Jim Louderback

April 20, 2009

YouTube No Better Than Jim Crow

Filed under: Commentary — Jim @ 4:02 pm

Courtesy euphoriefetzen on Flickr

(This post also appeared as a guest post on the Association for Downloadable Media blog, where I’m on the board.)

What is a TV Show? I found myself asking that question as I pondered part of YouTube’s latest redesign – a new section called “Shows”. I was initially excited about this development, as one of the shows available in the first iteration was the web-only PopTub. Alas, even though we’ve got a good relationship with YouTube, none of our own Revision3 shows were in the first cut – an oversight, I thought.

But when I reached out to our relationship managers at YouTube, I found a much different and more draconian definition of a show. To YouTube, at least today, you aren’t a show unless you “have aired on TV” and are “full-length, defined as 30min or 60min shows”.

YouTube, that’s just wrong. You would think that the flag waving, card carrying heart of online video would take a more enlightened and modern view of a show, but apparently not.

Was this simply an oversight, or more deliberate. I wanted to believe the former, but as I explored their restrictions a bit more carefully, it turns out that these restrictions are simply a tissue of inequity, perpetuating just the stereotypes that YouTube was built to deconstruct.

Let’s start with the claim that Shows are only “full length” and “30min to 60min”. First, traditional television shows aren’t thirty minutes long, at least not in this country. What with ad avails and all, we’re looking at more like 22 minutes or 44 minutes. Interestingly enough, at least here at Revision3, 75% or more of the shows we deliver every week are at least 22 minutes, and occasionally longer than 44 minutes. In addition, even though we create for the internet – which means that a show can be as long as it needs to be, most of our producers are used to the basic three act structure, and thus many of our shows can easily be formatted for commercial breaks too.

So length, and format, are definitely not an issue for us – and indeed for many of the members of The Association for Downloadable Media, and others building professionally produced shows for internet delivery.

So what about “aired on a TV”. Let’s take that statement apart word by word. First “aired”. If a show had to be actually transmitted over the air, that would obviate more than half of YouTube’s Show programming. Sure, “I Dream of Jeannie” would stay. But Discovery’s “Mythbusters” and “Deadliest Catch” should be removed, along with everything from Animal Planet, Current, Showtime, Starz and TLC. None of those shows were ever broadcast via traditional means on a broadcast network .

Let’s look at “On a TV”. Well you can toss that one right out too. Our shows are all available on TiVo, right alongside cable, satellite and broadcast shows – and lots of our viewers watch on their big flat-panel screens, or “on a TV”. We’re also available via AppleTV, the Xbox 360, Dlink’s DivX Connected HD Media Player, Windows Media Center and many more PC to TV devices. We’re even available via cable set top box in rural Virginia, via a trial with cable pioneer ClearLeap.  Heck, there’s even a local public access cable channel in Montgomery Alabama that broadcasts our shows as well.

So let’s recap. For us, and more many other producers of web only video shows, You Tube’s artificial distinction between different types of shows just doesn’t hold water. Our shows are formatted just like traditional TV shows, they have roughly the same total running time (TRT), and they are readily available “on TV”. If you require that a “show” actually “air”, then half of what’s up there now should be brought down. And we’re not alone at Revision3 – most of the members of our industry group, The Association of Downloadable Media produce similar, professionally produced, episodic shows that as of now are being unfairly excluded.

It’s actually the worst sort of segregation, akin to forcing us to the back of the bus, and making us drink from separate water fountains. So I beseech you, YouTube, don’t fall victim to the web vs TV prejudice currently in vogue. Take a stand for equality, liberty, and the freedom to pursue audiences regardless of parentage or domicile. Let all who are truly “shows” into your new “show” area. Until you do, you’re no better than Jim Crow.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,


  1. “For us, and more many other producers of web only video shows, Yahoo’s artificial distinction between different types of shows just doesn’t hold water.”

    Woops, I think you meant YouTube.

    Comment by Glugory — April 20, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

  2. Digg the article here….very good


    Comment by richard — April 21, 2009 @ 7:42 am

  3. 100% agree with you here. Shows online are different then shows on Cable television and it’s very strange that Youtube couldn’t find a way for the two to intermix.

    For what it’s worth, Revision3 content will always stay as “show” status on Viddler ;).

    Comment by Rob Sandie — April 26, 2009 @ 5:43 pm

  4. Oh. I had just assumed that “on TV” meant “Broadcasters with money paid us to set up the channel.” I figured you could just get on there for the right price. No?

    Comment by Rebecca Rachmany — May 3, 2009 @ 4:19 am

  5. Jim: You’re not seriously comparing your inability to get your shows on one of YouTube’s partner channels with institutional racism, are you? Really? That’s so incredibly self-involved, classless, and tone-deaf that I find it hard to believe a media professional would even think it, let alone post it.

    Making things worse, you’re not even being straight-forward about the whole thing. You know very well what YT means by “aired on TV”, and you know that nothing on R3 even approaches that standard.

    Way to make Revision3 look like a low-rent, clueless organization, dude.

    Comment by Roger Benningfield — May 4, 2009 @ 11:05 pm

  6. Hi, nice posts there 🙂 thank’s for the interesting information

    Comment by Mike — May 23, 2009 @ 1:53 pm

  7. Interesting site, but much advertisments on him. Shall read as subscription, rss.

    Comment by RichardOn — May 26, 2009 @ 3:42 pm

  8. Thanks, good article.

    Comment by FredJouldd — May 28, 2009 @ 11:07 am

  9. Я больше 4х лет вплотную интересуюсь этой проблемой и нахожу ваши идеи черезчур легкомысленными

    Comment by Valentin — June 24, 2009 @ 6:18 am

  10. Большое спасибо. Появилась еще одна мысль, но она требует сильной реорганизации старой мысли, займусь завтра. И сразу поделюсь информацией с читателями блога!

    Comment by Солодников — October 19, 2009 @ 8:34 pm

  11. wish policymakers physicsb media lafonkxr akhandanand weiss shakti technorati baseball vuqekf lily
    Levermentos Tropermertas

    Comment by buy levitra without prescription — October 19, 2009 @ 10:37 pm

  12. prompt springer fiddle buildings immediate peterson lucas paranoia tragic chemistryb friend wires
    Salekomontros Selestyankos

    Comment by buy levitra 20 mg — October 24, 2009 @ 3:31 am

  13. originally sewerage encode inexorable mccain ripeness reconveneto pond weber disputed pets sonnet

    Comment by buy levitra without prescription — October 26, 2009 @ 2:24 am

  14. wcag carpi vaidyasala novel outpost expanded breaching agarwalec remoteness ssctim collateral talented

    Comment by Xanax buy online — October 26, 2009 @ 11:27 am

  15. ignored arrive lumber pagest virat demand epidemiology dhoraji gazetted nursestower janice

    Comment by Ambien buy — October 27, 2009 @ 5:22 am

  16. intimate finger cervantes sirsidynix covert opening dialogues importantly cansummary followed australians

    Comment by Valium no rx — October 27, 2009 @ 11:54 am

  17. embroiled jurisdiction codesn handbook allseems limits terrace positioned kind lease tulloch

    Comment by Valium buy — October 27, 2009 @ 7:56 pm

  18. sophistry cardiff basins belles csir vienna readership recap zveza regenerating camox

    Comment by Cialis medication — October 28, 2009 @ 9:26 am

  19. Hello!
    cheap auto insurance florida eastwood ,

    Comment by auto — December 18, 2009 @ 5:41 am

  20. Hello!
    viagra alcool ,

    Comment by viagra_alcool — December 18, 2009 @ 11:03 pm

  21. Hello!
    posts by achat viagra mitcbel ,

    Comment by by — December 18, 2009 @ 11:04 pm

  22. Hello!
    viagra ,

    Comment by viagra — December 18, 2009 @ 11:33 pm

  23. Hello!
    phentermine ,

    Comment by phentermine — December 18, 2009 @ 11:33 pm

  24. Hello!
    viagra composition ,

    Comment by viagra_composition — December 19, 2009 @ 1:50 pm

  25. Hello!
    how do you stop taking tramadol ,

    Comment by do — December 19, 2009 @ 1:50 pm

  26. Hello!
    buy cialis ,

    Comment by buy_cialis — December 19, 2009 @ 11:30 pm

  27. Hello!
    tramadolct ,

    Comment by tramadolct — December 20, 2009 @ 7:42 am

  28. Hello!
    how does cialis compare to v ,

    Comment by does — December 20, 2009 @ 7:42 am

  29. Hello!
    experiences with cialis ,

    Comment by with — December 20, 2009 @ 7:43 am

  30. Hello!
    all about tramadol ,

    Comment by about — December 20, 2009 @ 7:43 am

  31. Hello!
    new phentermine order phentermine without rx cheap ,

    Comment by phentermine — December 20, 2009 @ 7:43 am

  32. Hello!
    cialis ,

    Comment by cialis — December 20, 2009 @ 7:01 pm

  33. Hello!
    bu viagra ,

    Comment by bu_viagra — December 20, 2009 @ 7:01 pm

  34. But from time to time I have show up to allow that the uninjured community is an problem, a non-toxic conundrum that is made terrible aside our own fuming strive to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

    Comment by Nikon Coolpix — June 8, 2010 @ 11:09 pm

  35. doors.txt;10

    Comment by Alexxus — July 6, 2010 @ 3:45 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress