March 23rd, 2007

Why Have No Major Media Companies Invested Heavily In Original Content For The Web?

by Scott Karp

  •  View Comments

Or maybe you know of one that has. If you do, let’s discuss.

I’m just curious.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post  Post to Facebook Share on Facebook

 Subscribe to Publishing 2.0 |  Follow on Twitter

Topics: Digital Media | Media Economics | Online Publishing | Online Video

  • Tim
    I completely agree. I don't understand this whole rehased media effect. They are in the business of mass wealth accumulation rather than mass content creation...maybe it's also due to things like YouTube. Tim
  • There's a difference here between investing heavily and investing wisely.

    During the last boom there was a lot of very heavy and misguided investment in content. In the meantime - the real growth-meisters of the web have actually been companies who have the software to sift, sort and organise content - rather than the creators of it.

    At the Guardian, we have invested heavily in making our online presence replete with all sorts of content; and we will soon be filling the pot a little more with audio and video. But that investment is matched by the investment necessary to make sure that that content - and the content that comes from our papers is as easy to find as possible. All about being part of the web, rather than simply on the web, as we say. One strategy without the other is pretty fruitless.
  • Ben
    Some traditional publishers are developing an online first mentality. Professional reference publishers, e.g.
  • Sav
    ABC has created 3 TV series so far that are labeled 'Online Originals'. One of them 'Voicemail' has already made it online in their online distribution channel, Full Episode Player. (http://www.abc.com). I think more and more companies will go down this road but as of now, they are looking to capture online, the audience they already have on-air.
    Will online content drive spending to match those of 'LOST', 'CSI', etc.? Hard to say. But as of right now, they are trying to get the most of the dollars they have already spent.
  • It's a good question. In the future, I think many media companies will look a little bit like Netscape does now: some original reporting, some community-driven submissions/ranking, and some editor-selected links/commentary. Those that begin to embrace that platform now will be setting themselves up for success.

    I think NYT and MSNBC are making some strides but have a long way to go. Will be very interesting to see how it all plays out.
  • Easy. They're not interested in innovating, but maximising the multi-platform returns on the media formats they do know about.

    I think you miss the same point again when you say we're drowning in content. Maybe so. But its all the same.

    Content which is pushing the edges of the artform, both online and off, are rare indeed. But of course these companies are all about the money, so why should they innovative, better to wait and copy those who take the risks and succeed?

    At least some of us have the vision to square this circle.
  • i say
    thank god they aren't
    we've all got enough competition between ourselves already
  • Time Warner's Super Deluxe represents a large investment in *original* online content by a major corporation.

    Broadcast television doesn't translate well to the web's viewing medium (as pre-existing written content might).
blog comments powered by Disqus

Subscribe

Receive a free daily email newsletter with new Publishing 2.0 posts


Recent Posts

Clicky Web Analytics