• by Lydia Loizides , Op-Ed Contributor, April 2, 2007

So, here we are again, coming out of the throes of pilot season and weeks away from the upfronts. My, how time flies when you are having so much fun! It seems like only yesterday we were learning about "Heroes" and witnessing the onslaught of NBC's 360 Digital presentation, watching Steve McPherson dancing on stage and marveling at the 1000-watt Moonves smile.

But this season does have a different air about it. Streamed network programming has been proven to work in aggregating eyeballs, advertisers are stepping up to the plate and spending some real dollars in online entertainment while the "value" of online programming seems to be becoming a quantitative reality.

So what is next? Well, my magic eight ball is out for repair, but if I were a betting woman I would say that the future looks ripe with opportunities. Mr. Cohen at UniversalMcCann has all major media up 4.8% and Internet 20% for 2006. 2007 looks respectable with a 5.9% increase overall.

But what really excites me the most is the idea that we, as an industry, are finally beginning to give "online" the respect that it is due. There isn't a major media conglomerate that isn't thinking about original programming for online, that hasn't upped the number of digital extensions to traditional television programming and that isn't playing the "launch-a-new-business-to-support-this-Internet-space" as if it weren't 1999 all over again. The main difference is that this time there really is an audience, advertisers do really care about the space and are spending real dollars in it, and the past may have taught us a thing or two about expectations and valuations.

What does give me cause for concern though, is this lingering undercurrent of possessiveness on the part of distributors and, in some cases, advertisers.

Over the last several weeks, I have had the occasion to speak with people on both sides of the equation -- and while there has been great strides made in leveraging the technology and reach of online, there is still a real fear about the potential damage it can do to the cash cow we call television programming and advertising.

But let's turn that on its head and ask ourselves this: if the point of any brand owner -- whether that is a TV or product brand -- is to reach as many eyeballs as possible; and if reach is what communicates the message most effectively, then why are on earth are we trying to restrain that reach? With consumers, or better yet, customers of your brand becoming the most important channels of communication for your brand, why am I hearing more and more about the reigns being tightened, about walled gardens being built, about brand owners trying to shut out their most passionate advocates? Shouldn't we be making every attempt to loosen the ties that bind so that we can create stronger relationships with the audience?

It makes sense logically. It even makes sense practically. But old habits die hard -- and I guess for as much as the old guard has learned to talk the talk, they are still taking baby steps when it comes to walking the walk. Maybe 2008/2009 will be a different season.