pitchfork tv
Pitchfork.tv is almost here and apparently Wired got an early look-see... I’m not sure about this move into online TV. The one’s I’ve used such as Joost have ultimately let me down because they still push content at me rather than allowing me to pull in the content I want. Also I don’t want to spend a lot of time at the laptop just watching one piece of content; the thrill of discovery through linking ever onward on the ‘net means it takes a lot of great stuff to make me hang around one site, aka being ’sticky.’
I’m worried that the Pitchfork folks are seeing the internet as a TV channel rather like some ad agencies do. When PFork founder Ryan Schreiber says this - “There are a lot of people doing really cool stuff with music and video on the web, but in terms of clean, crisp audio and video recordings, there’s really nothing out there,” he is missing the point - yes there are many great sites that we can visit to watch stuff (hello, YouTube) but do we need “clean, crisp audio and video”? I say no we don’t, we want instant gratification and we don’t need production techniques to tidy it up and make it presentable. I saw amazing footage last month of a Boeing 777 trying to land in a storm in Frankfurt - it was a shot on either a mobile phone or a cheap digital camera and I watched it multiple times because of the content and subject matter and the commentators voice - someone who was equal parts thrilled and scared at what he was witnessing/capturing.
Schreiber goes on to say - “[We're] really documenting the music that we like and that we feel is vital.” That’s noble but should Pitchfork be a gatekeeper or a filter or both? A better way to go might be as a consumer-driven social network that allows music fans to upload what *they* believe is *vital.* Meanwhile I’ll wait until the folks at Hipster Runoff have their say.
April 6th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
“tv” seems to be the logical progression for entertainment based blogs.
boingboing has a tv version of their blog as well:
http://tv.boingboing.net/
its certainly a way to differentiate your blog from the competition. i agree that its not about production value. its about delivering rockin content on a consistent basis.
you could argue that the video will be more accessible with less production value. its just about getting your idea communicated. we don’t need mtv cutz!
April 7th, 2008 at 9:35 am
So here’s an opinion on why we don’t need ‘produced’ videos online…and this one includes models in bikinis http://www.adrants.com/2008/04/47-minute-movie-of-surfer-babes-a.php
April 7th, 2008 at 9:38 am
I generally disagree with Dave and Josh on this one… I think having certain media sites that offer quality over quantity (and interactivity) is a good thing, so long as the quantity\mashup\social networking sites still exist as well. I think we should be so glad to have a little professionalized and produced yin to our overstimulated OMFG yang.
I found that this helps: pretend that the site has nothing to do with Pitchfork. I think the latent anti-pitchfork-monopoly bias that we all have plays a role in souring our opinion in this, though I do wish that some other site had come along with this idea before pitchfork did.
As for the web 2.0 aesthetics, I still think that the internet needs to make full use of the mediums available. Sure, low quality video shouldn’t ruin anyone’s day, but there’s something to be said for finding a website that CONSISTENTLY offers good sights and sounds (I don’t think brand loyalty is a bad thing). I can’t tell you how many times I’ve cursed youtube after finding a great band playing a great song live, only to have the sound rendered literally intelligible by the fact that it was recorded on a cellphone.
I think to say that any one system of content delivery is too unhip to fit into the net is to miss the point of the web as a competitive playground for ALL types of media.
April 7th, 2008 at 9:47 am
@Justin, very good points (I for one have no bias against PFork BTW) but I suppose to be really compelled by this service I’d love to see it be included in Apple’s offerings for the Apple TV. The kind of stuff I’m expecting to get from PFork.tv is the kind of stuff I expect to be watching on a big screen from the comfort of my couch, not on a laptop at my desk….
April 7th, 2008 at 11:13 am
I like it. I think its nice to see/hear some high quality video/music for a change and not to mention, its free. Granted the videos are for one week only but I think that brings more value.
April 7th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Possibly as important as video quality, the audio quality is what makes most youtube (and most amateur made) live music videos almost worthless to me. I agree that the factor of making it easily embeddable is key though, and once pitchfork.tv gets this working they’ll be all over the place. According the Wired article, embeddable and ipod-friendly clips are forthcoming which will solve both the “stickiness” issue and the podcast/Apple TV thing as well. One thing I find pretty annoying about pitchfork.tv is their “Pitchfork Central Casting” in the Special Presentation section of shows. It feels pretty fake, and I think the last thing the channel needs is faux reality tv and College Humor-esque skits.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:54 am
If you ask me (and nobody did, heh) this just seems like a move to slip a more traditional media model onto the net, albeit disguised as new media. The very idea of Internet TV channels as a major part of the future of the net doesn’t bode well to me.
Once internet media sites begin acting like old media in a consistent, marketable way it won’t be long until the FCC decides it “needs” to regulate it. I believe the DCMA was one attempt to do this even without the old media influence.
Oh, and I believe the FCC will find a way to legislate around the fact that the stuff it wants to regulate online isn’t broadcast over the airwaves. They’ll figure out some kind of “save the children” public scare campaign and try to run some kind of legislation through….
I know this sounds a bit shrill, but we’ve seen this behavior from our government before.Does anyone remember the PMRC music hearings in the senate back in the 80s? And that was over a few Prince and Sheena Easton albums.
April 8th, 2008 at 8:32 am
@JW, you might be on to something there…this just in from CNet
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9911501-7.html?tag=nl.e703
Courts chip away at Web sites’ decade-old legal shield
For more than a decade, Web site operators have enjoyed a broad legal shield against lawsuits filed over material posted by their users, which has let user-driven sites like YouTube and MySpace.com flourish. But a pair of recent rulings by federal district judges have chipped away at that protective shield. If those decisions are upheld on appeal, and if more judges follow suit, Web site operators and Internet service providers may find themselves compelled to police what their users post–or face the unsettling prospect of being held liable for the contents.
April 9th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Youtube is great, but the quality sucks. Last night I spent about an hour watching beautiful full screen videos on PF. I think the site is very well designed, it has great content and the videos are very high quality. How could you not like that?
April 9th, 2008 at 8:26 am
@marc, I believe I’m going to like P4RK TV a lot when it is portable. As you say, you spent an hour watching full screen videos. That’s akin to an hour on the couch watching regular TV, there’s no differentiation. Obviously your ability to pick and choose, “filter” your content is cool and also time shift your viewing but watching video for an hour on my laptop even with an attached 23″ monitor just doesn’t do it for me.
As I said earlier, when this thing hits Apple TV and I can download and take portions with me on the iPhone, I’ll be happy….”the internet is not a TV channel” should be the mantra, advertising agencies are falling into the trap of thinking it is and they are failing to grab users attention because of that thinking. The internet is a whole expanding universe and when companies try to grab a part of it that piece just snaps off and withers on the vine as it gets left behind. The best thing the internet offers is interactivity - P4rkTV is a non-interactive experience as far as I can tell. Discovery is the key word I reckon. Keeping moving is the action. As I heard at a panel not too long ago “remember, kids are only one click away from porn,” meaning that the minute someone’s (very short) attention span is compromised by some video going on too long without interesting content..then click and they’re gone and they won’t come back either.
Meanwhile I recommend CoolHunting for beautiful videos that keep your attention because they last about 4 minutes and they’re packed full of interesting stuff. http://www.coolhunting.com/video/