Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
There has been debate on these forums about whether streaming and on demand services will ever replace linear TV channels. One of the things that has often been said is that there will always be a need for live television programmes, the implication being that you cannot show live stuff on demand.[/I]
|
Who said you can't show live stuff on demand, its hardly new....? The first live on demand show was a boxing match on Sky Box Office and that was probably 20 years ago.
As for linear tv, it will always be around in some form, but I would turn things around a bit and say that linear tv shows will always be around. What I mean by this is that it is the tv show/film/content that is the most important not who broadcasts it or streams it.
If Amazon somehow got the rights to stream Coronation Street live, I'd imagine Amazon would get a "few" new subscribers. Of course not everyone likes soaps or has internet access, but millions do and would go when they can get their favourite show. If Amazon then got the rights to Emerdale and Ex Factor and other top ITV shows, that would be the end of ITV. The broadcaster is not important, it is content that is king and the people who are behind the content, especially the writers/creators of it.
Another obvious example being Game Of Thrones, which has never been shown on normal tv, yet is the most talked about show of recent years. Breaking Bad another example, which has never been shown in the UK on any channel. People go where the shows are.
I expect things will eventually shift towards portals where writers and actors come together with funding via p2p lending bypassing traditional broadcasters including the current new kids on the block like Netflix and Amazon. And their shows will be put on these portals for everyone to see.
Oh and as for the new BBC magazine show, its all been done before. There's nothing new except you'll have people tweeting in, or commenting on facebook, or calling in live via Skype. Not Earth shattering by a long shot.