Monday, November 07, 2005

Does Al Gore really hold the future of TV?

AL GORERemember Al Gore? You know, the guy who was supposed to win (well, probably did win) the 2000 Presidential race but somehow never made it to the White House? We haven't heard much from him since those dark days. Following his defeat in the Supreme Court, he famously grew a beard, briefly taught graduate journalists at Columbia, and has been spending more time back in his native Tennessee, where he is steadily rebuilding bridges in his home state (which notoriously failed to vote for him in 2000) as rumors persist that he'll make another presidential run in 2008. Wikipedia also lists his current activities as chairing a company called Generation Investment Management, sitting on Apple Computer's board of directors, and serving "as an unofficial advisor to Google's senior management."

The role that has recently drawn the most attention to Gore - certainly in media circles - is his partnership in the new cable and web TV enterprise, Current TV, which went on air on August 1 this year. Gore and partner Joel Hyatt have set up the new network - based in San Francisco - in an effort to do something radically different with television. It seems like he might be on to something. Here's how a recent USA Today article ("Akimbo, Current Media could embody TV's next generation") introduces us to the operation.
    Two decades ago, if you wanted to see how cable would change TV, you might've visited Turner Broadcasting and MTV, just to soak up what was going on. Today, there's no question the Internet is going to alter television — not make TV go away, but make it different. So whom do you visit to check out where this is heading? Could be a lot of contenders, but while I'm in San Francisco, I can hit two on the same day: Current and Akimbo.

Akimbo, btw, is another nascent TV hybrid operation that seems to act like a "super-TiVO" for "niche video-almost-on-demand". Its main claim to fame seems to be that it's being run by a chap called Will Hearst, who apparently is a grandson of 19th Century newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst. But the Current TV operation sounds like it's the more interesting venture of the two. As USA Today notes, Gore and Hyatt are thinking about television in a very different way," as they attempt to integrate TV and web operations more symbiotically than ever before. "Current is using the Internet to make its viewers a meaningful part of the TV channel. More than 30% of the segments on Current are produced by amateurs and are sent in through the website." (I haven't got to see the TV version yet, but I have dug around on the web site to see the type of material being submitted and aired.)
    Here's how the system works: Anyone can use a digital video camcorder to create a five-minute story — or “pod” in the Current lingo — and upload it to www.current.tv. Then the site's users view the pods and vote on them. The pods that rise to the top — a sliver of the number sent in — are considered for the Current TV channel.

    Before launch, Current executives thought they'd be lucky to get enough good-quality content from viewers to fill maybe 5% of airtime, says Joanna Drake Earl, who runs Current's Web operations. But they were amazed at what came in. “It looks and feels different, but we love the rawness,” she says.

    So the channel has wound up with pods about religious-themed haunted funhouses, amateur kickball and young Afghans who work out with weights while admiring 1970s posters of Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Back in early August, right after the station started operations, NPR ran a piece that noted how the station was designed to "snag the short attention span of young people who don't normally watch the news." Clearly, though, no-one back then had a clear idea whether this exercise in truly interactive TV would take off. NPR quoted commentator (and USC professor) Todd Boyd, who refelected that the programming looked a little like "a cross between an earlier version of MTV, CNN, and the Internet." Boyd focused on how it was hard to imagine Al Gore being associated with anything "hip." Yet three months later, it seems as if Gore has hit upon something that connects to "the kids."

USA Today concludes: "For the past decade, the Internet has opened the door for people and subjects that wouldn't otherwise make it into mainstream media. Current is now using that opening to change mainstream media. And the industry is paying attention."

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've never heard of this genius Current TV. What an incredible idea. It's also great to hear how well Al Gore is doing. He was always the brunt of a lot of jokes, and I could never really understand why. He obviously has great ideas and good intentions.
I just checked out the site and the interface is really cool and easy to use. The idea that you can create your own video and submit it to be voted on is revolutionary. Well, not completely, because I know of other sites that offer that to filmmakers, but Current TV is an incredibly hip, easily accessible medium through which you can share your ideas and creativity through video. It also serves as an entertaining alternative to normal television. Not only does it have an interesting array of videos to choose from, but it seems that you can watch them whenever you want. As someone who loves watching tv, but can't always find something interesting on, I don't see how I can't become a member of this amazing site.

Lucas Magyarics

11/08/2005 4:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the jokes in the last campaign about Al Gore and how he invented the internet (he was instrumental in passing legislation that got it off the ground---without his hard work and support it might have taken many more years to get to its starting point) don't seemed to have had an effect on Al pursuing the power of the net. He is a very intelligent man, but his perception as a stilted person cost him more than Bush's perception of being a (I'll be nice) and helped lose him the election. Whether he has the backing of the Democratic machine for 2008 is hard to gauge right now, but he cannot be counted out for it and in the long run will impact this country one way or another in years to come.

DJ Smith

11/10/2005 5:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've seen Current TV once or twice, and (I hate to admit it,) I doubt it will have the staying power of some of the other fledgling-cable-channels-turned-multi-billion-dollar-industries like Mtv or CNN, etc. Although it is a genius idea, with a large growth potential, I feel like there really isn't an audience for this at the moment. Granted, it certainly puts TV into the hands of the viewer (literally) but I'm hesitant to say that when the novelty wears off Current TV will survive. I'm sure I'd have a different perception of the whole concept had I not grown up with a traditional form of network television, (it's hard to change perceptions.) Regardless of this, until other network and cable channels begin to put on programs similar to Current TV, this channel will remain on the fringes of television programming.
-Libby Donaldson

11/14/2005 12:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The internet and the ways in which people are utilizing its broad range of users is really exciting and innovating. The onset of "pods" seems to be a very good idea in that it allows viewers to see stories that, otherwise, would not have a chance to be told. However, I too feel that "pods" and "pod-casting" has a long way to go because there still remains a high number of people who are unable to utilize a computer, or are hindered because of low bandwith that they have at their home. In addition, it would be presumably hard to tackle the "giant" that is cable tv. However, it is nice nonetheless to see that a slowly growing interest is being put upon "internet-tv", rather than the highly biased news sources we get on the television.

sokin (david) yoon

11/15/2005 6:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Though this idea is very interesting and does have some promise, it seems more like something we will remember as a fad. Does anyone remember the last time people tried to integrate television and the internet? Well it was a very different concept known was WebTV. I feel like this Current TV will have similar staying power as WebTV had. With that said, I personally don't know anyone who still uses, or even has their WebTV. The concept is intrguing and perhaps I don't have enough information to make such a judgment, but I have to go with my gut on this one and say it that Current TV will be somewhat of a short-lived hit.

-Morgan Dunn

11/16/2005 4:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think its shocking at all when politicians become involved in the media. After all, media is now considered to make or break a politicians career and we all saw the attacks on Gore when he let himself go after the 2000 elections. His newest project, while I don't fully understand it and see it more as a fusion fade, shows more of his true personality. I think its interesting that once seen as one of the most boring men in politics, Gore is now being cast an influencial techie.

-Colleen Keltz

11/20/2005 5:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would also need more details on the current TV but it does seem as though it is some sort of fad. There a lot of new technologies out there but very few of them make it big and into the main stream. I personally have never even heard of current TV before this so I am slightly niave on the subject. It also doesnt surprise me that Al Gore is involved in this. I agree that the media is what makes or breaks a politician so it would only make sense that he would be apart of it developement.
-colleen wayne

11/29/2005 10:28 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home