• Print

Eventstreaming and People Publishing

The iPhone craze has seen the uncorrelated development of a new phenomenon, that while expected, is nonetheless a marker in the ongoing shift in media production.

Techcrunch calls it “event streaming”
; it involves the genesis of live video/audio production from an on-site event through the internet using widely available tools and services.

Eventstreaming is the missing link in Web 2.0’s challenge to network television.

Who could ever forget the coverage of the London Bombings in 2005 where user generated video featured as a main source of footage. Two years later and the technology has continued to improve; the step from recording footage of an event to streaming it live over the internet has been made.

Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine has more detailed analysis:

The infrastructural challenge in this is that we, the audience, won’t necessarily know where to find what’s going on. For a time, there will be portals for live — UStream et al — but it’s already hard to find out what’s happening there. Portals don’t work. So I imagine that news organizations will need to devote people to combing all the live video to see what’s happening out in the world. The real value will then be alerting all the rest of us that something is going on now so we can watch on the internet . . . or perhaps on our iPhones.

And, of course, soon those iPhones will be the means of gathering and sharing that news, as soon as they have video cameras and as soon as AT&T gets its act together. [My son] Jake told me that iJustine, one of the Justin.TV lifevloggers, doesn’t need to carry a backpack; her small camera hooks up to a Vaio in her purse. So the gigantic ENG (electronic news gathering) and SNG (satellite news gathering) trucks with their dishes and expensive equipment and expert operators are replaced by . . . a purse, and soon a mere phone.

For many of us, at first glance this is merely an “ahem, yes, of course” kind of moment. With modestly deeper analysis, it is an interesting indication of the profundity of the changes afoot within those societies where at least a significant portion (whatever that portion happens to be) of the population has ready access to these new tools of production. It has tremendous impact on issues of privacy; transparency; and definitions of solitude. As Jarvis has pointed out in this story and many others, the ease of consumer and prosumer video production should also imply titantic shifts in the economic structures of the firms involved with traditional media acquisition and distribution.

Much as in publishing, and libraries, one of the core questions seems to be the length of the delay before traditional organizational forms are disrupted – and what, eventually, becomes the catalyst for those changes. Most suddenly “traditional” industries – regardless of the changes in technological production – don’t become instantly relegated to backwaters the moment the new technologies hit the market. Rather, some new market is produced within which new media product forms can flourish and provide services perceived to be imperative, or stresses are encountered that older forms cannot accommodate.

Watching this evolution unfold – waiting for all the ramifications to be apparent – will make for an interesting show.

tags:
  • http://www.winextra.com Steven Hodson

    I’m glad to see that some-one other than myself only see’s this as an “evolution” as opposed to a ‘revolution’ – which IMO is an over hyped word that like so many others is losing any value.

    http://www.winextra.com/2007/06/30/lifestreaming-is-stupid-eventstreaming-is-evolution/

  • monopole

    And, of course, soon those iPhones will be the means of gathering and sharing that news, as soon as they have video cameras and as soon as AT&T gets its act together.[My son] Jake told me that iJustine, one of the Justin.TV lifevloggers, doesn’t need to carry a backpack; her small camera hooks up to a Vaio in her purse.

    …and when the iPhone develops the capacity to read minds directly the keyboard issue will be moot. So even though preexisting technology with no relationship with Apple is doing the job better now, nonexistent 4th generation Apple iPhone vaporware is of course credited for bringing about the revolution!

  • Roger

    Without some thoughtful delay what you usually end up having is real time sensationalism and instant rumor mongering. Real events become difficult to discern from staged (manipulated) events (and who exactly provided that video clip). The role of a true media (“traditional” or otherwise) is to gather/integrate and interpret multiple sources of information to provide their audiences with the best available perspectives of what is going on. Real time information is certainly very valuable but alone it can be problematic. When do you cross the line between entertainment buzz versus actual news? (Do we really need to see things like “real-time” car chases – apparently local network TV news in LA thinks so …).

    The sorry hype of the iPhone with the silly “real-time” broadcasting of the event by ‘iJustine’ and her ilk should be a warning of
    the shallowness of such “news” that is coming online. ‘Beware of media manipulation’ should be the modern mantra – but maybe it is too late, the Kool-Aid has already been served.

  • Sachin

    This post reminds me of the Evolving Personalized Information Construct (EPIC) video a couple of years back.

    Roger’s response echoes what I thought at that time: you watch/read news because of the verity of the information, the reputation of the organization that filters the information for you, the stature of the people who analyse the information and articulate their views/opinions/perspectives.

    The other aspect is how incumbent organizations tackle disruptive change. Smart incumbent organizations respond with adoption, acquisition and consolidation. They are in a much stronger position than the newcomers to dominate the new markets created by the disruption.

    Consumption trends also change with disruptive changes. More often than not, it usually becomes one option amongst many for the consumer. Radio didn’t wipe-out print, or television didn’t wipe-out radio and internet hasn’t wiped-out television. All of these co-exist, why?

  • http://www.diglib.org Peter Brantley

    Sachin, it is true that aggressively-acting incumbent organizations can respond effectively on some occasions. Established biopharmaceuticals have learned to accommodate the novel forms of product development engendered by biotechnology, for example.

    Within homologous classes of media, newer forms tend to greatly attenuate existing markets. However, emergent, distinctive forms of media may occupy new niches, or re-arrange the media ecosystem. Thus, CDs have nearly wiped out LPs, but radio did not destroy print.