TANSTAFL
Will video iPods eclipse the success of their audio siblings? Will consumers pay for content they can get over the air for free? Will the distribution of digital video content revolutionize a tevision industry that has changed little since The Texaco Star Theater? IMHO, the answer to all those questions is Yes, but it might take us back to those days too...openly sponsored programs, fifteen minute shows/newscasts and more.
How ironic is it that the stodgy old 60 Minutes is out of the gate early with a program sponsored by a single advertiser. It even promoted the fact of fewer commercials and more content as it thanked its sponsor. Certianly not the first to do it, Ford sponsored the season premiere of 24 a few years ago and movies and specials have been presented "without interruption" on broadcast TV thanks to a presenting sponsor. But the fact remains, someone paid for it.
As consumers, we will have to accept the TANSTAFL theory (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch). Someone will always have to pay for what has been considered free content.
But the beauty of delivering that free content on line is that it can be more effective for the publisher and user. If, in exchange for free content, users are willing to register and list their preferences, marketing messages can be delivered to a more targeted audience. The advertiser gets a more effective, efficient and targeted delivery and the user gets a message they are more likely to be interested in.
As cable (basic v. premium) and now radio (terrestrial v. satellite) have demonstrated, consumers are willing to pay for commercial free content.
I'm sure there will be a balance. "Commercial" forms will change, from :30s to :10s or maybe :60s depending on which work best. On line, those commercials will be more interactive and involving.
But consumers and publishers need to remember that advertising has been the lifeblood of free TV, radio and even online content. Without it, someone else will have to pay the bill.