It's no wonder Web video has caught fire as the preferred means of Web marketing communication among those who understand how information is processed and what it takes to communicate effectively.However using the right tool is only effective if you are using it correctly, and using it correctly means more than a technical understanding of what buttons to push. Video marketing starts with concept that is implemented by means of an appropriate script and delivered with an entertaining performance. Much of what we see on the Web is either off-the-cuff winging it by do-it-yourselfers who think they know what they're …

Since the early days of online video, marketers have been predicting the rise of the digital living room. Truth is, I've seen a number of articles discussing its existence, but I question the definition that has been provided over the last few years. In my eyes, the digital living room can be compared to a mythical figure like the Loch Ness monster or Big Foot.

I love YouTube. I love YouTube as a user and I love it even more as a video content entrepreneur. But, I'll be perfectly honest with you, I have no idea if YouTube will help me grow my business or force me to grow despite it.

It used to be simple. Creative agencies would make ads, media agencies would place them, and PR companies would handle corporate communications and press. This is no longer the case. Online video and social media have blurred the lines between these players, and opened the door for other, smaller companies to get larger pieces of the online advertising pie.

I read with bemused interest Jason Burke's July 6 article, "Video Ad Exchanges Aren't A Silver Bullet." Burke attempted to make the case that buyers on exchanges are chasing "unicorns" -- bargains that don't exist. Exchanges may indeed have limitations, but let's keep it real. None of the points in his article are new or unique to exchanges. In fact, exchanges are eliminating "unicorns" by actually improving brand protection, transparency, ad units and standards for online video advertising.

These are indeed amazing and volatile times for online video. Every day there's a new study showcasing the accelerating growth of online video; the never-ending demand for video content by brands; and a prevailing gold-rush mentality by media companies (both new and old) to get their piece of the pie. While the old saying that a rising tide lifts all boats might be true, all of us in the online video sector should periodically take a deep breath to ensure that we're not losing track of some important fundamental truths about online video in the midst of all this …

Yet another time, I hear the same story. A brand publisher is surprised to find that, while members of its sales team work for a company everybody knows, advertisers do not want to work with them. So advertisers are not interested in video inventory that's brand safe, in premium content, gets quality U.S. traffic, and comes in standard ad units like pre-roll? The reason? The inventory is too small.

Before YouTube, people turned to iFilm for video entertainment. While the site would occasionally publish a viral video without the written consent of the rightsholder; iFilm largely housed movie trailers. While they were advertisements, trailers were the quintessential short form of entertainment. But as a sign of how little "professional" video content existed at the time, iFilm was able to build a syndication business by aggregating movie trailers and redistributing them around the Web.

This diatribe has a lot to do with my new iPad2. I can't understand how a device that doesn't allow the user to access all moving image Web content (including certain Facebook features and our own emmytvlegends.org site) is thriving. Even worse, to make our website work for what is now millions of iPads in play, we've had to reprogram our site at great cost -- how many other nonprofits like ours, with unique video content, are in the same boat regarding Apple's obstinacy? How much amazing content will be forever lost in the shuffle?