Great Business Idea (TM)

Away in some near-future vaguely-Gibsonian alternative universe, there goes an industry like this: the personal shopping channel. Back here, ‘Personal shoppers’ are well-known amongst… well, basically, the rich. So maybe I wouldn’t know, but nevertheless the personal shopping channel is not something that’s attracted my attention.

The basic idea is this; the personal shopper heads out into the brave new world of… gosh, I don’t know, Regent Street, Soho, wherever such people go these days. Meanwhile, they’re videoed by the shopping channel people, who – moments later, in a nearby Starbucks – cut together and upload footage of the shopper’s selections. Uploaded solely for the individual paying for the personal shopper, of course.

Is anyone doing this? They should be. It feels so… frivolously, gloriously, pointlessly right.

Use mpeg4, people

I’m trying to view a showreel for a client of one of the London artists’ management agencies. The file is in Windows Media Player format… only, WMP crashes on launch on my Mac. My work PC is so old it can’t handle the compression, and it doesn’t have audio, anyway (a common circumstance). So… I can’t see the showreel.

So, I try reinstalling WMP for Mac OS X. No dice, it still falls over. I check the help site, and find this wonderful gem:

Although it is usually possible to play protected files by using Windows Media Player 9 Series for Mac OS X, in some cases you may encounter one of the following issues:

  • The Player displays the error message “Cannot open the file. Verify that the path and file name are correct and try again.” In this case, verifying the path and file name will not solve the problem.
  • A Web page is displayed that informs you that you should upgrade to a newer version of the Player. In this case, you already have the latest version of Windows Media Player for Mac OS X, so upgrading will not solve the problem.

In both cases, there is no way to resolve the issue, and you won’t be able to play the file.

Oh, for heaven’s sake! If the file was in anything like an MPEG4 format, I could play it on pretty much anything. Including my phone! Grrrr!

What I was really going to write in response to Gia’s post

OK, so having introduced you, dear reader, to the digital rights movement, I can now go off on one about TV and where it’s going. This is what I originally wrote in response to Gia’s post:

A year or so ago I was in a little seminar being addressed by Nigel Pickard, who’s the Director of Programmes at ITV. So far as programme makers are concerned, he’s The Man. The part of his presentation that struck home went like this:

“You’re all producers. You all think my job is to spend £850m a year on your work. It isn’t. My job is to sell at least £850m-worth of advertising space.”

There’s an extent to which that’s hyperbole for dramatic effect, but it does illustrate a major gulf between what people think commercial TV is about – more programmes – and what it’s actually about: making money. It is, after all, a business.

It’s also, of course, why the BBC is so important. Their entire job is to put decent media in front of lots of people. They’re going to find the shift from conventional TV painful, but they’ve been lifting their gaze into that future for some time now. As we saw at OpenTech last weekend with Backstage and Dirac and Kamaelia and the rest, they’re at least five years ahead of the commercial sector in terms of how they’re thinking. But we still don’t know what we’re shifting to. We don’t know what it looks like, nor how it’s delivered, nor how people consume it. Nor, for that matter, if they even will consume it. One catches glimpses of the future in things like the Podcasting phenomenon, which has gone from first glimmerings to more-or-less-mainstream in about a year.

I can see two ways this could pan out: either the BBC pulls something out of the bag and subsequently drags the rest of the broadcast industry along with it – most likely kicking and screaming and ungrateful and still trying to get its charter cancelled – or somebody does a movie download system right and TV eventually gives up trying to work it out for itself, rolls over, and hitches itself to that bandwagon. It’s hard to see anybody but Apple doing the latter, in part because everybody else still seems to be in denial about why the iPod and iTunes Music Store work, but… well, that’s a whole other post.

The people to watch are, I think, the advertising industry. There’s serious money involved there, and it’s hard to see how it flows without the relatively simple outlet that is TV. Broadcast TV isn’t so much one-to-many as few-to-shedloads; it’s a blunt instrument for advertisers, but it’s surprising how many worries drop out of the equation when you multiply by eight million pairs of eyeballs.

I begin to see how the BBC can survive the coming shift; I can sort of see how Sky will, since football is such a big draw; I have serious concerns about ITV; the ad industry? Answer hazy, ask again later.

What are they up to? What do the Saatchis and the Chiat/Days and the BBHs think? More to the point – what are their long-term plans?

Oh, and Gia: firstly, I’m not sure your trackbacks work, and secondly… sorry to have given you flack about the whole cat thing. I’m sure he’s lovely.

What all this ‘British EFF’ stuff is about.

Gia’s posted an interesting and timely rant about the whole copyright/fair use/personal use/file sharing mess we’re in. A direct example for people who haven’t really come across all this yet: I missed Absolute Power and The Extras on Thursday night. While I could have recorded them to tape – or even rigged something up with some other video kit here and recorded them onto my laptop at somewhat better quality – I didn’t bother. Why? Because I knew I’d be able to hop over to UKNova and download the files.

Now… from my point of view these were both BBC shows; I pay my license fee; I could have legally recorded them, for personal use, on my VHS deck. The quality would have been rubbish, and programming the VCR is clumsy and annoys the heck out of me. The alternative is that I download the same programme; it’s still clumsy to do, but I’d say easier than setting the VCR, and I don’t lose the tape by forgetting to label it.

But here’s the kicker – the download alternative is unlicensed redistribution of copyright material. It’s illegal. The BBC don’t lose out and I gain convenience, but currently it’s still copyright infringement.

The (near-)future of TV involves working out this sort of situation. Does it remain illegal? Will the tricky-to-use effectively-underground networks be overtaken by something legal with reasonable digital rights management and charges, like the iTunes Music Store? Or will the DRM be draconian and something we all have to bash our heads against on a daily basis, as the planned US systems currently look?

Over in the US there’s an organisation campaigning on this sort of thing from a ‘general public’ perspective, and it’s been remarkably successful; it’s called the Electronic Frontier Foundation (which, I have to say, always sounded naff to me. Maybe it loses something in the translation). There’s nothing similar in the UK, which is partly why the future of broadcast and digital media is being decided behind closed doors – when reporters are looking around for quotes, there’s nobody to put a counter-position, so it goes unreported.

A week ago at OpenTech, Danny O’Brien chaired a session titled ‘Where’s the British EFF?’. In a remarkable stroke of joined-up thinking, the group started a pledge drive via the cute and recently-launched PledgeBank system run by MySociety (many of whom were in the room, of course). This resulted in coverage from the Guardian (er… by Danny) and BBC Online, amongst others, but if you want to see the session in most of its glory there’s honest-to-goodness video of it thanks to… er, well, [blush] that would be me; also see Danny’s notes, Cory’s story at BoingBoing, Suw Charman’s first and second posts, Technorati’s list of people linking to the pledge.

Feel free to post additional links in the comments, but bear in mind that most of the readers here aren’t already digital rights activists, nor even total geeks. If this thing is to be successful, we need to convince a broad constituency that it’s important.

BBC Editorial Policy on Blogs

The BBC’s Editorial Guidelines site is a handy reference for programme makers and journalists (and possibly members of the public who wish to know what we worry about). There’s a particularly useful list of advice, concerning things like conflict of interest, funding for make-over programmes, game show prizes, and the like. Something that’s recently popped up there is an entry for ‘Blogs BBC Policy on Personal Blogs WIKI’ (sic).

The link goes to a BBC internal site, which of course is not available from outwith the BBC. All I can guess is that it’s running the Confluence commercial wiki software, which implies that the ‘BBC Policy on Personal Blogs’ is somehow under discussion and/or being updated by a group within the BBC.

Anyone know any more about what’s going on? And why is it linked from an advice site intended, supposedly equally, for external suppliers? It’s not that I smell a conspiracy, I’m just curious.

Oops

Did I mention I wanted an ‘undo’ button on MT-Blacklist? Er… folks… sorry, I just deleted about half-a-dozen comments, and left some perfectly good spam behind instead. I only noticed when Blacklist offered to add ‘quernstone.com’ to the list of banned URLs, which I suppose might serve as acceptable penance, but …

Bother.

[update: Thank heavens for browser caches. I think I’ve put everything back, though a couple of comments were truncated in the screen I could reach, and I had to fill in the gaps from memory. My apologies if I’ve put words in anybody’s mouth. Meanwhile, I think my own blog has just banned me for being an over-prolific commenter. Oh, the ignominy.]

[update 2: D’oh! Of course, Movable Type emails me everybody’s comments. So all I had to do was copy&paste from mail. Is this National Blinkin’ Eedjit Day, or something?]