The NY Times recently ran an article suggesting that the internet is actually driving traffic to television networks. The argument being that viewers are using social networks to to interact while watching programming. Indeed, the article sights a Nielson report that one in seven viewers of the olympics or superbowl were simultaneously on social networks.
This is a pretty amazing fact given that the internet was supposed to be the downfall of television. Why even have a TV when most of the content would eventually end up online? I wonder if it is too early to make a final decision on where the internet and tv dynamics will play out? Is there any reason Facebook could not buy a production company and begin playing television shows in Facebook? At some point will facebook or google be in the entertainment industry.
Given the prevalence of both programs, it is always easy to wonder where they will go from here, but being that they are both secretive and creative nothing is really out of bounds. I agree that producing and distributing media is not their prime business, but why let users split their time between tv and the internet when you can capture all of them. It is unlikely that Television networks can introduce any element of social networking, so there may be a one sided advantage.
Imagine, watching television one the top right hand corner of my computer screen, while using facebook below that, and using search on the top left, while reading news on the bottom left. This almost seems like the ultimate vision that media and tech companies are assimilating to. It may be too early to suggest that television has a bright future ahead of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment