DEMO, day three
January 30, 2007
So, we've arrived at DEMO launch day. Today the first press is starting to make its way out, in tiny bits, and the Wall Street Journal had a piece this morning focusing on Mobile Tech.

We hadn't planned for a group breakfast, but by 8:30am we were all downstairs and sitting and talking about the site, and the DEMO plans for the day. Waiting isn't one of my best skills -- so today was a bit hard to plan for. But I had a number of key biz dev calls (even closed a BIG deal) so that helped fill out the morning. More on that shortly.
Steve, Simon, and Laura prep on the couch

By 11am, we were registered and in our practice room for another series of run throughs and practices.
morerehresal 3.JPG

And then it was off to the booth.
sign of both.JPG booth simon sr.JPG

Then the lobby bar -- a packed scene, with a mix of start ups, new products, and web stars.
openingnightpart2.JPG

There were tons of folks from NYC -- fellow Silicon Alley startups. Sean Morgan from Critical Mention was there to pitch the new Clip Syndicate, on stage tomorrow just before us, and Preclick CEO Brian Smiga is presenting his product as well.
Sean Morgan from Clip Syndicate and Steve Rosenbaum from Magnify.net Steve Rosenbaum from Magnify.net, and Brian Smiga from Preclick.com

January 29, 2007
This thing is like a well oiled machine. There is a rhythm, and its really clear that arriving prepared is critical.

Beth had us at a team breakfast at 9am, which was leisurely -- except for the fact that we've all be up for hours reading blogs, and all we can talk about is how great the YouTube announcement is. The basic take of the team that the announcement validates the space -- since its now clear that UGV will be an advertiser supported medium -- and that the attention that YouTube brings to UGV and Advertising can only drive up demand for UGV at the site level, demand for higher quality (read, "curated") content, and the need for new solutions and tools for both creators and sites. Overall -- we feel very much in the middle of the whole space, and like the chapter in the life of this start up with be a ton of fun.
LargeScreen

Speaking of fun -- the DEMO stage is fun. That's the only word for it. It's high tech, the crew is organized and friendly, and the whole vibe is definitely about helping you do your best. Oh, wait, i jumped ahead.

At 11am -- we headed to the Ballroom to get our first look at the stage, and the set up. it's huge. A big room. and lots of chairs. Maybe they'll be people in all of them -- a scary thought. Ok, so when our turn comes, they take our laptops and the stage Emeri and Simon in assigned spots on the stage, each with stickers to label their laptops for the proper tech hook ups. If you've ever been at a tech conference where the AV didn't work right, you know how much that can suck. Clearly Chris Shipley and her team have decided long ago to never let that happen, so the tech is planned down to the second (really!) and the rehearsals are serious. I'm not sure what happens if you miss your rehearsal, but i bet that you don't get on the stage without one.

So, with just six minutes to tell the Magnify story -- here goes.
sixmin

I can't say it was easy... but after weeks of fine tuning the message, it went pretty well.
demoSRstage

After the rehearsal (and some kind words from the crew) we're off to a well-deserved Starbucks break.
demoTEAM

Heck, they have Starbucks in the lobby. Iced coffee in January. Ah, this is a bit of heaven. More conversation about the market, and of course, everyone is on wireless in the lobby: Emeri is working with sites, Simon is actually writing code -- changing the nav on the home page and fixing up some back end bits and pieces that we knew there'd be time for in the few days before the conference. We can't know what kind of traffic spike we may experience post DEMO, but we have to assume that some folks we care about will swing by for a look. So there's no detail too small.

Speaking of details -- the T-shirts came in. We knew we wanted some Magnify Swag for DEMO, even if only we could wear it (DEMO has a pretty firm no swag policy). But the first round from Cafe Press were kind of muddy. (the black t shirt process is still very beta). So we went back to plain old silk-screen T's -- and the result is pretty cool. We'll make some sort of plan to start sending T's to Magnify Site creators who do amazing stuff with the platform or content -- just not sure what the actually plan is yet -- so hold on, more on that post-DEMO.

January 28, 2007
DEMO DIARY - Day 1.

It's 39 Degrees in New York. Clear and Cold. And even though I know i'm not going on vacation - packing chino's and short sleeve shirts seems kind of wrong. I keep telling myself that - wardrobe not withstanding - this is going to be one of the most demanding weeks i've ever had in my professional career. I'm not making this up. I've done the research. I've talked to CEO's who've done the DEMO conference who say that it is something you train for - like a marathon.

And train we have. For the past four weeks we've been driving to get everything ready for DEMO. That means product, materials, web site, press materials, presentation, AV, logo, and most importantly - the actual product story. The thing is - everyone knows video is big and getting bigger - the shear volume of consumer press on YouTube assures us of that. But what will video BE? Will it be a destination, a or a language, or a ubiquitous piece of every bit of the web? We've got to arrive in Palm Springs ready to present a coherent and comprehensive view of the space - and our role leading the next generation of video. The good news is - we've got the team to do it. The bad news is - every day there's a new surprise that needs to be engaged and absorbed into the story. For example, just yesterday Google announced somewhat critically that it would present YouTube clips in the Google Video search results. Most folks think this means that over time, upload and such will move to YouTube, and Google Video will focus on monetization and search. But for the time being - that hasn't been confirmed. At the same time Chad Hurley was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, and ended up making a statement that YouTube would begin to pay creators. Hmmm.... was that planned? Probably not. Was it inevitable? Probably. So that's the fun of building in a fast moving space. As it turns out - neither announcement does anything but straighten the Magnify platform. YouTube also announced they were supporting Digg, StumbleUpon and others- ratifying the idea of multiple distributors for video going forward... but that didn't make as big a headline.

So, back to Palm Springs.

DEMO - if you don't know it - is the place where great ideas get rocket fuel. Fuel can be key biz dev relationships, or national press, or venture capital - or all three. It's two and a half days of high drama... and just six minutes on stage to tell your story. (www.demo.com)

Yikes.

Six minutes. So we've had to focus, focus, focus. Simon and Emeri will join me on stage- so we'll be able to do not one, but two demo's in our six minutes. I won't let the cat out of the bag, but it's going to be pretty great. I think it should have a real 'wow' factor. And that is what the demo crowd wants. They want something they've never seen before. And we're going to deliver that - in spades.

At the same time, i'm going to try and find the time to write here about other companies that we meet along the way...

Ok - off to the airport, Simon, Emeri and I are flying together. Beth and Laura are meeting us in Palm Springs... tomorrow at 9am it all begins.

The 12 months that changed media.

In January of 2006, I was at conference in Las Vegas called NATPE. There, Google had set up a booth and was beginning to talk about digitizing video for a new product called Google Video. You could feel the excitement around the idea of moving video to the web.

It was early days, but it was happening. Larry Page had announced Google video at CES just a few weeks earlier, and the media business was keenly interested.
By February of 2006, Google Video was live, and accepting submissions. And I - always the early adopter - was anxious to see just what kind of response online video would have. YouTube was already making waves, but it seemed then more like it might be teen content or amateur content on YouTube, and content that could really give content creators a piece of the long tail on Google. At least that was how it looked way back in February of 2006.

Wondering how to explore video on the web, it seemed to me then that folks were looking for less polished, more authentic material in their web searches. So, I did something I'd never done before - and went looking for raw material in my film archives. Because I had Directed 7 Days in September I was gathering material for a very large archive of 9/11 material at the same time, and mostly it had been sitting on hard drives in our edit room. Because the elements of the film were already digitized, transferring the raw footage to Google was pretty easy. And so, on January 24th 2006 I posted my first clip on Google Video: "Amateur Pilot Files Over World Trade Center - Pre 9/11." By mid February, I had hundreds of clips of 9/11 video posted.

The thing you have to remember is that this wasn't yet visible to a regular Google search, and there was no marketing or PR associated with it. We just put it there, and forgot about it.

A few weeks later - I checked to see what was happening with the 9/11 archive material on Google. My jaw dropped. Over a million video clips had been viewed. Still today that number is startling. For journalists, media companies, networks, and anyone who makes a living telling stories - the audience had spoken loud and clear. They wanted raw material, they wanted to explore footage that was often long, out of focus, or without context. And they were just getting started. By may, the number continued to climb. The New York Times took notice, and by mid summer the video viewers were well over 2 million. A massive audience, exploring raw media without a tour guide or a narrator. Now to be fair, 9/11 is not your average media content. That is for sure. People are hungry to understand 9/11 - in particular in the context of Iraq. But nonetheless, the results where not at all what I expected. At the same time, by mid summer 2006 - YouTube was moving in to the front position as the place to upload (and therefore to find) user-generated video. I put a handful of clips up on YouTube, and the results were just as dramatic.

Today the 9/11 Archive has been seen more than 2.5 million times. And we've posted more than 1,500 pieces of media on Google to share.

By August of 2006, when Google Video was just 6 months old, I watched as the head of Google Video and the head of YouTube appeared together on a panel in San Jose. The way they both described their services, it was clear to me then that there was the making of a good partnership.

On September 11th, 2006 - I made a decision that would change the way I think of filmmaking forever. With the 5th Anniversary so clearly and important milestone - I decided not to play 7 Days in September on network TV. Instead, I took the entire film - and encoded it and put it up on Google Video as well. Why? I'm not sure. Frankly, I'd been so moved by the number of people who'd been hungry to see the raw footage - I felt they might like to see my documentary view of how the material was organized into a coherent story. Sure, it was my take on the events - and yes, there were plenty of other points of view, but I wanted to continue the conversation further and putting my film out there seemed like the right thing to do. My film has been seen 64,410 times on Google - a tiny portion of the views of the Archive itself. But that seems as it should be.

And so, with the Year of Google video now moving into the late fall, the word came out that Google would be buying YouTube. To me, it seemed inevitable... and important. The life of video on the web has many uses, and many personalities. YouTube had won the right to call itself a video destination, and Google clearly provides a critical role in finding though search.

So - one year, almost to the day Google Video announced a series of changes. It would begin to index YouTube - allowing searchers to find videos on both serivices. Various pundits have suggested that Google will return to search, and YouTube will be the single destination for uploading and watching video. I don't know if that is exactly what will happen. It hardly matters.

What matters is that in one short year, Video on the Web was born, evolving, morphing, and now the era of destination sites and uploading will consolidate. That is only good. Because Google, YouTube, and many of the others leaders in this space are doing important work laying the groundwork for the emerging video ecosystem that we can now see on the horizon.

2,534,724. Two Million views. That's the number of views that the 9/11 Archive has received on Google since I put up a clip in January of 2006.

Just one year old, and video on the web has transformed how people make, share, and engage media. It's pretty staggering. Worth noticing. Because this is only the beginning. As we enter the era of video discovery, video encoding and storage will seem like a footnote in the history yet to come.

Happy Birthday Google Video.

The 2008 primaries have already begun - online.

Barack Obama was first out of the gate, announcing his candidacy in a video placed on the web. Hillary Clinton responded with her own video yesterday. Andy Plesser handicaps the technology behind the two videos, and gives Obama winning marks for allowing his video to be shared, linked, and cross posted.

I'd agree with Andy's evaluation on all points - and you should read his examination to get the whole story.
So let's instead look at the Substance, and Style of the two videos for a clue about how the candidates will fare in the web video world.

Both Clinton and Obama have chosen nondescript locations for their announcements, but Hillary's seems like it might be her home in Chappaqua - with trees out a window over her shoulder. Both have chosen to use a film style that includes overly stylized lighting... kind of like the fake window blinds that news magazines project on the wall behind interview subjects. Neither of their video's feel 'off the cuff' or 'natural' in their film style.

But this is where the similarities end.

Simply put - Obama's words feel like his own. Both convincing and colloquial. Direct and spoken without any sense that he's being asked to read 'copy'. His delivery is authentic. In stark contrast, Hillary is struggling with words that are not her own. You can practically see the tele-prompter reflected in her eyes. Every word has been word smithed, every phrase looked at by a team of consultants. Even the subject line of the email - "I'm in. And I'm in to win"- seems to respond to some unspoken marketing concern about her candidacy. Clinton's video is directed to look 'casual' , with the camera panning gently back and forth (like those old Maxwell House commercials). In contrast - Obama's spot doesn't attempt any false causal film effects... counting instead on his ability to deliver his message direct to camera. Don't get me wrong, there a moments were Clinton is clearly speaking her mind, when she says with a bit of exasperation - "after Six Years of George Bush...it is time to renew the promise of America." But when she then says - "Let's talk, lets chat..." you can just see the speech writers trying to find a way to soften her with the word 'chat'. Please. Hillary Clinton doesn't 'chat' - and it's not credible coming out of her mouth. "Because the conversation in Washington has been a little one sided - don't 'ca think." I do, but I don't by Hillary talking in slang. Obama instead is almost flat - straight - not overselling or over-promising. Just laying out his plans, with a frankness that's refreshing.

Neither video says much about what the candidates will do, or even what issues they'll run on. The only exception being Iraq. Obama characterizes Iraq as "a tragic and costly war that should never have been waged" while Hillary says: "let's talk about how to bring the right end to the war in Iraq".

As the campaign heats up, it's clear that 2008 is going to require a new and agile use of video on the web. The speed of communication, the need for responsive and authentic communication, and at the same time the ability for people to keep close track of the candidates comments - with an ear for shifts in position or an unwillingness to respond to issues in a direct way - will shape both candidates and campaigns.

2004 was the year that grass roots fund raising came to the web.

2008 will be the election that is won by the candidate that embraces the emerging open-source media environment that the web provides.

This is new territory. It's an important evolution. And it will redefine how politicians communicate and interact with voters.

Round one goes to Obama.

Near the end of an article in this weeks Broadcasting And Cable -

Oxygen's Debbie Beece said: "Don't assume think that will tip the balance of power in advertisers' favor."

"Maybe we should reject commercials," she said. "Say, 'if you're not going to be able to keep our ratings, then we reject you.'"

Replied A&E's DeBitetto: "We can't afford to reject commercials just yet."

But the fact of the matter is - Google began rejecting ads almost from the outset. If you try and use Google to post an ad with words like FREE or other over promises or over-the-top sales tricks... Google won't let you post the ads. So they put the experience of the Google environement over any advertiser. Maybe cable needs to rethink this as well...

Is Fox's "24" a clue about the future of the DVD/TV equation?

Did you watch the premier of "24" last week? The question is - did you watch the whole thing?

Probably not.

Because Fox pumped out four episodes (Four Hours!) of the premier on Sunday and Monday nights back to back. And the odds are that even the most passionate fans who have Tivo didn't grab all of it. I missed Hour 1 because my Time Warner Cable box decided to shut itself off. Ouch.

Which raises the question - why would Fox burn so much programming and hype over a two day period. Couldn't they have gotten more bang for their buck if they'd played it over four weeks?

The answers is, Fox made a decision that they wanted to feed more TV than the average consumer could manage. Why?

Well, if you watched the very end of hour 4, then you saw the offer to buy the DVD of the first four hours - TOMORROW! -

Wow.

For the first time, TV is now a promotional vehicle for DVD. Mark Cuban's single day and date releasing prophesy comes true. The TV hype drives interest in the DVD, and the programming makes it almost impossible for people to keep up with "24" without buying the DVD.

So, what did I do - having missed hour 1? I went on the web. Watched the prequel trailer. and read the notes from Television Without Pity. I didn't buy the DVD. But, hmm... maybe i will.

I haven't seen the sales #'s yet, and it may be that folks won't flood the stores for a 4 episode set of DVD's, but the die is cast. TV sells DVD. Just as theatrical sells DVD.

And that means that the shift from Broad to Niche-casting continues.

And here at Magnify.net, our goal is to bring order to a zillion little idea-cubes.
Find, Organize. Thaw. (ok, maybe i take the analogy a bit too far, but I liking the core idea).

Video on the web is either one of two things:

a. A parlor trick - like CB Radio or the pet rock.
or
b. The first moment of an information explosion that will change the
lives, work, and economies of almost everyone on the planet.

Hmm. ok - let's see, i pick 'b'.

Now - if you think that's a big set of expectations - let's just think for a minute.

Beyond food, water, air (and I would argue the environmental issues we're facing are
far more important than video on the web... though video may have a role in finding solutions).

Video is simply frozen knowledge.

Powerful. Portable. Compelling.

The tools to create, upload, and store this 'knowledge' are now in place. DV cameras,
YouTube and the other storage solutions, there's even a nascent system taking
place to create revenue for 'knowledge' creators and sites that retail knowledge.
(by which i'm talking about Google AdSense, Revver, and Brightcove).

But if you stand back, and think about the immense power, and the related challenges, of
a large percentage of the population having the tools and network access to create and
contribute knowledge - it's frankly just awesome.

It creates a tremendous opportunity to add a level of nuance - and value - to the larger
collection of content that we know as the web.

It's hardly a sure thing how all this will play out, but if you take a look at the broader trends,
you have places were people want you to submit your knowledge (video) into a cul de sac or
walled garden. And these companies tend to talk about 'their audiences' with a swagger and
a sense of ownership that seems farily draconian given the trends that are clearly driving
the change in media.

I'll go so far as to say, i've yet to see an authentic and genuine acceptance of the changing
role of the people formerly known as 'consumers' by any media company. There are
contests, and various places for carefully vetted and managed user-generated material - but
the excitement and innovation that's taking place in what David Sifrey calls 'The Participant
Economy' is being viewed more as a threat than an celebration by the current owners of
printing presses and television stations and cable channels.

That's a shame.

Because most folks aren't interested in swapping out their day jobs for full time work as content
makers. Frankly, it's as tough a gig as most - with long hours and demanding deadlines.

But they do want to take some tiny morsel of knowledge that they treasure and have nurtured...
and they want to add it into the collective consciousness.

Video is tiny bits of frozen knowledge.

And as a critical part of web 2.0, these bits will find their way into the communities, sites,
and collections that embrace them. We see Magnify as map that help you discovery video on the web. And there's a big map waiting to be drawn.

Originally blogged on iMedia connection

When I say the phrase 'network president,' what comes to mind? Think quickly. Is it Jeff Zucker, or Les Moonves or Bob Iger? Sure, you get points for those answers. But what about DC Smitty? Or Jessica Wells? Or Sean Knight? Ah, got you there, didn't I?

DC Smitty runs YouSurfTubes.com. Jessica is the proud president of The New York Hamster House and Sean Knight runs MadeInVT.TV

Hamsters. Surfing. Maple Syrup. This is the future of 'network' television.

This requires you to think about the word 'network' in a whole new way. It used to be that a network was a series of connected local stations-- a hub and spoke delivery system that made it possible to spend significant money on national television programs supplied to local stations. But that's all turned upside down now, and delightfully so.

Today, content is often driven by the passion, enthusiasm and deep knowledge of the members of a given interest group-- like surfers or hamster enthusiasts. The economics are topsy turvy as well. So surfers with high-quality DV cameras and access to a broadband connection are turning their passions into video-based content, with DC Smitty organizing and aggregating this collective knowledge into a network for both viewing and distribution. The economics of these new 'curated' networks revolve around sharing, not owning either content or audience. So DC Smitty owns the inventory on his pages, and video sources own the ad inventory in their video feeds. Sites like Revver share revenue with both content creators and site owners, and its expected that other video sites will over revenue shares as well. But the power is shifting from content pipe to contextual.

So the future of TV is no longer about content creation, though there will be plenty of that. It is instead about content discovery-- finding media nuggets that are site-specific and user-friendly. Video discovery is at the heart of TV 2.0.

So, should Jeff, Les, or Bob be worried about their jobs? Actually, the answer is kind of yes because the media model that they manage is all about the economies of scale. Large networks deliver large audiences, which commands large dollar amounts. But the internet is about identifying, aggregating and monetizing small (but targetable) niches, and there's little in the top-down media business that serves that purpose.

DC Smitty is building a self-sustaining community with members that are both content creators and content consumers-- they swing both ways. And as such, they create a community of like minded individuals who can be approached with marketing-- but only if the marketing is respectful of their community, their interests and their values.

I suspect that a few of my media-buying friends just snapped their slide rules in half. But the truth is the media world has been hungry for more contextual and targetable advertising environments for years. Digital cable wasn't able to provide enough metrics (pay per click, message targeting, et cetera) to pay off on that promise. But the new user-generated TV network ecosystem will close the loop. Advertisers will have a safe place to talk to contextually appropriate consumers, and consumer/creators will be welcomed into the media making mix.

So, what can entertainment marketers do to embrace this evolution and turn it into a useful part of their marketing toolkit? First, stop trying to wish user-generated content away-it's here to stay. Second, don't buy the argument that by using A-list bloggers in a media plan you've reinvented marketing. Instead, embrace the voice of customers-- and get used to the idea that honesty, rather than iron-fisted control, is likely to get you more traction with bloggers and curated network sites. And perhaps most interestingly, consider creating your own spaces for consumer-created content and invite submissions. Most folks may want to participate, even create content around your property-- but that doesn't mean they expect free reign. Oh, one last thing: no cash prizes. No fans need or want to be paid to make media about their favorite star, series or upcoming film. They'd take tickets, backstage passes, signed script copies or other swag. But cash isn't cool.

It's a great time to be a surfer, a fan of Vermont Cheddar or a hamster owner. But only if you can discover videos that fit your quest for adventure, your hunger or your passion. And if you sell surfboards, cedar shavings or Vermont travel videos, it could be your day.

ifocos.org today announced a call for entries and viewer-judges to the 2007 We Media Film Festival. The user-generated online film festival, launched in conjunction with the We Media Miami conference to be held Feb. 7-9, is organized in cooperation with the University of Miami School of Communication and Magnify.net, an online resource for community-powered video.

Video creators can upload or link to their videos and anyone can review and judge the entries online at: http://video.ifocos.org

The theme of the video festival is “My Community.”

“Community can mean so many things. It can be a place, an idea, or a group of individuals with shared interests,” said Andrew Nachison, executive director of ifocos.org. “We wanted We Media filmmakers anywhere to be able to use their personal media devices to paint on a broad canvas, and to celebrate the diversity of perspectives about what constitutes a community. We hope the entries will be entertaining and informative in their own right – and that they will enrich conversations worldwide about how media can inform and strengthen real communities.”

The contest is open to the public. Video creators may upload up to five minutes of storytelling around the “my community” theme. Or, if they have already posted a film on one of the popular video sharing sites, like YouTube, GoogleVideo, Revver or Magnify, they can simply link to that posting for their submission.

Ten winning entries will be selected, and winners will have their films premiered at the We Media Miami forum in Miami from Feb 7 – 9,, 2007. Winners will be selected by both a public panel of viewer votes and selected by the festival’s panel of judges.

The overall best entry, determined by the festival judges, will receive an N-series Nokia Multi-Media phone.

To be considered for a prize, entries must be submitted online by Feb. 2, 2007.

Rules for entry and submission guidelines are available by visiting http://video.ifocos.org.

As a resource for community-powered video and the We Media forum, Magnify.net also provided the site design for the festival, and the video upload technology and hosting for the festival site. “Magnify.net is based on the idea that ‘We’ is the future of media creation. Whether it’s peer production, peer review, or submission, Magnify.net is fueled by the very concepts that drive “We Media,” said Steve Rosenbaum, Magnify.net’s CEO.

About iFOCOS
iFOCOS, the Institute for the Connected Society, is an independent not-for-profit organization committed to enabling a better-informed society. Based in Reston, Virginia, iFOCOS convenes thought leaders from across industries and disciplines to understand, apply and experiment with media and technology, and to harness the power of media, communication and human ingenuity for the common good. iFOCOS organizes the annual We Media conference. For more information visit www.ifocos.org.

About Magnify.net
Magnify.net powers user-generated video channels for web publishers, media companies, and video bloggers. The Magnify platform searches and sorts video based on a site’s unique interest and engages the users to discover, share, rate and rank them for relevancy and entertainment value. The company, headquartered in New York, is founded by a team of experienced media, technology, and web development entrepreneurs with track record of best-of-breed innovations. With over 1,500 UGV Channels already on the platform, Magnify.net provides customer focused solutions that are critical to the Video 2.0 revolution. For more information visit www.magnify.net.

For more information:

For iFOCOS:

Andrew Nachison, Executive Director
(703) 251-4807
andrew AT ifocos.org

For Magnify.net:

Laura Galloway
Galloway Media Group
(212) 260-3708
laura AT gallowaymediagroup.com

On January 9th, just as the Consumer Electronics Show is revving up its annual bacchanal of electronic goodies - Steve Jobs will stride on to the stage at Mac World in San Fransisco and officially release Apple's iTV device.

The name is unknown, but in rare Apple form, the device itself has already been revealed.

The devise is significant, perhaps even game changing. And so it seemed worthwhile for the state of the market for Consumer Electronics, and the impact that the Apple living room device could have on advertising and media consumption generally.

First, a look back. The iPod itself is just five years old. Announced just a month after 9/11 - (as Steven Levy's book "the Perfect thing" so poignantly reminded me). And in 5 years the device has done what no other has been able to do. It turned the music industry upside down. It changed pricing of music from albums to songs. It created an iPod eco-system, and along the way almost accidentally created podcasting.

Today the iPod has 88% of the market for digital music downloads, and the ITune music store virtually owns the sale of network television series episodes. This, despite the fact that watching video on an iPod is not a great experience (even Jobs admits that).

Hmm.... something's got to happen, right?

So now we've got Apple iTV. A few stats. It's priced like a consumer device ($299), it's got HDMI so it's a simple single plug into your "Big Flat Screen," as Jobs calls it. And it's pre-wired with 802.11b WiFi. So for the digital early adopters it will literally plop into your home digital set up.

Oh, and it will connect directly to your living room PC or Mac and then to the Apple iTunes store.

Few things it's not. It's not a tivo. No hard drive. And it's not a cable box replacement. No cable card here.

So, why does this matter sooooo much to marketers?

First, because iPod lovers are fanatical, and they WANT to buy stuff to jazz up their iPods. So this isn't going to languish on the shelf like the Microsoft home-media center pro extender whatever you call it. This thing will SELL. It will create an economy just as the iPod did.

And second, because the passion that has driven the adoption of YouTube (100,000,000 video views a day) is hardly near saturation point. In fact it's just begun. Because while some percentage of web visitors will be content makers (2% 15% ? who knows) - the large majority will be content consumes of UGC. Which means that the real explosion in UGC has been waiting for a playback experience that is more TV like.

And my bet is that Apple is about to unleash this experience on the world. They will use their brilliant marketing and super-hip market position to make their iTV device and extension of the most popular consumer electronics device in history (the iPod).

That means that for marketers - there's an opportunity to grab hold of a new trend that has every thing they've ever wanted in TV and Direct Marketing combined. Narrow Niche Casting. Focused User-Generated Video (and advertiser created video, and of course video from all the sources we've come to know) directly 'discovered' on the net, and brought home via the net, and then streamed wirelessly to you Big Flat Screen TV.

It's the starting gun. The race is one. Media will be made for you. Delivered to you. And Shared among you and your friends. Apple's iTV is the missing link. Last mile to the living room from the den. The connection that turns web video into consumer entertainment.

It's going to be cool. Steve Job's said so. And I'm not betting against him.

Democrats, Media, and Americans - ignore the "Surge" at our peril.

Ok. I'm fed up. First of all, I voted. A bunch of us did. We told the Democrats in a clear voice... get us out of Iraq. Then there was the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group report. Pretty clear what their message was. And then there were

all the Generals in the field who said, in a pretty clear voice - we need to 'redeploy' out of Iraq.
Ok. So the Democracy is functioning.

Or is it?

President Bush decides the solution is to 'Listen' for two weeks - and goes in search of anyone who will tell him what he wants to hear. His listening tour brings him right up to the Holidays, so he's going to need some time to 'think' and 'strategize'.

But he does begin to use the word "Surge" - dropped in to key media. And the media, as the dutiful reporters that they are - repeats it.

Let's first examine the word. It's brilliant. It's a forceful word that seems both determined and to have a limited time frame. You can almost see what a 'surge' would look like on a graph. A big bump up, and then a measured slop back down. We're not increasing troops - we're Surging.

And as Bush has said it, again and again, the media has begun to report the "Surge" as an inevitability. Said Charles Gibson last night: "When the President Speaks to the Nation next week... he's expected to announce a "Surge" in troops in Iraq.

Oh, but meanwhile, he's also replacing all the field commanders. Why, because they told him he's out of his mind. Oh, and he's going to increase the size of the Military... hire more troops. Why? Because the reservers are going to start going AWOL if he doesn't get some fresh kids in the mix fast.

So, let's recap.

The Miltary that has been arguing for a phased redeployment. They're all being replaced. The Iraq Study Group Bi-Partisan commission. They've been sent packing. The Voters. Ignored. The Democrats. Ah, I saved the best for last.

So, here we are. They've got a majority in both the House and Senate. But what are these newly minted Democrats saying - as they get sworn in? Well, Nancy Boyda from Kansas - on ABC yesterday - said she would vote to fund the "surge" because "George Bush is Commander in Chief".

Oh, well. Of course. We voted for you, we told you to get us out of Iraq. But now you're going to get all cowardly on us. Damn.

Oh, and by the way Ms. Boyda, if he's the Commander and Chief, make him declare war.

You CAN do that.

A war against who? Against what? With what objectives? With what mission? At what cost?

I'm furious. Fed up. And if this Congress rubber stamps the now all but inevitable "Surge" that is being shoved down our throats - then they have squandered their first opportunity to re-balance the political books and create the checks and balances they were elected to provide.

I think i'm about to Surge, myself.