A few random things that pop out at me.
Issue #1: Consumers like things that are free. An 85-year-old grandmother can sit in her recliner in middle of nowhere, USA and watch her favorite shows on the major broadcast networks. The cost to her? $0. You can't start forcing the public to pay for TV, because everyone will go off about how people are living on fixed, limited incomes and cannot afford to pay for it.
There is no "force" here. There will simply come a point where advertising can't pay for CSI: Miami anymore. It won't happen overnight, but the old system of shows being broadcast at fixed times to generate ratings so that advertising spots can be sold is one that has limited life left in it.
Advertising might still be able to pay for Deal or No Deal or Big Brother or whatever, but probably not Lost.
Issue #2: There are still people who do not have access to the Internet or computers. Now, not only are you demanding that consumers pay for content that used to be free, but you're also requiring that they go out and buy hardware (a computer) and internet service in order to access this content. Again, people who are living on low, fixed incomes cannot afford this.
I'm not
demanding anything. I'm
predicting the way I think things will go.
Television is not free, it costs you money every time you go to the grocery store.
So right there, you're going to lose viewers. Just because Nielsen reports that a particular show averages 15 million viewers a week in primetime does NOT mean that a studio can convince 15 million consumers to pay for that content.
Of course it won't, I never suggested that it would. As
Temis says, you have to be very focused on who your audience is under such a model.
Issue #3: What about the networks? They'll start to lose money because they won't have the same content to air. Sticking them with reality shows, game shows, news and sporting events may not be profitable enough.
Issue #4: What happens to cable TV? What exactly are all of those channels going to air? And what about those cable networks with original programming? Will Discovery Channel stop broadcasting new series and specials? Will they have to switch over to this new delivery method? Cable networks will start losing money, too.
Issue #5: Marketing. How do you market online content successfully enough to reach a wide audience? Right now, the networks air promos for the shows they are airing. They pay for online ads, billboards, etc. If the networks are removed from the equation, then the cost to market all of this programming falls to the studios. So now they've got to recoup even more money on the investment. And will they pay to market a show on TV that isn't even available to watch on TV?
Issue #6: What happens to New Media? If consumers must pay for content in order to watch it, what the hell makes you think that they would pay to buy it on DVD or from the iTunes store? As things stand now, revenue from new media and home video sales are icing on the cake. The studios are already making money from the networks, who pay the licensing fees to air the show. Then the studio can turn around and put the same content up on iTunes and makes a little extra cash, and then sell DVDs and make more money. If consumers have to pay to own content once, they will not pay for it again.
The rest of these points suggest that it will be the established producers who make the switch when it won't necessarily be them. The existing networks and cable channels have no particular right to exist. They are in competition with each other and, very soon, sites like YouTube and Revision3. Even ordinary, non-video Internet use is eating in to TV ratings. Then you've got a rapidly growing chunk of your young, male audience with their oh so important disposable income who prefer to receive their entertainment from their Xbox 360.
The problem right now is that audiences for shows we like are shrinking rapidly. Heroes on NBC is losing to repeats of iCarly, Caprica's getting less than a million viewers and even Lost would be pushed if it hadn't jumped.
Why ? Because the audience for those shows isn't made up of 85 year old grandmothers. It's made up of busy young people who don't want to sit down at a specific time, don't want to sit through commercials and, worse for the networks, have Internet connections where they can get shows for free to keep via BitTorrent. DVR viewing makes no difference, even if you track it down to every last viewer, because nobody watches commercials on a DVR. Those people might as well not have bothered watching.
The television industry is in the same place as music was a few years ago. The people who consume their content the old fashioned way are getting older on average. They have to think of new ways to sell their content. And yes, that means that today it's harder for a musician to make the ridiculous sums of money they used to - so we have to listen to Lily Allen crying about having to, quite literally, sing for her supper.
A show can get 15 million viewers, but unless some of them are people with money to spend, what's the point of advertising towards them ?
A good example - Britain's most watched programme on an average week is an episode of long running soap Coronation Street. The old fashioned mind would think that this would mean that it would have the highest rates for advertising. It doesn't because the audience is made up of pensioners.
The best slot if you actually want to sell something is around 4:03pm on a Sunday afternoon on Sky Sports 1. Why ? Because that's two minutes before the biggest Premier League match of the weekend kicks off live. That'll only get about 1m viewers but they're young, male viewers who can afford expensive Sky Sports subscriptions. That's also why the ads are usually selling expensive products like cars, alcohol, electronics etc.
Removing unnecessary regional restrictions would be a big help here. If the potential audience for a show is limited to just the United States then you're telling people you don't want their money because of their passport, which is frankly moronic.
Ultimately, none of this is going to matter to me personally within a few years because there is literally nothing on the horizon I want to watch in terms of scripted drama. The ratings for everything I do watch are
terrible to the point where I can't see how they stay on the air. If I'm lucky, in four years time maybe Stargate Universe will still be on the air and that's a huge stretch. By then, TV will be dead to me and I won't miss it.
