UK time is: 06:01:43
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

A little over six weeks ago I moved house. In doing so, I decided to ditch my subscriptions to Sky and Setanta. (NO, NOT because of the *shudders* credit crunch, if I was buying sky on credit then that would suggest I could not afford it in the first place). I attend pretty much every Arsenal match anyway, I reasoned to myself and any games that I am itching to watch that do not involve us, I can watch at my local. So far, I have only troubled the Guinness barrels once in that six weeks, to watch the Carling Cup Final. Match of the Day has scarsely been on my radar for some years, Saturday evenings are usually spent either hurtling down the motorway away from another Northern arena or else indulging wine, women and song. (Well, usually whining about women, I let around 30,000 at the Emirates whine about Song).

In fact, now moved, my flat has only one television, a 15 inch portable in the kitchen which picks up only four channels. I was never the most erstwhile television viewer anyway, but I have not missed it one bit. Having thrown off the mind forged manacles of the goggle box; I have come to realise that the online revolution is gathering apace. Can't see Match of the Day or Goals on Sunday? There's always a stream someewhere offering highlights. No televisual access to the paint drying epic between Liverpool and Chelsea? Games are streamed all over the interweb. Whilst the legality of these sites is certainly questionable, it is doubtless that people are aware of them. But if I have been slow to fully realise the emerging underground of football viewing, have the television companies had their thumbs absent mindedly dithering away from the pulse too?

BSkyB has just spent a gargantuan 1.62bn on securing rights to Premiership matches until 2013. But will the way in which we view football have altered irrevocably by then? The cult of viewing football over the internet has been bubbling under the surface of the mainstream for some time now, but the counter culture is always two steps ahead of culture, the underground always sets the beat for the mainstream and crime is always a hop, a skip and a jump ahead of the law. As it is, was and ever shall be. With economic recession rife all over the globe and streaming technology improving all the time, you have to wonder if more will swap their Panasonics for their Packard Bells. I began to pontificate that it will only be a matter of time before the television corporations get a stranglehold of the online revolution and slowly bleed it back into their coffers. Instead, I read they are actively trying to surpress it.

This is the massive error that the music industry made initially. Online file sharing and free downloading had been commonplace for sometime in the early 2000s, but instead of seeking to embrace this new technology and commodify it for their own ends, the industry tried to quash it. Led by the American rock band Metallica, indigenous file sharing website Napster found itself hauled before the courts. It would take several years after the shutdown of Napster as a 'pirate' site for the music industry to cotton onto the will of the people. The backside had to entirely fall out of the whole industry before the pennies stopped dropping and they patented the likes of I-Tunes; years after the laptop had begun to replace the Compact Disc Player. Television could be heading down a parallel path. The Premier League are currently undertaking a crackdown on public bars that broadcast Premiership games through foreign satellite packages, so they must feel as though their territory is being threatened. A publican in Portsmouth is currently taking her right to show top flight football on cheaper foreign packages through the European Court of Justice as she feels preventing her from doing so contravenes European Trading Laws. Clubs suffering low attendances will be taking note, if they feel local punters are eschewing the ticket prices of Ewood, The Stadium of Light and the Riverside in favour of their local pubs, their territory is threatened too.

Channel 4 and the BBC have begun broadcasting programmes online; indeed you can view Match of the Day live on your apple mac in the UK, so the television online revolution is a train that is slowly chugging into the station. Much of Arsenal TVs output mimics established programmes from the Arsenal TV Online package. In Germany, as from next season, TV channel Premiere will be offering live pay per view Bundesliga matches on the internet. This will be most favourable to supporters keen to see their own team's games without having to subscribe to an entire package of randomly selected fixtures. In the meantime, Sky are not so much embracing the potential as trying to whitewash over it by pushing the Government into policing sites that provide these streams with a more Dickensian bent.

We seem to have hit a cul de sac with regards to football coverage. Sky's overbearing dominance of football broadcasting in this country (confirmed by Setanta now only being able to afford 50% of their current football coverage for next season) is punishing for people and businesses in times such as these, but allowing the anarchy to continue will likely hit clubs in the pocket if stay away fans can be tempted by the pub or the internet, not to mention hit the pockets of the television companies who are sponsoring football'sfeeling of insolation from economic sanity. The juggernaut success of I Tunes, some years after the renegade phenomenon of Napster has showed that if you give people the service at a fair price and in a manner that suits their current habits, they will pay for it. I rather think Sky is repeating the mistakes of the music and film industries from the turn of the Century in trying to ride roughshod over this revolution. No matter how curmudgeonly the corporation or how oppressive its power, the underground will always be one step ahead, because that's where the creativity emanates from. Television companies concerned with broadcasting football are going to have to accept that the will of the people will always win through.LD.




Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!



For the very latest Premier League odds

Free 15 bet when you spend 5 on The New Football Pools

Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The Journalist

Writer: Tim Stillman Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Tuesday March 24 2009

Time: 9:05PM

Your Comments

I would point out as a caveat that no one should advertise any sites that do live streaming because it contravenes the rules of site! :-)
Little Dutch
I would point out as a caveat that no one should advertise any sites that do live streaming because it contravenes the rules of site! :-)
Little Dutch
That's a great thoughtful piece. I wonder how long before the mainstream media picks up on this theme? As Broadband speeds get faster and streams more watchable the impact could be substantial.
Amos.
That's a great thoughtful piece. I wonder how long before the mainstream media picks up on this theme? As Broadband speeds get faster and streams more watchable the impact could be substantial.
Amos.
LD living out side UK I only manage to go to 1 or 2 games a year, instead I watch most of the Arsenal games at the local but have recently started t o watch them online and the quality of the streaming is defenetly getting better.
Armory
LD living out side UK I only manage to go to 1 or 2 games a year, instead I watch most of the Arsenal games at the local but have recently started t o watch them online and the quality of the streaming is defenetly getting better.
Armory
The TV companies are citing intellectual property laws to try and stop this, but the fact is, the internet is such a marvellous playground for this sort of thing because it is so hard to commodify. There's always a free alternative. Newspapers are suffering and will be extinct in a few years, ditto magazines because it's all available online. If you try and commodify it online and charge, there will always be a free alternaitve. The New York Times tried to ofer an online version of their publication online and it fell through because people could always get their news free from elsewhere. The corporatiosn cannot crush it, they're just going to have to embrace it or collapse.
Little Dutch
The TV companies are citing intellectual property laws to try and stop this, but the fact is, the internet is such a marvellous playground for this sort of thing because it is so hard to commodify. There's always a free alternative. Newspapers are suffering and will be extinct in a few years, ditto magazines because it's all available online. If you try and commodify it online and charge, there will always be a free alternaitve. The New York Times tried to ofer an online version of their publication online and it fell through because people could always get their news free from elsewhere. The corporatiosn cannot crush it, they're just going to have to embrace it or collapse.
Little Dutch
same here Armory. what the Germans are doing is quite decent I think. Being able to watch the one game you want to watch in good quality for a price of a division 4 ticket (about 6-7 euros) should attract a large customer base. If Arsenal offered a package to watch all official games in season for a price of 300-400 euros, I'd take it.
G4L
same here Armory. what the Germans are doing is quite decent I think. Being able to watch the one game you want to watch in good quality for a price of a division 4 ticket (about 6-7 euros) should attract a large customer base. If Arsenal offered a package to watch all official games in season for a price of 300-400 euros, I'd take it.
G4L
In the US, some of the more forward-thinking broadcasters have begun shifting large parts of their programming to the internet. www.hulu.com is a legal, ad-driven site where fans of FOX or NBC shows (and many others) can stream episodes with just one click. Additionally, major sporting events are broadcast on the internet via the governing association's website (i.e. the Super Bowl on nfl.com). Also, ESPN (the major sports broadcaster) has a feature on its website that broadcasts certain games that they have the rights to but cannot show for whatever reason. That is where I watch Arsenal's CL games because of course they have to show Liverpool or ManU if they play at the same. (Legal) TV on the internet is without a doubt the future of broadcasting.
TPowell
In the US, some of the more forward-thinking broadcasters have begun shifting large parts of their programming to the internet. www.hulu.com is a legal, ad-driven site where fans of FOX or NBC shows (and many others) can stream episodes with just one click. Additionally, major sporting events are broadcast on the internet via the governing association's website (i.e. the Super Bowl on nfl.com). Also, ESPN (the major sports broadcaster) has a feature on its website that broadcasts certain games that they have the rights to but cannot show for whatever reason. That is where I watch Arsenal's CL games because of course they have to show Liverpool or ManU if they play at the same. (Legal) TV on the internet is without a doubt the future of broadcasting.
TPowell
What a great piece LD - love it mate. Really good.
OLASAL
What a great piece LD - love it mate. Really good.
OLASAL
Good piece LD, shame you didn't do it last year - I could have used it for my essay lol. As you guys say, this is not unique to football but a threat to multiple industries, some of which were quicker to act than others. I'm afraid football is probably one of the industries who're the slowest to react to new media developments. Remember how football uesd to resist TV coverage cos they saw it as a huge threat to their gate revenues? (You may not "remember" as it's in the 1930s, the first televised football match, incidentally, was between Arsenal and Arsenal Reserves in 1937.) If it took decades (and Rupert Murdoch's ground-breaking offer) for them to truly realise how they could sell football as a media product, I don't see how they'd respond proactively to this. These threats (and opportunities) will just keep coming and football will keep playing catch-up, as always.
GoonerLou
Good piece LD, shame you didn't do it last year - I could have used it for my essay lol. As you guys say, this is not unique to football but a threat to multiple industries, some of which were quicker to act than others. I'm afraid football is probably one of the industries who're the slowest to react to new media developments. Remember how football uesd to resist TV coverage cos they saw it as a huge threat to their gate revenues? (You may not "remember" as it's in the 1930s, the first televised football match, incidentally, was between Arsenal and Arsenal Reserves in 1937.) If it took decades (and Rupert Murdoch's ground-breaking offer) for them to truly realise how they could sell football as a media product, I don't see how they'd respond proactively to this. These threats (and opportunities) will just keep coming and football will keep playing catch-up, as always.
GoonerLou
Excellent piece Tim!! Whilst it may not be exactly ethical to watch these internet streams free of charge, I'm not exactly sure how ethical it is to charge 40 to attend one football match, or to make billions of pounds by monopolisings the coverage of our sport. As LD correctly points out, no matter what technologies and preventitive measures are introduced, it will only be a matter of time (usually within hours) that some computer whizz kid will be offering a service/tune/game free of charge somewhere. These guys are just too damn clever.
Rocky7
Excellent piece Tim!! Whilst it may not be exactly ethical to watch these internet streams free of charge, I'm not exactly sure how ethical it is to charge 40 to attend one football match, or to make billions of pounds by monopolisings the coverage of our sport. As LD correctly points out, no matter what technologies and preventitive measures are introduced, it will only be a matter of time (usually within hours) that some computer whizz kid will be offering a service/tune/game free of charge somewhere. These guys are just too damn clever.
Rocky7
Nice write up..if i had a pound for every time i said that...eventually the PL/Sky will be forced to catch-up. I wonder where all this will lead to eventually...I forsee a reduction in tickets to coerce more fans to watch matches..I forsee a weakened next generation of football fans...methinks the business side of football is at its peak...we may soon begin the slide down....and the internet will either lead to its dearth or its ressurgence
number14
Nice write up..if i had a pound for every time i said that...eventually the PL/Sky will be forced to catch-up. I wonder where all this will lead to eventually...I forsee a reduction in tickets to coerce more fans to watch matches..I forsee a weakened next generation of football fans...methinks the business side of football is at its peak...we may soon begin the slide down....and the internet will either lead to its dearth or its ressurgence
number14
Hey I was kind of hoping someone would "advertise" some of these site...dont worry we wont hold you site staff accountable..;-)
number14
Hey I was kind of hoping someone would "advertise" some of these site...dont worry we wont hold you site staff accountable..;-)
number14
It's the same with most phenomena, the authorities will always try to destroy it; realise that doesn't work, so they ********ise it instead. The best example I can think of is hip hop music. When this really began to take off in the ghettos in mid 80s America the Government and the corporations felt threatened so they tried to ban it. When they realised it was too big, they commodified it themselves through channels like MTV. Now they'll show you ***** artists like 50 Cent and Nas and all that empty vacuous crap and tell you its hip hop and keep all of the good, hard hitting stuff on the underground by denying it airplay. But the internet is different because it's almost beyond control and I happen to think that's a brilliant, liberating thing for the most part.
Little Dutch
It's the same with most phenomena, the authorities will always try to destroy it; realise that doesn't work, so they ********ise it instead. The best example I can think of is hip hop music. When this really began to take off in the ghettos in mid 80s America the Government and the corporations felt threatened so they tried to ban it. When they realised it was too big, they commodified it themselves through channels like MTV. Now they'll show you ***** artists like 50 Cent and Nas and all that empty vacuous crap and tell you its hip hop and keep all of the good, hard hitting stuff on the underground by denying it airplay. But the internet is different because it's almost beyond control and I happen to think that's a brilliant, liberating thing for the most part.
Little Dutch
Isn't there a danger that this official online streaming would undermine there bread and butter. I would have thought that a lot of people buy sky packages primarily for sport and stay for other things so making football an online ppv might be less profitable overall. Also once peolple start watching matches online they'll eventually filter through to these dodgy free sites so you'd also have to police the internet as well
Phartman87
Isn't there a danger that this official online streaming would undermine there bread and butter. I would have thought that a lot of people buy sky packages primarily for sport and stay for other things so making football an online ppv might be less profitable overall. Also once peolple start watching matches online they'll eventually filter through to these dodgy free sites so you'd also have to police the internet as well
Phartman87
Great thoughts eloquently written - something I bet most internet savvy football fans have pondered for some time. I could give a ***** less about other football, I'll watch the highlights of other games elsewhere. Arsenal is what I want to see so if Arsenal.com offered me a HD/HQ stream for each & every game at a reasonable pop - I'd be more than happy paying 5 - I'd be all over it like a fat man in a pie shop. As I use my 42inch LCD as my laptop monitor anyway (thanks to the magic of a HD out on my laptop) the stream would probably be better quality than Sky/Sultana anyway. It's gonna happen, and when it does, I'm first in line.
Gunnerman
Great thoughts eloquently written - something I bet most internet savvy football fans have pondered for some time. I could give a ***** less about other football, I'll watch the highlights of other games elsewhere. Arsenal is what I want to see so if Arsenal.com offered me a HD/HQ stream for each & every game at a reasonable pop - I'd be more than happy paying 5 - I'd be all over it like a fat man in a pie shop. As I use my 42inch LCD as my laptop monitor anyway (thanks to the magic of a HD out on my laptop) the stream would probably be better quality than Sky/Sultana anyway. It's gonna happen, and when it does, I'm first in line.
Gunnerman
The bread and butter is already being undermined and will continue to be so. It's gonna happen in the end and the TV companies basically have a choice of trying to work with it now or playing catch up later. It's the same with music downloads, it's still possible to download illegally, but by and large apple have caught on and cornered the market. Law abiding technophobe dunderheads like myself use it and happily pay for it, apple has the advertising savvy and the capital to market it and be successful. So do sky. There will always be the free sites, but then there's been illegal sky packages for as long as I can remember, you can still rip and burn your friend's Emerson, Lake and Palmer album onto a blank CD, you could always tape songs off the radio when I was a kid, people do all of these things, but when the corporate juggernaut wades in, 95% of people get on board.
Little Dutch
The bread and butter is already being undermined and will continue to be so. It's gonna happen in the end and the TV companies basically have a choice of trying to work with it now or playing catch up later. It's the same with music downloads, it's still possible to download illegally, but by and large apple have caught on and cornered the market. Law abiding technophobe dunderheads like myself use it and happily pay for it, apple has the advertising savvy and the capital to market it and be successful. So do sky. There will always be the free sites, but then there's been illegal sky packages for as long as I can remember, you can still rip and burn your friend's Emerson, Lake and Palmer album onto a blank CD, you could always tape songs off the radio when I was a kid, people do all of these things, but when the corporate juggernaut wades in, 95% of people get on board.
Little Dutch
Great write up - too good for just our consumption....!
shewore
Great write up - too good for just our consumption....!
shewore
Excellent piece. The TV Companies need to react and quickly. Probably, what they will end up doing is selling the broadcast rights to an internet company, who can then sell individual games or the whole package to the end customer. A good business opportunity. However, Sky recovers some (or a large?) part of its 1.62B outlay by selling broadcasting rights to companies worldwide (ESPN in Asia, Supersport in Africa etc) and in these countries, the volumes make it affordable for people to still subsribe to these channels. For instance, I pay less than 5 pounds a month for satellite TV (which includes ESPN-STAR) and I usually get to see every Arsenal Premiership game live. Live streams are getting better, but some of them are still dodgy. I couldnt get a proper working link to the Roma game (it wasnt live on TV here). Things will change, but they might take their time.
prits
Excellent piece. The TV Companies need to react and quickly. Probably, what they will end up doing is selling the broadcast rights to an internet company, who can then sell individual games or the whole package to the end customer. A good business opportunity. However, Sky recovers some (or a large?) part of its 1.62B outlay by selling broadcasting rights to companies worldwide (ESPN in Asia, Supersport in Africa etc) and in these countries, the volumes make it affordable for people to still subsribe to these channels. For instance, I pay less than 5 pounds a month for satellite TV (which includes ESPN-STAR) and I usually get to see every Arsenal Premiership game live. Live streams are getting better, but some of them are still dodgy. I couldnt get a proper working link to the Roma game (it wasnt live on TV here). Things will change, but they might take their time.
prits
I think TV is a bit quicker on the uptake than the music industry (of course the extra bandwidth and technology needed for video bought them time). In North America even the big tv networks have started showing many programs on line (free, but there are commercials). I think the future model is iTunes and to a lesser extent Xbox Live. iTunes lets you watch many current shows commercial free for $1.99 or so, and you can 'rent' movies for a few bucks or buy them for about ten bucks. Add an Apple TV set top box or a similar device and you can stream from your computer to your big screen tv in full Hi Definition. Live sports is a fair bit behind this curve, but at least over here is getting there. For years the WWE has been streaming their PPVs live on line, but their pricing policy is all wrong- it costs the same on line as to order it through the cable company and I prefer watching, say, Wrestlemania with friends, booze, and snacks on comfy couches to having people huddling around a monitor or lap top. It's probably not that far off that bricks and mortar DVD stores and record stores are essentially antique stores- welcome to Ye Olde HMV. Great article LD.
elbondo
I think TV is a bit quicker on the uptake than the music industry (of course the extra bandwidth and technology needed for video bought them time). In North America even the big tv networks have started showing many programs on line (free, but there are commercials). I think the future model is iTunes and to a lesser extent Xbox Live. iTunes lets you watch many current shows commercial free for $1.99 or so, and you can 'rent' movies for a few bucks or buy them for about ten bucks. Add an Apple TV set top box or a similar device and you can stream from your computer to your big screen tv in full Hi Definition. Live sports is a fair bit behind this curve, but at least over here is getting there. For years the WWE has been streaming their PPVs live on line, but their pricing policy is all wrong- it costs the same on line as to order it through the cable company and I prefer watching, say, Wrestlemania with friends, booze, and snacks on comfy couches to having people huddling around a monitor or lap top. It's probably not that far off that bricks and mortar DVD stores and record stores are essentially antique stores- welcome to Ye Olde HMV. Great article LD.
elbondo
Great piece LD, it echoes my own recent thoughts on the subject... As an old school net head it has been interesting to see the effect of the net on the traditional distribution and sales methods for media, in particular music, but now also movies and broadcast media. Lets be clear about the this, the old media empires are dying a slow death, and the truth is, the likes of apple only account for a tiny proportion of downloaded content- the vast majority being illegal via point to point file sharing/ torrents, and the signs are this is unlikely to change anytime soon... As a musician these are interesting times indeed- on the one hand I can market and distribute my music without pandering to the whims of anr men, on the other, the chances of me making cash are significantly less than -say- 15 years ago... In the case of football the money lost in subs will most likely be taken up by advertising revenue, for example- if Arsenal can show that x million people tune into streams of their matches worldwide, corporations will say sums to reach that audience...
KaoTeK
Great piece LD, it echoes my own recent thoughts on the subject... As an old school net head it has been interesting to see the effect of the net on the traditional distribution and sales methods for media, in particular music, but now also movies and broadcast media. Lets be clear about the this, the old media empires are dying a slow death, and the truth is, the likes of apple only account for a tiny proportion of downloaded content- the vast majority being illegal via point to point file sharing/ torrents, and the signs are this is unlikely to change anytime soon... As a musician these are interesting times indeed- on the one hand I can market and distribute my music without pandering to the whims of anr men, on the other, the chances of me making cash are significantly less than -say- 15 years ago... In the case of football the money lost in subs will most likely be taken up by advertising revenue, for example- if Arsenal can show that x million people tune into streams of their matches worldwide, corporations will say sums to reach that audience...
KaoTeK
Oh and you can't be dissin Nas- Illmatic is a classic album, the rest of his are $h!t though...
KaoTeK
Oh and you can't be dissin Nas- Illmatic is a classic album, the rest of his are $h!t though...
KaoTeK
Great article but I can't agree with the general sentiment here about the death of newspapers as if it's all a terrific idea and as if it's just like what happened with music. There's a difference with what happened in the music industry because people will still pay to purchase music online. However people will not pay to purchase an article. This means that people can no longer make a living doing real journalism. This is the problem newspapers are facing. It is not a good thing that real investigative journalists like the people who write for the McLatchy newspaper chain (one of the last remaining independent chains who challenged the Bush admin. throughout the Iraq debacle) will no longer have jobs. Not all journalism is Rupert Murdoch. The NY Times (like other big papers) has had to closed down many of its foreign offices and let go several foreign correspondents. And no, blogs don't replace real investigative journalism, which is a dying art and badly needed today. // On another subject entirely: I'm mystified as to why Song hasn't been called up by Cameroon. Not that I like our players going off for int'l duty but Song ALWAYS gets called up, he's an important member of their nat'l team. Cameroon are playing against Togo for a wc qualifier, and Ade's been called up. Here's the list of our 16 players who've been called up: http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/internationals-sixteen-gunners-called-up
jaelle
Great article but I can't agree with the general sentiment here about the death of newspapers as if it's all a terrific idea and as if it's just like what happened with music. There's a difference with what happened in the music industry because people will still pay to purchase music online. However people will not pay to purchase an article. This means that people can no longer make a living doing real journalism. This is the problem newspapers are facing. It is not a good thing that real investigative journalists like the people who write for the McLatchy newspaper chain (one of the last remaining independent chains who challenged the Bush admin. throughout the Iraq debacle) will no longer have jobs. Not all journalism is Rupert Murdoch. The NY Times (like other big papers) has had to closed down many of its foreign offices and let go several foreign correspondents. And no, blogs don't replace real investigative journalism, which is a dying art and badly needed today. // On another subject entirely: I'm mystified as to why Song hasn't been called up by Cameroon. Not that I like our players going off for int'l duty but Song ALWAYS gets called up, he's an important member of their nat'l team. Cameroon are playing against Togo for a wc qualifier, and Ade's been called up. Here's the list of our 16 players who've been called up: http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/internationals-sixteen-gunners-called-up
jaelle
I'm with KaoTeK on this one. NAS - Top 5 dead or ALIVe
Youngest in Charge
I'm with KaoTeK on this one. NAS - Top 5 dead or ALIVe
Youngest in Charge
Despite the doom and gloom espoused by the record companies, and lower cd sales, they are still making good profits. The artists, the record companies, and Apple are all making good money off of iTunes. Most people still find it more convenient to pick up a new CD at HMV or buy legal downloads from iTunes (and others) than go through the effort of finding and downloading music illegally. Believe it or not, many if not most people don't know the difference between a bit torrent and a Tim bit (sorry, only Canadians will get that one). But the music industry has always been defensive rather than innovative- I have albums from the 80's with a big skull and crossbones (the skull being a cassette tape) reading, 'Home taping is killing the music industry'. You think they would have learned something in the ensuing 25+ years.
elbondo
Despite the doom and gloom espoused by the record companies, and lower cd sales, they are still making good profits. The artists, the record companies, and Apple are all making good money off of iTunes. Most people still find it more convenient to pick up a new CD at HMV or buy legal downloads from iTunes (and others) than go through the effort of finding and downloading music illegally. Believe it or not, many if not most people don't know the difference between a bit torrent and a Tim bit (sorry, only Canadians will get that one). But the music industry has always been defensive rather than innovative- I have albums from the 80's with a big skull and crossbones (the skull being a cassette tape) reading, 'Home taping is killing the music industry'. You think they would have learned something in the ensuing 25+ years.
elbondo
PLEASE HELP!: I don't know where else to put this. I just tried sending a message to VitalArsenal's editor using the e-mail given under the "Site Journalists" section but the message bounced back. I have a question about the search function on VitalArsenal. I'm trying to look for LD's match report on our Man City game called "Scream to a Sigh" but the search function doesn't work. I've noticed on VitalArsenal you can't find articles earlier than a couple of months. There's a tab that says "club menu" and under that there's a tab labeled "match reports" but there's nothing there when I click on it. How do I search for older articles on this site?
jaelle
PLEASE HELP!: I don't know where else to put this. I just tried sending a message to VitalArsenal's editor using the e-mail given under the "Site Journalists" section but the message bounced back. I have a question about the search function on VitalArsenal. I'm trying to look for LD's match report on our Man City game called "Scream to a Sigh" but the search function doesn't work. I've noticed on VitalArsenal you can't find articles earlier than a couple of months. There's a tab that says "club menu" and under that there's a tab labeled "match reports" but there's nothing there when I click on it. How do I search for older articles on this site?
jaelle
I'm sorry elbondo, that just is not true, a quick google search will show you the record industry is loosing money hand over fist, with only the established mainstream artists making any cash. Yes, apple (and beatport etc) are doing well but far more people are using the likes of soulseek to get their media for free, it's easier to use than itunes (which I should add is a horrible resource hog) and you often get a higher quality bitrate too... If you are genuinely interested, visit www.reaper.fm and search the forums for "copyright" or "filesharing" -you'll find some very interesting times threads there by people who make a living as artists and producers.
KaoTeK
I'm sorry elbondo, that just is not true, a quick google search will show you the record industry is loosing money hand over fist, with only the established mainstream artists making any cash. Yes, apple (and beatport etc) are doing well but far more people are using the likes of soulseek to get their media for free, it's easier to use than itunes (which I should add is a horrible resource hog) and you often get a higher quality bitrate too... If you are genuinely interested, visit www.reaper.fm and search the forums for "copyright" or "filesharing" -you'll find some very interesting times threads there by people who make a living as artists and producers.
KaoTeK
*times= threads (on my phone doh)
KaoTeK
*times= threads (on my phone doh)
KaoTeK
I think youre massively overblowing this "revolution". The demand for watching football on TV will always massively outweigh any demand for online viewing. Aslong as BSkyB have dishes in every house (personally i couldnt live without SkyPlus lol) then Footballs home will be the box. The difference with music is that people have always bought A-tracks, Vinyl, Cassettes and CDs etc as part of a collection. With the Mp3 player and now Ipods etc people just want to build up their previous CD collections again only in a digital format, and its mostly used individually. With live TV especially football a group of family or friends sit down to watch a big game, its a totally different "product" once its over its over. I aint gonna sit down infront of my laptop or mobile phone and watch Spurs play with my father. The revolution will not be televised because there is no revolution imo.
HuddersfieldYiddo
I think youre massively overblowing this "revolution". The demand for watching football on TV will always massively outweigh any demand for online viewing. Aslong as BSkyB have dishes in every house (personally i couldnt live without SkyPlus lol) then Footballs home will be the box. The difference with music is that people have always bought A-tracks, Vinyl, Cassettes and CDs etc as part of a collection. With the Mp3 player and now Ipods etc people just want to build up their previous CD collections again only in a digital format, and its mostly used individually. With live TV especially football a group of family or friends sit down to watch a big game, its a totally different "product" once its over its over. I aint gonna sit down infront of my laptop or mobile phone and watch Spurs play with my father. The revolution will not be televised because there is no revolution imo.
HuddersfieldYiddo
Journalism won't die, the internet provides it with opportunities. Most media nowadays makes its money through advertising, London is absolutely awash with free newspapers (literally, I can't get on the tube to work without slipping over the poxy things), writers can start their own blogs and sell advertising space. How do you think this site keeps going? Nobody pays for TV journalism outside of the BBC, I certainly do not pay to watch Channel 4 news. I think freeing writers from publications, whilst not unproblematic, is an encouraging thing because it frees them from editorial constraints which are incredibly damaging to democracy and rather than subscribing to the agenda driven rhetoric of any newspapers, be they left wing right wing or liberal, you get people's honets opinions and observations. As for Hys point, nobody's saying that absolutely everyone will be streaming in three years and TV will be extinct, but the amount of people watching football this way is increasing year upon year. The reason I mentioned foreign satelite packages in pubs is precisely because of what you descrive HY, people still want to gather around in a social setting to watch a match (although in my uni days, we were always happy to have several of us watching a film on a PC screen). Basically, the we in which football is being consumed is changing and Sky and others will have to adjust to it in the end. The States are adjusting, Germany is doing so, but as usual, Britain lags behind.
Little Dutch
Journalism won't die, the internet provides it with opportunities. Most media nowadays makes its money through advertising, London is absolutely awash with free newspapers (literally, I can't get on the tube to work without slipping over the poxy things), writers can start their own blogs and sell advertising space. How do you think this site keeps going? Nobody pays for TV journalism outside of the BBC, I certainly do not pay to watch Channel 4 news. I think freeing writers from publications, whilst not unproblematic, is an encouraging thing because it frees them from editorial constraints which are incredibly damaging to democracy and rather than subscribing to the agenda driven rhetoric of any newspapers, be they left wing right wing or liberal, you get people's honets opinions and observations. As for Hys point, nobody's saying that absolutely everyone will be streaming in three years and TV will be extinct, but the amount of people watching football this way is increasing year upon year. The reason I mentioned foreign satelite packages in pubs is precisely because of what you descrive HY, people still want to gather around in a social setting to watch a match (although in my uni days, we were always happy to have several of us watching a film on a PC screen). Basically, the we in which football is being consumed is changing and Sky and others will have to adjust to it in the end. The States are adjusting, Germany is doing so, but as usual, Britain lags behind.
Little Dutch
Sorry LD, you couldn't be more wrong about journalism. I think you're thinking about journalism as just a guy who hangs around London and checks out the internet for research and puts together some opinion piece or finds some quotes to put together a quick report on something. An investigative journalist, if he's going to make a living doing it, NEEDS MONEY to pay for his travel (foreign correspondents esp.), lodging, other expenses, payment toward people who help him get to his sources, etc. The reason that investigative journalists who broke the Watergate story, the Pentagon Papers story, who told the world about Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia and Laos, who broke the savings & loan scandal, who told us about the true story of what was going on in New Orleans during Katrina, who've told us about the CIA's black sites around the world, etc. -- the reason we know about these things is that investigative journalists can earn a living from a newspaper doing their job. Online sites then link to those reports and opine on it. Robert Fisk at the Indepenent could not report about the Qana massacre without an employer. London is awash with free newspapers? What's the quality of journalism in those papers? Any serious reporting going on or just quick opinion pieces? Ray Bonner during the 80s was paid by the NY Times to report the real story of Reagan's war in Central America, he couldn't do that without an employer. Yes, editorial constraints have always been a problem in journalism--which is why indie chains like the McLatchy newspapers (formerly the Gannett chain) are so valuable. They were the only newspaper chain in the US to report accurately about the Bush crowd's lies in the run-up to the Iraq war--they had real information with real sources, far better substantive information than all the opinion stuff on the net. They paid their journalists to investigate, which takes MONEY. And you're quite wrong to think there are no editorial constraints on the net. A journalist wanting to make a living writing for an online publication is just as constrained by that publication's editorial outlook as he'd be if he were working for a print publication. He can of course write for all those non-paying publications all over the net, or those publications that pay next to nothing. But he can't make a living that way. Not if he wants to do serious investigative work, which takes time and money. All the net provides opportunities for is for a writer or journalist to get his work published quickly. And since you yourself say that most media nowadays makes its money thru advertising (which was also true of the old media, btw), then that in itself is an EDITORIAL CONSTRAINT, since an investigative journalist's work might upset advertisers.
jaelle
Sorry LD, you couldn't be more wrong about journalism. I think you're thinking about journalism as just a guy who hangs around London and checks out the internet for research and puts together some opinion piece or finds some quotes to put together a quick report on something. An investigative journalist, if he's going to make a living doing it, NEEDS MONEY to pay for his travel (foreign correspondents esp.), lodging, other expenses, payment toward people who help him get to his sources, etc. The reason that investigative journalists who broke the Watergate story, the Pentagon Papers story, who told the world about Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia and Laos, who broke the savings & loan scandal, who told us about the true story of what was going on in New Orleans during Katrina, who've told us about the CIA's black sites around the world, etc. -- the reason we know about these things is that investigative journalists can earn a living from a newspaper doing their job. Online sites then link to those reports and opine on it. Robert Fisk at the Indepenent could not report about the Qana massacre without an employer. London is awash with free newspapers? What's the quality of journalism in those papers? Any serious reporting going on or just quick opinion pieces? Ray Bonner during the 80s was paid by the NY Times to report the real story of Reagan's war in Central America, he couldn't do that without an employer. Yes, editorial constraints have always been a problem in journalism--which is why indie chains like the McLatchy newspapers (formerly the Gannett chain) are so valuable. They were the only newspaper chain in the US to report accurately about the Bush crowd's lies in the run-up to the Iraq war--they had real information with real sources, far better substantive information than all the opinion stuff on the net. They paid their journalists to investigate, which takes MONEY. And you're quite wrong to think there are no editorial constraints on the net. A journalist wanting to make a living writing for an online publication is just as constrained by that publication's editorial outlook as he'd be if he were working for a print publication. He can of course write for all those non-paying publications all over the net, or those publications that pay next to nothing. But he can't make a living that way. Not if he wants to do serious investigative work, which takes time and money. All the net provides opportunities for is for a writer or journalist to get his work published quickly. And since you yourself say that most media nowadays makes its money thru advertising (which was also true of the old media, btw), then that in itself is an EDITORIAL CONSTRAINT, since an investigative journalist's work might upset advertisers.
jaelle
KT, a quick Google search will tell me what the record companies want me to think, or a contrary position, or whatever- the internet is not audited books (which can be fiddled with as well, especially by an entertainment giant- too many hit movies? Okay, we lost a fortune on music). As for only the biggest acts making money, tell me when that hasn't been the case in the last 50 years? I will check out the link though. Thanks
elbondo
KT, a quick Google search will tell me what the record companies want me to think, or a contrary position, or whatever- the internet is not audited books (which can be fiddled with as well, especially by an entertainment giant- too many hit movies? Okay, we lost a fortune on music). As for only the biggest acts making money, tell me when that hasn't been the case in the last 50 years? I will check out the link though. Thanks
elbondo
El- I'm not going to argue the point, as the facts are there for any publicly listed company... As for your point about only mainstream artists making money I disagree, a niche band like napalm death (for example) used to make a great living out of record sales and gigs, despite their tunes being 30 seconds long and sounding like... Erm... Napalm death... That is much less likely to happen these days because nobody buys music anymore... Whether this is good or bad (no more bands like nd) is, ofcourse, wholly subjective :)
KaoTeK
El- I'm not going to argue the point, as the facts are there for any publicly listed company... As for your point about only mainstream artists making money I disagree, a niche band like napalm death (for example) used to make a great living out of record sales and gigs, despite their tunes being 30 seconds long and sounding like... Erm... Napalm death... That is much less likely to happen these days because nobody buys music anymore... Whether this is good or bad (no more bands like nd) is, ofcourse, wholly subjective :)
KaoTeK
But there again, live music has been reinvigorated as a result, bands have to rely on gigging and touring a lot more and have to make sure they are good at it! Jaelle, you make some good points, but braodcast media still represents opportunities for good investigative journalism, there are about 5 24 hour news channels on British satellite, which is considerably more than when the Watergate Scandal broke. The two best investigative journalists of our time, in my opinion, Michael Moore and Greg Palast did not use newspapers (Moore wrote for one and became frustrated then started his own magazine, before deciding TV would get his point across), Palast was so effective despite having no newspaper to take him on that he had to flee the U.S. Like I said, nobody pays for Channel 4 news in Britain, but their bulletin is considered the most hard hitting.
Little Dutch
But there again, live music has been reinvigorated as a result, bands have to rely on gigging and touring a lot more and have to make sure they are good at it! Jaelle, you make some good points, but braodcast media still represents opportunities for good investigative journalism, there are about 5 24 hour news channels on British satellite, which is considerably more than when the Watergate Scandal broke. The two best investigative journalists of our time, in my opinion, Michael Moore and Greg Palast did not use newspapers (Moore wrote for one and became frustrated then started his own magazine, before deciding TV would get his point across), Palast was so effective despite having no newspaper to take him on that he had to flee the U.S. Like I said, nobody pays for Channel 4 news in Britain, but their bulletin is considered the most hard hitting.
Little Dutch
And coincidentally, there is a bit of a story over here at the moment about a Tory MEP whose rant at Gordon Brown was compltely ignored by all newspapers and TV stations until it became the most watched video on YouTube and several bloggers began linking to it on their sites.
Little Dutch
And coincidentally, there is a bit of a story over here at the moment about a Tory MEP whose rant at Gordon Brown was compltely ignored by all newspapers and TV stations until it became the most watched video on YouTube and several bloggers began linking to it on their sites.
Little Dutch
 

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Arsenal Articles

Archived Arsenal Articles

List All Vital Arsenal Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Naijagunner 78
2. Amos. 74
3. Chippy Brady 60
4. Rocky7 52
5. Deltaforce 33
6. Guyfox 22
7. FunGunner 20
8. elbondo 17
9. NYArse 12
10. damiano_tommassi 12

League Results (view all)

Latest Results

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
1. Arsenal 0 0 0 0 +0 0
2. Aston Villa 0 0 0 0 +0 0
3. Burnley 0 0 0 0 +0 0
4. Chelsea 0 0 0 0 +0 0
5. Crystal Palace 0 0 0 0 +0 0
6. Everton 0 0 0 0 +0 0
7. Hull City 0 0 0 0 +0 0

Breaking League News

Luke, A Shaw Bullet Dodged? ‏
Chelsea : 29/07/2014 19:54:00
Liverpool: LFC Conclude 10m Origi Transfer
Liverpool : 29/07/2014 19:34:00
Eighteen instead of Seventeen!
Chelsea : 29/07/2014 19:18:00
Sunderland In Chase To Land Promising Youngster.
Sunderland : 29/07/2014 19:17:00
Jenkins Update On Bony Situation
Swansea : 29/07/2014 19:07:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Which area does Arsene need to strengthen next?
Suggested By:  
Keeper 6%
Full back 6%
Defensive Midfield 64%
Wingers 4%
Striker 20%