Thank you to my panelists, attendees, and Ustream participants for a successful and informative panel!

[Here's the eMarketer chart we discussed showing advertising spending for online video and projections until 2011. I asked my panelists about these projections, and if they thought they'd remain accurate. Considering that advertisers still spend around $65 Billion a year for television ads, $4 Billion in 2011 is a comparatively small piece of the pie, however they thought this was a low estimate. Much of the sentiment from the panel puts these numbers in context--much needed after you've read Paul La Monica's pithy blog post on these numbers. We discussed what was possible for online video despite the comparatively low spending thus far.]

I’m moderating I’ve moderated a panel on the future of online video content, from the perspective of those who are actually creating online content in a professional manner. I created this panel for the premier of a television show I co-created for Tru TV. Rather than go on about my experiences with network television, I thought it more appropriate to look to the future, especially because my primary profession is that of emerging media specialist, not a creator-producer in the entertainment industry.

Thank you to Robert Richman! Rob summed this up quite well in his guest post on Andrew Warner’s Mixergy.com blog. Here are Rob’s conclusions:

1. Content will take the lead
We’ve seen it before. When the technology becomes a commodity, it’s the aggregators and the content that win. But don’t get trapped in that word. Stretch your imagination for what that term (content) really means. It’s just what we use to fill a medium. What might that mean? What would the first crowdsourced movie look like? 

2. Brands will be the new VC’s.
As the technologies become more ubiquitous and free we’ll see another shakeout (and more outfits like Ycombinator). As traditional media becomes more and more irrelevant, brands will seek new channels to reach new customers, while strengthening brand loyalty with the existing ones. So if you have something that can get attention, think about what brand is in alignment with those interests and values. Prove you have something that people will use or watch, and you may just have an investor. 

3. People don’t like to pay money, but advertisers will.
Yes, it’s shockingly that simple. Go where the money is. People do not want to pay for content, and unless Paypal can streamline a one-click micropayment, we’re not going to see much change. So stop mining the miners and look at the big skyscrapers up-town. Nielsen is having a harder and harder time tracking ratings. You’ve got the razor’s edge. They want to bleed.

+++

My Panelists Included:

• Amanda Congdon, the host and executive producer of Sometimesdaily. http://sometimesdaily.com/ and blogger at http://amandacongdon.com
• Gilad Lotan – Technologist / Digital Media, Endemol USA -http://endemolusa.tv
• Ken LaZebnik from http://www.Strike.tv
• Hayden Black of Goodnight Burbank: http://goodnightburbank.com and http://www.abigailsxratedteendiary.com
• Michael Pilla of http://www.indieflix.com
• Tim Street of http://www.frenchmaidtv.com/
• Doug and Rosanne Welch, http://welchwrite.com  especially with regard to podcasting
• Espree Devora, owner of http://www.Zexsports.com
• Martine Beerman, writer and producer of “Guide to Getting a Life” athttp://www.thestream.tv

Several audience members and Ustream participants asked insightful questions. Thank you to BLANKSPACES for the amazing event space, thank you to Asahi for their sponsorship, thank you to TechZulu for recording the event and livestreaming it for all of us to enjoy.

When we first created this show, we had visions of promoting it by tapping into the natural fanbase of hackers, geeks, and enthusiasts found all over the Internet. The uber-talented cast–Chris Nickerson, Luke McOmie (Pyr0), and Ryan Jones–have friends far and wide both within the hacker community and beyond. That alone, with almost no effort, was enough to gain fan interest and much press when the show premiered last year. Within a few days we had a wikipedia entry, we were rising up on Digg, and other kinds of social and collaborative media were used to embrace the show, primarily because it struck a nerve with actual security professionals. They are so used to inauthentic portrayals of hacking, that when they find something real, they love it.

Ori Neidich (one of my partners) and I had talked about what we could do for TruTV (then CourtTV) in terms of promotion on the net. We knew that we could get a huge following for the show that would translate into big ratings for Turner Broadcasting, on a very small budget. All we needed was cooperation from them. After all, it’s a Faustian bargin when you sell a show–they own the rights!

TruTv/CourtTV had little interest in promoting the show at all, let alone allowing an Internet campaign to be associated officially with them. This, for a show that they told us was the highest-scoring of all of their test-piloted shows in the history of the network. What gives?

This may be indicative of television networks’ lack of understanding in general as to what online media can do for the marketing of a show, for very little investment. Grassroots campaigns are nothing new to Hollywood, but for this level of budgeting, they may not have realized just how much they could have gotten for free. Ori and I would not have charged extra for our time. Certainly Chris, Luke, and Ryan did an amazing job promoting the show on their own with no extra bucks–my hat goes off to them. Even when Chris sent the network a dossier on all that had been accomplished for free, the network barely responded and probably did not give it more than 2 minutes of thought. Really, Turner Broadcasting? Can you afford to turn away from social media and internet marketing in general? You’re ok with a little website that does next-to-nothing? Is that how you want to promote your tv shows, especially the ones that appeal to Internet-types?