The next couple of days will tell us a lot about the ambitions and strategies of two of the major broadcasters in the UK.
The BBC Trust is set to give its verdict on the iPlayer today and ITV will relaunch ITV.com with on-demand content on Tuesday; Both events follow the decision from the BBC Trust to give the green light to the much delayed Freesat project last week.
Hauling both corporations into the digital age should give a boost to the programming of both as a wider audience will be able to access programming on their own terms and in their own time.
How quickly this will spell the end of mainstream linear broadcast remains to be seen, but it will be interesting to watch what impact the moves have on viewing habits and in ITV’s case advertising revenues.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Do You Value Free Speech?
The UK government, through Education Secretary Alan Johnson, said today that sites have a "moral obligation" to tackle bullies who post clips showing abuse of teachers and pupils and are urging site operators to do more to remove videos taken by pupils on mobile phones which humiliate or mock staff.
The argument over bullying on sites such as YouTube cuts to the very heart of UGC and the question of whether it should be moderated.
In the traditional media world there are checks and balances - to an extent - to ensure that any damaging content appearing has consequences, but in a world where everyone is a broadcaster those checks have been removed.
The question now is do we want to materially modify what UGC is by introducing checks to ‘free speech’? And will those who use these sites willingly submit to these or move on to sites that give them a more free hand?
I can remember when teachers were fair game for a bit of ribbing, but the dispersal of content has become so efficient through social networks and upload sites that real damage can now be done.
The moderation of these sites will undoubtedly bring in more advertising revenue as brands will feel more comfortable in a controlled media environment, but the edgier brands and users will be looking for the next YouTube and it is the users who make the environment.
Which side of the argument do you pin your colours on?
The argument over bullying on sites such as YouTube cuts to the very heart of UGC and the question of whether it should be moderated.
In the traditional media world there are checks and balances - to an extent - to ensure that any damaging content appearing has consequences, but in a world where everyone is a broadcaster those checks have been removed.
The question now is do we want to materially modify what UGC is by introducing checks to ‘free speech’? And will those who use these sites willingly submit to these or move on to sites that give them a more free hand?
I can remember when teachers were fair game for a bit of ribbing, but the dispersal of content has become so efficient through social networks and upload sites that real damage can now be done.
The moderation of these sites will undoubtedly bring in more advertising revenue as brands will feel more comfortable in a controlled media environment, but the edgier brands and users will be looking for the next YouTube and it is the users who make the environment.
Which side of the argument do you pin your colours on?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)