CBS Learns The Lesson Quickly: Don't Build Your Own Destination; Syndicate Your Video Content

from the go-forth-and-multiply dept

Whenever we talk about the ridiculousness of big media companies demanding all their content be stripped from YouTube, people show up in the comments saying that they need to do this in order to build their own destination site for video. That doesn't make sense. In a world where attention may be the scarcest resource of them all, you should want your content spread as widely as possible. It appears that CBS is the first of the major networks to get this. While the company had tried to build its own video destination site for its content, it's now admitting that it should have been called CBS.com/nobodycomeshere. CBS is learning that people don't want to have to hunt down your silo for content and deal with your redesign and usability issues. They want the content wherever its easiest to get it -- and CBS has decided to comply. Rather than focusing on building out its own destination site, the network is going to push to get its content syndicated everywhere possible. This really isn't that surprising, given that CBS was one of the few networks to recognize that YouTube actually increased viewership of its TV shows. However, it is a bit amusing to think that CBS was just recently split off from Viacom, who has gone in the exact opposite direction.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Thinkerati, 14 May 2007 @ 3:38pm

    Nobody went because it was so poorly designed...

    Sure, I agree with everybody that it would be smart for all of the networks to make their content available via sources who specialize in getting it out and making it available to anyone.

    However, part of the reason why CBS is making this move and the other networks haven't yet, is because their Innertube design is so crappy. Trying to watch shows on their site is often a frustrating, unsatisfying event. The feed sometimes would break off, or it would loop the same section of material again and again instead of going to the next part (forcing me to watch the same annoying commercial multiple times until I could get it to advance), or it would skip whole sections altogether. And the quality of the picture was extremely poor. Also, if you were halfway through a show and needed to leave and come back later, you couldn't come back and click on the part you wanted to go straight to, you had to watch the entire thing again to get to the part you wanted. Although there were a few things I liked about it (they were one of the first networks to let you pick which episode you wanted and went back further in episode availability), overall it was just plain poorly designed and built, and a big pain, so no wonder nobody went there...

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.