bits.blogs.nytimes.com — “The Daily Show” is a bellwether for the evolution of Internet video. It is also one of those programs that signify for people why they pay so much money for cable.That’s why my eyebrows jumped when I saw the announcement last week that full episodes of three Comedy Central shows will start being webcast.
May 30, 2008 View in Crawl 4
itspuddingtimeMay 31, 2008
Basic cable is still an extra cost over no cable. (yes, I'm one of those)
remlapMay 31, 2008
The Daily Show plays out on free channel in the UK more4.
spammishkingJun 1, 2008
Why do people always forget the The Daily Show is a comedy show, satire. ITS NOT A REAL NEWS SHOW. Dammit people it's even on a network called Comedy Central, not [network] News.
Closed AccountJun 2, 2008
I hate their f**king player. It never buffers enough video before it starts playing, resulting in countless stops and pauses and breaks. On most players, you just pause the video and wait for it to have downloaded enough of the stream and then hit play when you feel it is ready. Not so with whatever bulls**t player comedy central uses. Hit pause, and it stops downloading video altogether. Want to watch it again? You've got to re-f**king stream it instead of playing a cached copy. I hate their f**king player, it makes clips unwatchable.
Closed AccountJun 3, 2008
I concede this reply you tool:"Wouldn't that actually be pro-Semitic, if you're criticizing people from trying to hide their Jewish heritage?"You fail dips**t
joeanonSep 6, 2008
That's a lame perspective that all media while consolidate into one.This is simply the hot medium. If you really think about it video is a kind of limiting theme all by itself.Video is going 3D and you'll also see more taste, touch, smell and air cannon 4D theaters with the new digital 3D and modern effects in clear high res 3D.Hulu is just some low res 2D and video stream is one of the most bandwidth wasteful models you could come up with.It's far better to share content in a bit torrent like fashion where you have this dynamic clustering of file hosts all over the world downloading only once and playing locally.Streaming is convenient for the dumb masses, but it's only so useful and you're nearly prone while watching a video, unable to multitask of effectively take other input.Your media choice depends on what you do and where you are, not just cheap convenience. I think it's safe to say your forgetting that media distribution companies are a trillion dollar industry and that while they might fight for decades to keep their business model alive.Eventually, their wealth will not run out, but it will change business model. These are consolidated mega corporations in some case.They'll find a way to get into the action. You can see this in iTunes, and the new TV technologies IPTV and Apple TV.That's going to eventually kill streaming services for mainstream content in my opinion because at some point it will be cost effective to just admit that it's cheaper for both parties to go with an IPTV style setup since advertising is actually what's paying for everything not monthly fees.Just imagine if Comcast starting offering 3-4 or more times as much for advertising on stream sites.It would be hard for them to resist and Comcast would be positioning themselves as part of the streaming channels revenue outlooks allowing all kinds of potential for profits or power plays.You're vastly underestimating the wealth gap between these industries and how that gives the long term advantage to big business, not the innovative little guy.They will position themselves, in time, as the landscape of media distribution stops changing so much. Itunes is already there and I'd think it won't be long until we have a flat monthly fee for huge selections of content from online providers.. legally.You'll be able to get JUST the channel(s) you want like Comedy Central and pay directly to them with a small commission from the distribution channel, because when done right, internet media distribution is cheapest way to go. Well, until too many people get on and too little funding is committed to bandwidth, but that will work itself out I think. Though.. if the services were here and broadband was quicker to spread throughout the US we'd probably see more exciting business models that can cut entertainment costs for viewers. So I'd would support a smart and well managed government/corporate cooperative boost for internet bandwidth, but only under the correct terms in regard to what the people get vs what the corporations get. It has to be about efficient delivery of content not about creating subscription revenue.