Hulu to Steal 'Right' to Free Content
| Wed Jun. 24, 2009 9:41 AM PDT
I love TV, but don't have cable. So the news recently that Hulu, the free television website hosted by NBC and Fox, could soon charge for content hit me pretty hard. Asked earlier this month whether Hulu would charge customers, NewsCorp’s chief digital officer Jonathan Miller responded, "the answer could be yes. I don't see why over time that shouldn't happen."
Hulu's final move on charging for content could decide the future of online media. As the viability of print sources becomes more and more unrealistic, and advertising revenue continues to fall, online television channels, magazines, and newspapers will be faced with a similar question: Charge for content and risk losing customers and advertisers, or keep content free and suffer inadequate advertising revenue to maintain traffic.
Either way, I just can't stop thinking about all the quality (and not-so-quality) television that I will miss out on if I don't subscribe (which might not be realistic on an intern's paycheck). Below are some of the shows that I will miss the most, covering what I believe to be the spectrum of essential Hulu genres.
- Battlestar Galactica. Get your nerd on watching the 70s version of the best modern space-related show on Hulu. The site also has the most recent 5 episodes of the new and improved series. Watchable? Yes for 2004 series, absolutely not for 1978 series. Also Enjoy: Star Gate SG-1, Lost in Space
- Arrested Development. Hulu is the only site I know of with all three seasons of one of the oddest sitcoms in history. Watch to prepare for the upcoming movie. Watchable: Only if you don't die laughing. Also enjoy: The Office, 30 Rock.
- Late Night Comedy. Catch full episodes of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Watchable? Yes, but they aren't uploaded until the next day, which takes away from the late night charm. Best before work, at lunch, or around 4 pm, when quitting time is almost within reach. Also Enjoy: Saturday Night Live, The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brian.
- WWE Monday Night Raw. No full episodes, but Hulu delivers with nearly 300 clips of action, all performed by hilariously bad, massively built actors. Watchable? No! Ridiculous question! Also Enjoy: Friday Night Smackdown. But, really?
- Miami Vice. Police were weird in the 80s. If things still ran this way in Miami, we'd have way bigger problems than potentially paying for online TV. Watchable? Undecided. Also Enjoy: The A Team, Airwolf.
At the end of the day, it's unrealistic to feel entitled to free online television. Somewhere along the line, though, internet users began to think that all content available online should be free. First came Napster, and music listeners all of a sudden felt entitled to free music, regardless of the economic impact it had on artists. Then newspapers and magazines transitioned online and universally struggled to find a working online business model. Finally, television channels and media organizations began providing their content online. And before we knew it, free TV felt like a universal right. Unfortunately, it's not. And if Hulu decides to charge its viewers, then newspapers, magazines, and online radio stations will likely follow close behind.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Subscription TV
Submitted by R. O'Quinn (not verified) on Wed Jun. 24, 2009 11:22 AM PDT.
I have absolutely no problem with the concept of subscription TV, even though I grew up in the age of free tv, period. However, there would have to be some caveats in order for me to consider it:
- price would have to be reasonable (I'm thinking $.25/episode - that's twenty-five cents, roughly)
- advertising would have to be completely absent
- I would have to be able to view on my own player with my own settings
- I would have to be able to pick and choose what I pay for (I don't want my money going to support someone's vile reality tv habit, f'rinstance, nor am I willing to pay when the writing gets bad because some idiot exec decided to make the show more "mainstream")
If online tv can make these things happen, they'll have success. If they don't, they'll just create more pirates.
Believe it.
Is it really inrealistic to
Submitted by Mndrake (not verified) on Thu Jun. 25, 2009 9:43 AM PDT.
Is it really inrealistic to think of entertainment as being something free (or at least mostly free)? The assumption that it shouldn’t be free is based on the idea that people make their livings by entertaining but it wasn’t all that long ago (in the grand scheme of things) that this idea was ridiculous. Music wasn’t invented when it became economically profitable to do so. Neither did acting. I’m fine with there being NO celebrity actors or musicians, just people who perform for fun in their spare time and want to entertain others. The world would not suffer for this change.
I can see things poised to move in this direction. How many good independent films or music can you find online by people not wanting to make money but simply to have fun and entertain friends and others? I think the old model of art for profit is outdated.
How long ago?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat Jun. 27, 2009 3:34 AM PDT.
The assumption that it shouldn’t be free is based on the idea that people make their livings by entertaining but it wasn’t all that long ago (in the grand scheme of things) that this idea was ridiculous.
What? I'd say both the stars of the Globe Theatre as well as anyone who lived through a career as a minstrel would tell you that there were job opportunities for performers at least as far back as the Renaissance. If we are speaking in these sorts of time intervals, it wasn't all that long ago that the idea that the sun is the center of the solar system was ridiculous as well.
It's not 'free' now...
Submitted by Rev. Bruce (not verified) on Thu Jun. 25, 2009 11:20 AM PDT.
They don't really give it away free now, as you have to watch the commercials, which by the way, they charge the advertisers 2 to 3 times as much as for broadcast tv commercials.
The assumption that it
Submitted by Audemars Piguet (not verified) on Sat Jul. 4, 2009 7:35 AM PDT.
The assumption that it shouldn’t be free is based on the idea that people make their livings by entertaining but it wasn’t all that long ago (in the grand scheme of things) that this idea was ridiculous.
