Comments on: Viacom moves on without YouTube

Viacom offers a peek at its strategy--sans YouTube--for promoting video clips from its Comedy Central channel.
Image: This Jon Stewart clip could be yours

[Blito]

Better to AD then take away

If Viacom wants so be in innovative then stop taking away and worrying about other websites. People get the wqrong impression. Web people like a hpappy freidly company so they thehn get very [popular.
Make your site better, smoother, more savvy and add the posting TAGS so people can ADVERT your show around the web. Forget about what YouTube does.
In fact if y'all are striking partnerships with YouTube how about insuring the video quality (reception) is really high over there too.

Thanks

[Lite Rocker]

Includes Chappelle videos?

Will he quit real life to come back to the internet?

[shoffmueller]

How's a guy supposed to get the Series of Tubes video?

That clip is a national treasure.

[shoffmueller]

How's a guy supposed to get the Series of Tubes video?

That clip is a national treasure.

[shoffmueller]

I swear

I hit "Submit My Reply" only once, but it still double-posted my comment. Grrrr.

[FellowConspirator]

Viacom = not so bright

First, I'd point out that not all of the 100,000
videos Viacom asked YouTube to pull are
Viacom's. Quite a few people have been upset to
find their own personal video posts -- copyright
by them and containing no content from another
party -- have been yanked from YouTube in
response to the Viacom request.

Second, Viacom is shooting themselves in the
foot. By "opting out" of YouTube exposure, they
are taking their content away from where people
search for it; and they are largely removing
accessibility to search engines. Further, they
take on the mantle of providing the content (the
transcoding, storage, maintenance, bandwidth and
site design) all at cost to them. And in some
instances offer videos with peculiar codecs that
some platforms have issues with, and more
frequently provide sites with botched
JavaScript, HTML, or CSS that frequently renders
poorly or cuts off parts of the video.

"'Why is it better for people to consume our
video on YouTube rather than my site?'" --
Because it's a centralized place to search,
because they're tagged and rated, because your
site takes forever to load, because it doesn't
have as many clips, because people can't comment
on the clips or make cross-references to other
clips, because you can't search by topic across
other videos, and the list goes on.

[Bob H in NPR]

viacom w/o you tube

I once had "The Daily Show" on my "My Yahoo" page, but removed it. Why? There were occasional problems with loading & playback in the beginning, but I could usually eventually get a decent viewing in a reasonable amount of time. Then came the new, improved version. More often than not, I could not even get to the "Mother-Load" screen. When I finally did, it took forever to get to the clip, which almost never ran properly if it ran at all.. So much for Viacom doing a good job on their own. They didn't shoot themselves in the foot; the took out both kneecaps.

[HandGlad2]

Why would Viacom care about YouTube?

Are these viewers really the target audience anyway?

[pixelm]

filtering

good story with a substantial error. Filtering is not hard and is getting easier. It is MUCH easier when filtering videos as they upload, then having to check the entire site each day to see if there is anything new. Audible Magic, gracenote, auditude, Thomson, Phillips all have effective automated solutions. Problem is simply that the studios do not believe youtube has any incentive to implement the technologies. In fact, Chad Hurley said in last Friday's NY Times that they are ready to filter - but only if you have a deal with them. Kind of "if you won't sell it, I'll take it"

[boggart]

Who needs You Tube.

OK, I need You Tube for the traffic it brings to my sites, but I am an individual with a budget of zero for promoting my work. Viacom aren't.
Anyone thinking of piling in and telling me how You Tube is the future of entertainment should first ask themselves "how many fart lighting videos does an intelligent person need to see?"


http://greenteeth.blog.co.uk/main

[politix]

You tube only stands to help Viacom. Duh, Viacom might notice that video quality on youtube flash video is terrible. If someone watches a video clip from a you tube video dont you think they might go out and buy the whole video in real high quality dvd. Not to mention if they watch a 2 minute clip from a you tube video they might want to buy the whole movie on dvd in its 2-4 hour format.

Hello Viacom Wake up