How to Save TV

Mark Cuban posted an article on his blog this morning claiming that the Internet is "old news... useful and boring with obsolescence right around the corner."

Now, Cuban has a personal financial stake in the success of TV, both directly through his investment in HDNet and indirectly through his ownership of the Dallas Mavericks, which depends on lucrative television contracts that pull in tons of advertising revenue. I can understand why he both has a problem with YouTube and why he would want the Internet to become obsolete. YouTube sucks all the oxygen out of television (as he sees it), and the capabilities of the Internet may one day make television obsolete.

Let's leave that aside, because it truly has nothing to do with whether or not he's correct. It just gives us cause to examine his claims more closely.

His fallacy on this matter is that he's assuming the way the Internet is now is the way it will always be. He even said as much when he called the Internet "mature utility." However, the truth is that the interruption advertising model that supports television is broken, and without the utility that is currently found only on the Internet, TV will eventually become completely unsupportable.

People don't like to watch ads. The combination of the Internet and DVRs have opened up a Pandora's Box... People know what life is like without the traditional advertising model, and there's no going back. They will willingly sacrifice some production quality if doing so means they don't have to be interrupted. Trying to force people to accept interruption is only going to turn them off more.

But contrary to Cuban's implication, this isn't a competition between TV and the Internet. The Internet is richer because of TV, and it's becoming increasingly clear that programs are richer because of the utility of the Internet. That interdependence needs to be embraced -- even harvested.

As such, the way to save television is to discard the interruption advertising model on which is based -- that is, to make it more like what is good about the Internet. Rich interactive programs (Choose Your Own Adventure, anyone?), on-demand content that remains free and non-intrusive, and effective, accountable advertising.

The Internet, simply, needs more bandwidth to support better quality content, higher adoption rates, and better usability. I know Cuban doesn't think much of this can be done, but I'm staking my future on the idea that it can.

What will we call this integrated system? It's hard to predict. I suppose it depends on the primary path the innovation takes -- whether we're getting the combination of TV and Internet through AppleTV 10.0 or if we're getting it through Comcast Cable. If it's the former, perhaps our children will be asking if we can watch the Internet tonight. If it's the latter, maybe they'll ask if they can play on the TV.

I like Cuban. From what I've been told by people who've met him, he's a swell guy. He's also obviously very bright, and even though I haven't cared to watch basketball since Michael Jordan retired, I absolutely admire Cuban's passion for the game. We should all have the same passion for what we do.

Cuban's obviously committed. As we've already established, he's got a fortune riding on the belief that he's right. How much can we say the same? - Cam Beck

P.S. Perhaps this is wishful thinking, but I hope the future of TV advertising, one way or the other, looks more like this. (Link via Random Culture).

Comments

[Paul McEnany]

I agree with you, Cam. Cuban's post struck me a little funny (like many of them lately). I don't get how he discounts Moore's law so easily, or recognizes the massive changes that happen on the web on a daily basis. Hell, Google's not even a decade old! Who knew about YouTube just a year ago?

It's ridiculous to think the internet we have now is just the way it will be. There's just too much growth that will happen as the infrastructure gets more robust, and (as you said), as the internet and tv continue to integrate.

[Joshua Dorkin]

I'm with you guys on this one. As for Cuban, while he is clearly very bright, I'm a bit lost on his strategy for HDnet. I know a few people who have done work for the company, but non have ever watched the channel. At this point, I don't know of a sole who is a subscriber. Is there something that I'm missing, or does he think that his name alone is enough of a draw to charge a subscription fee (ala Howard Stern)?