roundtable: Re: Is the problem content production or access to carriage?

roundtable: Re: Is the problem content production or access to carriage?

Re: Is the problem content production or access to carriage?

Samuel A. Simon (ssimon@idi.net)
Mon, 28 Mar 1994 22:33:49 -0500 (EST) 

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 22:33:49 -0500 (EST)
From: "Samuel A. Simon" <ssimon@idi.net>
Subject: Re: Is the problem content production or access to carriage?
To: roundtable@cni.org
In-Reply-To: <9403280332.AA24121@a.cni.org>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.85.9403282249.A18710-0100000@idi.net>


On Mon, 28 Mar 1994, Michael Chui wrote:
> 
>      While it's certainly true that non-profits are usually struggling
> to raise funds, could you say more about why you believe the production
> of high-quality content is likely to be a greater problem than obtaining
> access to carriage?  From a technical and economic standpoint, it seems
> to me that the means of producing high quality content have been become
> increasingly available with advances in digital technology - witness
> low-cost "Rodney KingCamcorders," digital audio/video editing equipment
> like Video Toasters and morphing software, $500 gigabyte disk drives,
> free WorldWideWeb editing/server software, etc.  However, there appears
> to be real business incentive for carriers to develop "vertical 
> monopolies" from content production to delivery, denying access to 
> potential information providers.  It is pretty much technically and 
> economically feasible for a non-profit to build a "basement video 
> server," but no bidirectional point-to-point digital network exists to 
> deliver the service.  I agree that non-profit funding is an important 
> problem, but vis-a-vis the digital media, it seems like the more 
> pressing public policy issue might be access to carriage, rather than 
> funding content production (ignoring, for the moment, the previously 
> discussed difficulties in prioritizing content for funding).
> 
> Michael Chui
> mchui@cs.indiana.edu


  Michael,


   I understand about the more ready availability of production equipment 
and the like.  But I have experience now in two occassions, one in cable 
and the other in low-power television.  We have had "the outlet", but the 
cost of  producing signficant proramming over time had nothing to do with 
the availabity of cheap camcorders. Indeed, the need is for production 
quality euipment, but it wasn't the equipment cost that was/is the 
problem. It is the absence of the money needed to produce the 
programming/material at a level and on a scale that would gain audiences 
in a market with multiple traditional outlets.  Even "sliver casting" 
didn't work, because we don't ahve the resoures to go to the level of 
porduction...not just quality of the video, but teh qualityof the program 
content itself. 

   While I undersand the idea of opening up a street corner for anyone to 
go make a speech (or put up a digital program), I think the need/goal is 
bigger.  It is to produce material on a consistent basis that is 
read/seen/used, and to do that requires a lot of money.  With that money, 
if there is a strong program/service/idea then the outlet will be there 
in all likelihood. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Samuel A. Simon
IDI (Issue Dynamics Inc)	|   Internet:	ssimon@idi.net
901 15th St. NW Suite 230
Washington, DC 20005
(202)408-1400 (v/tdd)
(202)408-1134 (fax)
(202)408-1163 (BBS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[CNI Home Page]