Comment the article Net + Television by Thomas Tessarolo, for some it is described as a long [...] 'other' [...] [...] a kind of justification, "from others' [. ..] [...] resignation! " It could be all this but the real crux of the matter, in my opinion, is far from being gutted! N3TV, the project where I had the good fortune to participate actively, it was a fantastic experience, experienced by all participants with large genuine enthusiasm (I say this because I was there). Not everyone, unfortunately, including me, were able to devote time and resources! I do not deny - and Thomas knows - that the evolution of the project was which seem strange, changing its original form into something that at the end - I think - had little to do with the Web, the so-called Net-Television, in short ! Least, had nothing to do with the basic premises of the project. But this is normal! An innovative project evolve and change over time, due to unforeseen events, and is therefore no reason to wonder whether the initial conditions change.

I state, for the avoidance of doubt, which I firmly believe in freedom of expression and, as long as you do not harm others, everyone can do and say what they believe, especially in a "free world" as the Internet.

Precisely for this reason I turn to my discussion on events and is critical to N3TV both to Current.tv, and my staff - so do not necessarily endorsed - interpretation of the meaning of Net-Television.

What is Net-Television?

The simplicity and clarity are essential when introducing a new topic and will become even more so when you add the word - magic - 'TV'. Anyone who has read the book by Thomas (Net TV: how Internet television will change forever) is expected to be in agreement that, ultimately, the project N3TV has actually departed from the premises set forth in the text Teesarolo. However, he at least maintained its identity Web, unlike baby Current.tv. A "true" Net-Television, in my opinion, should have the following requirements:

• Must be enjoyed mainly by Web
• Must provide all those Web services is cross-platform, cross-media: RSS, Podcasts, etc ...
• It should allow a strong interaction with users, blog-style or - better yet - Web2.0 style: word order, therefore, interactivity
• Should promote, and at the same time check, the User-Generated Content
• Should not forget that his audience is what the Internet! The arguments (format) must evolve so this target

But all this has something to do with the video? Nothing! I think television has inadvertently smothered the Net-Television. I always thought and still think, that to make Net-Television forget the TV classic. After the initial enthusiasm, in fact, it seems that even the most promising projects (see Joost or Babelgum) are liable - if they have not already done so - to fall into the trap of the "mirror" make the Web what it already does a normal TV! These things, inter alia, has discussed his presentation of the book Tessarolo: the time due to the birth of N3TV!

To understand, I do not at all interested in seeing or CSI Dr. House on Joost! I expect, at least, that such initiatives are taken by the RAI (which prarte does), by Mediaset or any other broadcaster, including the manufacturers of the same format: HBO transmits on its website Sex and the City, and so on ...

What we forget is that Blog, Radio-Television on the Web and Net are, ultimately, the same thing! Web tools like blogs have opened the season Web2.0, carrying (or restoring) the user at the center of attention and participation! Internet is, therefore, free participation. While blogs have allowed end users to create text-based content (see comments or suggestions for other post), radio (podcasts) give "voice" for users. Natural consequence, then, thanks to new technologies (diffusion mass of Adobe Flash Player) is to give "video", a "face" to the users! Schamtizzando:

• Blogging has given me the Scripture
• The Radio / Podcast gave "voice", the sound
• The Net-Television should give the "face" or, indeed, the sum of the previous

Just as happened with the transition from radio (traditional) television (traditional), the Net-TV should just to aim to merge text-audio and video into a single entity! If only because it is able to do so.

What Current.TV?

Directly from the website: "Current shows you what's happening in your world and that you and your friends will not find on any other news site or cable TV channel.." For this reason it is a channel, and is probably for this reason that is visible on Sky.
Furthermore, "virtual Current.com is the place that allows you to find and share stories and videos that interest you. The site connects you with Current TV, a global satellite network.. " It is a "virtual place" is true, because it uses the Internet but is not a "television" for the Internet. Use the Web to "swap" information but does not realize what he had tried to do N3TV. Tries, but it remains to be seen if we will succeed and in what ways.
Finally: "You can watch Current TV online or enjoy it sitting comfortably on your couch." The last five words clarify the concept. A "true" Net-Television is not the "fruisci" "comfort of your couch!" For that there are already many, many options.

Surely not fully Net-TV! Least nell'accezione described precisely by Tessarolo. Not respect, in fact, some of the points listed above, apart from the UGC (User-generated content) as a side effect all to assess. Personally Current.tv is a "new" (yet another) channel, nothing more. Bad, also, the choice (if choice it was) to go on Sky, an initiative that distracts and removes the little web that there might be. This does not say it is not something to follow, although personally I find no incentive to go there often, but with the concept of Net-TV do not see what it has to do - for now ...

Why Current.tv or Joost are NOT Net-Television?

Who said that? If we redefine the meaning of Net-Television anything is possible. Tessarolo, for example, has repeatedly emphasized the difference between IP-TV, Web TV and Net TV. Evidently, in the end, it was just made so much confusion!
I may have misunderstood, no doubt, but the meaning I attach to the term Net-Television is not simply "web TV" or through the Web In this case falls in the cross-platform, ie the ability to a medium to be enjoyed on different devices. I interpret the Net-Television in a different way, the more it approaches the traditional and less TV and Net-TV!

What remains then?

Radiopodcast: all voucher N3TV first manner

Remain, for example, interesting initiatives which, although not dealing with video (and maybe now it's better that way), give off that "fragrance" that both recalls the original spirit of the Net-TV style Tessarolo or - if you will - N3TV first manner.
Radiopodcast, led by DJ Frank, is a "true" web-radio (or Net-Radio), just because it respects the points listed in the first paragraph:

• It is mainly enjoyed by the Internet
• Provides for all the cross-platform and cross-media: Blogs, RSS, Podcast
• Allows Web Chat Skype Chat via a 'real-time interaction on the show, along with the ability to comment after the post was broadcast in Podcast
• And User-generated content: You can send any audio
• Do not forget all the Internet world, concentrating, more often, its own format on issues not covered (or intractable) elsewhere

These characteristics can not but bring to mind the first "days" of life N3TV, when the Web and the interactivity were placed at par with the video / format.
The fact that you can not hear on Radiopodcast Ligabue or the latest single from Madonna, in my opinion, an asset and not a defect. For that there is the home stereo, iTunes, eMule or iPod! I "listen" - and interact - with Radiopodcast just because it offers what I can not find elsewhere.

N3TV / Net-Television: what is lost?

Worth joining! Very probably, the imbalance between format and the Web, is "the change of course" that the project has been compared to the first premises. The Daily News (which required a major task, even at night - congratulations to all those who made them), on technology, Videogames and much more, despite their extreme quality and care, were not enough to offset the loss of interactive direct-first manner.

Focus was "too much" on the video, almost "manic" quality of the movie, chasing "too much" look of television formats! You forgot the web, thinking more high definition (HD), permitted with the latest release of Adobe Flash, and less time inventing instruments (and format) of interaction and immersive. If you remove his ability to comment on a blog ...?
A blog is not necessarily a graphically treated Blog "success", then everyone can have an opinion on the word "success". Whatever are the contents of a blog and the activities of readers to make it an interesting tool and useful.

Web 3.0

I conclude by explaining better what I mean by "invent tools (and format) of interaction and immersive." The videos offered on the internet is not groundbreaking as follows "equal peers" the television video. I expect the Web broadcasts in real time with a participatory involvement and "technology" by users.
I expect a "contest" and "games" that take advantage of online video, audio, chat all together.
I expect the ability to invent new meeting places and entertainment that make use of audio-visual capabilities of the Internet.
I expect a short film (or entire movies in the future) interactive, where the user is involved in an experience completely different from that of today.
In short, I expect an attitude of "reformist" and "innovative". How blogs have changed the way we interact and bring the Web, the so-called Net-Television - if any - should do the same!

Finally, I believe that the misunderstandings are due to the whole issue right to the word "television" which, until now, has not been a great help. From today, so I will try not to use the term Net-Television that, in light of the facts seem to me that he understood not mean anything! I feel much better instead to talk about Web 3.0.

Related Post

• Net TV: how Internet television will change forever (1)
• Live Now, Radiopodcast (1)
• Internet Killed the TV Star (3)
• Accessibility and Usability: unobtrusive Javascript (4)
• Web2.0: Gran Paradiso Firefox 3.0 and Apollo (2)

Was this article helpful?:

Loading ...