Going Webby

Interesting LA Times story striking writers looking to launch web-startups to bypass the studios who are so unwilling to share web revenues. It's an intriguing development. The TV and movie studios business models are fundamentally all about controlling the channels of distribution -- the very thing the rise of the internet disrupts. But they still have a massive leg-up in the new medium simply because of all the embedded human capital in the form of relationships with the talent.

They seem to have decided, however, that the dawning of the digital age is mostly a good time to try to claw back compensation from their workforce rather than a time when good relations with their workforce are becoming more important than ever in a world where control of the distribution channels is becoming less and less important.

Comments

"in a world where control of the distribution channels is becoming less and less important."

Meh.

The recent creation of the long tail doesn't make the meaty body disappear.

Posted by Petey | December 17, 2007 10:19 AM

a good time to try to claw back compensation from their workforce

That's one way of looking at it, I suppose, but I doubt that's how the studios see it.

Posted by right | December 17, 2007 10:27 AM

The recent creation of the long tail doesn't make the meaty body disappear.

Nicely put.

Posted by James Gary | December 17, 2007 10:58 AM

Less important doesn't equal disappear??

Posted by yep | December 17, 2007 11:20 AM

"Less important doesn't equal disappear"

Sure. But most of the meat is still going to be on the body, not the tail.

The long tail's existence is a wonderful thing for artists who don't aspire to the mass market, but the meaty body is always going to be the most important part, in terms of nourishing money-making.

Control of distribution in the Long Tail world may mean that you have control of 80% instead of the previous 99%, but 80% is still pretty damn close to everything.

Posted by Petey | December 17, 2007 11:46 AM

It's a nicely coined phrase, Petey, but totally ignores the issue at hand. No one here is arguing that popular mainstream entertainments will cease to exist. But we need broadcast infrastructure and retail distribution less with each passing day.

Posted by Tom | December 17, 2007 12:00 PM

"But we need broadcast infrastructure and retail distribution less with each passing day."

If you don't aspire to the mass market, this is entirely true.

As stated, the Long Tail world is wonderful for some creators.

But control of distribution is always going to be king. Most consumers just aren't as intrepid and curious as New World Maximalists would have it. You have to put it on their plate before they'll eat it. They don't want to go out foraging.

Posted by Petey | December 17, 2007 12:07 PM

Petey --

I'm late for picketing, and haven't had a chance to read the LAT article, but isn't distribution much easier in the Internet world? It just takes money to build a brand, not money to build affiliates and transmission facilities. And wouldn't somebody like Joss Whedon, or Lorne Michaels, be his own brand?

Posted by Delicious Pundit | December 17, 2007 12:37 PM

Can we assume that control of the channels of distribution is the only value that the studios, or any production company brings to the table? That seems a little bit over-simplified to me.

Posted by Jamaal | December 17, 2007 2:00 PM

isn't distribution much easier in the Internet world? et al.

As I see it, it isn't distribution per se, but the financial and logistical capacity to produce complex product that's the issue here. I just don't see a single person or small self-organized group (even Joss Whedon or Lorne Michaels) being able to organize the writing, acting, and production staff and materiel that are required for even a lower-end network TV series.

As was sort-of-addressed in Matt's post about textbooks the other day, much content-creation requires a level of complexity and commitment that precludes it being done by amateurs in their spare time.

Posted by James Gary | December 17, 2007 2:14 PM