Trend: The younger generation doesn't want to sit in front of a TV to watch video.
Jeff Matthews says that whoever purchases YouTube understands how the younger generation watches video. Excerpts below.
Link: Jeff Matthews Is Not Making This Up: What Google Wants is What Rupert Has: Next TV.
YouTube is the Next TV.
Before you spit out your coffee, or Jamba Juice, or chai tea, or soy latte at that grand statement, consider for a moment what is happening here.
People watch more than one hundred million videos on YouTube every day. Since YouTube accounted for just under half of all visits to U.S. online video sites in September, more than two hundred million videos are viewed every day on U.S. video sites, including YouTube, MySpace, Google and others.
Keep that number—two hundred million a day—in mind.
Now, consider that of the nearly 300 million Americans alive at this moment, roughly 15% are below the age of 10 and roughly 50% are 35 or older, which leaves some 35% of those 300 million within the prime online-video-watching age range of 10-to-35. That is something close to 100 million pairs of “eyeballs,” as they used to say during the Dot-Com Bubble.
But let’s assume that at least two-thirds of those 100 million 10-to-35 year olds have better things to do than watch a video of some poor loner lip-synching “Stop! In the Name of Love” to his pet iguana. If my math is close to reality, then about one-third of those 100 million likely viewers, or 35 million, are watching those two hundred million videos a day.
Which amounts to approximately seven videos per person per day.
Keep in mind these videos aren't all made by lip-synching losers: there are old Jerry Seinfeld nightclub shows and home-made videos of early Beatles concerts; there are television shows both pirated and, thanks to Fox, which announced last week that it would put shows on MySpace, legit, not to mention stupid "Jack-Ass" type stunts and almost anything else you can think to look for.
And that is why I call YouTube and its ilk the Next TV.
Yes, I know the mantra from the not-dead-yet TV and Movie Establishment—“Who wants to watch a movie or a TV show on their computer?”
Unfortunately, that’s almost exactly what their friends at EMI and Warner Music asked when the iPod came along: “Who wants to listen to music on a computer?”
This notion that people need to sit in a living room to watch moving images is, I think, the opiate of the network TV bosses. If they asked me, I’d tell them precisely who wants to watch television and movies and sports on their computers: my daughters and all their friends and all their friends' friends.
About 35 million of 'em, for now.
Which is why it makes all the sense in the world to me that the Google guys—whose video service hasn’t gained much traction whatsoever—are looking to buy YouTube (founded February 2005) even though my friend Mark Cuban famously predicted YouTube will get “crushed” owing to the same type of commercial copyright issues that brought down Napster.
In fact, it makes all the sense in the world to me that Rupert Murdoch, the canny Old Media Mogul who saw what was happening and bought MySpace a year before poor old Sumner Redstone realized what was going on, is reported to be in the hunt for YouTube as well.
Because what Rupert knows is this: Cable TV is dead: long live Next TV.
Coming soon to a URL near you.
Not that I disagree with the fact that YouTube is enormously popular amongst pop culture, but there is a subject not addressed in your post. If YouTube is going to replace TV, where will YouTube get its content?
While I contribute the reason that young kids watch YouTube is because there aren't programs on TV that are tailored to children anymore, a good portion of the other folks are searching YouTube for content they may have missed on TV. One can argue that there's some entertaining videos on YouTube, but it doesn't compare to the quality to those sponsored by broadcast networks and the comfort of watching it on your living room couch.
As for the MP3 analogy, the characteristic of music is that it's good accompaniment, not all attention is required to listen to it, so it is an ideal accessory to multitask with on the computer. On the other hand, videos require a good amount of attention to truly enjoy the material, so for some major down-time, why not sit on a comfy couch instead?
Posted by: corB | October 10, 2006 at 03:48 PM
YouTube will get its content from people with digital cameras and videos. Most of it will be interesting to the creator and a small circle of peers, but occasionally someone will create a sensation.
I think the key is time shifting. In my home we record TV programs with a DVR so we can watch them when we want (and skip commercials). Easily bored and short attention span young people want to watch videos whenever they feel like it -- especially with the portable video players that are becoming available. They can download 5 GB of videos, watch them, delete them, and download more. Video is hot media and very compelling to people who want high stimulation.
Posted by: Myke | October 11, 2006 at 07:41 AM