New Top NBC Exec Didn't Get The Memo On YouTube's Usefulness

from the how-quickly-things-change dept

What a difference one executive makes. Over the last year or so, we've noted that Disney has become much more reasonable when it comes to new business models and embracing the internet under Robert Iger (though, he pissed off most of the rest of Hollywood in doing so). Unfortunately, it looks like NBC might be moving in the opposite direction. While the company had just been discussing how useful online videos were and appeared to be embracing the promotional benefits of YouTube, the new top executive at NBC Universal, Jeff Zucker, apparently didn't get the memo, and attacked YouTube in the press his very first day on the job. Of course, Zucker isn't really "new," having been at NBC in leading executive roles for many, many years -- it's just that he's moved up a notch. So, it's a bit strange that the rest of the company he runs seems to have been pulling in the opposite direction...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 2:39am

    I kicked the ball, and there it was in the back of the net!

    Hello Brian.

    I'm opening a boutique.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 2:39am

    I kicked the ball, and there it was in the back of the net!

    Hello Brian.

    I'm opening a boutique.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    ScytheNoire, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 2:42am

    and how can one person be in control of a company to that extent that they can harm it so drastically?

    i think the shareholders need to speak up and let them know what they think.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Nobody Special, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 5:09am

    not surprised

    I suspect he did get the memo. And perhaps he disagrees with it. It is not unusual for someone in the top levels to disagree with the direction a company heads.

    It could also be some sort of two pronged approach. The head talks about the evils, while the tail benefits from those evils. In the meantime nothing is done and they head can claim to be friends with those who believe the evils should be stopped. Why do you think that large corporations give to both sides of a political race? Either way the race goes, they win.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    sysadmn, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 5:17am

    No wonder

    Um, read the article. The first part says he claims YouTube should do a better job of blocking copyrighted material, and the second says YouTube is believed to be in talks to pay for copyrighted material. Connect the dots. He's not necessarily saying giving content away is bad, but it sure looks like he wants better control over it, or is posturing for a better monetary deal. He can't extract more money from YouTube for content if YouTube drags their heels in preventing fans from uploading it for free.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    YouKnowNothing, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 5:29am

    Re:

    Do you think Jarrow will adopt a more defensive posture for the first leg of the next tie in Turkey?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anna Mouse, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 7:04am

    Does not get It

    Probably just does not get it.

    The tighter you control your content the less likely anybody wants your content. Loosen up and get a clue. It was a video clip from the show (SNL) shared on the interenet (primarily YouTube) that has renewed some interest in the show. Maybe this can work for other content as well.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 7:05am

    Jiminy freakin' cricket man...

    Business Opportunity: People want to watch your shows online...not REEE!!! REEE!!! REEE!!! SECURITY BREACH @ YOUTUBE.COM!!!

    isn't it obvious what the solution is???

    YouTube: Give the networks there own page on the site and link all their protected material through there. The Networks can get advertising kickbacks for hits on there page. Hell, they don't even need to put ads in the video if they can have six different ads running next to it simultaneously. Let the networks sell episodes directly from the site, or from their own external site. Either way, you guys can work out the details.

    Networks: Just like any other business, loses happen. Every retail store deals with shoplifting everyday. You are no exception, piracy is going to happen no matter what you do. It is very easy to find almost any recent episode of almost any show on the internet. Give the people what they want, and make some money on the side.
    Remember, you're in the entertainment industry. Learn a lesson from the mistakes of the **AAs. Entertainment needs to be fun, it shouldn't feel like you're doing your taxes when you're just trying to take your mind off the hustle and bustle of everyday life.

    So, just my $0.02, I know it's simplistic, but sometimes that's the best solution...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    SailorAlphaCentauri, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 10:47am

    Re:

    YouTube is already doing this, of sorts. I was on it last week and there are a number of CBS clips on the site (with a CBS banner on the page it appeared on and everything), so YouTube isn't the party unwilling to bend in this case. Jeff Zucker apparently wants people to not care about NBC's programs because he'd rather put down YouTube than make use of it to showcase his network's shows.

    I remember when the Lazy Sunday sketch (or whatever the hell it was called) got popular. I went to look for it on YouTube but NBC had had it taken down. I went to NBC's site (where they proudly crowed that you could see their clips legitimately instead of illegally) and spent far more time digging through their pages to find the clip than it took to watch it. And by the time I found it, I couldn't give a damn how funny it was supposed to be because I spent too much time looking for it. If Zucker and NBC want to be obstinate, let them. They can lose potential viewers to their tired old shows and be the has-been network.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Gary, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 11:33am

    The only reason why I watched the first episode of "30 Rock" was because of that clip I watched on YouTube--the one where Alec Baldwin kicks down a door and says, "Gary's dead!"--otherwise, I wouldn't have bothered.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This