A screenshot of the iArtHouse website.

My question is this: how in demand will the over 800 movies be that iArtHouse has on offer? Titles include the controversial The Tiger and The Snow, which iTunes only has a trailer of. So yes, it might get a few downloads a month.

The announcement of the launch of iArtHouse coincided with the closing of two other online movie download channels, Morgan Freeman’s ClickStar and Verizon’s Vongo. ClickStar launched in 2006 and released movies like Ten Items or Less (the first legitimate online movie download) and Lonely Hearts with John Travolta and Salma Hayek. However, titles associated with ClickStar were shunned by cinemas, because it meant the movie would be available within homes in a matter of days or weeks.

So why did iArtHouse have the guts to step into the public arena? It must be because they think they have something up on iTunes. And they do: their titles are edgy, interesting and unique. It means they’ll only have a niche audience, but that’s all they really need to get by.

The sanctioned Amercian choice is obviously NBC, which is promising over 2 200 hours of Olympic online television. That’s all the events between all countries all the time. I think this is fantastic for people who have enough bandwidth to throw around with. A country like South Africa will never be able to get the full Olympic experience. Of course we talk about 8 channels of live Olympics on DSTV in hushed voices resonating with excitement. But will that ever beat being able to watch and re-watch an event where South Africa wins a medal? I realise we’re still waiting for this glorious moment, but so is Canada and they have a website dedicated to online Olympic television, CBC.

There are other providers of streaming television, such as WatchOlympicsNow.tv (snazzy title) and a special channel on YouTube.

But is this online experience all it’s cracked out to be?

Just to be petulant and demanding: all of these sites have placed some restrictions on viewing. WatchOlympicsNow is expensive: It costs $99 (R771) for the duration of the Games, and there is a brief pre-games window during which the price was down to $49.95 (R389). CBC has free coverage, but only for Canadians. NBC also streams free content, but only to America and has also placed other restrictions on its coverage; no events scheduled to be televised on normal NBC channels will be available online until after they are seen on TV. Bummer. YouTube lets you watch for free, but will sell advertising around the channel.

On the illegal down low, China is top nation in terms of peer-to-peer video streaming, with PPLive officially licensed to show the games — but only to an audience within China. If you can get a good proxy server to this site, you might get lucky.

It seems that it’s still best to watch the Olympics on television.  Just pray you’ll be there when we finally win a medal.

OK, so let’s rewind back to 2005. The South African blogosphere was buzzing with the news that Johnnic was launching a citizen journalism site in January 2006. Although everyone had their sceptical 5 cent to add to the debate, they seemed to have been won over in the end. Reporter.co.za had found its niche and was doing surprisingly well.

Citizen journalism was carefully observing the new addition to its brood. When it was satisfied that Reporter.co.za was going to be just fine, Avusa dropped the bombshell:

Now the site has to be transformed to adapt to new technology. With video becoming such an important medium for news, a revamped Reporter site will need to be able to accept feeds from contributors whether they are shot by camera or mobile phone. The site also needs to be able to accept audio submissions.

It’s like the quiet before the storm. Nobody wants to open their big mouth, because they don’t want to be proven wrong again or ridiculed by the 6,000 contributors that have supported Reporter.co.za. But I’m going to say it: this idea is shit.

First of all, South Africans do not have the broadband capacity to post videos and view videos on a daily basis. If only 6,000 contributors participated in writing, how many will stick around to film a news clip? Reporter.co.za admits that it lacks breaking news stories – how will this change when switching to a video format? Contributors write about braai spots and Zimbabwe and they write poetry. They don’t become eye witnesses to corruption and natural disasters.

The Times has professional reporters who go out and film news as it happens. But even a video as newsworthy as stranded refugees only scores 136 hits. OK, maybe that’s overdone. Let’s try something more original. Formula 1 action in Sandton. Nearly 700 views. Wow. The Times had its big hurrah with the xenophobic violence outbreaks. What has that gotten them? No more regular viewers than usual it seems. And this isn’t because no one is interested. It’s because nobody has quota to throw around with.

Internet in South Africa is a matter of get in, get out. Almost like a military operation. Sure, I’m chilling here writing my blog, watching videos and playing around on facebook. That’s because I’m paying big bucks to do that. At home, I have to watch my little 3G counter very carefully, cause if I look at too many photographs (not videos!) I shoot R50 over my allowance. It hurts the wallet. I’m a middle-class white student. I haven’t even mentioned the poverty barrier which people hit against when wanting to be kick-ass citizen journalists.

Over 57% of the population is below the poverty line. THOSE are the citizens. They should be the ones practicing citizen journalism. Not bored housewives and rich lawyers with nothing better to do than make an extra R35.

An additional concern with Reporter.co.za’s big plan is the quality of the footage they receive. Even if it is lo-res, you can see the content quality of South Africans shooting videos on their mobile phones or digital cameras (expensive equipment!) at Myvideo.co.za. Don’t forget to snort in derision when you see this or this!

Dear Reporter.co.za. Please rethink your plans for video citizen journalism. South Africa is just not ready yet. Gotta run, my quota is finished!

Vodpod videos no longer available.

The technology is of course still in its infant shoes, but this is how it works: The programmers of this special TV have placed millions of little dots as reference points in this excerpt of a popular German daily soapie. Therefore, the TV recognises objects as ‘newspaper’ and ‘human’, etc. It can therefore incorporate objects into the visual sequence or take them away. It has basic knowledge like “Water in a cup is meant to be drunk. A straw performs this function. Therefore a straw inserted in the screen can make the water disappear from the cup.” This is not shown in the clip, but it was shown in a full-length report on German TV. This new type of TV is more like a computer. It has a sensor pad on all sides. When you tip the TV, you renegotiate all the little points so the whole scene shifts and objects can fall over. 

Currently, this technology is not on offer to the public. When it does get released, only limited programmes will participate in the trail run and the interactivity will not occur in real time. So does this make it iTV at all? Interactive TV is characterised by immediacy. One of its features is that it acts as a type of electronic democracy. Viewers communicate with the programmers by giving their opinion or vote (by telephone call).

So what do we have on our hands here? A technology that will blow current iTV definitions out of the water? Or will it create a new theoretical wave? We could call it “New Television”. Either way, with these basics of a new kind of iTV already discovered, who knows what other clever things our scientists will come up with?

OK, so you must be feeling really pretty stupid right now. The man showing off this “brand new technology” is in fact a magician, Simon Pierro. Yes, that’s right. He’s pulling your leg. And so am I. Except the part where the future of iTV is a lot more complicated than current definitions make it out to be.

WARNING: VIEWER DISCRETION IS STRONGLY ADVISED

But why did we need this devastating thing to happen to get our nation’s Internet users to watch online video? The answer is simple: broadband. In 2006, 10.3% of South Africans were connected to the Internet. Experts estimate that up to 15% could now be connected. However, the stats for broadband are much lower. South Africa’s broadband penetration has been pinned at 0.5%.

What is broadband? I like the following definition:

Broadband in telecommunications means a wide range of frequencies that are available to transmit information. This ultimately means that the wider the range of frequencies available, the high the amount of information that can be sent at one given time. For an easy way to picture a broadband internet connection compared to a narrowband internet connection, think of a highway. With a one lane highway (narrowband), only one car at a time can travel, however with broadband, you can have a highway with 6 or 8 lanes, allowing more traffic to pass at one specific time.

So basically this means that most South African users have a slow Internet connection. But that isn’t even the half of it. You need to have serious money burning a hole in your pocket to be able to afford broadband. Or even narrowband for that matter. The fastest broadband offering in South Africa is Telkom’s DSL 4 Mbps service. This service is priced at R675 a month and allows for a 3GB monthly usage allowance which means the service costs R56,25 per Mbps/GB.

Using the Digital Opportunity Index (DO!), South Africa can be ranked 38th when compared to 40 other countries. SA is 10 times more expensive than China. Dr. Tim Kelly, from the ITU Strategy and Policy Unit said, “South Africa is paying far too much for broadband.”

Sounds pretty hopeless doesn’t it? However, there is a little gem called 3G. It’s the third generation in wirelesss technology. In South Africa, mobile service providers such as Vodafone and MTN offer 3G to thir customers. It basically works with a sim card and over the cell phone network. And because the cell phone network is far more advanced than the landline system, the 3G speed is quite impressive. Even in little old Grahamstown, 3G works like a charm. I have it at home and the ‘Flames of Hate’ slide show downloaded superfast. Plus, I’m not paying an arm and a leg for it. So the good news is that mobile technologies provide a decent alternative for the lower end of the market.

But where does this leave online video? The Times has chosen to wait until the “broadband bubble pops” – yes, that overused phrase. We’re all wondering if it’s ever going to pop. Until then, they’ll just have to wait like vultures for the bad news. Because fluffy video diaries just don’t cut it anymore.

However, with the Internet came sinners who created websites praising sloth and greed. God was forced to reach down one more time. And he created GodTube.

How pretentious of him. GodTube is a Christian version of YouTube. Ground rules: there is only one God. OUR God. Therefore, don’t upload any non-Christian content. Never mind if you call your god God.

Sorry, I’m veering off the topic. What I actually wanted to talk about was the awesomeness of using online TV for freedom of religious expression. I got a bit distracted by the territorial nature of it.

I think the idea of GodTube and other such online religious channels is a good one. When I searched for “Christian” on YouTube, the first video I found showed a gay kiss. Hmmm, not that Christian I think. Through online religious TV, worshippers are guaranteed to get some good, clean, holy fun.

There are other religious online TV services, such as IslamicTube:

This is especially relevant in the African context. Restrictions on freedom of religious expression and a low amount of free TV channels have restricted the way in which worshippers negotiate their religion. An Episcopal report has highlighted concerns over church attendance drop. Whether this has anything to do with minimum exposure to the Christian faith in popular culture may be debated, but I think it may have something to do with it. As journalists, we are told to report both sides of the story. We no longer cover Christian book launches, Islamic traditions, and Buddhist rituals: we investigate them. And the media delights in atheism, because it always causes a stir.

What are the youth being taught about their faith? It is no longer “cool” to wear a khumūr or parade your faith by wearing a cross around your neck. Maybe by praising their respective gods online, religions can attract younger worshippers. They sorely need it.

I am not religious, but I feel everyone has a right to express their religious thoughts and feelings. Online TV might just be the next frontier that religions need to utilise a lot more.

What does it mean to “go green”?

Consumer electronics, as a whole, are more eco-friendly than ever. Today, virtually every product on the shelf contains fewer chemicals, is more energy efficient, and is easier to recycle, repair and upgrade. Many manufacturers have developed green electronics lines. These products go the extra mile to contain fewer chemicals and are more energy efficient. In order to be labeled green, a product must meet a stringent checklist of criteria. There are hundreds of green electronics from plasma TVs and computers to MP3 players and cameras.

The USA doesn’t even have serious power failures, which are what South Africans in major cities have to experience on a daily basis. The government tells us: “Save energy!” but they don’t guide us in the right direction. Call me ignorant, but until I stumbled across the My Green Electronics website I didn’t realise that newer televisions save energy. It seems obvious now.

American cable companies are required by the FCC to keep supporting consumers with analog tv until 2012. After that, they will probably start charging extra to keep the connection going.

Cue the scary music. According to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, “If the cable companies had their way, you, your mother and father, or your next door neighbor could go to sleep one night after watching their favorite channel and wake up the next morning to a dark fuzzy screen.”

I think the way this whole undertaking is being run is exemplary: it might be profit-based, but it is a strong move towards Digital TV and will therefore help the planet go green.

South Africa needs to shape up and guide its population towards effective ways to save energy by saying “Bye, bye!” to Analog:

W.O.W. – this takes Internet advertising to the next level! I can imagine this being incorporated into online TV. While watching the next episode of Grey’s Anatomy (now sponsored by Discovery Health) you could click on the insurance policy a bleeding man is holding and find out how to insure against leg amputations. Or whatever. 

Imagine watching a news piece and buying the same blouse the anchor is wearing! I hope you wash it before you wear it. You never know where those anchors have been.

Seriously: I think this is a great way for advertisers to engage with their audience. It’s fun for the audience as well. Sitting in front of the PC screen can be boring, even when watching something unbelievably exciting such as the news. However, this is a way in which the user can interact with what’s happening on the screen. Online games are very popular and this speaks for the interest in interactivity that users are expressing.

The reason I am suggesting this for online TV is simple: who is going to browse the web for ads? Unless you’re paid for it, you won’t consider watching an online ad. Coull speaks of these ads going viral. Seriously? “Hey Fred, I just saw this GREAT ad for smarties. Check it out! Cheers, Tammy.” If Tammy ever sent you this email, she’s quite a dull friend.

Screenshots:

Those are awesome stockings in that Agent Provocateur ad. My boyfriend would love these on me. Let’s click on them.

Wow! I can order them right here and now. Nifty.

However, there is one thing in the story that I find a bit far-fetched. Make that two. Firstly, an occupational therapist says that children who spend a substantial amount of their day watching television develop low muscle tone. This makes them use too much effort to sit up straight at school and – BAM! – all their energy is used up and they can no longer concentrate. In my opinion, the fact that they can’t concentrate lies in their overall decreased concentration span. The constant “surfing” on TV channels is what makes them so distracted in other scenarios like school. And it’s not only TV to blame! The latest children’s video games are action-based rather than learning-based. They don’t teach concentration or thinking-skills. It’s all just wham, bam, thank you ma’m!

The second thing which makes me snort in derision is the portentous reset button. It makes occupational therapists the world over shudder at the thought. Children can just press the button and the whole ending changes! “There is no need to attempt to rectify or improve the situation and consequently no time for reflection and learning,” says child psychologist Carol Affleck. The reset button, my friend, has been around for a very long time. I grew up with a reset button on my Nintendo. And look: I do not live in a delusional world that allows me to erase what I just did! All children grow up to learn these things eventually and I doubt anyone (including Carol Affleck) hasn’t dreamt of being able to start the day over. Unhealthy? I think not.

In the future, television habits will have to be taken into account eventually. Lessons in school might have to be shorter or more interactive. However, parents are more responsible than ever to make sure their children get a healthy upbringing in the world of bigger, better, faster next-generation TV. 

As you might have picked up from the media, television is going digital. And Internet TV has been deemed more of a possibility than anyone thought at the time of its inception. YouTube has made the idea seem more palatable to its users than ever before. Software has been developed to ensure the quality of video distributed over the Net. And companies such as Microsoft are developing products that enable Internet video to be viewed on TV sets instead of only on PC screens.

Apple Computer is trying to do the same thing in the video market. In 2005, it introduced an iPod that plays videos, and launched a department in its iTunes store that sells episodes of popular TV shows, such as Desperate Housewives and Lost. While the iTunes video library is limited today, it’s clear that Apple’s approach is shaking up the entertainment industry and a new distribution model is emerging for video.

As always, the Internet is one step ahead of us: in 2005, a website called Bollywood.tv, which uses EdgeStream’s technology, launched a service that offers more than 730 Indian movies over the Internet.

The future might not be that far away after all.

Links

Slingbox (TV streaming device)