million off $57 million in 2011 revenues (1.2X revenues). What’s troubling, however, is that the company’s enterprise value (market cap plus debt less cash) is actually only $40 million (or 0.7X revenues). Indeed, as of December 31 2011, the company’s balance sheet carried $65 million in cash/short-term securities and $33 million in total liabilities. The company is worth less than its revenues, arguably, because a) revenues are down from $70 million in 2008, and b) it lost $9 million in 2011, and ic) it faces a barrage of competitors big and small. Lessons from TheStreet.com Despite being a finance buff, I’ve never been a regular reader of the site, but I’ve always kept an eye on the company as an investor, executive and entrepreneur. 1 - Diversification of content verticals works. It’s smart to launch with one vertical, but over time, you need to go horizontal to really serve your readers and viewers. BusinessInsider launched with a business focus but today covers multiple verticals including entertainment, lifestyle, travel and sports. 2- Everyone is betting on video. To TheStreet.com’s credit, it’s not cutting back on video. According to the same Business Insider article, video reporter/analyst Debra Borchardt and video producer Gregg Greenberg will remain with the company. That’s no surprise, given how all publishers are focusing their attention -- and allocating their resources -- to video. 3 - Subscriptions and paywalls create opportunities for new competitors. The Web’s infrastructure is built, the platforms have emerged; we’re now filling the pipes with content -- free, ad-supported content. TheStreet.com always mixed free content with subscriptions, leaving an opening for competitors, including BusinessInsider and also SeekingAlpha, the crowd-sourced community. Forbes also saw the threat and has added a SeekingAlpha-inspired base of outside contributors. 4- Finance is TOO timely. Finance is one of the most valuable verticals in both an absolute and relative sense: total advertising across the banking and financial services sector is amongst the largest, and CPMs are high -- allowing for publishers to create content profitably. But the vast majority of finance and stock market information is too focused on immediate (and immediately disposal) news. Other verticals have a longer shelf life and thus, higher lifetime value. Content creation is expensive; you need to recoup the investment over a long payback period. With finance, it’s almost impossible. 5- Jim Cramer is too binary. One of the main drivers of success for content creators is (supposedly) to have big-name personalities leading the way. That is true to some extent to cut through the clutter, but studies and anecdotal evidence suggest that users care more about the information than the voice. As such, TheStreet.com’s mercurial founder Jim Cramer was a double-edged sword who turned off as many fans as he won over. Despite what the critics say, I think he’s a priceless asset, but TheStreet.com failed to balance out Cramer with other voices. 6- Vertical is a winner-takes-all strategy. I’ve previously looked at the pros and cons of a vertical vs. horizontal strategy, and the fact remains, adopting a vertical strategy requires a winner-takes-all outcome to succeed. Not only did new competitors eat away at market share and mindshare, but larger horizontal players like Yahoo and MSN can boast larger finance verticals than TheStreet.com anyway -- so even then, TheStreet.com’s vertical focus was somewhat moot to marketers. 7- Costs matter. While its revenues probably tower over its competitors’, its legacy cost structure hampered it over time: TheStreet.com is spending $5 million per month. That’s a lot of money, to be sure. 8- Video is a disruptive innovation. I’ve long argued that video is a different beast than articles, and so long as a publisher’s core focus is text content, then videos will always be treated as a stepchild. I don’t watch too many videos from TheStreet.com, but considering how evergreen videos trump timely ones, TheStreet.com never stood a chance in this domain. 9- Past performance doesn’t guarantee future success. TheStreet.com has one of the strongest brands in the online world. With the right strategy it can come back as strong as some of the companies it covers. 10- Content can disrupt content, too. However, the big lesson for content executives is that content can sometimes be disrupted by other content, too, and not just solely by technology.