At the moment actual tv programmes (minus crap) are about 22 minutes anyway -so what difference, except production quaity. Which does mtter.

What might be accelerated is how much of non-network tv is stripped schedules; the internet allows a personalised version of that with shorter episodes. that’s all. [like pre-developed 80-episode short-form runs].

Just as cable allowed, the current transition will allow a few new companies to develop and grow, in this current “new” sector, but just as IAC is already doing, this will all become part of the same media-empires we so love!

Ultimately, their might be some democratisation of cultural-seeding, but in the main, with the way the communiactions industry works, The internet will simply be a pipe, indistinguishable for the content it delivers via mobile, stb, mpc, broacast towers, dvb-h, games-system, mobile (cell) -including passed to/through mobile, but projected/played onto a big screen.

Content will be specially created for some fomats, but most likely it will be reversioned of un-broadcast/tertiary content when it’s not the same universal content. [think summaries/synopsis, 7minute sopranos].

Yours kindly,

Shakir Razak

As far as having full TV on the Internet — I’m going to have to disagree. I think it might be a concept that’s harder to grasp now, but it was similarly hard to grasp when TV’s first came out — and that changed as well. I am of the opinion that — if you tell them, they will come. The Internet is going to change entertainment, absolutely, but is it going to abolish long-form? I don’t think so.

And, to please Liz — I’ll conclude with this: as audiences grow bored with kittens, they’re going to come and watch Break a Leg… with… mittens.

I’m definitely not a poet.

-Yuri

http://www.brightcove.com/channel.jsp?channel=474416516

um, if it were that easy, everyone would be doing it (I know, that’s a cliche, but, there’s a reason cliches exist).

try running your numbers with an ad supported model with a net $5/cpm back to Producers — 1000×5x10=

– mitch

So, while technically long-form may be shoved through internet television pipes and screens, the economics aren’t there to support it. Not even close.

And, I agree with some of above comments about “content shaping” for today’s audience. Replicating old 1/2 hour or hour models would be equivelent to going back to screenplays with 180 pages of dialogue and 3-6 cuts per minute. Won’t happen.

The economics aren’t there. The audiences aren’t there. So, why strive for it?

Yup, I like that 2-Act :04 minute structure over 80-episodes too. More like tapas, than “snacks,” a bit more thought put into the presentation…

The question is what, who, and where will people snack. Desired content hasnt changed since the days of the Romans. Sports, drama, comedy, current events and of course T & A/Sex.. They all are snackable, and to Liz’s point satisfying in terms of emotional connections for advertisers, IF packaged up right and properly targeted. User generated will have a place, but as mentioned before most fall under the law of diminishing returns.

For internet tv, in the past year, we’ve seen good efforts at shaping content, telling stories, testing new story structures (episodic, weekly and seasonal) and the respective episodic running time durations.

There is the now classic 1-act, :01-:03 minute story, which is maturing with PROMQUEENTV, introducing a mandated novela-isque end-hook. But, read the MYSPACE comments, the audience doesn’t seem terribly satisfied with running time or format. Sometimes they venture into a 2-act structure, but, it’s rare (but, better when they do).

It’s gruelling to have to force a new cliffhanger every :90 seconds — why? Because you are left with watching nothing but “set up,” with no “pay-off” until late in the Season. Payoff = satisfaction for audience, otherwise, keeping track of all the “set ups” is just too much work for an audience.

The 2-act, :03-:05 minute stories, such as YOUNGAMERICANBODIES (on NERVE) seem much more robust from a story perspective. And, they allow pay-off scenes to be intermingled. I’d say these are the best episodes right now for considering running time and story structure for new audiences (including mobile).

Also worth noting are the the 4-act, :07-:09 minute episodes from zyntroPICS productions on their alamoheightsSA series (in both English and Spanish). Similar novela/soap format as PROMQUEEN are undertaking, but, they’d have done better to cut each episode in two, as 2-act, :04 minute episodes, which is what they are representing future series will be shaped as.

Interesting, zyntroPICS first introduced the 80-episode “season” concept to advertisers, allowing them to commit to a 4-mo. campaign window, and that 80-episode “season” has been further standardized by PROMQUEENTV. It’s not just about the Episodic running time, it’s about the Seasonal Story and audience retention.

• It should be noted that alamoheightsSA was the first internet series that wound up with a broadcast license on the LATTV network in 5 US cities, running in prime time, where 3-episodes per night were delivered in a 1/2 hour Prime Time slot.

YOUTUBE has done to content running-time what MTV did to # of edits per minute edit style. The half-hour and hour format is over — the audience isn’t there.

A year from now, a new “standard” will seem natural. And, unless there is audience satisfaction for the story, the advertising space within and around the Content is worth nada.