Is there any more lame a comment than "You just don't get it". Its a simple, dismissive phrase that says more about the person saying it than the person/organization its directed to. Its a way of saying "You dont agree with me, but i dont have anything of consequence to say. "You just don't get it" stops any discussion where i might be asked to say something worthwhile dead in its tracks..
I have a simple question. Who does get it ?
The guys who started Myspace obviously got it. They were able to build a social network and actually make money from the operation of the company. It started off as a network built around music and evolved where its users took it. The same with Facebook. It started with a simple premise and its users drove its growth. In both cases, although its difficult to sell advertising on the sites, there aren't any legal reasons why they can't.
There are hundreds of social networks of all shapes and sizes, but how many are sustainable ? Friendster was a great idea. They got it, but they weren't able to sustain it. The many others out there, particularly those that don't host video have a shot because its not expensive to host webpages. If you can build some momentum, then you can sustain a user base as long as they stay interested in each other.
Youtube on the other hand doesn't get it. Why ? Because its not a sustainable model. If it was owned by any company with less than a billion dollars in the bank, they wouldn't be able to keep it alive. Google is loses money hand over foot because of the bandwidth bills. They can afford it. Few others could. Beyond the bandwidth bills, there is the legal liability. Again, few companies can set aside hundreds of millions of dollars "just in case".
Youtube is also not a social network. In a social network, the members provide all the content. That's what makes it a social network, right ? A social network doesn't have to go out and license content. They don't have to give away hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stock and cash to gain content. They encourage and trust their members to evolve the network.
Entities that have to go out and license content are called Traditional Media Outlets. TV stations license content. TV Networks license content. They both complement that content with webpages that allow user discussion and interaction. The interaction doesnt make the a social network. They are still traditional media outlets.
They pay the highest licensing fees for the content they feel is the best. For content that production companies can't license anywhere else, traditional media outlets can get that content in exchange for a percentage of advertising sold. The rest of the content out there is available in exchange for eyeballs that the production company hopes creates revenue from other sources.
Youtube is what it is. A very, very popular, traditional media outlet that provides its content on the net. It is video on the demand that is absolutely no different than the video on demand that comcast or any other cable company or telco offers, except that its user uploaded, limited to 10 minutes and the quality is awful. It fills a need as a place to find anything. It has done a phenomenal job of using user created content and user uploaded stolen content to create a huge, huge audience. Unfortunately for Google, it remains to be seen if that is worth anything. One thing for certain. Its not a social network.
Is there an opportunity for social network that focuses on being a video outlet ? No question about it. The issue is that this outlet won't be able to hide behind the DMCA. A video based social network, in order to be sustainable, has to reliably be able to generate revenues from the uploaded video. It has to be able to market the brilliance of its members and the product of their work to advertisers and sponsors. It has to be able to market its members video online and offline. You can't hide behind the DMCA and know exactly what your members are offering on your site. Revver is trying to get it right. But its not easy. Ning is creating great tools so that niche social networks can be built that can be sustainable with multiple revenue options. Im sure there are others I dont know about. It will be exciting to see "who gets it in this space"
Video, music and personal pages are not the only beneficiaries of social networking.
I love the combination of social networks and the political process. I just signed up as a delegate on Unity08.org . I think the community opportunity integrated with politics has a chance to catch on. I don't think it will be easy, but with a little luck can have a huge impact on the political process. I'm a believer that we need to get beyond the 2 party system. Hopefully this is a first step.
"You just don't get it " and Social Networking
Reader Comments
(Page 1)2. Ning is just the latest entrant in the Content Plantation Sweepstakes.
http://theheadlemur.typepad.com/ravinglunacy/2007/02/ning_the_latest.html
http://theheadlemur.typepad.com/ravinglunacy/2007/02/ning_the_latest_1.html
Posted at 4:53PM on Mar 1st 2007 by alan herrell - the head lemur
3. It is not clear how many of these social networks will survive beyond a few years. Some of them will fail due to cashflow and others will fail when the "fad" isn't cool anymore.
Dogster, Catster, Friendster, and many others, don't have very strong social connections and themes that will go beyond the novelty stage...in my opinion.
Political social networks are strong for the time period leading up to an election, but after an election they completely collapse.
YouTube was burning cash big time, and still is. Not because they were paying for content...just the bandwidth bills were killing them. Imagine if YouTube had to pay royalties for content. I really don't see this working.
The content owners think their audio and video is worth $1 to $10 per stream because that is the retail price of a music download or DVD. YouTube can probably get advertisers to pay a penny a stream...maybe 5 cents a stream. The gap in perceived value is just too great to make it work profitably.
Social networks are just that...social. Trying to make them into a profitable business that can sustain itself beyond the fad or novelty stage is very tricky.
Don Dodge
4. I forgot to add that Facebook and MySpace are indeed social networks that are real businesses. The reason is the tight demographics of their audiences. Advertisers are willing to pay a lot of money to get their brands in front of that audience.
Perhaps some sports oriented social networks could succeed as well because of the strong brand associations and audience demographics. The problem there would be the high price of video content which each league/team copyrights.
Social Networks will have a few big winners and a thousand broken hearts.
5. Mark I agree with you all the way. You would like my comments discussing the future of myspace and Japan's Mixi.
the site is http://blog.thevrworld.com/
Posted at 7:44PM on Mar 1st 2007 by Bo Armstrong
6. Mark:
I have never uploaded a video to youtube, but admit to watching The Arenas 1 armed free throws, 1 too many times. If the media companies would give the consumer (me)what they want,we would gladly pay. In my dreamworld, I would have one Media provider that would be a lot like Sirius Radio on steroids. I want the digital highway to have off ramps to all the differnet worlds I live in. I like having my media experience avialable to me in a consistent, customized, go anywhere manner free from all government imposed moral authority. My access and experience should be the same on a boat at sea, in my office, or in the bathroom if I should decide to hang my "media device" in there.
The only thing I ask for from this provider is that they offer anything and everything that has been digitized available for purchase 24/7 at "a la carte" prices.It is their role to negotiate with all content owners and assure they have been compensated reasonably out of my money.(and no laws broken)
About a year ago INHD broadcast a 1080i NBA game with no announcers or camera angle changes? If i remember correctly. If I were on vacation in say Costa Rica, I should be able to chill out on a hammock somewhere with my HDTV "media devise" and feel like I am sitting courtside at game. And I mean that literally. I want to hear clearly every word that you hear. I know more than a few guys that would pay full ticket price without the hassle of parking for that.
Oh...In this dreamworld ,Arenas can also make a trey with 2 arms.
Posted at 8:25PM on Mar 1st 2007 by Laxdog
7. I agree that we need to move past a two-party system and mass social networking sites could be a way to rally a cause. I feel in order to succeed, there needs to be alot of passion and creativity.
The passion for a cause is just obvious to me. When someone is passionate about what they are doing it just flows out of them and makes others want to be a part of the project or go out and do their own thing.
Passion and creativity seem to walk hand in hand but not always and not always in a positive fashion.
Pedestrian safety is a huge issue in Hawaii so I pondered on what could be done to effect change. I first, created a myspace group. I had to have a name that would catch an eye or two. If I just went with Pedestrian Safety Advocacy Group or PSAG, the draw wouldn't really be there right. If it was, only people who cared about the issue would join or read or whatever.
Instead I named the group the Pedestrian Liberation Organization or PLO thinking that PLO would be more of a draw. But, I was surprised to find out many young people, either going to college or finished with school, don't even know what the PLO is...
So I thought some more and then wrote a wiki about the group, thinking that it might generate more buzz.
Then it hit me. The best way to mass market this and get people to think is to turn it into a story treatment for a movie, The Ballad of the Angry Pedestrians.
So I posted the story on the myspace just to see how many views it would get. I posted it less than a week ago and I have a private account so almost 20% of my network has read or at least seen it based on the hits I've received. This isn't quite the national average for people who vote, but hey, it's a microcosm within a microcosm of society. Keeping systems theory in mind, I could anticipate if I continue to be passionate and creative, the cause will be one that more people care about, the movie will be made, things will change, and pedestrians will be safe!
Posted at 8:44PM on Mar 1st 2007 by Jason Walter
9. I liked this post.
Posted at 9:56PM on Mar 1st 2007 by benny
10. Hey,
this entry made me think. I agree with you that google/youtube
does a very bad job about the legal aspects of the uploaded
content and mixing it up with bought licensed content.
But on the other hand it got me thinking what makes a
sustainable social network (for video content)? How long can
you keep a community or social network interested just their
own work?
In my opinion it's very hard to just create or keep a video community/social network with content on consumer or amateur
level. This is why I think that mixing professionally produced
content with these content makes sense. It keeps or leads the attention on the platform and could, if properly implemented,
lead the visitors to the content of the social network.
So for instance it could link Jack Ass episodes with content from any skater or boarder kit out there doing their best tricks. I don't like the term long tail, but it is actually what could be used here very well. Use the mainstream to attract the users/visitors and lead them to the content of the social network.
Actually I would like to go even further and allow the users of the network to use the uploaded licensed content to create new content in new contexts. But I think the legal systems and the media industry is not ready for this kind of creativity, yet.
With this in mind I think Youtube is different from other media outlets, as it has the infrastructure to involve the user into the media production and I think we shouldn't think to much in categories.
But maybe I just don't get it!
/lars
Posted at 6:33AM on Mar 2nd 2007 by Lars Kirchhoff
11. You don't like 'you just don't get it', but 'youtube is what it is' is ok?
You're right though. YouTube can't be sustained profitably without a serious overhaul. And that overhaul will likely lead important contributors to competitor sites.
49-9? -- awesome.
Posted at 9:48AM on Mar 2nd 2007 by Matt
12. Mr. Cuban Goes to Washington--I love it!
And if you think your "Happy Gilmore" parallel (posted on Dec. 25th) works well in the realm of sports marketing, you should really try it in the political arena...
To say the American people are thirsting for AUTHENTICITY & CHARACTER in their political representation might very well be the understatement of this young millennium...
Sounds like you're ready to help mix it up, and with your mastery of all-things media & marketing, you've clearly got the recipe... And the resources...
The right mix of charismatic, capable & genuine candidates is all that remains.
(And judging by those NBA standings, "sustaining momentum" might not be such a problem after all!)
So if you need help generating it, you know where to find me--have got more "passion & creativity" than I currently know what to do with!
Go Bucs.
DS
13. who cares?
when i was a kid we stole songs off the fm radio with a casette tape recoder and shared the song with friends.
no one cares now.
Posted at 11:20AM on Mar 2nd 2007 by gary
14. "Youtube is also not a social network"
It may not be a 'true' social network but it has a lot of the aspects of a social network. I know that I have met and communicated with many members on the site. I have joined groups and used the site to network with users who may be interested in my videos.
So while I agree that it is not a 'true' social networking site, you are able to more networking than you can with any of the traditional media outlets (which offer nothing similar) so I don't think Youtube should be labeled as JUST another media outlet. They have differentiated themselves in a new way.
Do I agree with their way of handling copyright issues? Heck no, I stand behind you on this issue.
Posted at 11:25AM on Mar 2nd 2007 by Mark Barrera
15. This seems odd to me. Social networking sites like MySpace are built from the ground up. There was never a media blitz propping up MySpace. Common people discovered it, signed up, and told their friends, who in turn told more people.
You're the first person I've seen to talk up Unity08 who isn't a news pundit. Once the website grows in popularity beyond the David Broder crowd, maybe I'll give it a shot. For now, it just seems too idealistic and unfeasible.
Posted at 1:13PM on Mar 2nd 2007 by Eric
16. So basically you wrote this article to promote that site unity08? Otherwise I don't see a point to it. In fact, I couldn't bare to read all of it.
I have an idea cuban. . . learn a programming language and show us that you get it.
Posted at 8:31PM on Mar 2nd 2007 by brant tedeschi
18. "Youtube is also not a social network. In a social network, the members provide all the content."
In a social network, the members network socially.
Check the comments at YouTube. YouTube's very different from MySpace but a social network or, more accurately, social networks have formed among the members.
LonelyGirl13 (or whatever she's called) is a great example of user generated content and of a social network amplifying her work on YouTube. It was always about much more than pageviews or video plays.
Posted at 9:01AM on Mar 3rd 2007 by Clyde Smith
19. My gut instinct (which, again, has no real authority on anything) says that something like DVDs would be a later development, because of the community that you would need already in place to make an investment (of not just money, but due diligence to figure out the logistics of...) like that profitable.
Also, there's probably a ton of operational issues as far as the formats of videos and then also the licensing and etc with something like that.
That being said, it will probably happen at some point, I mean Flickr is doing the same thing with pictures, there's no reason that video sharing/Vimeo wouldn't do it with moving pictures.
20. Mark, Thanks for posting about Ning, we signed up and it's very cool. There are some issues with Firefox, and our RSS feed didn't display well, but I think they'll work out the kinks as it gets bigger.
Posted at 12:09AM on Mar 4th 2007 by Affiliate Network
1. Unity 08 sounds nice in theory, but in practice in cannot and will not help or work. I agree there needs to be more than 2 parties, which there are. The problem is that the "other" parties have difficulty gaining momentum. The major parties always steal their thunder by adopting the ideas that start to work, which is exactly what is supposed to happen. The problem is that because of campaign finance reform and because of other election laws limiting who can get on the ballot, it takes longer than it should for the smaller parties to gain recognition on their ideas. But a "mixed" ticket just shows that those candidates are not solid in their beliefs and ideas. The economy and I think the people want more than anything is to know what they are getting, even if it is something they don't agree with.
Posted at 2:28PM on Mar 1st 2007 by Lucas