Erin Andrews Nude Video Means We Should Regulate The Internet?

from the please-explain dept

In talking yesterday about the legality of viewing the "spy camera" footage of sportscaster Erin Andrews in her hotel room, someone pointed out in the comments that some journalists are now claiming that this shows why the internet needs to be regulated. Wait, what? How? Why? Creating the video was already illegal. What kind of regulation is needed here and how would it actually change anything? It seems that any time something "bad" happens some people suddenly jump up and insist "their oughta be a law!" without actually thinking through what that actually means.

Meanwhile, some others have noticed that this video apparently has been online for many months, and no one paid any attention at all to it until ESPN made a big deal out of it. Now, you can understand ESPN's general position, but it makes you wonder if there wasn't a better way to handle this that could have involved tracking down who was responsible without putting out a big press release and kicking off all this interest in the video. It's almost as if (perish the thought!), ESPN is actually trying to exploit this situation (and Andrews) to draw more attention to itself...

24 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dear Newspapers: You Don't Have A Monopoly On Local News Coverage

from the neglect-it-at-your-own-risk dept

In talking about business models for the newspaper industry, one point is often discussed: that newspapers are uniquely positioned to provide really good and thorough "local" news coverage. And while they often do a superficial job, in many cases they really don't provide as useful or as thorough coverage as they could. And that's opened up the market to others -- both big and small. We've seen a bunch of stories about various "hyperlocal" startups growing up. But, it need not be startups. BullJustin (who, btw, was the fastest on the trigger and was the very first buyer of our CwF + RtB store) alerts us to a story about how sports giant ESPN is moving in a big way into local sports coverage, hoping to take attention away from newspapers who could use some competition on the beat. Funny then that, as we're being told that there's no business model to support beat writers, ESPN seems to be finding an increasing need for them.

7 Comments | Leave a Comment..

No, ESPN Still Isn't Breaking Imagined 'Reverse Net Neutrality' Concept

from the once-more-with-feeling dept

Back in 2006, some people noticed that the ESPN360 online video service was only available to subscribers of certain ISPs, leading it to be charged with violating "reverse net neutrality" principles for -- gasp -- deciding the business model under which it wanted to sell its content. ESPN was taking a very cable-channel-like approach: instead of selling access to individual users, it sold access to ISPs, who then offered it to their subscribers, much like cable operators offer its channel to their users. The idea that ESPN was violating some sort of net-neutrality ideal was way off-base then, and it still is today, even though somebody at Wired just noticed what ESPN's doing.

So, once again, it bears repeating: a content company using the business model of its choice doesn't violate net neutrality, nor this invented concept of "reverse net neutrality." Whether ESPN's business model will be successful is another discussion; but selling access to ISPs instead of individuals really is no different than ISPs offering their customers the use of various ISP-specific portals, or offering them free anti-virus software. Does it violate net neutrality somehow that, say, Verizon FIOS subscribers can't use AT&T U-Verse webmail? The ESPN360 scenario really is no different: it's content or a service that the ISP has licensed and is offering to its subscribers in hopes of gaining some competitive advantage over its rivals.

ESPN is being accused of "effectively [giving] the middle finger to net neutrality," but really, it's the total opposite. The concern with net neutrality is that content providers would have to pay ISPs so that ISP customers could access their content. What's happening here is that ESPN's convinced ISPs to pony up so that their subscribers can access its content. The ISPs are enabling access to content they've paid for, not blocking access to content from providers who won't pay. That's a tacit admission on the part of the ISPs that their networks are only as valuable as the content they can access. By enabling access to more content, they've enhanced the value of their networks. Imagine if Google took this approach and went to ISPs demanding payment, instead of the other way around. ISPs would very quickly figure out that impeding their customers' access to content -- the entire crux of the net neutrality argument -- will kill them in the marketplace. ESPN's gotten its ISP customers to admit that ensuring users can access as much content as possible enhances the value of their networks, and if anything, that affirms the principles of network neutrality.

Carlo Longino is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Carlo Longino and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

41 Comments | Leave a Comment..

If ESPN Can Replay Games With Madden '09, Let Us Do It Too

from the boom-goes-the-dynamite dept

In an effort to become more relevant to a new generation of football fans, this Sunday on "NFL Countdown," ESPN anchors will interact with simulated football players created using EA's video game technology. Using Madden '09, ESPN's football analysts can model different variations of plays to demonstrate possible outcomes. So, instead of just drawing X's and O's on a telestrator, ESPN anchors will be able to interact with the virtual players on camera to illustrate various football strategies and outcomes. ESPN and EA forged a 15-year partnership back in 2005, and this move strengthens both brand's ties with their audiences.

As the video game has improved, using Madden to illustrate plays has been done increasingly over the past few years, but football spectating still has to cross the chasm of interactivity when compared to the video game experience. In the video game, you're able to change camera angles, slow down the cameras, and highlight things like passing routes and defensive coverages -- all at the click of a few buttons. EA's new system, EA Sports Virtual Playbook, loads in actual gameplay data from the previous day's game, with which ESPN's anchors can then replay and modify the simulation to become the ultimate version of a Monday morning quarterback. That's great and all, it would be even better to let fans download that data to their Xboxes, do their own analysis and then share that back with the community. Though, that scenario is most likely a pipe dream, considering that the NFL still freaks out about even sharing more than 45-seconds of game footage.

4 Comments | Leave a Comment..

ESPN To Cover Competitive Video Gaming

from the next-up-on-the-ocho dept

ESPN has entered into a multiyear agreement with Major League Gaming to provide exclusive online coverage of MLG's upcoming video game competitions. The online coverage is a natural fit for gaming, however, this relationship could segue into more regular coverage on ESPN's television channels. ESPN already regularly covers non-traditional "sports" on its television channels now, from poker to the national spelling bee, so seeing coverage of video game tournaments is not a huge stretch. Video gaming is one of the most popular activities for the young male set, and ESPN is responding to the changing interests of its key demographic. Last year, the USA network aired the MLG finals, and more recently, MLG gamers are starting to appear regularly on ESPN's "Cold Pizza" morning show. The allure of professional gaming has been around since the dawn of video games (remember The Wizard?). Korea (the site of the first world cyber games) leads the charge, with its professional video gamers making good money as early as 2003. That said, professional video gaming is still dwarfed by professional sports (and even professional poker), so it still remains uncertain whether or not it will ever grow to have wide appeal, or if it will remain a relative niche spectator interest.

22 Comments | Leave a Comment..

The Journalism Business Is Dying? Someone Forgot To Tell Sports Reporters...

from the time-to-go-into-sports-reporting dept

For all the whining from professional journalists about how the internet is killing newspapers and putting journalists out of work, apparently someone forgot to explain that some of the companies hiring journalists these days. The NY Times has an article noting how ESPN, Yahoo and Sports Illustrated have been slugging it out trying to hire sports reporters from various newspapers, sometimes at three times their existing salaries. Newspapers are complaining that they just can't keep their sports reporters -- which is a fairly amazing statement, because being a sports reporter is a dream job for many people. So, perhaps rather than freaking out about how the internet is "destroying" their business, journalists might want to start looking around at the new opportunities the internet is creating for journalists where they can keep doing what they do best, and actually earn a lot more money.

4 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Having Learned Nothing From ESPN Mobile Debacle, Disney Closes Disney Mobile

from the wash,-rinse,-repeat dept

Disney explored the MVNO concept for years, convinced that given the opportunity, people would rush out to buy Disney-branded mobile phone service. What's amazing is that in all that time, the company never bothered to figure out how to actually make a branded mobile phone service compelling. It started an MVNO based on ESPN, which failed spectacularly, despite dumping millions of dollars into it. You would think that, having failed once, the company would be careful not to make the same mistakes -- but apparently not. When Disney launched its Disney-branded mobile phone service, it seemed perfectly designed as something no kid would want to use. So, it came as little surprise that Disney seemed to follow the identical path of other failed MVNOs: launch hype, quick price cuts, desperate flailing, closure. We noted Disney Mobile was following that exact pattern nearly a year ago (up to the price cut point), but the service continued to hang on... though, it seemed pretty clear it was in trouble. Back in April it tried to paint a rosy picture of its users with a bunch of stats, but glaringly left out how many subscribers there were.

Given all of that, it came as little surprise that Disney completed the trek of the failed MVNO, officially shutting down the service after a year and a half. Apparently, the massive failure with ESPN Mobile didn't lead to any additional insight into how to sell mobile phone service. Given the variety of high profile MVNO failures in the US lately, can we finally put to rest the concept that was popular a few years ago that every brand would have its own mobile service? People don't want to buy mobile phone service from an entertainment company -- especially when it's ultra expensive and has little in the way of features that are actually useful. If entertainment brands want to go mobile, they should create mobile apps that can work on a variety of services, rather than wishfully hoping that people will completely switch over to a branded service.

8 Comments | Leave a Comment..