Mark, you just put one lawyer out of a job and employed 20 interns! Net loss = $0

Consumers are taking control and smart brands understand this and focuses on the great advantages that comes with this change. Great video clips from the awards will increase the young consumers interest for the Oscars and they might even take a look at the TV award show next time. But going after YouTube like that or spamming content at consumers is a bad idea.

i don\’t think that you\’d get yourself banned from sites for flooding with this. if youtube was going to ban people for flooding, they\’d have already banned people for illegal content and the like. you\’d think that they\’d have posted a \’illegal content\’ button by now, but they seem set on allowing it.

But you inadvertently raise a good point–why haven\’t these same oweners adapted the flooding technique to the video-hosters like Gootube?

Is it just that you don\’t have a day-to-day hand in Magnolia or ?

Let me call your attention to the post you made the same day as this…

\”Is there any more lame a comment than \”You just don\’t get it\”. Its a simple, dismissive phrase that says more about the person saying it than the person/organization its directed to. Its a way of saying \”You dont agree with me, but i dont have anything of consequence to say. \”You just don\’t get it\” stops any discussion where i might be asked to say something worthwhile dead in its tracks\”

With that said…

I think that the \”old media\” gets it in a certain way. They\’re just waiting for someone else to separate the chaff from the wheat so they don\’t have to take the risk involved in developing the market. In favorable comparison, I\’ll speak about the industry with which I\’m most familiar.

In the 1990\’s, I was involved with several local ISP\’s in a mid-sized midwestern college town. We all knew that, in the long run, the telcos and cablecos had an insurmountable advantage because they controlled the physical layer out to the premises. At the end of the day, they have the wires that go to the customers, giving them final control over what gets distributed to the end user and how. But, for years, they didn\’t really take action in the ISP market.

There were vague threats of action regarding telco switch utilization, but nothing every materialized. Both the telcos and cablecos fought open access to their cable plants more than anything else, and they did so in a way that hamstrung (but didn\’t entirely prevent…important for working out the bugs) others from using their wires. It appears to me now that they were simply avoiding competition and waiting for the market to develop and mature.

Basically, someone else was taking the risk on which they would eventually capitalize. They were willing to give up the market in the short term because they knew, in the long run, that they would be able to mount such an overwhelming response as to render those who didn\’t control the critical element (the wires, which they guarded jealously) obsolete.

With online media distribution, I think that the companies that control the critical element (the content) are still sitting back, waiting for companies like Gootube to flesh out the details and solve the problems. They still think they can swoop in, after the market is developed, and reap all of the profits with a minimum of risk.

Thus, the model of a completely new discovery->creation->production->distribution chain is much more of a threat to the established media than Gootube will ever be. Gootube is an experiment. The old media are sitting back, watching, and taking notes, learning from Gootube\’s mistakes at little or no cost.

I don\’t know if that changes if you have a special channel or something, but I know for regular folks, you can\’t do it like that.