Print 36 comment(s) - last by wordsworm.. on Nov 23 at 8:53 PM

Viacom has banned Google TV from accessing its episode's stations with nary an explanation.  (Source: Engadget)
Google isn't getting much love from the television industry

Google TV seems on a roll.  Powered by Android, the specialized software has already popped up in Sony's new Internet TV hardware and should be showing up in Samsung sets early next year as well.  

Standing in its way is a bizarre blockade from the television industry that appears to be taking its frustrations on internet video out against the new platform.  ABC, NBC, CBS, and most recently FOX have banned the platform from accessing their television websites.  And now Viacom, who recently lost a long and protracted court war with Google web-video subsidiary YouTube over piracy, has joined the merry band of banners.

Customers visiting the websites of MTV, Comedy Central, and Nickelodeon were rudely greeted with denials when trying to access TV episodes via their Android-powered internet TVs.

The decision to ban Google's TV platform seems baffling.  Customers could simply step a few feet to their computer and access the episodes.  And why did the networks put the episodes up in the first place if they didn't want them to be viewed?  The question hot on the minds of many -- why are networks pulling such a seemingly illogical and glaringly anti-customer move?  

At the end of the day it likely has some sort of vague basis in reality -- perhaps television providers are fearful of customers switching from viewing live TV to online episodes, which reportedly earn less ad revenue.  However, the boat seems to have already sailed on this front and the TV networks help cast it off, in fact, by putting legal episodes for their most popular shows up online.

Ultimately, the move will likely accomplish exactly what the networks least want -- driving more customers away to piracy and web video.

At the end of the day what seems particularly egregious is the fact that none of the networks will even talk about their decision to block the device.  Customers deserve an explanation, but networks seem determined not give them one.  Any worthwhile business man can tell you -- treating customers with disrespect is the greatest error any business can make.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: change is hard
By tmouse on 11/22/2010 1:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
What does “making money selling crappy music and infinitely remade movies, etc.” have to do with anything? Google is not becoming a producer of anything. There will also never be a huge outgrowth of quality home spun content. Didn't happen on cable will not happen on the net.

I'm guessing here but maybe Google had plans to cut out their ads and insert their own? That certainly would not go over with the networks.

RE: change is hard
By muhahaaha on 11/22/2010 2:34:27 PM , Rating: 3
Oh come on Rupert Murdoch, stop trolling.

RE: change is hard
By tmouse on 11/23/2010 9:55:08 AM , Rating: 2
You couldn't be further from the truth there. For reasons I will not go into here I can tell you if Rupert Murdoch's mouth cought on fire I wouldn't pee in it to put out the flames.

RE: change is hard
By Jaybus on 11/22/2010 3:47:23 PM , Rating: 2
It has everything to do with it, particularly for live TV. Fewer and fewer people want to watch live TV. Watching the same ads over and over during the far too frequent interruptions makes live TV more annoying and less entertaining. It wasn't always like this, but live TV has evolved into a practically continuous infomercial with occasional breaks for a few minutes of actual TV show.

Live TV has very little entertainment value to me anymore, and it is due to formatting designed to force ads down our throats. The shows that I probably would otherwise watch are, for me, rendered unwatchable by the formatting. As a result, I watch mostly Netflix and BD/DVDs. I plug an iPod into my car's receiver while driving and never listen to the radio anymore. I know I'm not unique in that regard, so have to conclude that fewer and fewer people are watching live TV (or listening to radio). It's not necessarily the "crappy" content, but rather that even really good content is made annoying by the "crappy" formatting.

RE: change is hard
By tmouse on 11/23/2010 9:52:20 AM , Rating: 2
Did you even bother to read what the OP said?

He was ranting against the content providers

FU big media, can't wait to see you die.

My point was this has absolutely nothing to do with the content per se, it’s about the transmission so his rant is meaningless in this regard. If they die there is no content for Google either.

My guess is Google would like to link directly to their transmissions and bypass their advertisements; which is their source of income. I cannot blame them if this is true. Even if it is not they are probably planning to mine viewing interests for ad sales like Google is planning to do so again since its their content, it’s their right. If the viewer information is all shunted through Google they probably would not be able to get that information.

As for the formatting you have a choice of ads or pay to view, you like to put your money up front, that’s fine. In many countries you have to have a license or pay a fee to get television then it MAY be ad free. Either way you pay.

“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki