This wasn’t even an online video story, except that MSNBC does a great job of making clips of stories, particularly their news shows, available.

I was catching up on my Sunday morning roundtable shows before the Oscars, and had to hear this??

I just watched the clip and decided to embed it here for the hell of it. Then Ralph Nader joining the race for president became an online video story. Guess how? The second time I watched the clip, I got the same 30-second pre-roll ad for Boeing. But Mr. Nader also promised that his website would be the most interactive of any presidential candidate. He’s got the basics, but he’s just quite there yet. Sign up and donate, or see his whole platform, but as of this writing, the links to Facebook, MySpace and YouTube don’t work. Maybe that’s why he’s advertising for some web development help on the site, too. But we like that he’s looking for some videographers. Dont forget to send those videos our way, Ralph!

Does anyone care whether we call it a “podcast” or an “mp3″ of something? I’m currently browsing the Zune Marketplace looking for some new podcasts, but I realized its mostly short versions of traditional media (The Today Show Podcast), and the usual, mass distributed webisodes like Ask A Ninja.

My question….does the “buzzword” get in the way of peope’s understanding of the medium? People are asking about widgets without knowing what they are or how to measure their success. Seems a little “horse before the cart” to me. And now looking at all the podcasts available from Zune Marketplace and iTunes, are people really confused by their nomenclature? Or do they get the fact that anyone can make an audio recording of video interview available for download to be viewed on multiple devices? I’m not actually planning on watching HBO’s “In Treatment” on my Zune. I plan on watching on my PC, but Ill grab it through the Zune Marketplace….for free.

Not sure why this is bugging me, other than the fact that I need different settings for downloading and syncing my podcasts than my regular music. PITA.

Same with widgets. Will someone please bring a little thought into the process? Or just admit they want to dabble with a new medium.

What are you using to tag your audio files these days, anyway? I’ve spent most of this weekend updating and standardizing album art and setlists so they play in chronological order while maintaining my preferred file naming convention (artist/album/song - artist.mp3).

End holiday rant.

AdAge’s Bob Garfield runs through the commercials he didn’t like.

He doesn’t like most of them. But I’m not sure I agree with his reasoning.

My quick thoughts:

Audi R8: Parody of Godfather scene where the director finds the horse head may have been the worst commercial of the Superbowl. Could have been for any product that people are supposed to feel passionately about.

Bridgestone Tires with the animals screaming being afraid of being run over was also funny. As was nearly running over Richard Simmons.

The Careerbuilder campaign was disturbing. That was one bizarre looking heart.

Tide to Go was hysterical with the stain talking. One of the best commercials of the ‘bowl.

Coke ruled the second half of the game with the James Carvillle & Bill Frist commercial. Would have been better with Hillary and Obama, though. But the parody of the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade with the huge balloon characters chasing a huge balloon of a coke bottle. Good stuff.

ETrade: Did we need to watch a baby spit-up while performing stock trades? The “clown rental” commercial was certainly funnier. “Underestimate the creepiness.” Ha!

Budweiser delivered its usual blend of humor and pumping up the Clydsedales, this time with a Rocky inspired commercial.

And GoDaddy.com? Terrible. Danica has a nice beaver. Good message.

Check ‘em all again on MySpace or any of the other previously mentioned sites.

What worked for you? What didn’t?

Damn. I want to cry right now. Mr. Softy offered $44 billion to pick up the battered remains of Yahoo, stepping up to the plate with the chutzpah to execute a turnaround that seemed unlikely to happen from within.

But what do they get for it? And more importantly, is it worth it? Last week Yahoo stock was trading around $18. Microsoft’s offer of $31 a share is roughly a 60% premium over that. Sure they are both getting their asses handed to them in the search arena, but does a Microsoft with less than 25% combined market share pose a threat to Google anyway? I highly doubt it. Remember, the key to search dominance is results. Give the people what they want, and they’ll come back for more. But someone will eventually build a better algorithm, and users will migrate to that. How many people now find what the info they are looking for on Wikipedia anyway? If I’m not shopping, or looking for specific product info, thats where I head. But those types of searches don’t generate revenue anyway.

So its not for search. Must be for display, targeting and ad serving, right? Makes sense, but isn’t there already a huge overlap in users and services? Yahoo’s ad network has roughly 150 million unique users per month, 85% reach. Yahoo proper has about 135 million with 75% reach. MSN has about 100 million and about 60% reach. Blue Lithium, which Yahoo bought for $300 million also has 135 million uniques per month. Combined and de-duped, however, how much of an audience is really gained? If they are going to continue to frequency cap advertising per ad (ie - user wont see the same ad more than twice in any 24 hour period) across their properties, how much is that going to cut into their revenue? How many advertisers are out there willing to step up and pay the premium price tag for advertising on Yahoo or MSN if and when all that inventory becomes available?

So what else would they get? Right Media, the online ad exchange, should help the optimization of all that inventory, so there’s value there. And Yahoo just offered $150 million for Maven Networks, who powers video for Fox News, CBS Sports, CNet, and Scripps Networks. So there’s even more high value video inventory.

But overall, does it make sense? And is the price right given the economic downturn? If my previous post holds any water, then its a good move for Microsoft. But if its a pure ad revenue play, and ad revenue takes a big hit over the next year, the premium Uncle Bill is paying for Yahoo may look pretty ridiculous. $31 for an $18 share? Well, I’m just pissed I dumped my Yahoo in December to take the loss…..and my lumps.

Today, ad network Burst Media put out their latest issue of their newsletter, and in it, they bashed pre-roll with some pretty nasty looking data.

Once again, we’re presented with a bunch of charts and graphs and data points on why pre-roll sucks. But once again, we have no idea about the content that was used in the study.

Bad News: Most Stop Watching Video Content If An Ad Shows, Or Worse
Among respondents, one-half (50.7%) stop watching an online video once they encounter an in-stream advertisement.

Why is this even remotely interesting when you don’t know what kind of content the user was looking to watch? Answer - it isn’t. Users that abandon watching a “user initiated” video clip because they see the start of an ad simply don’t care about watching that video.

Would it have been worth it if they knew it was only a 5-second ad? I bet it would be. What if it were exclusive video? What if you desperately needed to hear about that breaking news story?

I am, again, on yet another rant about unmonetizable content. If the success of your business depends on running a pre-roll ad in front of “Man Lights Fart on Fire,” then you need to reconsider your business model. Fun to watch? Sure. Good business? Not even close.

Can we please stop bashing pre-roll? Can we please stop pumping out research that tells us that people don’t like advertising? Can we please talk about this powerful, exciting and effective medium like the complicated and layered business that it is? Size of the video player, quality of content, type of content, length of content — all factors that are continuously left out of research, but desperately need to be factored in to media planning. There are no simple answers, so lets stop looking for them. Lets start working on some in-depth analysis that (gasp) may be over the head of a 24 year old media planner.

Yes, it is hard to measure so many factors in any one study. But without it, we will continuously discover the same thing. Kids like music and entertainment, news is the most popular video category, and nobody likes ads.

B.F.D.

A few weeks ago, AdRants’ Steve Hall blew his stack - rightfully so - about the promotional advertising floating across the bottom of his TV in the middle of the program he was watching. I can’t wait to read what he has to say about this.

Yes, I harp on the value exchange, and users keeping up our end of the bargain, quite a bit. Today is no different. Why? Because if we keep dodging commercials, we force the networks to find a way to reach us. And they are really, really good at it. That, and they’ve pretty much got us by the cajones for the time being. Its still the content that we tune in for. They’ve got it. We want it. End of story.

MTV and Bravo are adopting their version of the web’s “L-Rack” on their networks. Their “L-Bar” has ad space on the side and along the bottom of your TV screen throughout the entire program. Think ESPN News.

Remind me….why am I going out to buy a 60″ flat screen TV to devote 25% of it to advertising? Is watching a commercial really that bad? I find myself infinitely more annoyed by the new forms of ads that intrude on and distract from my content consumption way more than a clean commercial break ever did. Am I alone?

YouTube issued a press release today highlighting videos at the “forefront of politics, music, entertainment and more.” 90% of it is worthless crap.

While YouTube brought us Battle at Kruger which was pretty amazing, it also brought us “cultural phenomena,” (their words) including Chris Crocker and NORA the Piano Playing Cat. The medium made it possible for this content to reach millions of people but what is the cultural benefit?

Here’s a line directly from the release:

Otters holding hands – What is cuter than otters? Otters holding hands, of course! This YouTube video rocketed to fame on the strength of its sheer adorableness, making it the #2 Most Watched Pets & Animals video of all time.

This is not to say that TV doesn’t have its share of worthless content, 22 minutes of A Shot at Love is at least as mind numbing as Paris in Jail, but there are very few examples of original user-generated content that enriches and offers societal benefit, or artistic originality.

Here’s hoping for more worthwhile original online video in 2008.

There’s been a lot of discussion today surrounding an LAT article about striking WGA members working with VCs to start digital content companies. Writers can start all the digital content sites they want, it won’t make any difference. Online video in its current state is most valuable as an extension of TV, and MSM owns the most valuable portals.

Independent writer-driven portals? We have those, they’re called Funny or Die and My Damn Channel and they have been at most modestly successful. Their long term potential will never rival that of longer form content distributed on TV.

What these sites have driving their success is star power more than writing. Hollywood will have the eyeballs and as a result the big bucks for talent and promotion for the foreseeable future, and writers is are kidding themselves if they think they can compete on their own.

John Kerry has again inserted himself into the role of concerned New England sports fan. The political hack Massachusetts Senator sent a letter this week to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and NCTA commissioner Kyle McSlarrow urging them to reach an agreement before the season ending Pats-Giants game which will be broadcast on NFL Network.

Kerry never misses an opportunity to act the part of Boston sports fan, which has grown increasingly pathetic. In 2004 while running for prez, he attempted to ride the Red Sox World Series wave, sharing a box with Ben Affleck several months after he referred to Red Sox players in the 2004 All-Star game as “Manny Ortiz.”

This situation needs to get resolved, but what is needed is pressure placed on the NFL to accept placement on a premium tier. Letters urging both sides to agree amount to cheap PR for politicos, but do nothing to actually lead to an agreement.

As the writer’s strike lingers on (hey, at least Broadway is back), more and more people throw their opinions into the mix. One of the most rational I’ve seen lately comes from Shelly Palmer. I’ve enjoyed the conversations we’ve had the few times we’ve met, but his recent Media 3.0 newsletter reminded me why I enjoy chatting with him so much.

If they’d just set a three year time limit on the Advanced Media portion of the deal, they could promise the writer’s 100% of the profits — there won’t be any! That’s a bit of hyperbole, but it’s not entirely inaccurate. Guys — we’re in a transition period, any deal you make today will be completely obsolete by the time the ink is dry. You’ve made your point, let’s revisit this when everyone understands the issues better than we do today.

Well said, Shelly. Its not like any of the striking writers are getting paid for spoofing their “day jobs” on YouTube.