Tag Archives: YouTube

Google Visitors Are So Weird

Even if nobody reads your stupid blog, it’s worth it just to see what terms people use to find it. Here are some of the searches that led people to this blog. How random. How in the heck are people finding this blog by searching the word “grief”?

free episodes of the office 4
grief 3
how to promote a video contest 2
best boobs 2
fucking ben affleck cast 2
willvideoforfood 2
instrumental music to use in video 1
apple macbook air commercial parody 1
best quality external hard drive 1
five stages of death 1
grief 6
will video for food 6
how to become popular 5
napkin musical 4
doubleclick google food 4
willvideoforfood 4
nalts 3
youtube 3
youtube videos 3
shirtless celebrities

Is Yahoo TV Closing or Widening Chasm Between Online Video & Television?

Yahoo TV Verizon sponsoredWhich online-video site is mostly likely to be part of the bridge between television and the Internet? You can fault the model, and question it’s sustainability. But Yahoo TV is well poised to leverage its partnerships with Verizon and TiVo to start serving its bite-sized video content via television sets equipped with broadband boxes.

Take, for example, Yahoo TV’s “Prime Time in No Time,” a show hosted by Frank Nicotero that recaps the prior evening’s television shows. It’s interesting on at least two levels:

  1. It appeals to TV junkies. I’m not sure there’s a market for general prime-time recaps (since audiences tend to form around tighter niches). But it’s clearly targeted at TV viewers who maybe need some hand holding to start consuming via Yahoo’s mini-TV play. With some prime time promotion, I can see this audience growing.
  2. The ad model is interesting. Verizon gets a brief intro (not a preroll that I noticed), some banner wrap-arounds, and even a logo tucked nicely in the host’s corner frame. It’s dominant without being obtrusive.

Yahoo Menu No Amateur VideoSo we’re still in the infancy of the “TV and online video” collision, which is clearly going to take much more time than we hoped. I’m far less interested in television administered in once-a-day pills (instead of intravanious drips). I find the more fascinating side to be the amateur creators gaining broader exposure than they currently get (assuming they’re good enough, and have consistent content that appeal to steady audiences even if relatively small).

While YouTube is still better poised for the latter, Yahoo comes at the web more like AOL: looking more like TV on the computer than web video as most consume it now. So we see less and more polished content, but fairly superficial interaction between the content and its audience. It’s still “one to many” unlike the magic of online video “many to many” play.

It’s Amazon not eBay.

As an example, one of my few popular videos on Yahoo has 90K views but just 90 comments. While one in a thousand comment on Yahoo Video, most of my YouTube videos get 1-2 percent of viewers commenting. My Mac Air spoof got 27K views with 13 comments, while the same Mac Air spoof on YouTube got 374K views and 1564 comments.

Typically the initial online successes are “pure plays” and not an offline entity moving in. This is true with almost any industry: gaming, retail, travel and media. But it will take a few failures along the way. YahooTV is bringing TV and online video ever so slightly closer together — even if it ends up being a log over the river.

Note that Yahoo Video (the quasi amateur section) still exists, but it’s not part of the primary menu on Yahoo. In fact, I almost gave up in my search for it, so it’s not likely drawing in many Yahoo users (Alexa won’t let me isolate http://video.yahoo.com/ from Yahoo.com, so I don’t know how it’s fairing). The featured videos seem to get paltry views relative to YouTube features, and even the Yahoo Video Awards blog post has just 35 comments 4 days after announced (by contrast, most top 100 YouTubers get that kind of views and interactions within an hour of posting).

P.S. Updated 3/27: Check out what InsideOnlineVideo has to say about Yahoo.

Trend Spotting: Tag-Team Vlogging… Brothers, Awesome Girls, Guys, Kids and Dogs.

picture-5.pngIt’s the hottest new trends in video vlogging since ZeFrank jumped the shark. A video channel shared by multiple people, each of whom takes a certain day of the week. The possibilities are endless.

picture-4.pngThought it’s probably an art form that has roots in the 1700s, this was mainstreamed by BrotherHood 2.0, where two brothers shared a channel for a year and communicated almost exclusively on a public stage. Then along came FiveAwesomeGirls, in which each vlogger takes a day of the week (they rest and shop on the weekend). Not to be outdone, the second-most intelligent gender came out with FiveAwesomeGuys.

We started 7AwesomeKids, and now there’s 5AwesomeDogs (here’s their canine debut).

What’s next?

Why Media Buyers Are Stunting the Growth of Online Video

Balding white marketer desperately wants to meet smart, strategic media buyer. If you’re one, please recognize you’re not the target of this rant. But the rest of  you are just so friggin’ short sighted and clueless.

There are some amazing online-video series that could be incredible opportunities for smart brands wanting to engage with early adopters of a medium that is changing the way we relate to content and brands.

Brands can reach depth and relevancy with their target, even if it’s not driving total significant awareness and immediately creating ROI through driving intent, store visits, and trial.

I give you exhibit one. iChannel.  A mere 8000 people are subscribed to this series on YouTube, but the views of the weekly series are roughly three times that (I’m the inverse of that with 30,000 Nalts subscribers, but some recent videos ranging in the 8-15K views). So it’s a healthy and highly devoted and interactive audience. Episode 31 had 180K views alone.

And it’s deeply philosophical, well acted, intelligently scripted and short and addictive.  I had the pleasure of appearing in one last May.

These guys spend more time setting up one shot than I do on my entire post production. The audience is like a microcosm of those watching Lost. Or The Office. They’re engaged, passionate, and hold their breath waiting for the next episode.

So why would a media buyer pass on this?

  • It’s not a big media deal. No hot AOL ad reps are pushing it.
  • The audience isn’t big enough. No scale yet.
  • The conversion from the episode to a bloated brand microsite wouldn’t be great.
  • They can just advertise on YouTube’s invideo ads and get there.

Why should an electronic manufacturer dye to have sole sponsorship?

  • They could probably own it for the equivalent of pocket change they dug from the back of their marketing budget couch.
  • It would be ground breaking.
  • The audience is perfect, and the level of product engagement would be far richer than an ad we’re trained to ignore.
  • It sets the stage for a new model where advertisers contract directly with creators of content (who carry fixed audiences). No worthless intermediaries clogging the pipes between.

What’s the solution to grabbing these types of opportunities? Have these deals championed by someone outside the regular media-buying job. While I was at Johnson & Johnson, the big deals between media players (networks and magazines) were done by folks that weren’t inline marketers like me, but had influence over the way media budgets were set across the many brands. After all, J&J couldn’t get interesting deals if each brand fended for itself, and the interesting partnerships required someone that could step outside the short-sighted world I live in when charged with P&L of a brand.

YouTube Hack: Watching Blocked Videos

YouTube HackJischinger has identified one way of watching blocked YouTube videos (assuming they block only the standard URL). This may not work for everyone, and your last resort is a free “virtual tunnel.” I have used vtunnel before but it requires a major virus wipe after a few sessions. It’s not a safe way to surf.

To watch blocked YouTube videos, simply grab the alpha numeric code from the URL (starting after the = sign) and paste it after this URL: http://www.youtube.com/v/.

Got it? It gives you a full screen image. Example:

Change this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=YFmAtmquNrg

To this:

http://youtube.com/v/YFmAtmquNrg

Experimenting With Large Uploads on YouTube: Bubble Gum Tree Show

Here’s today’s Bubble Gum Treee Show (featuring Charles Trippy) as it appears after I uploaded an 800 MB exported version from iMovie using all of the fancy specifications he recommends. And here’s another version that was about 20 MB. Sorry I just can’t seem to see a radical difference. Can you?

Now let’s try adding the “secret” code:

  1. Big version with the HD code.
  2. Little version with the HD code.

Anyone? Here are jpegs of the same video when I toggle between high resolution and low.

Low resolution high rez

YouTube Goes High Definition: The “Secret” Hack Know As &fmt=18

The thing that put YouTube on the map was easy file sharing — quick uploads and fast Flash-based streaming. Lately YouTube is experimenting with high definition, which is a slight improvement from the typical squished Flash format.

Here are the key things you need to know:

  1. It’s in testing, and it’s not perfect. The audio sometimes fails to synch, and not all videos work in high definition.
  2. This isn’t HDTV. It’s just a higher resolution version of Flash.
  3. You can add the code: &fmt=18 to the end of a video’s URL to see if it makes it better.
  4. You’ll see some text below videos that allow you to toggle between high and low resolution.
  5. You can update your account preferences so you have the ability to default to high definition if you don’t mind the potential loss of speed.
  6. I’m not aware of any discrimination on this feature between “Partners” and everyone else.

Charles Trippy posted a video on this yesterday and SMPFilms in (“YouTube Hack”) announced the news as well. This perhaps prompted YouTube’s Blog to post” YouTube Videos in High Definition.”

Mike Abundo (Inside Online Video), of course, identified the hack on March 4, and provided this recent update. I saw the post, but found the improvement to be of nominal visual distinction.

Charles Trippy provided this nice post for Mac users to help them export their videos to take advantage of this higher definition.

I’m working on a video that explains this, and demos some of the before/after. It will also show people how to turn on high definition as a default via their account preferences. I’ll show the step-by-step for exporting better quality (the limit is now 1 gig for all).

Another source: Wired Wiki explains formatting in great detail

Maybe Online Video Isn’t Just Staging Area for Wanna-Be Media Stars?

Michael Buckley: Media WhoreI found this quote interesting, as Liz Stowasky of the “Point Click and Go” show on Fox.com interviewed Michael Buckley (see video) from the WhatTheBuckShow. Stowasky asked Buckley about his plans for the future:

“It’s so funny because whenever I do interviews they always seem disappointed when I kinda say I’m happy where I’m at. They definitely want to hear ‘oh, I am aspiring to much more.'” … Sure if E called and wanted to give me a half-hour show… that would be great. My biggest fear is they’re going to censor me… and they’re going to be ‘don’t say this or do say this, or take it down a notch or don’t be so gay or whatever.”

Hmmm. Downsides to “crossing over.” Someone telling us not to be so gay.

One thing we sometimes forget is the tremendous creative freedom we have as online-video creators. No studios to please. No sponsors to patronize (unless we choose). No script review or censorship. Just us and our audiences.

I suspect that Will Ferrell’s motivation for FunnyOrDie was about having that freedom, and not on getting rich via the web. After all, Ferrell already has enough money to buy Buckley and make him his $4,000-a-date Spitzer gimp.

Speaking of Spitzer, how come nobody’s done a “Spitzer throws puppy from a cliff” video yet?