Why TV Hasn’t Lost

Tech guru Paul Graham has a pretty good following, for the most part I’ve appreciated his point of view as an expert, but his latest post, “Why TV Lost” is way off base.

Graham argues that all content will be viewed on computers – in a sense they already are, set-top boxes connected to TVs are already doing the job of the computer, and clearly the technology in the boxes will only get better, in addition to being built into TVs independently. But his larger point, that “Facebook killed TV” he never really backs up.

All video will eventually be delivered over IP, I believe that is coming. But that doesn’t mean the networks built on creating content are going to die, nor does it mean that the living room big screen – which I would argue is the traditional definition of TV – is going anywhere.

Wikipedia defines Television as “a widely used telecommunication medium for transmitting and receiving moving images.” TV, as it is perceived by consumers will not change. We will still receive moving images on screens whose primary purpose is delivering those images. The living room TV may get smarter, we may be able to interact more, but content is still king, and people still enjoy long-form content on a big screen in the highest possible quality.

When Graham talks about the way viewing patterns are shifiting he underestimates the desires of the public and the power and influence of existing networks. Television in the U.S. alone is a $70 Billion advertising market. It’s a medium that viewers enjoy, one that advertisers are familiar with spending on – and the machine driven by the viewer/advertiser value prop is one that isn’t going anywhere, bittorrent be damned.

Graham writes:

Whether they like it or not, big changes are coming, because the Internet dissolves the two cornerstones of broadcast media: synchronicity and locality.

So be it, but even with the dissolution of synchronicity and locality, content is king. And as long as content drives the viewership drives the advertising, the media machine will ensure that while the technology behind TV will shift, and while this shift will be costly to TV Networks and distributors, the changes that result will be largely invisible to consumers.

The vested interest of the networks, advertisers, and of consumers will ensure that the largest number of consumers are provided with the greatest level of content at the lowest possible cost in exchange for advertising. In other words, TV as we’ve known it, with a few added improvements.