The net hasn't had the impact on radio that it will have on tv. In australia, at least, the existence of community and other radio has to a large extent trumped net radio demand. Basically if you explore the dial radio in oz it is pretty damn good most of the time for most niche tastes. Excepting perhaps jazz.

Free to air (and most of pay)tv otoh is an embarrassing wasteland. I'd much rather spend an hour or two randomly exloring youtube - EVEN AS IT IS NOW than randomly watching TV.

Net TV will only get better.

Francis,
I struggle to watch free to air --Suzanne watches an hour or more each night. I try but I get frustrated by the junk. I Ionly watch pay TV for work in Canberra.

Re your comment ---'Net TV will only get better.' I increasingly watch Question Time from a live feed to my computer than via the ABC when I'm in Adelaide. I just assume the quality will improve.

The at 18 Doughty Street UK conservative internet tv looks rather interesting.

It isnt a startup anymore, it got sold for 1.2B USD. Its innovation was doing video through flash which has become the standard method now.

Cam,
Yes I realize that Google bought it. I presumably because they are very innovative in terms of the media, Google, (like Apple?), is well positioned to become next-generation, broadband-centric video distributors.

If the traditional leaders are cable TV and satellite operators, then the strength of broadband as a robust video distribution medium means that there will be competition with these incumbents sometime down the road.

Google can see the potential of YouTube--apart from the economic value of both distributing its AdSense ads on YouTube pages and embedding Google's WebSearch on YouTube.

I'm just trying to figure out where they reckon it will go. Hence my turn to Wired magazine for the utopian tech insight. I reckon that potential appears to be more than internet TV.

Narcissus Now Rules OK!

Once upon in more traditional cultures,teenagers were considered as know nothing young punks and were obliged to go through a profound process of testing relative to their adolescent smartiness. Only after they had passed the demanding tests were they then considered eligible to even to begin to have something worthy to say in the forums of the Wise.
Now the world is ruled by know nothing adolescent punks.

John,
it would be hard to defend commercial free-to--air television as the forum of the Wise in relation to the world of user-generated video and to YouTube's youth communities given this use of YouTube.

I 've actually gained a lot of information from exploring the music videos uploaded onto YouTube--eg., I have some sense of the neo-traditional "country" music of Gillian Welch, and some sense of the tribute show--- Return of the Grievous Angel: A Tribute to Gram Parsons.

That's my new video experiences. It would be interesting to hear about Francis' Cam's and your video experiences.

Consumers' behavior with video is changing fast. We users want their programming on-demand, from myriad sources (i.e. professional, independent and fellow users) and perhaps most importantly, with opportunities to involve themselves in it (e.g. sharing, reviewing, collecting, etc.).

If Google Video's efforts to meet consumers' video expectations were sub-optimal, then YouTube's are market-leading. Presumably YouTube will continue to keep its finger on the pulse of consumers' video behaviors (and potentially improve its ability further with Google's technologies).

Broadband video is popping up everywhere.Major newspapers, which are confronting challenges brought on by new technology, changing consumer behavior, new competitors and impatient shareholders, have been beefing up their web sites and rolling out broadband video initiatives.

I presume that Google will try to effectively migrate the big media companies to the broadband video world. Presumably, Google desires a much tighter connection to what consumers want from their new video experiences.

I'm just trying to figure out where they reckon it will go.

Apparently they are planning to split ad revenues 50/50 with original content producers. So they plan to become distributors. I watched the four series of QI on youtube. I bit-torrented the first series of Battlestar Galactica too. About the only periodical I make an effort to get infront of the TV for is Rome on HBO, and even then the second series has become crap.

Basically I watch stuff online now. Not to mention that I download tv shows that I miss or cant be bothered organising my life around the tv for - such as Ghosthunters. Youtube is more convenient for watching tv than itunes though.

Cam,
As a user-generated content site YouTube, has a rebellious image. It has deftly designed itself around what appears to be one of the more significant contributors to the growth of an online product: Enabling a community of users to create content around content.

I presume that I am not just watching music videos made by users themselves; often the videos posted and viewed are clips of television shows and music videos whose copyright belongs to entertainment corporations--such as the tribute show---The Return of the Grievous Angel: A Tribute to Gram Parsons referred to above.

Yet this was the only way that I could watch the tribute show--- Return of the Grievous Angel: A Tribute to Gram Parsons---in Australia.Internet TV appears to be the only way that I could watch it, as it is only the CD that is publicly available. A CD is not the same as a DVD.

I'm interested in the public information angle that is different to the social networking function that ruptures the power of big money message controllers. An indication of this is the powerful 'Vote Different ' citizen ad----BIg Sister/1984 video about Hillary Clinton----- posted on YouTube by ParkRidge 47.

I will post the video.

Cam,
Of the two links you sent me by email my preference is Road Coaster by the Super Happy Motivated Rock Band.

YouTube opens up all kinds of creative possibilities for ordinary folk doesn't it?